Michael Moore Dares to Ask: What's So Heroic About Being Shot Down While Bombing Innocent Civilians

weedwhacker, what you state is a fallacy about our nukes saving lives. The japanese had been begging for surrender for months before then. We, the americans, demanded unconditional surrender, and they offered everything except one condition, that their emperor remained in power. We had reliable info that even that one condition they were about to agree to, but we bombed them anyway....and afterwards let them keep their emperor in power anyhow. So basically, we stayed at war with them several months longer than we had to, JUST so we could finish and test the nukes on two civilian areas of almost totally women and children.
Many believe that the last strike in WWII was actually the first strike in the cold war, and that we intentionally used our nukes on japan for 2 reasons.
1. because russia was about to enter into the war in japan and we wanted their complete surrender to us alone, and
2. as an intimidation against the USSR in the new cold war that western leaders knew was sure to begin with them.

reply to post by pexx421


pexx....thanks for that info!!!

See, there is a lot to understand, and hopefully continue to learn.

I think I mentioned, I'm not a privy to all of the complexities of the decisions made to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Good to hear your perspective!!

Originally posted by TXMACHINEGUNDLR
Yeah, sorry about that. Let me just say that he is a PROVEN liar. A hack film maker, and in general a disgusting human being. I would not back Moore even if he was saying, Oh I don't know " Obama is the media darling because he is black." I would still say the same thing. He was making Roger & Me while investing in GM. He was making Farenhype 9-11 while investing in Halliburton.

There that "On topic enough for ya"

Mr. Moore invests just any other person would. Plus those investments allowed himself into shareholder meetings. Seems like a good place to get inside information to me, don't you think? Plus when was the last time he dropped a bomb killing and injuring innocent people.? You cant compare anything that he has said to vast destruction a bomb causes.

Originally posted by pexx421
weedwhacker, what you state is a fallacy about our nukes saving lives. The japanese had been begging for surrender for months before then.

Geezus, your history is even worse then Budski's.

We, the americans, demanded unconditional surrender, and they offered everything except one condition, that their emperor remained in power.

Please post link to reliable historical evidence.

We had reliable info that even that one condition they were about to agree to, but we bombed them anyway

Wrong. The Japanese put out a communique that was less then clear in its meaning, but was clear in its purpose of not being a final communique. The Japanese knew there was a ticking clock. But like all self-deluding fools, the leadership kept playing for time they didn't have.

....and afterwards let them keep their emperor in power anyhow.

Again dead wrong. Hirohito was stripped of his godhood and turned into a mere mortal constitutional monarch, identical to Elizabeth II.

So basically, we stayed at war with them several months longer than we had to, JUST so we could finish and test the nukes on two civilian areas of almost totally women and children.

Crap. Truman knew nothing of the bomb until his sudden promotion. He was extremely reluctant to use it.

Many believe that the last strike in WWII was actually the first strike in the cold war, and that we intentionally used our nukes on japan for 2 reasons.

1. Because many people will believe anything if its hinted at darkly enough and often enough.

2. Because many people know their history only from what Hollywood or their grandfather has told them and not from reading books by historians who have read the official papers and talked to the people who were there.

1. because russia was about to enter into the war in japan and we wanted their complete surrender to us alone,

Cetainly the US and British Commonwealth did not want Japan occupied by all the major powers the way Germany was.

and

2. as an intimidation against the USSR in the new cold war that western leaders knew was sure to begin with them.

Truman knew nothing of the kind. It was Churchill who advised him so stringently to share the knowledge of the existence but not the makings of the bomb with Stalin.

Remember, in 1945 Churchill was voted out of office. At the final "big 3" conference Stalin was the only original there. Truman had succeeded the dead Roosevelt, Atlee had defeated Churchill at election.

Atlee was such a "Cold Warrior" that he gave the designs for the brand new Rolls Royce Nene jet engine to Stalin for free.

