Substitute North Korea, or is that propaganda too?
Let's say England if it makes you happy. It really doesn't matter.
What would be your response if YOU were the President and your country was attacked. How would you feel if Israel nuked Palestine? Although admittedly that would destroy more than both.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Substitute North Korea, or is that propaganda too?
Let's say England if it makes you happy. It really doesn't matter.
What would be your response if YOU were the President and your country was attacked. How would you feel if Israel nuked Palestine? Although admittedly that would destroy more than both.
WHY NOT DO IT ON REAL ACTUAL TERMS
What about Iraq responding to an unproked attack where america tears the country apart
what should their response be
AUSSIE AUSSIE AUSSIE
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
What would your response be? Seems like your gung-ho about retaliation, yet what will that really accomplish?
Nope, I'm not. But I'm also a realist and I believe that having these weapons has protected us. I also certainly think our arsenal should be dramatically reduced. I'd keep less than 100 considering all the types that there are. I would never initiate an attack, in fact I am in support of removing our military from every place on the planet except the US itself.
Let everyone else deal with everyone else, just don't call us the next time an earthquake decides to drop a 7.9 on you. My attitude has changed, I'm pretty much strictly going on reducing the taxes on the American citizen.
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
What would your response be? Seems like your gung-ho about retaliation, yet what will that really accomplish?
Nope, I'm not. But I'm also a realist and I believe that having these weapons has protected us. I also certainly think our arsenal should be dramatically reduced. I'd keep less than 100 considering all the types that there are. I would never initiate an attack, in fact I am in support of removing our military from every place on the planet except the US itself.
Let everyone else deal with everyone else, just don't call us the next time an earthquake decides to drop a 7.9 on you. My attitude has changed, I'm pretty much strictly going on reducing the taxes on the American citizen.
why does it have to be all or none though unsung? i'm trying to get my head around your logic. how is withdrawing from Countries that the US is waging war against, connected to providing some sort of humanitarian assistance to another Country that may have suffered devastation from an earthquake and desperately needs help?
has changed, I'm pretty much strictly going on reducing the taxes on the American citizen.
why does it have to be all or none though unsung? i'm trying to get my head around your logic. how is withdrawing from Countries that the US is waging war against, connected to providing some sort of humanitarian assistance to another Country that may have suffered devastation from an earthquake and desperately needs help?
Correct me if I am wrong but I seem to remember on this very forum someone complaining that our military was helping in Haiti. I'm saying if they don't want the military helping then we should simply keeps our ships docked.
Post edited by unsung on
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
no lets bring it down to your and my terms
what if a country invaded you own nation for reasons that later were found to be false. on the very first bombing raid ( THEY CALLED IT SHOCK AND AWE) your beautiful daughter was ripped to shreds from a bomb.
what would your response be. would you take up arms.
this is what suprises me .
do you see, do you understand.
Your nation feels the need to retaliate . your asking what that retaliation would be.
but you do not understand when individuals do it in Iraq. you call them terrorists.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Fair enough, but something doesn't add up. Why does our military presence somehow equate to our involvement in humanitarian efforts (as you mention earthquake)? The US is involved with lots of humanitarian efforts, but also tons of military exploits (far more) which have no importance to others well being, but solely our own interests. And please don't bother trying to refute that, we can name 2 genocides off hand we completely ignored while embarking in 2 major wars in the past 15 yrs. In my opinion, one thing has really no baring on the other... we'd all be better off staying directly out of people affairs and taking more of a teacher/student role in the areas of peace, development and global issues. Teach a man to fish, etc. Sadly enough, we will never do that cause it's not in our interests to do so... but tis a nice dream. The idea of perpetual war for perpetual peace is a dead end road we keep continuing down and will only suffer more the longer we follow it. Until we acknowledge and change our habits and practices otherwise, I honestly don't care about my fellow citizens tax rates or similar. Reap what you sow in life, so if everyone wants to dig their grave, go ahead and jump in.
Nope, I'm not. But I'm also a realist and I believe that having these weapons has protected us. I also certainly think our arsenal should be dramatically reduced. I'd keep less than 100 considering all the types that there are. I would never initiate an attack, in fact I am in support of removing our military from every place on the planet except the US itself.
