the hiroshima pictures

[Tom]

Originally posted by: alejandroAT

Originally posted by: Stumps

Originally posted by: alejandroAT
haha....i know...it's not the first time. My only hope is that there are still a few who agree with me even though they are american. I have started mapping them according to originating state. It is interesting to see how some states are filled with fanatics and others seem to have more normal people.

hmm While I agree that the Atom bomb was a horrible thing to use. The fact that my countryman (Australia) would have been involved in the invasion of japan along side the American's, makes think that it was probably the easiest way to end the war.
The struggle that Australia had with Japan was one of the fiecest of WW2 and one of the most brutal, thousands of Australian's along with possible million's of American's would have died invading Japan...they(the Japanese Imperial Army) truely were savages and would have possible fought the fiecest battles in the history of warfare to protect their homeland.

surely the easiest way to end the war would have been to accept japans surrender?

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/trinity/supplement/procon.html

You really think the world would be a better place the last 60 years, if the culture of militarism that was WW2 Japan, had been allowed to continue to exist ?

That's like saying we would be better off if we just pushed Hitler back into Germany, but let him stay in power.

 

[alejandroAT]

We have something common and that is that we both think the other is the extreme.

Comparing Pearl Harbour to Nagasaki and Hiroshima is for me an extreme. What you did to iraqis for what saudis did to you is another extreme. For you it was the normal thing to do.

posted by: Tom
You really think the world would be a better place the last 60 years, if the culture of militarism that was WW2 Japan, had been allowed to continue to exist ?

be careful with remarks like that mate because they backfire. There is no question that the US is a military culture. The country with the biggest military spending in the world, the only country to have ever used nuclear weapons, had a few army generals for presidents, and indeed the country with the largest list of wars in the past century!

I truely do not want to come across as passionate with what i say. I am really just expressing feelings of eveyday people outside the US. This is pretty much what the world thinks of you. What the papers write about you, what even our politicians have expressed from time to time. Even CNN in europe (different broadcast than the US) is against american ongoing warmongering. It is not fanatic thinking over here, its everyday talk.

All i am saying is that you lot cannot continue to behave like cowboys and use the world as your ranch because in the end that makes you no different from all the dictators you fought against. We are truely grateful that the US jumped in to save the world from the nazzis (you accused me of maybe thinking that we would have been better off with hitler) but that cannot be used as an eternal proof of your goodwill. Goodwill you have shown none for a long time. It's all come down to demands and orders.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: alejandroAT
you are of course right DanTMWTMP to say that we shouldnt hold grudge over something that happened so long ago. But look at the other side too. How long is long enough to forget? 60 years was for japan. 40 for vietnam, 30 for greece, 10 for kossovo, still-going for iraq, tomorow iran and korea, maybe canada ( 🙂 ).

Do NOT FORGET that americans want to be forgiven for the atom bomb, yet 5 years ago some crazed up saudi arabians killed a couple of thousand civilians (countless times less than the japanese victims of the bomb) and a completely irrelevant country like iraq is STILL PAYING FOR IT RIGHT NOW. So what the hell are they trying to say? that nomatter what they do they are the good guys by default. Of course, you cant trust a slit-eye can you? they are always scheming to take over the world arent they? too bad america beat them to it. (sarcasm intended)

An example: my country, greece, had a military coup supported by the cia that lasted 7 years from '67 to 74' and during which coulntless people were tortured, jailed, executed. Executed !!! in the 70s!!!! That could never happen in the states and americans live in denial that it happens elsewhere in the world. Even after the public was informed about guandanamo and Abu Ghraib, nothing really changed. Instead of being shocked they started yelling "suits them right" and "everything goes in war".

Yes they say now "who cares about something that happened 60 years ago" but they do not realise that IT HAS NOT STOPPED YET. Since then they have invaded, killed, tortured, manipulated, countless times over and around the world and they have the nerve to be called liberators and righteous. They have the nerve to say that they are the true great democracy and that all the rest of the world live in tyranny and ignorance. Even the president has claimed to be doing the WORK OF GOD. How messed up is that?

