WELL DONE USA

EquallyWorthless

haffajappa wrote:

HeidiJam wrote:

When someone else starts a brutal and devastating fight, you don't apologize for ending it on your own terms.

:roll:
The people of the country don't start brutal and devastating fights.
The idiots in power do...

Nice compassion.
Two entire cities were annihilated, and a lot of innocent people were blown to dust and charcoal skeletons.
I hope no body will ever have to see the things my grandfather saw picking up those bodies.

PS, you disgust me. I don't care if I get banned for saying this, but you're comment is fucking ignorant.

I agree with the bolded part.

EquallyWorthless

Shawshank wrote:

Some of you need to spend a little more time studying your history. Japan was ready to fight to the death, down to the last man, woman and child if necessary. They had no intention of surrender...EVER! Yes, some of their military leaders were concerned about their ability to continue to wage war, but surrender was not an option. If you knew anything about their culture, and their commitment to their Emperor, you would know that simple fact. Here are some other facts you may have overlooked....before any bombs were dropped the Potsdam Declaration was issued to Japan. This basically said, surrender now or face total destruction, or something to that effect. This was signed by the US, Britain, and I believe China.

Nearly 30 million leaflets were dropped on the cities of Japan for about 9 days, warning of total destruction if they didn't surrender. The Japanese simply ignored the warnings and continued waging their war against the allies. Only after continual warnings and demands for surrender were given did the US drop the bomb on Hiroshima. Hiroshima housed a high concentration of military troops, a base and large military factories, and it was also one of the only cities that hadn't been damaged by air raids.

I find it a testament to the belief our military leaders held at the time that the Japanese would not have surrendered, by the mere fact that they still did not surrender even after Hiroshima. Further calls on them to surrender August 6th, 7th and 8th were completely ignored. It has been theorized that the Japanese leaders felt that the US had used all it had, and they wouldn't drop another one. So when the second bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, it showed that the US would completely obliterate them until they surrendered. However, even after all of this, they still would not surrender unless their Emperor would be allowed to remain as a head of state. It was only after the allies accepted this condition that Japan truly surrendered.

The Taliban will never surrender. Does that justify dropping a nuke on a section of the middle east that houses insurgency fighters and trains suicide bombers? NO, you know what justifies dropping a nuke on someone? NOTHING. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. The reasons you are trying to use to justify nuclear attacks is comical.

LikeAnOcean

I kind of agree with HeidiJam.

Taking innocent lives is wrong on all parts, but you can't paint the U.S. as evil. Humans have the built in gene to war with each other. It's part of our natural selection. It's population control. One lost life, thousands of lost lives, our time on this planet is short either way you look at it.

I would not support a nuke on anyone, but you really can't pin point the blame on anyone other than mankind. What's done is done. Move on and learn from it.

Shawshank

EquallyWorthless wrote:

The Taliban will never surrender. Does that justify dropping a nuke on a section of the middle east that houses insurgency fighters and trains suicide bombers? NO, you know what justifies dropping a nuke on someone? NOTHING. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. The reasons you are trying to use to justify nuclear attacks is comical.

Nice try, but I wasn't justifying anything. There are reasons behind everything, and most of the time it's more than just a bunch of bloodthirsty savage Americans looking to kill people. People fail to read and comprehend their history, and not just the history we sugar coat for ourselves, but what is written from the perspective of other societies about us. The ignorance here is appalling at times. Some people think we just woke up one morning and thought it would be neat to drop a fucking nuke. :roll:

haffajappa

Shawshank wrote:

EquallyWorthless wrote:

The Taliban will never surrender. Does that justify dropping a nuke on a section of the middle east that houses insurgency fighters and trains suicide bombers? NO, you know what justifies dropping a nuke on someone? NOTHING. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. The reasons you are trying to use to justify nuclear attacks is comical.

Nice try, but I wasn't justifying anything. There are reasons behind everything, and most of the time it's more than just a bunch of bloodthirsty savage Americans looking to kill people. People fail to read and comprehend their history, and not just the history we sugar coat for ourselves, but what is written from the perspective of other societies about us. The ignorance here is appalling at times. Some people think we just woke up one morning and thought it would be neat to drop a fucking nuke. :roll:

Well then maybe there are reasons behind someone hijacking an airplane and smashing it into a building - and no I'm not talking about the kamikaze. If someone said no one should appologize for the thousands who lost their lives on 9/11 because of the actions of the US Government a lot of you would be shitting yourselves.