Let everyone else deal with everyone else, just don't call us the next time an earthquake decides to drop a 7.9 on you. My attitude has changed, I'm pretty much strictly going on reducing the taxes on the American citizen.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
What about Iraq responding to an unproked attack where america tears the country apart
what should their response be
Listen newb, before making your 21st post on this forum educate yourself. I do not support US troops in Iraq and I never have.
NO newb here I just dont need to post on everything like some
and again put up wher I said you support it. I made light of your IMAGINED enemies like IRAN or North Korea and brought it to a reality of what the USA did do in Iraq.
never questioned your support for or against.
and regardless a nebie has as much right to post as an old timer
ONCE DEVIDED wrote:
no lets bring it down to your and my terms
what if a country invaded you own nation for reasons that later were found to be false. on the very first bombing raid ( THEY CALLED IT SHOCK AND AWE) your beautiful daughter was ripped to shreds from a bomb.
what would your response be. would you take up arms.
this is what suprises me .
do you see, do you understand.
Your nation feels the need to retaliate . your asking what that retaliation would be.
but you do not understand when individuals do it in Iraq. you call them terrorists.
where above do I speak of your supports
I stated you nation ( you are from the USA are you not)
You asked about retaliation and aI aske why you call them terrorists ( when all they are doing is what you say amercia should or would do if an nuclear attack happened )
its a long stretch to say that I accuse u of suuport or lack of it.
I will say this about Japan - cruel doesn't even begin to describe how they acted leading up to the second world war ... but having said that - they changed their constitution to renounce war as a means of settling international disputes ...
The other night on Nat Geo channel I watched an hour long show called "24 hour after the Hiroshima". Was a great inside into some of the decisions that the Americans thought out prior to dropping the bomb and discussed stories and details from survivors. I think it puts a human face and touch on the reality of our weapons and wars. The show ended with survivors of the bombing basically saying these sort of events should be the focus on to why we need to change and not repeat such things. Basically, forgiveness needs to follow in order to build a better future... something we clearly need to learn and apply.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
My two cents no one will give a fuck about. I am no expert but:
The Hiroshima bomb I believe was justified. Remember, it was still a total war at this point. A brutal war. Like nothing any one here can relate to. The casualties we suffer in Iraq and elsewhere in a year were suffered in terms of days if not hours in the battles against the Japanese. We have no point of reference to identify with what the families of solders were dealing with in 1945. The Okinawa battle had just concluded and it was the most difficult, strenuously defended piece of territory in the Pacific War to that point. For those that are unfamiliar, Okinawa was literally hell on earth. The difficulties experienced by both sides and the slaughter of troops and innocent civilians is breathtaking and unbelievably sad. I believe the leaders at that time truly were convinced the Japanese would defend their home island just as vigorously and would inflict massive US casualties. And this war had been going on for almost 5 years at this point - for the US anyway.
Flip the coin around. Do any of you honestly think Japan wouldn't have done the same if they were winning the war, possessed such a weapon, and were on the doorstep of the US, ready to invade but knowing every single person in the US would resist them in the fiercest way possible? Of course they would have.
Second, I don't believe scientists had a true understanding of the long term effects of radiation poisoning at the time. They had their theories but no real way of understanding.
The US killed WAY more civilians through conventional and incendiary bombing in Tokyo and the other Japanese cities before the nuclear strikes. If not for the nukes, that practice may have gone on for many more months in preparation for invasion. You could argue that the death toll for Japanese civilians and military would have been greater if the US had continued the conventional bombing campaign. The plan for the invasion of the mainland was supposed to be put into effect late 1945, early 1946. That would have meant six more months of firebombing. Then the invasion. Think about that.
The Nagasaki bomb in my opinion was unnecessary and if you want to talk crime, you can start here. The US didn't give Japan enough time to seriously assess the damage, or to allow the military sufficient time to talk the emperor into surrender. This wasn't 2010 where thousands of people took cell phone pics and uploaded to FB and everyone knew what was going on 2 minutes after it happened. The US could have communicated to Japan and said something along the lines of "We have 25 more of these things and for every day you don't surrender, we destroy a city. You have two weeks to decide."