So you cant really stand back and say "go cowboys go" cause you know once one war is over, they'll just start the next one, like they have been doing for half a century now.

Europe is now extremely cautious with americans. I dare to say that we fear them. We fear their immaturity and cowboy behaviour. We are starting to wonder whether we may be next. Who knows, maybe one day we do something that america doesnt like or does not approve. That day they may come to "liberate" us too!

I love this, Europe fights with itself and others for thousands of years inflicting horrific death tolls in the name of imperialism and religion (and completely screwing up a couple continents in the process) but the US is the one to always be painted the big warmonger.

I didn't hear anyone complaining when we were pushing the Germans out of the countries they had taken. Whatsmore, we actually gave them back to their peoples unlike the Soviets.

I don't support the Iraq war or even like our president, however to paint every conflict the US has been in over the last 100 years with the same brush is absurd. We had to freaking twist europe's arm something fierce to do anything at all about Serbia/Kosovo (a genocide on your back doorstep).

Also, your country had little in the way of moral quams when they hid behind our skirts from the Soviets (joined NATO) who would have gobbled up all of Europe post WWII had we let them.

 

[alejandroAT]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: alejandroAT
you are of course right DanTMWTMP to say that we shouldnt hold grudge over something that happened so long ago. But look at the other side too. How long is long enough to forget? 60 years was for japan. 40 for vietnam, 30 for greece, 10 for kossovo, still-going for iraq, tomorow iran and korea, maybe canada ( 🙂 ).

Do NOT FORGET that americans want to be forgiven for the atom bomb, yet 5 years ago some crazed up saudi arabians killed a couple of thousand civilians (countless times less than the japanese victims of the bomb) and a completely irrelevant country like iraq is STILL PAYING FOR IT RIGHT NOW. So what the hell are they trying to say? that nomatter what they do they are the good guys by default. Of course, you cant trust a slit-eye can you? they are always scheming to take over the world arent they? too bad america beat them to it. (sarcasm intended)

An example: my country, greece, had a military coup supported by the cia that lasted 7 years from '67 to 74' and during which coulntless people were tortured, jailed, executed. Executed !!! in the 70s!!!! That could never happen in the states and americans live in denial that it happens elsewhere in the world. Even after the public was informed about guandanamo and Abu Ghraib, nothing really changed. Instead of being shocked they started yelling "suits them right" and "everything goes in war".

Yes they say now "who cares about something that happened 60 years ago" but they do not realise that IT HAS NOT STOPPED YET. Since then they have invaded, killed, tortured, manipulated, countless times over and around the world and they have the nerve to be called liberators and righteous. They have the nerve to say that they are the true great democracy and that all the rest of the world live in tyranny and ignorance. Even the president has claimed to be doing the WORK OF GOD. How messed up is that?

So you cant really stand back and say "go cowboys go" cause you know once one war is over, they'll just start the next one, like they have been doing for half a century now.

Europe is now extremely cautious with americans. I dare to say that we fear them. We fear their immaturity and cowboy behaviour. We are starting to wonder whether we may be next. Who knows, maybe one day we do something that america doesnt like or does not approve. That day they may come to "liberate" us too!

I love this, Europe fights with itself and others for thousands of years inflicting horrific death tolls in the name of imperialism and religion (and completely screwing up a couple continents in the process) but the US is the one to always be painted the big warmonger.

now this is childish. How mature do you have to be to say something like that? You are comparing the crimes of the past with the modern doings? Are we to say that because europeans tortured in the middle ages it is quite ok to have a guandanamo in the year 2006? Europe has learned from the past. Try and do the same.

I didn't hear anyone complaining when we were pushing the Germans out of the countries they had taken. Whatsmore, we actually gave them back to their peoples unlike the Soviets.

again, you cannot keep reffering to that to justify all current actions.

I don't support the Iraq war or even like our president, however to paint every conflict the US has been in over the last 100 years with the same brush is absurd. We had to freaking twist europe's arm something fierce to do anything at all about Serbia/Kosovo (a genocide on your back doorstep).

the notion that america bombs for moral reasons or to liberate is naif to say the least.