My point was you can't justify saying people had it coming to them because their government/military started/participated in a war! Would you just shrug and call it history if someone nuked New York because of the wars that presidents start? Oh well I guess they had it coming because they are responsible for what a handful of idiots decide on in office.

EquallyWorthless

Shawshank wrote:

EquallyWorthless wrote:

The Taliban will never surrender. Does that justify dropping a nuke on a section of the middle east that houses insurgency fighters and trains suicide bombers? NO, you know what justifies dropping a nuke on someone? NOTHING. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. The reasons you are trying to use to justify nuclear attacks is comical.

Nice try, but I wasn't justifying anything. There are reasons behind everything, and most of the time it's more than just a bunch of bloodthirsty savage Americans looking to kill people. People fail to read and comprehend their history, and not just the history we sugar coat for ourselves, but what is written from the perspective of other societies about us. The ignorance here is appalling at times. Some people think we just woke up one morning and thought it would be neat to drop a fucking nuke. :roll:

You were trying to justify it, without actually having the balls to come and say it. If you read between the lines of what you wrote, you totally support what happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Its quite obvious. Trying to say the Japanese would never ever surrender is just ignorant. What if Iran, Afghanistan and Iraq had the combined military weight the US does, and they decided to actually come over to the US and wage war on your soil, would you expect your leaders and people to just surrender? No? So why was it so evil of the Japanese to not believe in surrender? No matter the odds. Regardless of Hiroshima and Nagaskai being Military outposts, the US in response to an attack on a military naval base (Pearl Harbour) dropped bombs on Tokyo in March 1945, killing over 100, 000 civilians. The intent was to have the city burn and kill as many civilians as possible. How do you justify that? You don't think the message wasn't sent. 65 years later after the atomic bombing in Japan people are still dying from the fallout, radiation in the soil etc. Those people have nothing to do with the conflict.

http://www.vho.org/D/gzz/WalendySkull.jpg

This photo ran in life magazine, a US model was sent a Japanese skull by her naval boyfriend. On the skull he wrote a Good Jap, a Dead one.

History is written by the winners.

haffajappa

EquallyWorthless wrote:

You were trying to justify it, without actually having the balls to come and say it. If you read between the lines of what you wrote, you totally support what happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Its quite obvious. Trying to say the Japanese would never ever surrender is just ignorant. What if Iran, Afghanistan and Iraq had the combined military weight the US does, and they decided to actually come over to the US and wage war on your soil, would you expect your leaders and people to just surrender? No? So why was it so evil of the Japanese to not believe in surrender? No matter the odds. Regardless of Hiroshima and Nagaskai being Military outposts, the US in response to an attack on a military naval base (Pearl Harbour) dropped bombs on Tokyo in March 1945, killing over 100, 000 civilians. The intent was to have the city burn and kill as many civilians as possible. How do you justify that? You don't think the message wasn't sent. 65 years later after the atomic bombing in Japan people are still dying from the fallout, radiation in the soil etc. Those people have nothing to do with the conflict.

http://www.vho.org/D/gzz/WalendySkull.jpg

This photo ran in life magazine, a US model was sent a Japanese skull by her naval boyfriend. On the skull he wrote a Good Jap, a Dead one.

History is written by the winners.

even if say, the USA government was in some sort of war and was threatened to surrender but would not, is it still justified that 300,000 Americans be blown to dust because of the decisions of their government? Its like bombing a family house killing all the children just because their father was a idiot. Yeehaw.

_

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... =129031051

This story came out this morning about the National Museum of Nuclear Science and History. Seemed relevant to this conversation. I think I'll go check out the museum; it's only a mile from my house. NM is home to all kinds of nuclear science activity - historically and today - and it's a big source of controversy. It's interesting to see the different attitudes portrayed in the article though.

EquallyWorthless

scb wrote:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129031051

This story came out this morning about the National Museum of Nuclear Science and History. Seemed relevant to this conversation. I think I'll go check out the museum; it's only a mile from my house. NM is home to all kinds of nuclear science activity - historically and today - and it's a big source of controversy. It's interesting to see the different attitudes portrayed in the article though.

