27
   

Is your personal beliefs or privacy worth losing your job over?

 
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Fri 29 Oct, 2021 09:11 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:

gIVEN THE FACT THt we killed immediately or doomed to a slow death several hundred thousand japanese civilians their secondary or tertiary military targets is pretty inconsequential. The revulsion worldwide at the effect of the bombing spurred the entire world to say NEVER AGIN. And for seventy years that has held. tho trumpwas juat a bit too eageer to use them. Which is why the joint chiefsacted to make sure he hidn't
t use them, as they should have done in the name of humanity.


Square miles of cities was turn into ashes by way of fire storms set off by thousands of bombers so being burn alive in fire storms are so must less worst then being killed by a nuclear blast?

Note the fire bombings was killing about the same numbers as the nuclear attacks but the impact of the fire bombing raids did not end the war the two atom bombs did,
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 29 Oct, 2021 10:03 pm
@BillRM,
Justice was inflicted on Japan in multiple ways. All of it was good.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 29 Oct, 2021 10:04 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
gIVEN THE FACT THt we killed immediately or doomed to a slow death several hundred thousand japanese civilians

No more than 200,000.


MontereyJack wrote:
their secondary or tertiary military targets is pretty inconsequential.

Hiroshima was a huge military center with tens of thousands of soldiers awaiting deployment to the beaches to resist our coming invasion. It was also the military headquarters in charge of repelling that coming invasion.

The second atomic bomb was supposed to be dropped on Kokura Arsenal, a massive (4000 feet by 2100 feet) factory that was Japan's primary source of machine guns and machine gun ammo. Due to a variety or problems they had to divert to their alternate target at Nagasaki, where they destroyed two large torpedo factories (one for air-dropped torpedoes and one for naval torpedoes).


MontereyJack wrote:
The revulsion worldwide at the effect of the bombing spurred the entire world to say NEVER AGIN. And for seventy years that has held.

OK.

It's a shame that bastard Eisenhower stopped Dr. Teller from building Sundial and Gnomon though. They would have been beautiful weapons.


MontereyJack wrote:
tho trump was just a bit too eager to use them.

Hardly. He made no attempts to nuke anyone.


MontereyJack wrote:
Which is why the joint chiefs acted to make sure he didn't use them, as they should have done in the name of humanity.

That was treason. They should be prosecuted. When Mr. Trump is reelected I'm sure they will be.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Sat 30 Oct, 2021 05:27 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:


Frank Apisa wrote:

BillRM wrote:

oralloy wrote:

maxdancona wrote:
And I love your attempt to downplay the attrocities of war.

Dropping justice bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not an atrocity in any way whatsoever.


My father along with one hell of a lot of others men on both sides would had likely not had live through the war but for those bombs and I would not have been conceived in 1948 but for the ending of the war when it did due to those bombs.



There is nothing whatever wrong with arguing that the use of the atomic bombs was necessary, justified, and preferable to ending the war via invasion of the Japanese homeland.

And there is nothing whatever wrong with thinking that dropping nuclear weapons on civilian populations is a disgusting thing to have done.

Both positions, in my opinion, are absolutely correct and valid.


You do know that the Japaneses manufacturing of war materials was must more broken up into small centers and mixed in with civilian areas then the West to begin with next there is nothing of magic about one small nuclear bomb then a thousand bombers dropping fire bombs other then the shock of two nuclear bomb did end the war and save hundred hundred of thousands of lives on both sides including perhaps my father.

The Japanese government had plans of using children arm with spears to attack our soldiers so ending that war with atoms bombs was more then call for.


Okay...so let me modify my comments.

There is nothing whatever wrong with arguing that the use of the atomic bombs nor fire bombs on cities filled with civilians...as necessary, justified, and preferable to ending the war via invasion of the Japanese homeland.

And there is nothing whatever wrong with thinking that dropping nuclear weapons or fire bombing cities filled with civilian populations is a disgusting thing to have done.

Both positions, in my opinion, are absolutely correct and valid.

oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Sat 30 Oct, 2021 06:45 am
@Frank Apisa,
The second position remains factually invalid.