Also, your country had little in the way of moral quams when they hid behind our skirts from the Soviets (joined NATO) who would have gobbled up all of Europe post WWII had we let them.

my country took the only option to escape communism. Then when america found out that they could not control it, it supported a military coup that kept greece in the dark for 7 years. Even today we have a US military base inside our borders. Dont go there mate it's not to your best interest. Your military is everywhere. Waiting in case we lose grip on democracy...

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: alejandroAT

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: alejandroAT
you are of course right DanTMWTMP to say that we shouldnt hold grudge over something that happened so long ago. But look at the other side too. How long is long enough to forget? 60 years was for japan. 40 for vietnam, 30 for greece, 10 for kossovo, still-going for iraq, tomorow iran and korea, maybe canada ( 🙂 ).

Do NOT FORGET that americans want to be forgiven for the atom bomb, yet 5 years ago some crazed up saudi arabians killed a couple of thousand civilians (countless times less than the japanese victims of the bomb) and a completely irrelevant country like iraq is STILL PAYING FOR IT RIGHT NOW. So what the hell are they trying to say? that nomatter what they do they are the good guys by default. Of course, you cant trust a slit-eye can you? they are always scheming to take over the world arent they? too bad america beat them to it. (sarcasm intended)

An example: my country, greece, had a military coup supported by the cia that lasted 7 years from '67 to 74' and during which coulntless people were tortured, jailed, executed. Executed !!! in the 70s!!!! That could never happen in the states and americans live in denial that it happens elsewhere in the world. Even after the public was informed about guandanamo and Abu Ghraib, nothing really changed. Instead of being shocked they started yelling "suits them right" and "everything goes in war".

Yes they say now "who cares about something that happened 60 years ago" but they do not realise that IT HAS NOT STOPPED YET. Since then they have invaded, killed, tortured, manipulated, countless times over and around the world and they have the nerve to be called liberators and righteous. They have the nerve to say that they are the true great democracy and that all the rest of the world live in tyranny and ignorance. Even the president has claimed to be doing the WORK OF GOD. How messed up is that?

So you cant really stand back and say "go cowboys go" cause you know once one war is over, they'll just start the next one, like they have been doing for half a century now.

Europe is now extremely cautious with americans. I dare to say that we fear them. We fear their immaturity and cowboy behaviour. We are starting to wonder whether we may be next. Who knows, maybe one day we do something that america doesnt like or does not approve. That day they may come to "liberate" us too!

I love this, Europe fights with itself and others for thousands of years inflicting horrific death tolls in the name of imperialism and religion (and completely screwing up a couple continents in the process) but the US is the one to always be painted the big warmonger.

now this is childish. How mature do you have to be to say something like that? You are comparing the crimes of the past with the modern doings? Are we to say that because europeans tortured in the middle ages it is quite ok to have a guandanamo in the year 2006? Europe has learned from the past. Try and do the same.

I didn't hear anyone complaining when we were pushing the Germans out of the countries they had taken. Whatsmore, we actually gave them back to their peoples unlike the Soviets.

again, you cannot keep reffering to that to justify all current actions.

I don't support the Iraq war or even like our president, however to paint every conflict the US has been in over the last 100 years with the same brush is absurd. We had to freaking twist europe's arm something fierce to do anything at all about Serbia/Kosovo (a genocide on your back doorstep).

the notion that america bombs for moral reasons or to liberate is naif to say the least.

Also, your country had little in the way of moral quams when they hid behind our skirts from the Soviets (joined NATO) who would have gobbled up all of Europe post WWII had we let them.

my country took the only option to escape communism. Then when america found out that they could not control it, it supported a military coup that kept greece in the dark for 7 years. Even today we have a US military base inside our borders. Dont go there mate it's not to your best interest. Your military is everywhere. Waiting in case we lose grip on democracy...

If you are going to judge us by our historical conduct I am well within my rights to do the same.

