Speaking as a Brit, we are always in America's debt for helping us in two world wars, whatever their reasons. Alot of young men from all countries died in mud and shit to save our freedom.
Printable View
Speaking as a Brit, we are always in America's debt for helping us in two world wars, whatever their reasons. Alot of young men from all countries died in mud and shit to save our freedom.
We weren't lossing in the Pacific theater. We were winning slowly, but the cost of life on both sides was terrible. The atomic bombs were a great and horrible way to end the war in the Pacific. They took many lives, but saved much more of our guys in the end. I bet you didn't know that all the Purple Hearts that were given in all American conflicts since WW2 are surplus medals made in preperation of the invasion of the Japanese mainland. The casualties we were estimated to take were over a million 1,000,000. Lossing any life is horrible, but it seems like you are saying that we should've continued the war and caused even more death rather than ending it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Reefer Rogue
That's all war is though. It is just a big accumulation of evil :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphoric
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reefer Rogue
yes america did most of there fighting over in japan
wasnt fighting in japan,,,few islands close to it is about it.
until they were losing ( you sadly mistaken)
and cudnt handle the japenese ( man thats moronic)
so they bombed millions of innocent people
it was the only way to break that society from world domination
just so they could save there own lives
YOU DAM RIGHT THERE,SAVE USA SOLDIERS CLEANING A MESS UP
instead of invading japan.
and ya think invading would have saved who,oh yea the enemy
well
wtf?
losing
invading
save yourself?
if america was losing then they would of been no invasion
it came down to who was to die,them who support a warrior society
or those BRAVE souls who would hit the beach to stop them
its right and wrong at war
japan needed its as kicked and it got the worst asskicking ever givin to any nation it got the bomb
it took two of them to convince them that the usa would kill every citezen of that nation if it didnt lay down its weapons,
i dont see where america should of donated lives to that mess as you seem to be saying.
when it can in fact end it with a couple bombs instead of a few thousand 20 yr old farm boys lives
so for my great uncle who was killed in the solomons
fuck you for saving that
he died on a ship hit by kammkazzi's
so
now we can toke and act like this never happened.?like you never insulted my nations honor when it in fact STOPPED THE WORST GENOCIDE EVER SEEN
smoke on
first of all im sorry your uncle died in the solomans. so your saying that you STOPPED the greatest genocide ever by creating the biggest genocide ever? i dont understand that at all. if i was so moronic as to say that you were losing to the japenese why do you go on to say that the only choice you had other than invading was to bomb them then? you say you ended it with a few bombs other than a few thousand 20 year old farm boys lives. well a few thousand isnt as much as a few million (i think it was around that many i dont know) personally i think bombing them was taking the easy way out. anyone can do that. americans are always boasting about there superior army so why didnt you invade them and prove it? i think the japs would've won if you would have invaded because they would've never given up. i think you saw this and thats why you annialated them. just my opinion take it as you see fit. looking forward to ur reply.Quote:
Originally Posted by NowhereMan
Yes it is obvious you don't know. The death toll for the two atomic bombs was around 340,000 including the deaths from radiological effects years later. The estimated causalties for the invasion of mainland Japan was 1 million and this is just American casualties, many more Japanese would have died also. I guess it's okay to sacrifice people as long as they are farm boys huh? We kicked the Japanese military's ass all the way across the Pacific, but you would have us waste more lives to "prove" that we have a better military. There is not easy way out in war idiot, just ways to lessen the loss of life. Look at the numbers and do some research before you post such ridiculous shit. :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Reefer Rogue
good to see you didnt stoop to a low level of name calling... i regret posting in this thread. i don't know what your talking about with the farmboys i didnt say that it was ok to kill them. i personally think that it was unjustifiable to drop the atomic bombs. here are some reasons why i think that :Quote:
Originally Posted by sawleaf
Japan was ready to call it quits anyway. More than 60 of its cities had been destroyed by conventional bombing, the home islands were being blockaded by the American Navy, and the Soviet Union entered the war by attacking Japanese troops in Manchuria.
American refusal to modify its "unconditional surrender" demand to allow the Japanese to keep their emperor needlessly prolonged Japan's resistance.
A demonstration explosion over Tokyo harbor would have convinced Japan's leaders to quit without killing many people.
Even if Hiroshima was necessary, the U.S. did not give enough time for word to filter out of its devastation before bombing Nagasaki.
The bomb was used partly to justify the $2 billion spent on its development.
The two cities were of limited military value. Civilians outnumbered troops in Hiroshima five or six to one.
Japanese lives were sacrificed simply for power politics between the U.S. and the Soviet Union.
Conventional firebombing would have caused as much significant damage without making the U.S. the first nation to use nuclear weapons
Anyway id like to see you reply with a bit more class next time instead of trying to belittle me. There is a thing called constructive critisizim, try using that instead of just being an asshole.