On the comment someone made about Russia getting involved and how Japan was finished anyway - They were finished anyway on Peleliu, Iwo Jima, and Okinawa. The writings left by the Japanese commanders at these islands made no secret of the fact that they knew they could not win those battles. They were defeated before the battles even started. They knew that! Yet, they tenaciously defended those islands to almost the last man, refusing to surrender. If you look at that, the "Japan was beaten anyway" argument doesn't hold because in every single case where they were "beaten anyway" they fought to the last man and the last bullet.
On the Hiroshima visit - it has been 65 years. Isn't it time a US leader visited? This is not the "apology" tour. This is about mending bridges and showing respect. Japan is one of our biggest allies and dwelling on past animosity is useless. It no more shows weakness on the US's part than killing a pentagon order for some super stealth fighter jet we don't need. I don't understand why people get up in arms about the man visiting this site and paying respect.
Nukes today - Sure I would like to get rid of all of them. That would be great! But, think for a minute. You going to convince China, England, Russia, France, Pakistan, India, Israel, North Korea and whoever else to get rid of theirs? Realistically I mean? And then you can convince every nation on the planet not to build more? Sure, a nice dream, but in reality this will never happen. I believe these weapons are terrible, but you have to have them. It is just the reality of the world we live in. I believe they do keep us safer because any country now or in the future knows they cannot attack us without that threat over their heads. Now, as to our actions in the world today, that is another thread.
wow, excellent read. I'm not going to give an opinion one way or another, but I enjoyed reading all of these posts and learned several things I didn't know.
"All I Ever Knew" available now in print and digital formats at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and iBooks.
Comments
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
people usually need a reason to hate don't they. if you don't want people to hate you and want to attack you, maybe stop participating in violence.
there is nothing 'peaceful about this Empire is there.
What about Iraq responding to an unproked attack where america tears the country apart
what should their response be
Nope, I'm not. But I'm also a realist and I believe that having these weapons has protected us. I also certainly think our arsenal should be dramatically reduced. I'd keep less than 100 considering all the types that there are. I would never initiate an attack, in fact I am in support of removing our military from every place on the planet except the US itself.
Let everyone else deal with everyone else, just don't call us the next time an earthquake decides to drop a 7.9 on you. My attitude has changed, I'm pretty much strictly going on reducing the taxes on the American citizen.
Listen newb, before making your 21st post on this forum educate yourself. I do not support US troops in Iraq and I never have.
now now lts not get our panties all twisted. relatively speaking based on post tallies ... to me you are a newb so lets just try and be polite.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
where is the accusation that you support the current war in iraq?
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Correct me if I am wrong but I seem to remember on this very forum someone complaining that our military was helping in Haiti. I'm saying if they don't want the military helping then we should simply keeps our ships docked.
A reply on pg 4 and this page sent that message.
are you referring to this:
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
NO newb here I just dont need to post on everything like some
and again put up wher I said you support it. I made light of your IMAGINED enemies like IRAN or North Korea and brought it to a reality of what the USA did do in Iraq.
never questioned your support for or against.
and regardless a nebie has as much right to post as an old timer
no lets bring it down to your and my terms
what if a country invaded you own nation for reasons that later were found to be false. on the very first bombing raid ( THEY CALLED IT SHOCK AND AWE) your beautiful daughter was ripped to shreds from a bomb.
what would your response be. would you take up arms.
this is what suprises me .
do you see, do you understand.
Your nation feels the need to retaliate . your asking what that retaliation would be.
but you do not understand when individuals do it in Iraq. you call them terrorists.
where above do I speak of your supports
I stated you nation ( you are from the USA are you not)
You asked about retaliation and aI aske why you call them terrorists ( when all they are doing is what you say amercia should or would do if an nuclear attack happened )
its a long stretch to say that I accuse u of suuport or lack of it.