IIRC, the US maintains several bases in Greece via agreements with the Greek government that come up for renewal every so often. If you don't want the bases simply don't renew the agreements. I don't think that will happen though since their existance provides economic and strategic advantages to the country.

 

[alejandroAT]

yeah sure....and the prisoners in guandanamo can get a lawyer...nice one mate...your "naivite" is truely scary.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Yeah, people scold the atom bomb drops yet they don't mention the bombings of Tokyo where more civilians died in relation to. The Japanese military was suicidal, and all indications pointed that they would fight to the last man and child (obviously far more deaths, Japanese and Ally, than those sacrificed by the A-bomb). The point is that the A-bomb was so devastating for such a relatively simple attack (one high altitude plane could accomplish the task of an entire fleet of bombers). Such power showed Japan they had a choice - be wiped out, or surrender. Obviously the suicidal choice suddenly lost its value, as they could no longer take as many allies down with them.

Yes, it is terrible so many "civilians" died so quickly and suddenly without any chance. But anyone I've known that has had a lick of knowledge of military history would agree the dropping of the atom bomb was the right thing to do. Perhaps different targets might have been better (ones that were mostly abandoned with large structures that could show off the power of the bomb yet take fewer lives), but we'll never know, its too easy to say such things with 20-20 hindsight.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: alejandroAT
yeah sure....and the prisoners in guandanamo can get a lawyer...nice one mate...your "naivite" is truely scary.

:roll:
Nice red herring.

The US would close the bases if requested when the agreements are up, you are just spewing paranoid conjecture now.

However, given the economy of Greece I doubt that will happen.

 

[alejandroAT]

what do the bases have to do with the economy? what do you think greece is? what are you talking about? go chew some tobacco or pick corn or live in a trailer parc like most of your countrymen. How can you treat torturing as a paranoid conjecture? dont tell me you get your information on sunday mass!!!

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: alejandroAT
non-american point of view coming into the fight!

Once again they put forward as argument the ridiculus estimates (see 100+ thousand and so on) of what would the death tall be if the US had not dropped the bombs. We know these estimates. For the past 50 years we see these estimates proved wrong on all american wars. The napalming of vietnam, the hospital bombings of kossovo, the anarchy and civil war in iraq. I must say that your estimates are not good enough for toilet paper. So stop saying what would have happened if you hadnt dropped the bomb cause history has proven your military is incapable of making estimates.

Where have you seen the deathtoll estimates of an invasion of Japan in 1945 or 1946 proven wrong? Has the military been wrong before? Of course, however I'd like to see some sort of evidence for your claim that an estimate of more than 100,000 deaths for the invasion is ridiculous. I'm not saying that you are lying, but you're touching on a very sore subject on the forums and you need to bring your A-game.

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: alejandroAT
what do the bases have to do with the economy? what do you think greece is? what are you talking about? go chew some tobacco or pick corn or live in a trailer parc like most of your countrymen. How can you treat torturing as a paranoid conjecture? dont tell me you get your information on sunday mass!!!

Do you base your hatred of the US on the above stereotypes or does using them just make you feel more comfortable with your biases? Fortunately for you I don't believe all the stereotypes regarding Greeks and their fascination with the bodies waste disposal orifices.

 

[alejandroAT]

no not hatred. dissapointement, resentment yes.... i know nearly half of you dont support wars.

and its not the tobacco chewing that i resent. Its the hillbilly ignorance that seems to be affecting even the educated peope of your country.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: alejandroAT
what do the bases have to do with the economy? what do you think greece is? what are you talking about? go chew some tobacco or pick corn or live in a trailer parc like most of your countrymen. How can you treat torturing as a paranoid conjecture? dont tell me you get your information on sunday mass!!!

Greece gets money in return for the leases and the bases enhance the local economies since they require services and you have US servicemen spending their money. Why do you think base closures are such a big deal in the states? Becase of what having them does for the local economies.