You are right, the Japanese never give up, for them to surrender was the ultimate dishonor. The Japanese were known for fighting to the death. Why would you possibly want to invade a country where the people see their leader as a living god and fight to the death? Why would you want to send your boys into that situation? In your last post you state that they were ready to give up. They were not ready to give up just beaten back into a corner and that corner was the Japanese mainland. I don't think there should have been a conditional surrender for a country that attacked us, showed zero mercy, and committed mass attrocities against humanity. Do you think it would've been okay if Germany surrendered and Hitler stayed in power? The bomb is always a tough topic, but I believe it's use was justified. Loss of life is always terrible, but this was a terrible war and we had to end it. It is a tough call to decide to end thousands of lives, but in a war our side comes first, and that's what we did, we looked out for our boys by not sending them into a meat grinder. We had been bombing Japan non-stop, but it was a costly mission for our pilots. I will agree with you on these posts though:Quote:
Originally Posted by Reefer Rogue
A demonstration explosion over Tokyo harbor would have convinced Japan's leaders to quit without killing many people.
Even if Hiroshima was necessary, the U.S. did not give enough time for word to filter out of its devastation before bombing Nagasaki.
The bomb was used partly to justify the $2 billion spent on its development.
The two cities were of limited military value. Civilians outnumbered troops in Hiroshima five or six to one.
Japanese lives were sacrificed simply for power politics between the U.S. and the Soviet Union.
What set me off about your other post is that you seem to justify that more American lives should have been sacrificed. War isn't about weighing the casualties on both sides and trying to balance them out. It's about winning and lessening the loss on your side. If that means killing thousands, that is what is going to happen. Is war terrible? Of course it is. Did the bomb save American lives by ending the war? Most definately.
i guess we can agree to disagree on the justification of the bombing. im done with this thread.
If there is one thing Americans aren't afraid of, it's a real fight. Look at people like Torog, just sitting there wishing he could die gloriously in battle after saving his platoon. Americans have some sort of superhero mentality Saying that Americans are a bunch of aggressive, bloodthirsty warmongers, waiting for a reason to kill, but are afraid of battle doesn't really make sense, does it?
Donahue Pilot Officer A G American 64 KilledQuote:
till no Americans. WOW I found one , Haviland Pilot Officer J K American 151 , better than none I suppose
Fiske Pilot Officer W M L American 601 Killed*
Haviland Pilot Officer J K American 151
Keough Pilot Officer V C American 609 Killed
Leckrone Pilot Officer P H American 616 Killed
Mamedoff Pilot Officer A American 609 Died
Tobin Pilot Officer E Q American 609 Killed
As for not fighting battles in Europe, the Battle of the Bulge seems like a real fight to me...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_bulge
I believe that Patton was very helpful to the Allies in Europe, do you disagree?
That doesn??t mean it wasn??t needed. How exactly did the U.S. government profit from the lend lease? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend_leaseQuote:
As for the supply of weapons , the US were interested only in making money out of any deals , they didn't do it out of kindness or as an act of support to an ally in times of war. They wanted their pound of flesh , as I said the US is only interested in helping itself.
The Marshall plan wasn??t making the gov??t any money, it was an act of kindness. I am not 100% certain about the government not profiting from the Marshall plan, but I am pretty sure. If you know different, please inform me.
Were we on the topic of India? No, we weren??t asshole. Did I ever say I liked the Indian government? Not mentioning India in a discussion about the U.S. and the Iraq war doesn't mean I'm a fan of India you fucking twit.Quote:
and do you really think INDIA is going to be a countries with liberties? hah..i laugh at you, especially becuase you hate the USA becuase of the war in IRAQ, but you faild to not be a hypocrite and hate INDIA over the war in kashmere, or were you to uninformed to make that connection.
Obviously everyone doesn't think like you, how strange. Iraqi youths are rallying against America at an alarming rate, that tells me that they did not want America to ??liberate?? them. People in other parts of the world don't think like you do. I don't mean that they are pro being tortured or pro extreme censorship, I mean that they have a different way of thinking about how they want to live their lives (like Islamic extremists). I comment more about Americans slaughtering civilians because Americans like you say that we went over there to stop the murdering in Iraq. You should stop acting like the coalition kills no children or innocent citizens.Quote:
in the eyes of me, and probally any other person with a grip on reality, you look like a selfish sonofabitch, taking our freedoms for granted, if we were in an opressed country, with a tyrant leader, killing citizens left and right, at will, raping women, living in a constant sense of fear that you may be next, would you want a country to come in and give their OWN LIVES to save you from your hell?
"They Harbor terrorists"Quote:
but we had no right to go in there...right?