Nuke free since 8 June 1987
I will say this about Japan - cruel doesn't even begin to describe how they acted leading up to the second world war ... but having said that - they changed their constitution to renounce war as a means of settling international disputes ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_9_ ... n_of_Japan
at least on their part - they recognized some of their atrocities and changed ... we can't say that for every nation can we?
http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/explorer/4826/Overview
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
The Hiroshima bomb I believe was justified. Remember, it was still a total war at this point. A brutal war. Like nothing any one here can relate to. The casualties we suffer in Iraq and elsewhere in a year were suffered in terms of days if not hours in the battles against the Japanese. We have no point of reference to identify with what the families of solders were dealing with in 1945. The Okinawa battle had just concluded and it was the most difficult, strenuously defended piece of territory in the Pacific War to that point. For those that are unfamiliar, Okinawa was literally hell on earth. The difficulties experienced by both sides and the slaughter of troops and innocent civilians is breathtaking and unbelievably sad. I believe the leaders at that time truly were convinced the Japanese would defend their home island just as vigorously and would inflict massive US casualties. And this war had been going on for almost 5 years at this point - for the US anyway.
Flip the coin around. Do any of you honestly think Japan wouldn't have done the same if they were winning the war, possessed such a weapon, and were on the doorstep of the US, ready to invade but knowing every single person in the US would resist them in the fiercest way possible? Of course they would have.
Second, I don't believe scientists had a true understanding of the long term effects of radiation poisoning at the time. They had their theories but no real way of understanding.
The US killed WAY more civilians through conventional and incendiary bombing in Tokyo and the other Japanese cities before the nuclear strikes. If not for the nukes, that practice may have gone on for many more months in preparation for invasion. You could argue that the death toll for Japanese civilians and military would have been greater if the US had continued the conventional bombing campaign. The plan for the invasion of the mainland was supposed to be put into effect late 1945, early 1946. That would have meant six more months of firebombing. Then the invasion. Think about that.
The Nagasaki bomb in my opinion was unnecessary and if you want to talk crime, you can start here. The US didn't give Japan enough time to seriously assess the damage, or to allow the military sufficient time to talk the emperor into surrender. This wasn't 2010 where thousands of people took cell phone pics and uploaded to FB and everyone knew what was going on 2 minutes after it happened. The US could have communicated to Japan and said something along the lines of "We have 25 more of these things and for every day you don't surrender, we destroy a city. You have two weeks to decide."
On the comment someone made about Russia getting involved and how Japan was finished anyway - They were finished anyway on Peleliu, Iwo Jima, and Okinawa. The writings left by the Japanese commanders at these islands made no secret of the fact that they knew they could not win those battles. They were defeated before the battles even started. They knew that! Yet, they tenaciously defended those islands to almost the last man, refusing to surrender. If you look at that, the "Japan was beaten anyway" argument doesn't hold because in every single case where they were "beaten anyway" they fought to the last man and the last bullet.
On the Hiroshima visit - it has been 65 years. Isn't it time a US leader visited? This is not the "apology" tour. This is about mending bridges and showing respect. Japan is one of our biggest allies and dwelling on past animosity is useless. It no more shows weakness on the US's part than killing a pentagon order for some super stealth fighter jet we don't need. I don't understand why people get up in arms about the man visiting this site and paying respect.
Nukes today - Sure I would like to get rid of all of them. That would be great! But, think for a minute. You going to convince China, England, Russia, France, Pakistan, India, Israel, North Korea and whoever else to get rid of theirs? Realistically I mean? And then you can convince every nation on the planet not to build more? Sure, a nice dream, but in reality this will never happen. I believe these weapons are terrible, but you have to have them. It is just the reality of the world we live in. I believe they do keep us safer because any country now or in the future knows they cannot attack us without that threat over their heads. Now, as to our actions in the world today, that is another thread.
BOS-9/28/04,9/29/04,6/28/08,6/30/08, 9/5/16, 9/7/16, 9/2/18
MTL-9/15/05, OTT-9/16/05
PHL-5/27/06,5/28/06,10/30/09,10/31/09
CHI-8/2/07,8/5/07,8/23/09,8/24/09
HTFD-6/27/08
ATX-10/4/09, 10/12/14
KC-5/3/2010,STL-5/4/2010
Bridge School-10/23/2010,10/24/2010
PJ20-9/3/2011,9/4/2011
OKC-11/16/13
SEA-12/6/13
TUL-10/8/14