It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

so... will usa destroy their nukes too?

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2004 @ 11:49 PM
link   
so yet again the US decided for other nation, to what's better for them!, how do you know maybe they wanted to fight till the end and not be shut up and embaraced(sp?) instead? and the radiation from that bomb will kill and kill! for a long time!


btw, here's true bush
media.ebaumsworld.com...




posted on Feb, 11 2004 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by CyberGhost
so yet again the US decided for other nation, to what's better for them!, how do you know maybe they wanted to fight till the end and not be shut up and embaraced(sp?) instead?

First off, it saved 1 million Americna lives. That alone was reason to drop it. Second, yes, I'm sure the Japanese were/are much more happy being alive than being gunned down needlessly.


and the radiation from that bomb will kill and kill! for a long time!

Uh...no it won't. The radiation is gone. Who the hell told you people are still getting sick from it?



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 12:15 AM
link   
There are abnormal amounts of babies born in the region with deformities due to the fact their parents were exposed to the radiation... i feel the Japanese would've been better off in case of an invasion... but i do understand the point of saving US lives... thats what a government should do...

but i feel no more safe Bush having Nukes than i do the North Korea Guy or Saddam or anyone else for that matter



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by specialasianX
There are abnormal amounts of babies born in the region with deformities due to the fact their parents were exposed to the radiation...

Oh, that I can believe. But this guy is saying that the radiation is still there, which is untrue.

i feel the Japanese would've been better off in case of an invasion... but i do understand the point of saving US lives... thats what a government should do...

I don't. I can't imagine how many people would have died if it had occured.

[qutoe]but i feel no more safe Bush having Nukes than i do the North Korea Guy or Saddam or anyone else for that matter
I don't agree with you at all, but you're entitled to your opinion.



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 12:33 AM
link   
Esotorica your in the States right? thats why you feel safer... he wont nuke you... in regards to the Japs (no racism intended just easier to write) being happier being nuked... like you said they were veryproud and willing to fight to the death... the japanese are all about honour... they would have been much happier (in my opinion of course... feel free to disagree i love a good debate) to have had put up a fight and been beaten on their doorstep then to have to be humiliated and having to surrender due to a new super weapon which they had absolutely no defense against...

i just think they would have been happier if they were given a chance to defend themselves...
WMD's are a cowardly way to resovle a conflict if no-one else has them.. nowadays though he who deploys a nuke on another nation indeed has alot of balls to do so



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica

Originally posted by CyberGhost
so yet again the US decided for other nation, to what's better for them!, how do you know maybe they wanted to fight till the end and not be shut up and embaraced(sp?) instead?

First off, it saved 1 million Americna lives. That alone was reason to drop it. Second, yes, I'm sure the Japanese were/are much more happy being alive than being gunned down needlessly.


and the radiation from that bomb will kill and kill! for a long time!

Uh...no it won't. The radiation is gone. Who the hell
People are most probably getting theside effects of radiationtreatment meaning they are still suffering.



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica

Originally posted by CyberGhost
so yet again the US decided for other nation, to what's better for them!, how do you know maybe they wanted to fight till the end and not be shut up and embaraced(sp?) instead?

First off, it saved 1 million Americna lives. That alone was reason to drop it. Second, yes, I'm sure the Japanese were/are much more happy being alive than being gunned down needlessly.


and the radiation from that bomb will kill and kill! for a long time!

Uh...no it won't. The radiation is gone. Who the hell told you people are still getting sick from it?

People are now getting sick from the side effects of radiationtreatment.



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by specialasianX
Esotorica your in the States right?

Yes.

thats why you feel safer... he wont nuke you...

I doubt he's going to nuke anybody, though. I'd be terrified of him using a nuke anywhere, I just don't think he'd do it.

in regards to the Japs (no racism intended just easier to write) being happier being nuked... like you said they were veryproud and willing to fight to the death... the japanese are all about honour... they would have been much happier (in my opinion of course... feel free to disagree i love a good debate) to have had put up a fight and been beaten on their doorstep then to have to be humiliated and having to surrender due to a new super weapon which they had absolutely no defense against...

Well, by happiness, I'm not just talking about Japan circa WWII. Sure, they were honor-crazy, and were happy to kill themselves for the Emperor. But, I believe that allowing them to live and evolve as a culture was better than cutting a swath through the home islands. And I'm pretty damn sure Japan today, maybe not happy we did it, can realize that the alternative was much worse.

Nobody wanted to drop the bomb. However, there are times when even a bad choice is the best one.


i just think they would have been happier if they were given a chance to defend themselves...

They may have been happier, but they'd also be dead. I think they'd rather get to live.