Beware of the logical fallacy: All cats have four legs. My dog has four legs, therefore it is a...cat? Something must be done, this is something, therefore we must do it.


Truman dropped the bomb because Marshall told him invading Japan would make Iwo Jima and Okinawa look like a sandpit fight between four-year olds.

The second bomb was dropped because Japan did not surrender, instead they accelerated preparations for defence against seaborne invasion.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Nuremberg was a circus much the same the trials of Saddam. Surely you remember the trials of Saddam and his "henchmen" .. a sham if I ever saw one.

Sure and so are all the war crime trails where just one sides criminals are prosecuted.

Certainly... but he was following orders. Tell me, would you want a man in charge of the entire US Armed Forces if he himself deserted/stood up to superiors?

He stood up for the law of the United States of America ( which the Geneva conventions are) and thus the primary authority in the land. If a military man does not wish to make himself subject to the laws that would protect his family in cases where other nations have sufficient power to respond in violent kind then he is either misinformed, ignorant or too cowardly to do the right thing by the citizens of the world. Since it does not make much sense to break laws that are in fact meant to protect you and those your supposedly fighting to protect i am sure soldiers are mostly misinformed or completely ignorant of these laws.

Stellar

Originally posted by weedwhacker
I just wish to say, LeftHand.....you covered a lot of ground, but what jumped out to me was the suggestion of using the Nukes off shore....

I'm not a great student of the War.....but I am stunned that I never thought of that!!!

They thought about using the bomb on an offshore island as a demo, but thought that Japanese might move POWs to the island. Who knows? We dropped the bombs, the war ended. Now the revisionists are rewriting history to fit their agenda.

But, back to Michael Moore.

His 2002 Oscar-winning film documentary "Bowling for Columbine" is on right now, as I type.

Think what you will of him, it is not ever appropriate to judge the man for being overweight and unkempt looking....is it??

If he looked like Charlton Heston or "Ah-nold" would you judge that same way?

PS...Mr. Moore is a member of the NRA. For a long time...

reply to post by AllAround369


While Laos suffered more bombing than all of Europe combined in WW2, it wasn't something like 18 years, McCain had nothing to do with it (it was Stratoforts) and it has nothing to do with this thread topic.

What you should note about the Laos bombing (you did, just not very well) was that all of Laos except for Vientiane and Luang Prabang were considered a virtual free-fire zone, especially the Plain of Jars and that pilots who couldn't find the primary target in NVN were instructed to jettison their bombs over the plain on their way home to Thailand because, as anyone should know, landing a B52 with a full load just isn't that much fun.

So it was nothing more than mere disinterest that led to Laos being the most bombed piece of real estate on earth. The Yanks couldn't even muster up the effort to do it deliberately.

Originally posted by LeftHandBodhi
Firebombing civilian areas in WWII was barbaric. We could have used one nuke 20 miles out to sea from Tokyo and got them to surrender.

Point two is A) absolute crap and B) proves you have never studied the incident in question.

Point one ignores two key things.

One is the fact that Germany invented the policy of aerial bombing of civilian populations. Try and learn something about a rather large piece of canvas called "Guernica".

Two is the fact that World War Two was the first "Total War" where every asset a nation had was turned to the war effort. This came about as a result of the way the West wages war. Remember Serbia/Kosovo? The West wages war by slowly increasing the pain it causes until the opponent ceases doing what they're doing. The West doesn't particularly like going to war because a lot of people come home dead. But it will go to war, however reluctantly. Once it has gone to war it is only after it has made its mission statement and goals plain.

Germany knew what the mission statement was: Unconditional surrender of Germany (and Austria and Italy). Germany began the conflict and Germany ignored the rules, bombing columns of civilian refugees, invading neutral nations, bombing civilian infrastructure.

The simplest rule in life is this: Never begin what you cannot afford to see right to the very end. Germany began it. The Allies saw it right to the very end.

I don't particularly salute the firebombing of Hamburg and Dresden (or Tokyo), but I understand how and why they occurred and I know that I am looking at them with 20/20 hindsight and therefore I won't outright condemn them, either.

