Nukes best thing that happend to Japan.

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 07:18 PM
link   
I think you are completely missing a fundamental concept of war:

Do what minimizes casualties on your side in a manner that minimizes civilian casualties on the other side. Now, I have read this thread and it has been pointed out to you numerous times that the Japanese civilian death count was going up at an astronomical rate without any nukes involved, and they showed no signs of letting up. You need to go read a real history book so that you understand the U.S. did NOT start the agression, did NOT ask for it, and did NOT warrant it. Furthermore, the U.S. was NOT the only country being viciously attacked by Japan...without warrant. IF, a single act killing a certain number of people stops a war that if allowed to continue could kill 10 X that number of people, it is warranted...period. AND, if that single event can be pulled off to the benefit of the side that is doing it...it becomes a no-brainer. You cannot apply morality to military logistics and strategy...especially against an inhumane opponent.




posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreeMason
Uh they weren't civilians.



"....weren't civilians.....".....





Hiroshima and Nagasaki were among the last few Cities in Japan that were not struck, even though they were producing weapons and material for the "War effort"...so that the attrocities of their Army could continue.


Say weapons were being manufactured in Texas during a war.....would that justify Japan nuking Texas? I think not....




Chebob, you're no different than any other moron, opinionated, and arrogant, who has no clue what the Japanese were doing through out the war.


I'd have to say that you are what you are describing, from the sounds of it. Unless that is you were actualy alive and in Japan during the bombing. Otherwise, I'll assume you only know what you've read and/or decided to believe. I think your just mad because someone doesn't agree with you.....




If you want to cry for Civilian deaths, go cry about Dresden, the Germans were comparably more civilized than the Japs, and the Nazis were barely more civilized than the Japs.

The only difference between Japs and Nazis, was that the Nazis were only killing Jews and "Undesirables", the Japs just killed everyone that wasn't a Jap.


More obscure comparrisons and propoganda. I never said the Japanese military wasn't commiting evil crimes, but whatever they were doing, it has happened in other countrys, and is of no relevance anyway, as it was the whole population who suffered, because the US government couldn't be bothered to keep fighting a war. They were like kids with the big red button. You didn't nuke Iraq, you didn't nuke Zimbabwe, yet horrible punishments by a regime have happened here. Thats because dropping a nuke is sick. After Hiroshima most people actually noticed it. Not all though......oviously.



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 07:24 PM
link   
After Hiroshima, the Japanese army began to kill Civilians and POWs as fast as they can out of "revenge".

Nagasaki put an end to that.

You Chebob, can now officially shut up.



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by chebob

Say weapons were being manufactured in Texas during a war.....would that justify Japan nuking Texas? I think not....




If the U.S. had un-provoked made an aggressive act against Japan, and was manufacturing nukes in Texas...YES, if the Japanese could make past 29 Palms...they would have every right to bomb the manufacturing plant in Texas...I absolutely DON'T get your point.



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 07:28 PM
link   
chebob I only get mad at Idiots...and an Idiot is someone who has an opinion, that is retarded in the eyes of the Truth.

Your opinion is beyond retarded in the eyes of Truth.

Valhall and eye may not get along, but I in no way am "angry" at her nor think her an Idiot


But you, chebob, are probably the least .... guh I don't even need to say it.



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreeMason
After Hiroshima, the Japanese army began to kill Civilians and POWs as fast as they can out of "revenge".

Nagasaki put an end to that.

You Chebob, can now officially shut up.


Freemason, YOU are the over-opinionated one. What you just said proves nothing........what you expect a crazy regime to do after witnessing such an act of terror? Throw their white flags in the air and praise America? Japanese government was evil. American government was evil. Japan were evil for attacking military bases, American government was Doubly wrong for nuking Japan.

Valhall, if you think there was no "more humane" way to end the war, thats your opinion. But that doesn't make it reality. In reality, our countries could have invaded japan, causing less civilian casualties, and toppled the Japanese dictatorship. Yes, lot's of civilians would have died. But not as many as the nuke caused. Yes, lot's of American soldiers would have died. As you've all put it so many times, thats war. Yes, it may have been one of the toughest challenges of the war, but thats not to say we couldn't have done it, and it would have just been seen as another big battle from the war.

Instead, we decide to get bored of the war and wipe out hundreds of thousands of civilians to put an end to it as effortlessly as possible.

A war may give justification to certain acts that may cause the loss of innocent life........but there is a line that can be crossed. Stalin crossed it, America jumped over it in Vietnam, Hitler flew over it, and America jumped it again by nuking Japan.

Thats my opinion. You don't agree with it, not my problem. I don't believe yours, thats life.



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
I think you are completely missing a fundamental concept of war:

Do what minimizes casualties on your side in a manner that minimizes civilian casualties on the other side.


That isnt exactly true. The priorities are : 1. Spare civilians, stick to the geneva conventions and humanitarian chartas 2. Do anything what you like within these bounds (f.ex. minimize own losses). The difference is HUGE. Your version warrants f.ex. siege strategy as used by the US against Saddam Husseins regime after GW1 which resulted in more than a million innocent dead, over half of them children.