WMD's are a cowardly way to resovle a conflict if no-one else has them.. nowadays though he who deploys a nuke on another nation indeed has alot of balls to do so

I don't consider the nuking of Japan cowardly. The government did what it had to do to save American lives (which is it's job, after all). I mean, sure, the Japanese were heroic and honorbound. Where did it lead them? To defeat and suicide. Those men are now dead in the ground. The Americans who ended up not invading lived their lives out.

Dropping the bomb was neither heroic or cowardly. It was just an action taken to end a war that was going to end sooner or later.

Rememebr, Russia had it's eye on Japan. If the war hadn't ended sooner, Stalin would have invaded along with the Americans. Look at the mess East Germany made, imagine if it applied to Japan also.



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by specialasianX
Esotorica your in the States right? thats why you feel safer... he wont nuke you... in regards to the Japs (no racism intended just easier to write) being happier being nuked... like you said they were veryproud and willing to fight to the death... the japanese are all about honour... they would have been much happier (in my opinion of course... feel free to disagree i love a good debate) to have had put up a fight and been beaten on their doorstep then to have to be humiliated and having to surrender due to a new super weapon which they had absolutely no defense against...

i just think they would have been happier if they were given a chance to defend themselves...
WMD's are a cowardly way to resovle a conflict if no-one else has them.. nowadays though he who deploys a nuke on another nation indeed has alot of balls to do so


So True! Japanese people are all about honour! and i'm pretty sure they'd have preferred to fight and die like man, than to be nuked!



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 12:57 AM
link   
WERE about honor, remember that. Iraq is the first time the Japanese Defense Force (they won't allow themselves to have an offensive military) has been deployed. They accept that they went sort of nuts in WWII, and are working to make sure such a thing does not happen again.



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 12:58 AM
link   
People are most probably getting theside effects of radiationtreatment meaning they are still suffering.

Most people who were actually nuked are probably dead or close to it due to age. This was over 50 years ago. Even children then are over the hill.



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 01:08 AM
link   
I just saw a report on MSNBC that people were starting to question this. I did not hear who was making the comments, but I will try to find out any info I can.

I was actually reading the Dan Rather-Saddam interview transcript and I know most will not like this, but then again it contributes partly to the NWO Conspiracy, Hussein stated:
I say to the honest Americans that if such a thing happens, do not capitulate, do not give in. You have to defend your country, defend your family and your honor. Do not commit aggression against us. And, as you know, we have not committed any aggression against the United States. The United States intelligence (UNINITEL) against our country, our people, our children.
am speaking now with you, and maybe airplanes, warplanes, American warplanes, are flying over Iraqi air space, over south or north, and dropping ammunition, weapons thatare destroying property, property belonging to our citizens, our population -- either private property or public property, because public property also belongs to the people. This is happening daily.
So when such a law is wished to prevail in the world, to govern the world, whether it's in possession of huge powers and has the right to destroy others or to control others and then you have to accept their control or their domination, such a law does not possess the basics, the most basic elements or ingredients of morality and the most basic ingredients of faith, whichever this power might be. Regardless of this power, this state of affairs will be the law of the jungle, and we are people who believe in our destiny and we will not accept any law of the jungle. It is our duty, it is our responsibility to defend our country, to defend our children, to defend our people, and we are not going to succumb, neither to the United States nor to any other power.

The thing that got me was "to govern the world".
He also goes on to explain that "when Mr. Tariq Aziz, as Foreign Minister, had a meeting with Secretary James Baker -- that was in January in Geneva. Baker threatened Tariq Aziz with something that he hoped that Tariq Aziz would bring back tothe government of Iraq."
" They began talking about Iraq possibly having produced WMD, weapons of mass destruction, after and that they have information or data to that effect. We have said that Iraq has not produced any such weapons. What does that mean? It means that what they had threatened with -- pushing Iraq back into the pre-industrial age - had not actually taken place, that they could not do that to Iraq, what they had threatened Iraq with in - through Baker in - had not taken place. So nobody can metamorphosis. Nobody can sort of take Iraq apart. That is not fair to the will of Allah, and it's not fair to the people of Iraq who are facing the difficulties in resolve and through serious work and through creativity."
"The United States can destroy - but the question is, why should America destroy? And why should America generate hostility - the hostility of the world -- towards the United States?
Did the Americans obtain the weapons in order to control and dominate the world? Or did those (UNINTEL) and the taxpayers (UNINTEL). Did they do that in order to control the world? (UNINTEL) the USA. I believe that the scientists of the United States and the people of the United States and the taxpayers of the United States, when they paid that, when they supported that, that was for the basic defense of the United States. Is it right? Is it right? Is it acceptable that anybody, any official, anyone in power, once he is in possession of a weapon, then he should go and take that weapon to destroy other people?"