I have no problem with the bomb being dropped on Japan. Not even with 20/20 hindsight. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were two very different things to Hamburg and Dresden.

A single bomb, a single explosion, over within minutes. Not an entire night of flames and smoke and self-feeding infernoes.

I don't hear any of those bleating about Hiroshima recalling Nanking.

I don't hear any of those bleating about Dresden recalling the Siege of Leningrad.

But all of this is beside the point. That point is this: McCain isn't a hero for being a pilot, for bombing anything or for being shot down. He's a hero for enduring captivity that consisted of a series of war crimes as defined by the Geneva Convention and for not leaving early when given the chance, but choosing to stay with his fellow officers and prisoners.

That is what makes him a "hero".

And that, Mister Moore, is why your question deserves no answer. Your question deliberately ignores the substance of the matter.

As for those who are saying military experience does not a good leader make, I again give you this list:

George Washington
Andrew Jackson
Abraham Lincoln
Ulysses S Grant
Harry S Truman
Dwight D Eisenhower
John Fitzgerald Kennedy

Now, let's compare them with, say, Richard Nixon and George W Bush, not to mention National Security Advisors Henry Kissinger and Condoleeza Rice...or Secretaries of Defence Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld...

Originally posted by budski

Michael Moore Dares to Ask: What's So Heroic About Being Shot Down While Bombing Innocent Civilians?

[edit on 22/8/2008 by budski]

When do innocent civilians get surface to air missiles to shoot down fighter aircraft. To say that we only bombed innocent civilians in Vietnam is flat out false. What about the 58000 or so american troops who died. I guess that was all fratricide. As a matter of fact, the us airforce must have shot his navy plane out of the air because they knew what the navy was up too.


It is so easy to criticize the US. How about the 3 million civilians murdered by the north Vietnamese for collusion. That is fine of course because they fought the US. I have n o problem with people finding faults with the US. I have problems with people ignoring everyone else's faults and blaming the entire worlds problems on the US.

reply to post by greysave


Try actually reading the article - it didn't say the US ONLY bombed civilian targets, it merely made the point that McCain was bombing a civilian target when he was shot down.

Don't people read anymore?

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by HowlrunnerIV

 

Re-writing history a little there aren't we?

Nazi germany was attacking a US ally, and was an ally of a country which attacked the US.

Any bombing of germany also pales into insignificance when compared to hiroshima and nagasaki.

Any way, to get back on topic - McCain WAS bombing civilian targets when he was shot down, regardless of what he was flying or how many times he'd done it.

I'll ask the question again - if a foreign pilot was shot down after bombing a major US city, do you think they would survive, even if they landed safely?

IMO the answer is a resounding NO.

McCain also condones the torture in Iraq and gitmo - he hasn't spoken out against it, so by default he condones it.

How does that sit with the fact he's been tortured himself (something else he exaggerated - the length of time, not the torture)
Is it a case of because he's been through it, then all POW's must go through it?

I happen to know John McCain and like some of the others on this forum who are from my state and have actually met the man and have seen him with his shirt off at a BBQ held for VN vets hosted by one of our Clients home. He doesn't look like Rambo did in the Jail shower scene but you can tell right away, that guy went through some god awful hell and Budski I read so much of your anti American threads usually passing them over as so much silliness but this one is regarding someone you know not a damn thing about and you post this TRASH and by the way bud all of it is trash. This man did something I don't not a damn one of us can say we would have done but Ill save that for your re-post because I love using this to put one big foot in the mouths of McCain Bashers like you.

Oh yeah Bud that's how I read your "im from the UK and its all Americas fault typical bash all American Bash" posts. Just more Budski Bashem and trashem and frankly I am getting so sick of the UK talking smack about Americans I hope to hell your leaders idiotic sharia laws consume your entire legal system where the Muslims inherit a nation equipped with nukes just so we can shut you off. If I'm real lucky, it will be McCain that gets to call that one. That way it will justify your insane paranoia of us and the man who has had more attacks made on him to disparage his military service record by people who couldn't fill his jock strap much less endure the kind of experience this man did.

