Originally posted by Indy
And what would you call the US killing over 100,000 Japanese civilians?

Are you talking about Hiroshima? You do realize that ALL of the Japanese
civilians were part of the war machine, right? Even 6 year old kids spent
half the day in factories making bullets and war equipment.

Go to Hiroshima. I did. I spent almost a week there. It is very
interesting and very enlightening.

The Japanese were the attackers. They would not stop. The
entire population was an war machine. We warned them that they
had to surrender or we'd wipe out the city. We even dropped leaflets
saying when and where we'd do it. I saw the leaflets in the
museum in Hiroshima.

By dropping the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki we ended
their war machine and actually saved the lives in the rest of
Japan. They wouldn't have stopped unless we dropped the
bombs. We also saved the lives of tens of thousands, some
estimates have hundreds of thousands, of Americans.

I don't care how he died.

He could have died naturally. He could have died from poison.
He could have died from suicide. I just wish he died 5 years
ago and it would have saved a half billion dollars in trial money.

Emotions aside ... the victims of this mad man deserve their
day of justice. They deserve the world to know how they
were victimized, tortured, and murdered by him and his
regime. I'm sad that they won't get their day.

Not in this world but in the next I guess.

Originally posted by Indy

Originally posted by Lanton
So what's the Bosnian Genocide then; a figmant of the imagination of the Western media?

In fact, the Hague tribunal's officialy defined the Srebrenica massacre as genocide.

Was there a genocide? How many of us were there to witness it? I'm guessing none of us on this site. And where is the evidence that Milosevic placed the orders for the killings that supposedly occured?

That is why you have a trial. If a genocide occured you have to prove that Milosevic was responsible and not a member of his military. He may have been responsible. He may not have been. Imagine how people would feel if it were revealed that he had nothing to do with it. But something tells me that people would still want him to be found guilty even if the evidence suggested otherwise.

There was genocide, there shouldn't be any question about it. The number of victims and the mass graves tell it.

Now, the problem is the western media has set out to demonize Milosevic and make him responsible for the entire Genecide, when it was independent Bosnian Serb Paramilitary units the ones who did most of the killing in Bosnia. He did not control them! Could he have done something to stop them or slow them down? Yes. Was he behind the entire genocide? No, there's no evidence that he directly order the mass murder of Bosnians. If there was, he would have been found guilty in no time.

Originally posted by valkeryie
Maybe someone did poison him.

OR he set it all up and committed suicide. Sort of a 'one last
punch in the nose' to everyone who put him on trial and who
brought him down.

Either way, it doesn't matter to me. He's dead and in hell.

Originally posted by Indy
And what would you call the US killing over 100,000 Japanese civilians? Sounds like genocide to me. At best it would be considered a "crime against humanity". What else would you call the deliberate targeting of civilians in an effort to influence a government?

As you can see by the reaction to that post that many American people has been very well work out to believe that the US does not do harm and when US kill people is all for the good of the world and justified.

Killing is killing any way you put it and killing thousands and letting millions die from one race or nation is also called Genocide.

No matter how much perfume and and sugar coating you want to cover it with.

Murder is murder.

Originally posted by marg6043
As you can see by the reaction to that post that many American people has been very well work out to believe that the US does not do harm and when US kill people is all for the good of the world and justified.

Killing is killing any way you put it and killing thousands and letting millions die from one race or nation is also called Genocide.

No matter how much perfume and and sugar coating you want to cover it with.

Murder is murder.

okay lets say we didnt drop the bomb, marg would you be the first to offer your father's or his father's life, so those 'poor' japanese didnt die?

Do you realise what it would have taken to invade japan?! Do you realise they would of fought to every last man, woman, and child? do you realise those 'civilians' all had undergone some sort of training? even the children?

Do you realise that the japanese cut the heads off soldiers, beat them with rattan canes and otherwise brutalised POW's? Do you realise they, at one point, were also trying to develop an A-bomb or that they breeded fleas with disease to use as biological weapons? Do you realise what they did in manchuria?

okay, do you think anything at all?

Originally posted by XphilesPhan

okay lets say we didnt drop the bomb, marg would you be the first to offer your father's or his father's life, so those 'poor' japanese didnt die?

Just to let you know I never knew my Grandfather he died for this country during word warII, my mother was still in the womb when he died.

My father and one of his brothers served at the same time in Korea, I never knew his brother because he died in action.

During Vietnam my father also lost a younger brother.

My brother served in the Navy and my husband retired as a Marine and his father also served in korea.

So don't you dare tell me anything about my father war time or about giving his life because he has given more that you will ever give for anything in this life, my children are adults and if they want to serve they are old enough to decided but I will never give them volutarily, enough of my family has already given their blood to this country and It's wars.

BTW how many in your family has seved and died for this country?

Marg... its always an endless trail of excuses when the U.S. does something like deliberately targeting civilians. If we do it there is an excuse like it would save American lives. If someone else does it to us they are terrorists. It is this pathetic set of double standards that have disgraced the U.S. name. When you drop a nuclear weapon on a city center as an offensive weapon you are no better than someone that walks into a bus and blows him/herself up. The objective is to influence a government by targeting its civilians. People can make up any story or excuse they want as to why they did it. Maybe its to end WWII early. Maybe its to get the Americans out of the middle east. They are all pathetic excuses.