You threw out the Guantanamo issue into a discussion that has nothing to do with it (red herring). I don't agree with torture unless under certain extreme circumstances, which are not met IMO in this case. If you want to debate that in depth I'd be happy to, but we were talking about US bases in Greece.

I find your (ignorant) assumptions and stereotypes about who I am and what I believe in most amusing.

 

[alejandroAT]

you find them amusing and i'm holding my belly which is about to explode from laughter.

no seriously now. I did not intend to insult you and i apologise if i did. Continuing the argument in a personal level is not going to take us anywhere. When you have an argument about morals then do not carry your nationality on your back because then you will probably end up putting your country in the clear.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: alejandroAT
you find them amusing and i'm holding my belly which is about to explode from laughter.

no seriously now. I did not intend to insult you and i apologise if i did. Continuing the argument in a personal level is not going to take us anywhere. When you have an argument about morals then do not carry your nationality on your back because then you will probably end up putting your country in the clear.

No problem and the same if I offended.

Morality and our self-interest are not always, or even most of the time, in opposition to eachother. Mistakes and overcorrections of course have been made, especially regading our conduct in the struggle against the Soviets. Some of it was unavoidable and some of it wasn't. Ultimately, given the benefit of retrospect I think it was worth it though we do need to take better responsibilty for our mistakes as they often cost lives.

For the record, I'm 3rd generation Greek-American. Both sides of the family fought in WWII and Korea, some didn't come back. I can be proud of the acomplishments the US has made and still ackwoledge our failures and mistakes. I also made it to Greece for the first time last year and found it a wonderful country.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: alejandroAT
We have something common and that is that we both think the other is the extreme.

Comparing Pearl Harbour to Nagasaki and Hiroshima is for me an extreme. What you did to iraqis for what saudis did to you is another extreme. For you it was the normal thing to do.

posted by: Tom
You really think the world would be a better place the last 60 years, if the culture of militarism that was WW2 Japan, had been allowed to continue to exist ?

be careful with remarks like that mate because they backfire. There is no question that the US is a military culture. The country with the biggest military spending in the world, the only country to have ever used nuclear weapons, had a few army generals for presidents, and indeed the country with the largest list of wars in the past century!

I truely do not want to come across as passionate with what i say. I am really just expressing feelings of eveyday people outside the US. This is pretty much what the world thinks of you. What the papers write about you, what even our politicians have expressed from time to time. Even CNN in europe (different broadcast than the US) is against american ongoing warmongering. It is not fanatic thinking over here, its everyday talk.

All i am saying is that you lot cannot continue to behave like cowboys and use the world as your ranch because in the end that makes you no different from all the dictators you fought against. We are truely grateful that the US jumped in to save the world from the nazzis (you accused me of maybe thinking that we would have been better off with hitler) but that cannot be used as an eternal proof of your goodwill. Goodwill you have shown none for a long time. It's all come down to demands and orders.

I did not accuse you of anything, I was pointing out why it was necessary to get an unconditional surrender from Japan in WW2.

Your points about America, as far as goodwill, we spend a helluva a lot more on humanitarian aid than any other country, billions fighting aids in Africa for example.

As far as "warmongering", other than Iraq, what are you talking about ? As far as Iraq, many, or maybe even most Americans think we screwed up going in there.

As far as world opinion of us, we deserve criticism, but on the other hand, there isn't any country or region of the world, that can deliver that criticism without being hypocritical and delusional about their own mistakes and shortcomings.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Aimster
IMO killing hundreds of thousands of civilians to save the lives of soldiers is wrong.

soldiers have a job so let them do it.
do not play God and kill hundreds of thousands of civilians so the soldier death count is low.

Of course those days are over. Otherwise we would have nuked Vietnam.

After witnessing the fantaical fighting on Okinawa and Iwo Jima we had a good idea on the level of fighting we would see in Japan. Not only were we expecting to lose nearly 1 million men taking those islands. But the Japanese were expected to lose millions in troops and millions more in civilian casualties due to the fighting and conditions that come with the fighting.