I'll ask the question again - if a foreign pilot was shot down after bombing a major US city, do you think they would survive, even if they landed safely?

IMO the answer is a resounding NO.

Well that's the difference between us then isn't BUDSI, this is sort of leading the witness isn't it? Let me ask you Budsi, was serial killer Richard Speck, John Wayne Gacey, Ted Bundy, taken alive? Answer Yes.

In my NOT so humble opinion,, should they have been? Hell NO

But they were.

Was terrorist timothy McVeigh who bombed the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma taken alive? Yes he was, so not everyone is like you and I Budski. My question is what your point is.

Then their is this idea you say he hasn't spoken out against torture which is just simply NOT TRUE, in fact he was one of the first to come out on American television saying quite candidly that water boarding IS in fact torture and that he was dead set against it. This created somewhat of a rift between Bush and McCain but what else is new.

So BURY that one once and for all Budski never to say it again. You can find a myriad of youtubes on it if you like I don't feel particularly generous to lift that much of a finger for you myself so you'll have to forgive my lack of motivation.

It's when you try to squeak comments like this past us

Any bombing of Germany also pales into insignificance when compared to hiroshima and nagasaki.

That really piss people off and Oh if we had to do it over again,, it would have STILL been the right thing to do. The only mistake I can think we made is not crushing the UK along with Germany. Yeah you talk about tolerance while shoving your own intolerance of America down out throats and I am sick of it. I never had any ill feelings towards the UK until seeing the sickness of hatred and bigotry of Americans displayed by so many in the UK all the while they are telling us about ours never once seeing it in themselves.

I admit the word hero is tossed out so cavalier these days it doesn't have any meaning but I appreciate Jericho for posting that AZ Central on Mr. McCain and I have seen the many Military awards and Honors on the walls of his home office along with photos taken by his comrades. What makes him a Hero is that he didn't HAVE to endure those 6 years. He was offered a chance to leave but said he wouldn't take the offer unless it was made for all his fellow prisoners.

I can see what kind of talk they would be making now about him had he not had the courage to say no back then.

Now THAT is the kind of thing lard ass gold digging opportunists like Michael Moore could never understand much less articulate but I can.

That kind of thing is what Hero's DO and John McCain is NOTHING LESS than a True American Hero who has served this country all of his life.

You call this man hating? I doubt any of you could get past your own prejudices the likes this man had to overcome and has proven

www.usvetdsp.com...
Court Date Set for Vietnam Vet POW/MIA Activist Accused of "Intimidating and Harassing" Vietnam's Prime Minster
Senator McCain to be subpoenaed as a witness
By Ted Sampley
U.S. Veteran Dispatch
23 June 2005
www.usvetdsp.com


Vietnam veteran and longtime POW/MIA activist Jerry Kiley was arrested by the U.S. Secret Service Tuesday evening and charged with a Federal crime. Agents charged Kiley under Title l8, United States Code, Section 112(B).

After a night and day in jail, Kiley was finally presented for arraignment to a federal judge in Washington's U.S. District Court. The judge set July 8, 2005 as trail date. Kiley was released after signing an agreement not to go anywhere around the White House, or Communist Vietnam's prime minister, Phan Van Khai and his delegation while they are still in the United States.

The charge states that Kiley "willfully intimidated, coerced, threatened and harassed a foreign official, an official guest of the United States Government, to wit, Phan Van Khai, Prime Minister of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam and obstructed the Prime Minister in the performance of Prime Minister Khai's official duties."

Before Kiley was arrested, he, along with Vietnam Veteran/POW activist Ted Sampley and former Vietnam POW Mike Benge, had spent the most part of that day, June 21, in front of the White House helping former South Vietnamese soldiers and political prisoners protest Khai's visit with President George Bush.