Now, I have read this thread and it has been pointed out to you numerous times that the Japanese civilian death count was going up at an astronomical rate without any nukes involved, and they showed no signs of letting up.


Indeed, the bombing campaigns over Tokyo for example stemmed from the same twisted and irresponsible concept of warfare that brought up the use of the nuclear bombs. Furthermore, no one denies that massive firebombing has the same effect as a nuclear bomb. But is that an argument to decriminalize nuclear weapons ? To me it is rather an argument to criminalize these carpet bombing campaigns as well.



You need to go read a real history book so that you understand the U.S. did NOT start the agression, did NOT ask for it, and did NOT warrant it.


Indeed. Japan's alledged surprise attack drew the US into the war. But again. Acting in self defence warrants self defence, but warrants by no way the use of the most unthinkable destruction methods known to mankind.



Furthermore, the U.S. was NOT the only country being viciously attacked by Japan...without warrant. IF, a single act killing a certain number of people stops a war that if allowed to continue could kill 10 X that number of people, it is warranted...period.


This depends on the perspective. If you classify the japanese civilians that would have died as a consequence of USAF carpet bombing as part of the deaths that would have been averted, your logic is skewed. It is not because a torturer uses a "kinder" method of torturing than one he "could" have used, that this method is warranted !




AND, if that single event can be pulled off to the benefit of the side that is doing it...it becomes a no-brainer. You cannot apply morality to military logistics and strategy


Well, there are rules of moral conduct, even in warfare. And these rules were shamelessly infringed by all parties during WW2. The nuclear Holocaust of Hiroshima and Nagasaki stand as the single most spectacular act of immoral conduct.


...especially against an inhumane opponent.


Great. Overall, i must say that your opinions liken to those of Osama bin laden: "The US attacked us, we didnt warrant it, we'll nuke your country, so arabs can live in peace .. sure there will be some dead but it doesnt compare to the palestinian holocaust and the martyred iraqi children, so it's warranted.. period"

[Edited on 9-8-2003 by Mokuhadzushi]



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreeMason
chebob I only get mad at Idiots...and an Idiot is someone who has an opinion, that is retarded in the eyes of the Truth.

Your opinion is beyond retarded in the eyes of Truth.

Valhall and eye may not get along, but I in no way am "angry" at her nor think her an Idiot


But you, chebob, are probably the least .... guh I don't even need to say it.


That you have had to resort to name calling and branding because I don't agree with you says a lot about you.



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreeMason
After Hiroshima, the Japanese army began to kill Civilians and POWs as fast as they can out of "revenge".

Nagasaki put an end to that.

You Chebob, can now officially shut up.


You Folks are Way Cool !
Yesterday was the 58th Annniversarry of Hiroshima, Many Japanese Civilians Worshiped that Day and their deceased loved spirits in Harmony with Buddah!
Eat Sh-t And Die, you Mo Fo's that are Proud!

Do you not have Respect?

God Bless You That Lack Privelage To See!
BOBO
THE BASTARD OF WILL YOU LACK!



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by BOBO

Originally posted by FreeMason
After Hiroshima, the Japanese army began to kill Civilians and POWs as fast as they can out of "revenge".

Nagasaki put an end to that.

You Chebob, can now officially shut up.


You Folks are Way Cool !
Yesterday was the 58th Annniversarry of Hiroshima, Many Japanese Civilians Worshiped that Day and their deceased loved spirits in Harmony with Buddah!
Eat Sh-t And Die, you Mo Fo's that are Proud!

Do you not have Respect?

God Bless You That Lack Privelage To See!
BOBO
THE BASTARD OF WILL YOU LACK!



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 08:00 PM
link   
FREEMASON IS A FREAKING IDIOT!
HAS BEEN WILL BE!!
STRONGLY SUGGEST HE BE TERMINATED AS ASSHOLE!
COME SEE ME MO FO!
I AM BAD!

BOBO!



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 08:03 PM
link   
What were the Americans to do? Invade and see thousands upon thousands die in combat, Allied and Japanese? Sit back and lay siege to japan resulting in Thousands perhaps Millions dying of hunger and privation?
Or drop the Bomb and end the madness in one fell swoop? 200.00 thousand died more died from the after affects ..... the hardest thing anyone would have to decide upon. But in retrospect even though the thought of what happened is abhorent to us would the alernatives have been any less horrible?



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by RogueTrooper
But in retrospect even though the thought of what happened is abhorent to us would the alernatives have been any less horrible?


I would answer "yes", thats my point.



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 08:17 PM
link   


I would answer "yes", thats my point.


So young americans dying on the beaches in their thousands, women, children and the elderly killing themselves, thousands more dying of hunger would be a less horrible thing to happen to the American and Japanese people?
You have to remember that we are talking about the japanese homeland, and its importance to the Japanese people. They would have felt Honour bound to fight for every last inch of ground, it was only their Emperor that stopped that happening and only after he had seen the effects of an Atomic weapon.