That museum is featured prominently in the 2nd season of the TV series "Breaking Bad"

fuck

Shawshank wrote:

Some of you need to spend a little more time studying your history. Japan was ready to fight to the death, down to the last man, woman and child if necessary. They had no intention of surrender...EVER! Yes, some of their military leaders were concerned about their ability to continue to wage war, but surrender was not an option.

This is not only a lie, but a contradiction. On one hand, you say the nuclear bombs were necessary because Japan was never going to surrender, even "down to the last man, woman, and child if necessary." on the other hand, you say nuclear bombs brought about the Japanese surrender because the destruction and slaughter was too much. so which is it? they were going to fight to the last man, woman, and child, or only until a big defeat?

If you knew anything about their culture, and their commitment to their Emperor, you would know that simple fact.

their culture? is that enough to wage wars on people, our perception of their culture? yes, you may be speaking from your large exposure to Japanese culture, which probably involved you watching Tom Cruise in The Last Samurai for 2.5 hours, which shows that Japanese culture invokes the notion of no surrender, but that doesn't mean they are willing to sacrifice their women and children.

seeing as how we weren't willing to abandon our onslaught of a million iraqis, i wonder how americans would feel if Iraq had retaliated by nuking a U.S. city. probably in a hypocritical way, no doubt.

TriumphantAngel

Shawshank wrote:

There are reasons behind everything, and most of the time it's more than just a bunch of bloodthirsty savage Americans looking to kill people.

well, i guess when the US is fighting two wars and funding the illegal and brutal occupation of another, has the largest military budget in the world, more than the rest of the world combined and uses it without mercy, and is the only Country to ever use nucleur weapons against another, you might need to excuse the people who think you are a little bloodthirsty.

you are what you do.

Stone Is God

EquallyWorthlessDo wrote:

Trying to say the Japanese would never ever surrender is just ignorant.

I'm not sure how this is ignorant. This is the truth. Look at the Pacific War as a whole and see how the Japanese acted in Saipan, Tarawa, Iwo Jima, Guadalcanal, Okinowa and the Philipines. Many high ranking Japanese commanders comitted ritual suicide rather than be captured. Look at the 100's of Kamakaze pilots who willing took their own life in defense of their homeland. Japan had no plans to give up.

Operation Downfall would have cost the Japanese population many more casulties than the nukes did. Truman knew what was in store once they invaded the main island and he wasn't sure that the American public could stomach another year of brutal fighting. The invasion would have lasted into late 1946.

I am in no way saying that they "got what they deserved" but there are numerous instances that point to the fact that Japan was not going to roll over and play dead when it came to the defense of their homeland.

EquallyWorthless

Stone Is God wrote:

EquallyWorthlessDo wrote:

Trying to say the Japanese would never ever surrender is just ignorant.

I'm not sure how this is ignorant. This is the truth. Look at the Pacific War as a whole and see how the Japanese acted in Saipan, Tarawa, Iwo Jima, Guadalcanal, Okinowa and the Philipines. Many high ranking Japanese commanders comitted ritual suicide rather than be captured. Look at the 100's of Kamakaze pilots who willing took their own life in defense of their homeland. Japan had no plans to give up.

Operation Downfall would have cost the Japanese population many more casulties than the nukes did. Truman knew what was in store once they invaded the main island and he wasn't sure that the American public could stomach another year of brutal fighting. The invasion would have lasted into late 1946.

I am in no way saying that they "got what they deserved" but there are numerous instances that point to the fact that Japan was not going to roll over and play dead when it came to the defense of their homeland.

I never said it wasn't the truth. It is ignorant becuase of the context it was used in. It is ignorant becuase he portrayed it as only the mindset of the Japanese, I was pointing out it would be the mindset of every country. It is ignorant because he used to it further his point matter of factly like no other country would stoop to that. When faced with the threat of war, no country would just "roll over and play dead when it comes to the defense of their homeland"

Stone Is God

EquallyWorthless wrote:

I never said it wasn't the truth. It is ignorant becuase of the context it was used in. It is ignorant becuase he portrayed it as only the mindset of the Japanese, I was pointing out it would be the mindset of every country. It is ignorant because he used to it further his point matter of factly like no other country would stoop to that. When faced with the threat of war, no country would just "roll over and play dead when it comes to the defense of their homeland"

Understood. My thinking was that it was the Japanese mindset throughout the whole war and that included territories that they themselves had invaded and were not their homeland.