WRONG
we had all the right in the world to go in there
they harbor terrorists
they kill innocent citizens, one reason you hate america, but when iraq kills them by the dosens is ok isnt it? because they arent a WESTERN country..
we had a very good idea that there was a possibility of WOMD, we were wrong, but i guess saving the lives of millions of iraquis are no consolation...
...and this information came from the same fucking geniuses in the White House who told you that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction? Guess what, by ??protecting our selves from the terrorists in Iraq? (which there were very few of) we have created hundreds of thousands more terrorists. Big brother in the white house may have told you that there were terrorists in Iraq, but maybe you were to ignorant to realize that there were way more terrorists in Israel, Iran, Pakistan, Burma, Brazil, Russia, Albania, Saudi Arabia, Columbia, Kashmir, Uzbekistan, the Philippines, Syria, and many more countries. Many other countries harbor, and Syria even trains, terrorists.
Let??s attack them.
??They kill innocents?
No shit? So does North Korea, China, Burma, The U.S. (on a slightly smaller scale), and A LOT of other countries. Why don??t we attack all of them (except for us, of course, because we can kill who ever we want and it??s not bad, right?) North Korea is worse than Iraq was (in terms of civil rights violations and executions), and still is, and the threat of nuclear weapons, which most countries suspect Kim Jung-Il has or is pursuing (more reason to suspect than we had about Iraq??s possible possession of chemical weapons, which we now confirmed was incorrect, asshole.) is more dangerous than the threat of chemical weapons, North Korea expelled weapons inspectors, North Korea has shown military aggression like that of Iraq??s and has a significantly more powerful military, why not attack North Korea instead of Iraq? Maybe it was because North Korea doesn??t have such large oil reserves, maybe because it wouldn??t be finishing Bush senior??s old disputes...
In China, there are HUGE numbers of annual executions, many more than the Chinese government confesses to in official reports, and that is common knowledge. There are more than 10 times as many people suffering in China as are/were suffering in Iraq. China has shown aggression such as Iraq??s, and has nuclear weapons...why not attack China if you are so into ??liberating?? people? U.S. corporations (that means George??s rich buddies) make huge amounts of money off of Chinese prison labor and sweat shops, maybe you were to uninformed to make that connection.
http://www.usvetdsp.com/bush_trp.htm http://www.perspicacityonline.com/Ar...ights10302.htm
http://www.christusrex.org/www1/sdc/hr_facts.html
http://www.amnesty.ca/china/
As for who is profiting from the Iraq war: http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11462
http://www.prwatch.org/node/2793
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=6975
and there are significantly more profiteers ( including ` Michael Moore)
Iraqi citizens are still dying and suffering. The U.S. media doesn??t keep specific track of Iraqi casualties, incase you wanted to know...
Oh yea, and just incase you didn??t know, I am American. I don??t hate every United States citizen (which would include myself) because of the war in Iraq I hate the government, and the people who try to justify the war in Iraq because they are the reason we are in Iraq. I ALSO hate the British government, and Tony Blair for being Bush??s little bitch. I think some of you U.K. asses should stop talking about how we are so horrible for starting this war, when you are our biggest ally in the war. Torog, and all of you hick assholes should stop calling Europeans retarded 8th grade insults like ??Euroweenies? and talking shit about how ??prissy? you think the Brits are. Do you want them to stop helping us? When John Kerry said this war was unilateral you immediately starting spouting your shit about how he is insulting our allies, then you went and did the same thing. You talk about how you are being sympathetic and care about the Iraqis and how you ??liberated them to stop their suffering because you care about your fellow man? and then you call them stupid racist, bullshit insults like ??dunecoons, camel jockey, sandniggers.? Not to mention that Great Britain doesn??t exactly have a clean past.
As for your comments on pacifism, I am not pacifist. I am on probation for possession and assault/battery. I do believe unnecessary wars are not a good thing, that war should not be used to profit one or a handful of individuals that are not doing the fighting, or to make some megalomaniac asshole feel big and strong. But there are some people who would have strongly disagreed with you on pacifism only being good in theory or war being something declared so quickly and easily.
??What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty and democracy??
- Gandhi
??Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.?
- Dwight D. Eisenhower
??Surely a civilization that can develop supercomputers and send men safely to the moon and bring them back is smart enough to cease the killing of its own kind and the destruction of the accomplishments of previous generations. The only thing necessary is for the present mindset of people to change??all else will follow.?
-James M. Carroll
??Violence is the first refuge of the incompetent?
- Issac Asimov
As for Nowhere Man:The worst genocide ever seen I think would have to be the Soviet Gulag, and we did not stop that.Quote:
like you never insulted my nations honor when it in fact STOPPED THE WORST GENOCIDE EVER SEEN