I believe in the fact that Iraq did not threaten the US. Where they a threat? If you base your information on their past actions, Yes. As far as coming over here and attacking us, they don't have the capability to. The UN inspectors that were in Iraq prior to the start of the war did not find any WMD. If I remember correctly, they had asked for more time. As it turns out so far, there isn't any. I believe we had built weapons and arsenals for defense of our homeland, not to use them on a country that in hindsight we went to war with on false pretenses. Why did we not spend all this time looking for OBL? He is the ring leader, Right? OBL has come out and said that he had no ties with Saddam or Iraq, and vice-versa, wether it is truth or not, it has not been concretely disputed. Maybe the Iraqi people see what is happening to the US under GW, I don't know. Remember Vice President Richard Cheney says that if and when an American-led Army comes into Iraq, it will be greeted with music. It will be treated as a Army of liberation.

I have not seen the country embrace our presence like this.



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 01:12 AM
link   
*Side Note*

I like this thread coz no-one is getting pissed off at each other for their differing opinions its a good healthy debate. Usually there would be some fanatical anti-US guy hurling abuse (i think i got worked up at one point but at no-one in particular) and some fanatical patriot who is pro-US hurling it back... but his thread has been quite tame thus far...

my applauds to you all



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 01:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by specialasianX
*Side Note*

I like this thread coz no-one is getting pissed off at each other for their differing opinions its a good healthy debate. Usually there would be some fanatical anti-US guy hurling abuse (i think i got worked up at one point but at no-one in particular) and some fanatical patriot who is pro-US hurling it back... but his thread has been quite tame thus far...

my applauds to you all


I noticed that too. It's refreshing.

Hope we haven't jinxed it.

*sets up MG-42 nest just in case*


BTW, I'm going to bed soon, so I'll pick this back up tomorrow.



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 01:19 AM
link   
A note on the Iraq WMD issue... the chemical and biological weapons were given to the Iraqis by the USA to use on iran back in the 80's... does that sound like the responsible actions of a superpower... not in my eyes... then a decade or so down the line the USA invade Iraq coz they *may* have these weapons still (keep in mind they were moslty used on Iran and some on the Kurds which is NOT cool). But the fact that the US supports one nation one decade then goes against them the next gives me hope that in the future they will see the atrocities commited by Sharon and the Israeli administration...

I wonder which one of the US's allies will be next on the 'can we have our weapons back' list...



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by specialasianX
A note on the Iraq WMD issue... the chemical and biological weapons were given to the Iraqis by the USA to use on iran back in the 80's... does that sound like the responsible actions of a superpower... not in my eyes... then a decade or so down the line the USA invade Iraq coz they *may* have these weapons still (keep in mind they were moslty used on Iran and some on the Kurds which is NOT cool). But the fact that the US supports one nation one decade then goes against them the next gives me hope that in the future they will see the atrocities commited by Sharon and the Israeli administration...

I wonder which one of the US's allies will be next on the 'can we have our weapons back' list...


Well, back then, we hated Iran more than we hated Iraq. More of "My enemy's enemy is my friend". However, I do believe that if we took the responsibility of giving a nation weapons, then it is also our responsibility to deal with them if they become a threat (this is a general opinion, not just for Iraq).

Also on this matter, I could be no more happy than if we just dropped the whole middle east/Israel thing and let them go at it. Both sides are nuts, and neither side has moral superiority (I don't buy "Ancestral Land" bull#, whoever lives there now lives there, it's not their fault their grandparents kicked yours out, but Israel i pulling crap like those border villages).

Basically, while it could be bad for a while, once the smoke settles we can get the world moving on again.

OK, seriously, I'm going to bed now



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 01:31 AM
link   
Night dude nice dabating...

But in relation to the Mid-East responsibilty does need to be taken on both sides to resolve the issue... its just so unbalanced with the US backing Israel... i think its unfair its illegal to offer money for the palestinian cause but its ok to give israel money... israel are the ones who taught the palestinians how to use terror tactics... theyre both as bad as each other you right...
back on the topic... does Israel have nukes?



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 01:31 AM
link   
i don't know about all that but i won't be surprized if many many Iraqi people will become terrorists and start attacking the US! i mean, someone comes to your place destroyes your home! kills your family and friends! what you gonna do? you can't just come out and war! you'll start terrorizing(that's for the US, revange for you)



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 01:34 AM
link   
I think its funny how the media portrays the Iraqis fighting the US occupation terrorists... i think theyre resistance fighters personally... but i guess thats propaganda for you



posted on Feb, 12 2004 @ 01:53 AM
link   
media has the big power of brainwashing and controlling people!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join