During the presidential election, Sampley, Benge and Kiley organized and operated Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry (VVAJK). Their organization was first veterans group to publicly oppose Kerry. Their web site received over 10,000,000 visitors during the first 90 days online.

Khai is the highest-ranking Vietnamese official to visit the White House since 1975 when the North Vietnamese communist violated The 1973 Paris Peace Accords.

[edit on 26-8-2008 by XIDIXIDIX]

Mod Note: Excessive Quoting – Please Review This Link



[edit on 26-8-2008 by Jbird]

Originally posted by XIDIXIDIX ... The only mistake I can think we made is not crushing the UK along with Germany. Yeah you talk about tolerance while shoving your own intolerance of America down out throats and I am sick of it.

While I think you're entitled to your rant...as are we all...you're wrong with bashing the Brits. The very fact that they followed y'all into Iraq entitles them to a voice and courtesy. Disagree with Budski if you wish, but careful not to alienate one of the last of America's friends. Just a friendly caution from a friendly neighbour.

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by XIDIXIDIX ... The only mistake I can think we made is not crushing the UK along with Germany. Yeah you talk about tolerance while shoving your own intolerance of America down out throats and I am sick of it.

While I think you're entitled to your rant...as are we all...you're wrong with bashing the Brits. The very fact that they followed y'all into Iraq entitles them to a voice and courtesy. Disagree with Budski if you wish, but careful not to alienate one of the last of America's friends. Just a friendly caution from a friendly neighbour.

Yeah with friends like you, who needs a mulsim enemy.
You use that Iraq argument to bash us every chance you get on these boards cannuck JUST LOOK AROUND but dont think you can turn this around on me. Oh by the way you can start with THIS THREAD as a perfect example. Personally I don't trust the UK anymore and until they take their Government back and get rid of that idiotic Sharia Law that WILL consume the rest of the legal system there. You're just another Jihad waiting to happen.

Here is another from one of "our friends" in the UK
www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 26-8-2008 by XIDIXIDIX]

reply to post by XIDIXIDIX


You're entitled to your opinion, but there's just one problem:

I'm not bashing america, I'm bashing the idiots in charge, and I've also bashed the UK's leaders pretty often.

Fortunately we now have a PM (and a future PM) who won't be lead by the nose like bush's poodle blair.

The fact of the matter is, that thanks to being your ally, the UK is now the target of terrorist attacks, has a floundering economy and has a busted housing market, whilst spending money we can ill afford, following the "worlds police" around like some half arsed traffic warden - and it's not like your leaders even respond in kind. Just take the case of the evil "hacker" which has been in the news recently.

If McCain wants to promote himself using his war record, then he should be prepared to put up with the criticism as well.

He's also a cold war dinosaur - and the world has moved on since then, as it needed to.

Have your opinion, but don't tell me what to write or how to write it - you don't have that right.

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by XIDIXIDIX

 

You're entitled to your opinion, but there's just one problem:

I'm not bashing america, I'm bashing the idiots in charge, and I've also bashed the UK's leaders pretty often.

Fortunately we now have a PM (and a future PM) who won't be lead by the nose like bush's poodle blair.

The fact of the matter is, that thanks to being your ally, the UK is now the target of terrorist attacks, has a floundering economy and has a busted housing market, whilst spending money we can ill afford, following the "worlds police" around like some half arsed traffic warden - and it's not like your leaders even respond in kind. Just take the case of the evil "hacker" which has been in the news recently.

If McCain wants to promote himself using his war record, then he should be prepared to put up with the criticism as well.

He's also a cold war dinosaur - and the world has moved on since then, as it needed to.

Have your opinion, but don't tell me what to write or how to write it - you don't have that right.