I think the compassionate course of action was to end the war as soon as possible by dropping the big one on that nation. Yes, I know that sounds odd, but consider the outcome if we didnt end it quickly. They understood force, and they needed to know they were going to lose this war big time really soon.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
IMO: the single best thing to come out of using those two is the prevention of using other more powerful devices later.

One general proposed using 13 on Korea and was promptly canned. Those two bombs marked a pinnacle of "larger is better" warfare. Since then there has been a much larger emphasis on precision and taking out key targets rather than devestating an entire city. The pictures from Hiroshima and Nagasaki paint a picture of the worst part of all out warfare and why it should be avoided, and I believe that in the last 60 years there have been no nuclear weapons used in warfare because of them.

That was MacAruthur and he wanted to use it on China for intervening on N korea's behalf when the N Koreans were done for. One has to wonder however if we did drop one on China and they withdrew would we have the current situation in N. Korea where a nuclear standoff is taking place putting millions of lives in danger? Not to mention the millions of people in N korea who have been oppressed and subjected to horrible living conditions because the Chinese made sure they didnt fail?

Atomic weapons imo have also limited the scope of warefare since their use in Aug of 1945. The amount of people being killed due to warfare was on an exponential rise until Atomic weapons showed up. Then it leveled off to about 1 million a year on avg.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Aimster
IMO killing hundreds of thousands of civilians to save the lives of soldiers is wrong.

soldiers have a job so let them do it.
do not play God and kill hundreds of thousands of civilians so the soldier death count is low.

Of course those days are over. Otherwise we would have nuked Vietnam.

I think sometimes an act of insanity is the only sane course of action.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Czar
Can we agree that dropping an atomic bomb on two civilian cities is bad?

just like firebombing civilian cities is bad
just like enslaving neighboring countries is bad

asking those people to thank their killers is arrogance to the max

Winning a war is not bad. If you want to survive you kill your enemy. They always have the option to surrender before we kill them.

If you people had it your way during WW2, all of Europe would be speaking German.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Czar
Can we agree that dropping an atomic bomb on two civilian cities is bad?

just like firebombing civilian cities is bad
just like enslaving neighboring countries is bad

asking those people to thank their killers is arrogance to the max

Winning a war is not bad. If you want to survive you kill your enemy. They always have the option to surrender before we kill them.

If you people had it your way during WW2, all of Europe would be speaking German.

Yes, they were no liberals until after WW2. :roll:

Oh, that's right, FDR was a liberal for his day...... nevermind.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Czar
Can we agree that dropping an atomic bomb on two civilian cities is bad?

just like firebombing civilian cities is bad
just like enslaving neighboring countries is bad

asking those people to thank their killers is arrogance to the max

Winning a war is not bad. If you want to survive you kill your enemy. They always have the option to surrender before we kill them.

If you people had it your way during WW2, all of Europe would be speaking German.

Yes, they were no liberals until after WW2. :roll:

Oh, that's right, FDR was a liberal for his day...... nevermind.

Stop thinking left VS right, if that's all you are.

FDR did what was necessary in WW2. He was a real leader, not the pansies we have today. You will recall I never mentioned him, my complaints are with those oppose doing what is necessary to survive, and that is for both parties.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Czar
Can we agree that dropping an atomic bomb on two civilian cities is bad?

just like firebombing civilian cities is bad
just like enslaving neighboring countries is bad

asking those people to thank their killers is arrogance to the max

Winning a war is not bad. If you want to survive you kill your enemy. They always have the option to surrender before we kill them.

If you people had it your way during WW2, all of Europe would be speaking German.

Yes, they were no liberals until after WW2. :roll:

Oh, that's right, FDR was a liberal for his day...... nevermind.

Stop thinking left VS right, if that's all you are.

FDR did what was necessary in WW2. He was a real leader, not the pansies we have today. You will recall I never mentioned him, my complaints are with those oppose doing what is necessary to survive, and that is for both parties.

LOL, define "you people".