The justice bombs were dropped on military targets.

The incendiary raids were also directed at military targets.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Sat 30 Oct, 2021 06:54 am
@Frank Apisa,
Stalin entered the war against Japan at roughly the same time taking North Korea in the process.

That had as much bearing on Japan's surrender as Hiroshima and Nagasaki, because the Japanese would rather be occupied by America than the Soviets.
MontereyJack
 
  4  
Reply Sat 30 Oct, 2021 08:32 am
@BillRM,
all the more reason to make sure trump is not re-elected and never holds public office again, especially after the insurrection he fomented on jan. 6, and his attempted coup on the american people.
Brandon9000
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 30 Oct, 2021 09:44 am
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
all the more reason to make sure trump is not re-elected and never holds public office again, especially after the insurrection he fomented on jan. 6, and his attempted coup on the american people.

Nonsense. I defy you to produce any sentence he ever said or wrote asking people to foment an insurrection or break into anything.
Frank Apisa
 
  5  
Reply Sat 30 Oct, 2021 09:52 am
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:

all the more reason to make sure trump is not re-elected and never holds public office again, especially after the insurrection he fomented on jan. 6, and his attempted coup on the american people.


Exactly!

Brandon will never understand, Jack. He's part of the sheeple flock...and is not allowed to understand.

0 Replies
 
snood
 
  6  
Reply Sat 30 Oct, 2021 09:54 am
Yeah, MJ. And when you get done searching up the proof that Trump encouraged that insurrection and had prior knowledge of it, I’m gonna need you to get on that “water is wet” research.
Brandon9000
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 30 Oct, 2021 09:56 am
@snood,
snood wrote:
Yeah, MJ. And when you get done searching up the proof that Trump encouraged that insurrection and had prior knowledge of it, I’m gonna need you to get on that “water is wet” research.

You claim it's obvious, yet don't provide any sentence in which he said it. If it's so obvious, why not take a minute to produce an example?
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  4  
Reply Sat 30 Oct, 2021 11:07 am
@Brandon9000,
There you go again, demanding one specific piece of evidence, an exact phrase no less.

It's one way of ignoring the huge mountain of evidence already out there.

You seem to be of the impression that this whole thread is about making you change your mind, it's not.

I don't give a **** what you think, your mind is already made up.

No evidence will ever be good enough and I seriously doubt you would condemn anything Trump did.
edgarblythe
 
  4  
Reply Sat 30 Oct, 2021 01:14 pm
In a society that has its **** together, Trump and his henchmen would be either on trial or already under lock and key, staring at stone walls. Traitors used to be treated like that. Some were even executed.
BillRM
 
  3  
Reply Sat 30 Oct, 2021 01:18 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

In a society that has its **** together, Trump and his henchmen would be either on trial or already under lock and key, staring at stone walls. Traitors used to be treated like that. Some were even executed.


In a society that is sane Trump and his father before him would be selling U cars.
0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
Below viewing threshold (view)
Below viewing threshold (view)
Brandon9000
 
  -4  
Reply Sat 30 Oct, 2021 02:39 pm
@izzythepush,
That's not true at all. This is how debate works. A person claims that something is true. Either right from the start, or at least when asked, the person making the assertion needs to provide some evidence that what he said is true. A person who claims something is true but is unable or unwilling to provide a speck of evidence, loses the debate. "Everyone knows" is not a valid argument. This is how debate, both formal and informal, has worked for centuries and will continue to work in the future.

Suppose someone in your real life said that you made some ethnic slur, which you wouldn't dream of making. He tells other people and pretty soon your friends and associates are giving you the cold shoulder because of something you didn't do at all. You say to someone, "But I didn't say that. It never happened. There isn't a speck of evidence anywhere that I ever said that." He says, "Look, everyone knows you did." That's why people who claim that something is true should be able to supply some indication that it is actually true. Otherwise people believe a lot of stuff that's false.
Below viewing threshold (view)
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2021 08:34 pm
@oralloy,
SAY OINK FOR US.
 

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/15/2025 at 10:19:44