Originally posted by marg6043
killing thousands and letting millions die from one race
or nation is also called Genocide.

Sometimes thousands have to be killed in order to save the millions.

Such was the case with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If America didn't
drop the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, then there would have
been NO Japanese left alive because they would have fought on
and on and on. They vowed to. Even the 6 year old children vowed
to. Also, tens of thousands, some estimates of hundreds of
thousands, of Americans would have also died in the fighting.

Dropping the bomb saved many many more lives than it took.

And don't forget. Japan started the war. They also refused to
end it. Japan has only Japan to blame for what happened to them.

As far as genocide - you said that letting millions from one race
or nation die is genocide. Then allowing Saddam to stay in power
would have been genocide. He was mass murdering his people,
and the people of Iran and Kuwait through wars he started.
Mass murdering by the hundreds of thousands.

Originally posted by Indy
When you drop a nuclear weapon on a city center as an
offensive weapon you are no better than someone that
walks into a bus and blows him/herself up..

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were DEFENSIVE, not offensive.

You need to go re-read history and see who started the war.
The JAPANESE did.

You also don't seem to understand that the entire Japanese
population was involved with their aggressive war effort.
Even the children had their school days cut short so as to
go work in the bullet factories.

Have you ever been to Hiroshima? I have. Have you read
what the Japanese population, and in particular that of
Hiroshima, was to the war effort? No. Go read.

If we do it there is an excuse like it would save American lives.
If someone else does it to us they are terrorists

That's not an excuse ... that's a fact.
Hiroshima DID save American lives as well as Japanese lives.

And the fact of the matter is that the terrorists don't save any lives.
They just kill for the pleasure of it. They target civilians on purpose.
America doesn't. In the case of Hiroshima, the civilians were deeply
involved in the war machine. No amount of big-bad-amerian rhetoric
on your part will change that fact.




[edit on 3/13/2006 by FlyersFan]

Originally posted by FlyersFan
As far as genocide - you said that letting millions from one race
or nation die is genocide. Then allowing Saddam to stay in power
would have been genocide. He was mass murdering his people,
and the people of Iran and Kuwait through wars he started.
Mass murdering by the hundreds of thousands.

Yes you are right, but what Saddam was doing was doing it during the time that he was supported by the US too, he didn't started to target his own people after he became the enemy he was doing it way before that.

Also what is the difference of Iraq genocide by Saddam that the present administration deemed the most important as to invade that country when you know very well that Africa has been under genocides for over ten years and millions has died from the result.

How come our country or any other country in the world do not invade or put a stop to it.

Sometimes good things seems hypocritical when we actually stop and think about it.

Not everything seems to be what we has been told its.



[edit on 13-3-2006 by marg6043]

Originally posted by Indy
Marg... its always an endless trail of excuses when the U.S. does something like deliberately targeting civilians. If we do it there is an excuse like it would save American lives. If

I agree, excuses are like a rear end we all have one, it seems that only powerful nations has the right to dictate what is right or wrong when it comes to imposing views.

Killing is genocide when is done by the Enemy but when is done by powerful nations is called collateral damage so everybody can sleep better at night.

FlyersFan... a nuke is only a defensive weapon when it is used in the form of a deterrent. Any other use is offensive. There is absolutely no proof that nuking those cities saved anyone. It was the deliberate massacre of over 100,000 Japanese civilians. So is this the plan? Every time you are losing a war you just go and murder the other guy's civilians in hopes they will back out of the war? That is called terrorism. Any other name for it is just to allow the guilty to sleep better at night.

Sorry but where are the Moderators? I thought keeping a thread on topic was part of the J.O.B.

Just a friendly reminder, does anyone remember Milosevic and his death?

Originally posted by NuclearHead

There was genocide, there shouldn't be any question about it. The number of victims and the mass graves tell it.

The huge number of victims and the mass graves are proof of a massacre and not proof of a genocide. A mass murder or a massacre is not the same as a genocide, they are different words. When the word genocide is misused it sounds to me like a good ol´ witch hunt if you know what I mean. And the mainstream media are of course fueling the flames (again) . But don´t get me wrong in this case. Mass murders, massacres and genocides are all bad. And what happened in Srebrenica was very bad, genocide or not.

Originally posted by Hellmutt

Originally posted by NuclearHead

There was genocide, there shouldn't be any question about it. The number of victims and the mass graves tell it.

The huge number of victims and the mass graves are proof of a massacre and not proof of a genocide. A mass murder or a massacre is not the same as a genocide, they are different words. When the word genocide is misused it sounds to me like a good ol´ witch hunt if you know what I mean. And the mainstream media are of course fueling the flames (again) . But don´t get me wrong in this case. Mass murders, massacres and genocides are all bad. And what happened in Srebrenica was very bad, genocide or not.

The commonly quoted definition of the 'Bosnian Genocide' is that it consisted of the "killing of Bosnians, predominantly male Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina from 1992 to 1995 by the army and police forces organized by Republika Srpska."

Then you've got the term, "Genocide", as defined by the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide; "Killing members of the group; Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

It's arguable that Slobodan, members of his government and the military and police intended to ethnically clense the region of Bosnian Muslims (or any Muslims for that matter).