I take that as meaning all the "liberal pussies". My point is that FDR was a real liberal for his day and as you noted was a real leader too. i have no reason to believe that one of today's "liberals" couldn't be just as good of a leader.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Czar
Can we agree that dropping an atomic bomb on two civilian cities is bad?

just like firebombing civilian cities is bad
just like enslaving neighboring countries is bad

asking those people to thank their killers is arrogance to the max

Winning a war is not bad. If you want to survive you kill your enemy. They always have the option to surrender before we kill them.

If you people had it your way during WW2, all of Europe would be speaking German.

Yes, they were no liberals until after WW2. :roll:

Oh, that's right, FDR was a liberal for his day...... nevermind.

Stop thinking left VS right, if that's all you are.

FDR did what was necessary in WW2. He was a real leader, not the pansies we have today. You will recall I never mentioned him, my complaints are with those oppose doing what is necessary to survive, and that is for both parties.

LOL, define "you people".

I take that as meaning all the "liberal pussies". My point is that FDR was a real liberal for his day and as you noted was a real leader too. i have no reason to believe that one of today's "liberals" couldn't be just as good of a leader.

This entire thread would be self evidence of that.

For anyone thinking our course of action in WW2 was wrong, immoral, evil, etc, they carry an ideology that is going to bring us a great deal of suffering when we allow the current war to turn nuclear.

There?s no one in Washington willing to do what is necessary, out of fear that our population wouldn?t tolerate it. They?re correct, however, we?ve lost the will to survive.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Czar
Can we agree that dropping an atomic bomb on two civilian cities is bad?

just like firebombing civilian cities is bad
just like enslaving neighboring countries is bad

asking those people to thank their killers is arrogance to the max

Winning a war is not bad. If you want to survive you kill your enemy. They always have the option to surrender before we kill them.

If you people had it your way during WW2, all of Europe would be speaking German.

Yes, they were no liberals until after WW2. :roll:

Oh, that's right, FDR was a liberal for his day...... nevermind.

Stop thinking left VS right, if that's all you are.

FDR did what was necessary in WW2. He was a real leader, not the pansies we have today. You will recall I never mentioned him, my complaints are with those oppose doing what is necessary to survive, and that is for both parties.

LOL, define "you people".

I take that as meaning all the "liberal pussies". My point is that FDR was a real liberal for his day and as you noted was a real leader too. i have no reason to believe that one of today's "liberals" couldn't be just as good of a leader.

This entire thread would be self evidence of that.

For anyone thinking our course of action in WW2 was wrong, immoral, evil, etc, they carry an ideology that is going to bring us a great deal of suffering when we allow the current war to turn nuclear.

There?s no one in Washington willing to do what is necessary, out of fear that our population wouldn?t tolerate it. They?re correct, however, we?ve lost the will to survive.

If the current war turns nuclear, it will probably be due to the incredible hubris and hostility of the Bush pre-emptive invastion doctrine. You have obviously been worked into a fearful froth by the radical right. We have had (and remain so) totally defenseless borders with Canada and Mexico for many decades, yet nobody has walked explosives in and blown anything up, though it would be childishly easy to do so.

Our recent foreign policy has been dramatically over-reaching, and our internal NIE has confirmed the obvious; our actions are CREATING more terrorists than they are eliminating.

A responsible course of action is to accede the entire middle east to it's own devices, as it is handily surrounded by MUCH more powerful forces. We need to drop out of the picture in the ME, and become energy-independent. This is not impossible. But it may be under current Republican and Democratic leadership.

I also differ distinctly from you on one major point. I think it is a faulty hypothosis to say that our population wouldn't accept a major war due to this or that reasoning. I think it is far more accurate to say that we've grown very very tired of pointless and stupid conflicts such as Vietnam and Iraq. When it comes to responding to direct aggression, IE Afghanistan, our resolve is very much in place. As a matter of fact, if we hadn't so vastly diluted our resources by basically abandoning the Afghan mission for the Iraq one, we might have actually accomplished something lasting. As it is, we've stirred up such bloodlust that there is nothing to do but continue the hemmoraging, or withdraw and learn from these mistakes.