In my opinion, I'm a little bit more disturbed that an Emperor would tell his people (civilians and troops) to commit suicide rather than surrender. Brainwashing the people into thinking that the Americans would kill them and eat them is pretty reprehensible.

Dirtie_Frank

_outlaw wrote:

Shawshank wrote:

Some of you need to spend a little more time studying your history. Japan was ready to fight to the death, down to the last man, woman and child if necessary. They had no intention of surrender...EVER! Yes, some of their military leaders were concerned about their ability to continue to wage war, but surrender was not an option.

This is not only a lie, but a contradiction. On one hand, you say the nuclear bombs were necessary because Japan was never going to surrender, even "down to the last man, woman, and child if necessary." on the other hand, you say nuclear bombs brought about the Japanese surrender because the destruction and slaughter was too much. so which is it? they were going to fight to the last man, woman, and child, or only until a big defeat?

If you knew anything about their culture, and their commitment to their Emperor, you would know that simple fact.

their culture? is that enough to wage wars on people, our perception of their culture? yes, you may be speaking from your large exposure to Japanese culture, which probably involved you watching Tom Cruise in The Last Samurai for 2.5 hours, which shows that Japanese culture invokes the notion of no surrender, but that doesn't mean they are willing to sacrifice their women and children.

seeing as how we weren't willing to abandon our onslaught of a million iraqis, i wonder how americans would feel if Iraq had retaliated by nuking a U.S. city. probably in a hypocritical way, no doubt.

What is the lie?

BinauralJam

lukin2006

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731

EquallyWorthless

Stone Is God wrote:

EquallyWorthless wrote:

I never said it wasn't the truth. It is ignorant becuase of the context it was used in. It is ignorant becuase he portrayed it as only the mindset of the Japanese, I was pointing out it would be the mindset of every country. It is ignorant because he used to it further his point matter of factly like no other country would stoop to that. When faced with the threat of war, no country would just "roll over and play dead when it comes to the defense of their homeland"

Understood. My thinking was that it was the Japanese mindset throughout the whole war and that included territories that they themselves had invaded and were not their homeland.

In my opinion, I'm a little bit more disturbed that an Emperor would tell his people (civilians and troops) to commit suicide rather than surrender. Brainwashing the people into thinking that the Americans would kill them and eat them is pretty reprehensible.

It is, the Kamikaze Fighters are a pretty scary thought, and still used as a tool of war now. Also, Japan wasn't the first, or the last country, to use Propangdha as tool to perpetuate fear.

This was the US response. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q15S69jqvDw

ONCE DEVIDED

Well I started this thread and will be messaging the forrum heads to shut it down.
My thread was about celebrating moving forward. Not reahashing hatreds.
If you want to continue to hate others because of whe\at those before us did
GO TO PLACE LIKE ISREAL/PALESTINE, Ugoslavia before it fell apart.
CHRIST PEOPLE
STOP HATING . what in the end does it acheive
ITs fucking nothing but stupid to hate sombody for what there granparents did. just completely stupid.
BUT SO MANY CLING TO IT
DOES IT KEEP YOU WARM, make you happy.

In Hiroshima Families were incinerated. Mothers , children fathers, uncles and aunts.
This also happened at the world trade centres . and its so so sad, tragic.

it took 65 years for the nation responsable for Hiroshima/ nagasaki to come and stand- to mourn.
it took 65 years to finally overcome the guilt of that.
but they did and im proud of that, always will be

A grudge to me is somewhere I park my car (grudge garage get it)

TriumphantAngel

you do understand that when you start a thread, it's an invite for other people to contribute to the thread, and the reality is that sometimes not everyone is going to agree with you.

the points i raised were that it's taken 65 years for this to happen. President Obama talks so much of his push to rid the world of nucleur weapons and yet the US still thinks they can dictate to everyone who can and can't have them. the global nuclear weapons stockpile is estimated to amount to about 150,000 Hiroshima bombs. America and Russia have 22,000 between them.

so i understand that you might want to pat the US on the back for finally sending a representative to the rememberance ceremony. you say it's a start, but what is it a start to?

the irony is Japan has no nukes, yet the Country that Nuked them has so many it's a wonder they can even keep track of them.

wouldn't a real show of solidarity at one of the rememberance ceremonies be for America to stand alongside Japan nucleur free?

you can't expect people who feel strongly about this to not say how they feel about it. that's the whole point of debating with someone. we won't always agree.