You don't have the right to tell me that then budski. whats good for the goose. I don't care what kind of Dinosaur YOU think he is, he isn't dumb enough to run a war as idiotic as Bush has and he listens to his Generals who are NOT as prehistroic. Criticism is one thing but slander is something no one should have to defend against. Yeah I'd say just about ALL this "stuff" has been said and debunked as just so much "junk"

I probably wouldn't vote for him as I had another choice in mind but he didn't make it as the Candidate but Ill be damned if i am going to vote for a Chicago Slum Lord Attorney with a rookies experience in the senate and a history shrouded in lies. I agree with you about Blair but under the circumstances,, I sure can't say I wouldn't have done the same thing if I were him and The UK's best ally was asking me to do it. I know he couldn't have known how far out of whack that idea would have got much less the trouble it would have caused for his position at home.

I like Tony Blair, I think most Americans do whether he would have joined us or not, he seems like a decent man caught in a quagmire

The fact of the matter is, that thanks to being your ally, the UK is now the target of terrorist attacks, has a floundering economy and has a busted housing market, whilst spending money we can ill afford, following the "worlds police" around like some half arsed traffic warden - and it's not like your leaders even respond in kind. Just take the case of the evil "hacker" which has been in the news recently.

Ahh yes yess Here we see the true colors and the very injury that is the seething cauldron of emotions masked until then by a fatigued obstacle usually obeyed but here it is.

Yes and if the brits didn't have us to blame their whole miserable lives on they would all suffer a major hemorage.

Get OVER IT, or better, do us BOTH a favor and have nothing to do with us then. I'd be all for that


[edit on 26-8-2008 by XIDIXIDIX]

Originally posted by XIDIXIDIX

Yeah with friends like you, who needs a mulsim enemy.
You use that Iraq argument to bash us every chance you get on these boards cannuck JUST LOOK AROUND but don't think you can turn this around on me....Personally I don't trust the UK anymore and until they take their Government back and get rid of that idiotic Sharia Law that WILL consume the rest of the legal system there. You're just another Jihad waiting to happen.

I think you might want to go off-shore...or at least to the CBC to correct some of those factoids that are causing you so much grief. Try it...BBC, CBC...you'll sleep better.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
But, back to Michael Moore.

His 2002 Oscar-winning film documentary "Bowling for Columbine" is on right now, as I type.

Think what you will of him, it is not ever appropriate to judge the man for being overweight and unkempt looking....is it??

If he looked like Charlton Heston or "Ah-nold" would you judge that same way?

PS...Mr. Moore is a member of the NRA. For a long time...

Think what you will of him, it is not ever appropriate to judge the man for being overweight and unkempt looking....is it??

Why not? If the man doesn't respect himself, his own disheveled unshaven appearance on the outside where all of us can see, what little would he care then about who he is on the inside where only he knows what sinister lurks in his mind. He is a smart man, he knows what this means. So if he can't have enough respect for himself,, then why should we

He has made some good points in some of his films but saying this about McCain HA HA HA HA That coming from HIM,, is hysterical

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by XIDIXIDIX

Yeah with friends like you, who needs a mulsim enemy.
You use that Iraq argument to bash us every chance you get on these boards cannuck JUST LOOK AROUND but don't think you can turn this around on me....Personally I don't trust the UK anymore and until they take their Government back and get rid of that idiotic Sharia Law that WILL consume the rest of the legal system there. You're just another Jihad waiting to happen.

I think you might want to go off-shore...or at least to the CBC to correct some of those factoids that are causing you so much grief. Try it...BBC, CBC...you'll sleep better.

Thats funny, the same thing this guy said, also from the UK.


I have been to the UK quite a bit in the past and have even worked with some people employed by the BBC on some conract law dispute with another American company. The fact is it was the UK I get my info from but hey just google it yourself. Their are PLENTY of brits out there that will side with me

reply to post by XIDIXIDIX


I have no doubt that you would like to be an isolationist - the only trouble is, it's not the 1920's any more.

The US relies on the rest of the world far more than they rely on the US.

Same for the UK - we are both consumer societies who produce little in comparison to what we consume.

Here's the truth - mccain is a bush clone, and voting for him is voting for more of the same.