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 08:28 PM
link   
Ok, I give up. I've already given my opinion plenty of times, no point in repeating myself again. I don't like it, some of you do. I don't think theres any "middle ground" left to argue with. I'll leave tha to someone else



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 08:56 PM
link   
History is what has come to passed. Therefor Reality.

CHEBOB wrote "Valhall, if you think there was no "more humane" way to end the war, thats your opinion. But that doesn't make it reality. In reality, our countries could have invaded japan, causing less civilian casualties, and toppled the Japanese dictatorship. ""

SO reality is as you think it should be? The moment has come to past, that is history. The decisions made were reality and therefor our past.

And you attempt to argue that?
Please.



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by chebob
Ok, I give up. I've already given my opinion plenty of times, no point in repeating myself again. I don't like it, some of you do. I don't think theres any "middle ground" left to argue with. I'll leave tha to someone else

No one said that they liked it, my Grandfather served in Burma and i dont remember him saying that he liked it.
In fact he said that he and his mates were relieved that it was all over and that they were not going to have to risk their lives in what was sure to be the Bloodiest battle in history.



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Ahem, let's see, The Rape of Nanking=500-700k civillians dieing. Why? one main reason the japanese were disgusted because the Chinese surrendered. The Japanese thought that surrendering and not wanting to fight was disgusting and death worthy.

Have you ever seen the videos? You think Hitler was bad, you haven't seen mass murder until you see the japanese at work. The Nazi group killed the enemy, by their thought. The japanese killed anything that wasn't with them. Hell, after awhile they started using their own people(usually prisoners/elderly) for target practice.

Also, in Rape of Nanking video shown in History class, shows the people throwing babies into the air and being shot, like clay pidgeons. Mothers running away with their babies just to be shot down for target practice. Young girls, not even teens yet being raped.

Then in Korea, same thing, just not as many people. Maybe 200-300k in Korea. Then fighting in the Pacific. They wiped out entire villages of people, some who didn't even know a war was going on due to being secluded from the rest of the world.

Anyways, by the way, we killed 200,000 of their soilders in training. They killed over 1 MILLION civillians throught out Asia, at least that many. More could have died without us knowing.



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Lets look at some numbers.

60 million people died in europe during the war. We saw what having to beat our way through a violent enemy. The Germans were pragmantic, they werent as die hard as the japanese, who had no qualms about doing in massive numbers fighting to the death. Invading japan would have unleashed more horrors than Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Anyomne who fought the japanese knew they were bold, fearless, cunning, skilled, and dedicated warriors who spat in the face of death. Kamakazis showed us this. And you wanted to kamazi our troops against the entire nation? NO.

The object of the war, people, any war is to WIN! Quit babbling about the fraudlent fanatsy that is the joke called the Geneva conventions. Since the beginning of time, the object of any war was to win. it will always be as such. Win with as littlwe damage to your side as possible. the enemy is your enemy and they will either surrender or face annihilation. We did as much. Point in question: the Japanese would, without hesitation, done it to us first had they got the nuke first. hell,they were experimenting like mad in China with biologicals, some of which, circulate to this day in outbreaks of plague and other nasties. the Japanese were ruthless. they had the right idea. No mercy, the first rule of any war.

I think Freemasons title of this thread... is tacky, true to his style. it wasnt nice that Japan got nuked, but it saved us alot of lives, brought this nromally implacable foe to its knees with no further losses to us, and ultimately, ended 5 years of brutal human history. Compared to what happened to Europe, the japanese got off easily. Europe after world war 2 was an image of hell: entire countrysides laid to waste, burnt corpses, rubble of entire citys littlering the land, burnt out military equipment, stavation, masses of refugees, displaced from home, wandering hopelessly in search of food, rapes, looting, murder, ect.

Japan didnt have to suffer this nearly ont eh scale that europe did.



posted on Aug, 8 2003 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Ahem, let's see, The Rape of Nanking=500-700k civillians dieing. Why? one main reason the japanese were disgusted because the Chinese surrendered. The Japanese thought that surrendering and not wanting to fight was disgusting and death worthy.

Have you ever seen the videos? You think Hitler was bad, you haven't seen mass murder until you see the japanese at work. The Nazi group killed the enemy, by their thought. The japanese killed anything that wasn't with them. Hell, after awhile they started using their own people(usually prisoners/elderly) for target practice.

Also, in Rape of Nanking video shown in History class, shows the people throwing babies into the air and being shot, like clay pidgeons. Mothers running away with their babies just to be shot down for target practice. Young girls, not even teens yet being raped.

Then in Korea, same thing, just not as many people. Maybe 200-300k in Korea. Then fighting in the Pacific. They wiped out entire villages of people, some who didn't even know a war was going on due to being secluded from the rest of the world.

Anyways, by the way, we killed 200,000 of their soilders in training. They killed over 1 MILLION civillians throught out Asia, at least that many. More could have died without us knowing.


Where could I see that video?





top topics
 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join