Patting the wrists, rolling the eyes.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by ironweed
I would speculate that the blood that would have been spilled in an invasion would have been largely the blood of active combatants on both sides, rather than the Japanese civilian population in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and I think that is a point where one can draw a moral distinction.

I think your speculation is wholly unrealistic. A land war in Japan would have been devastating, and the estimates of civilian casualties were massive.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ironweed
I'm more American than you. I'm a yankee-fucking-doodle-dandy born on the fourth of July muthafucka, muthafucka. I'm as American as Eugene Debs, F.D.R. and Mike Quill (after he got his papers). I was loving this country when you were still sucking Margaret Thatcher's dick, so stuff it.

You're the kind of guy who says "loving" when he really means "fucking."

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
you don't think torture can provide benefits? Have you seen this?

No blood for oil!

[bilmore]

Originally posted by ironweed
What are we talking, 8-month-olds with rising sun headbands and bayonets in their gums crawling toward the foxhole? I might have seen this in a Bugs Bunny cartoon (before they yanked those kind) but I still have to think that by obliterating an entire city you're gonna catch at least a few who wouldn't have been fighting us on the beaches.

You're so cute when you're complaining that the country that bushwacked us might be hurt if we fought back!

[Spanky]

Originally posted by ironweed
I'm more American than you. I'm a yankee-fucking-doodle-dandy born on the fourth of July muthafucka, muthafucka. I'm as American as Eugene Debs, F.D.R. and Mike Quill (after he got his papers). I was loving this country when you were still sucking Margaret Thatcher's dick, so stuff it.

The residents of Okinawa were told that the Allies were going to torture, Rape and kill everyone. So the civilians, first threw their children, and then themselves off the cliffs. On the History Channel's "Color of War" they had color film footage of these Okinawan mothers throwing the babies over the cliffs. Every kid in School (kindergarten on up) was being taught how to resist the invaders. There are picture of tiny kids learning how to stab with sharpened bamboo polls. Everyone was getting ready to die for the Emporer.

Originally posted by bilmore
You're so cute when you're complaining that the country that bushwacked us might be hurt if we fought back!

You're cute when you complain about mass graves in Iraq but don't see anything troubling about annihilating two cities which, I don't care what anyone says, contained non-combatants. Some innocent lives worth more than others?

And for the record, I said dropping the bomb was the right strategic choice and I would have probably done the same. That doesn't mean it had no moral implications or was justified by the attack on Peal Harbor (the "bushwacking," no?). It was necessary to avoid American casualties -- go over to Japan and peddle the line that we were doing their civilians a favor too.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
You're so cute when you're complaining that the country that bushwacked us might be hurt if we fought back!

How is it that Pearl Harbor justifies nuking Japanese cities, but slavery does not justify minority set-asides for highway repair?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
The residents of Okinawa were told that the Allies were going to torture, Rape and kill everyone. So the civilians, first threw their children, and then themselves off the cliffs. On the History Channel's "Color of War" they had color film footage of these Okinawan mothers throwing the babies over the cliffs. Every kid in School (kindergarten on up) was being taught how to resist the invaders. There are picture of tiny kids learning how to stab with sharpened bamboo polls. Everyone was getting ready to die for the Emporer.

To put what they were told in perspective, we did not, as a rule, take prisoners in the Pacific theater.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by ironweed
You're cute when you complain about mass graves in Iraq but don't see anything troubling about annihilating two cities which, I don't care what anyone says, contained non-combatants. Some innocent lives worth more than others?

"Don't see anything troubling . . . "? Well, no. (ETA - not "no, nothing troubling", but "no, that's not my position.") I don't see the extent of moral failure on our part that you seem to see when we react to a country that starts and wages massive war on us, fer' sure. But, yeah, there are some troublesome aspects to incinerating that many people. I wish they could have stopped their own country from starting it, for one, and I wish the military nuts in J at the time hadn't decided to sacrifice millions of people in their bid for economic dominance. I'm sure you agree with these things - it's just that I seem to see (maybe unjustifiably) a thread of "it's our fault" in these kinds of posts from you, and I don't buy that.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
How is it that Pearl Harbor justifies nuking Japanese cities, but slavery does not justify minority set-asides for highway repair?

I'm not sure, but I think it has to do with the UCC, and balloons.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
"Don't see anything troubling . . . "? Well, no. I don't see the extent of moral failure on our part that you seem to see when we react to a country that starts and wages massive war on us, fer' sure. But, yeah, there are some troublesome aspects to incinerating that many people. I wish they could have stopped their own country from starting it, for one, and I wish the military nuts in J at the time hadn't decided to sacrifice millions of people in their bid for economic dominance. I'm sure you agree with these things - it's just that I seem to see (maybe unjustifiably) a thread of "it's our fault" in these kinds of posts from you, and I don't buy that.

Don't you see, ironweed, that if the Japanese military had been killing their own people, we would have been justified in invading their country to put a stop to it, but if they start killing our people, we are then justified to invade their country and kill their people.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
I'm not sure, but I think it has to do with the UCC, and balloons.

Congratulations: that makes much more sense than I expected.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Don't you see, ironweed, that if the Japanese military had been killing their own people, we would have been justified in invading their country to put a stop to it, but if they start killing our people, we are then justified to invade their country and kill their people.

Do you truly not understand that what you just typed is correct?

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by ironweed
You're cute when you complain about mass graves in Iraq but don't see anything troubling about annihilating two cities which, I don't care what anyone says, contained non-combatants. Some innocent lives worth more than others?

And for the record, I said dropping the bomb was the right strategic choice and I would have probably done the same. That doesn't mean it had no moral implications or was justified by the attack on Peal Harbor (the "bushwacking," no?). It was necessary to avoid American casualties -- go over to Japan and peddle the line that we were doing their civilians a favor too.

We agree. The fact that the bombs probably saved Japanese lives is a secondary (and after the fact) rationale. It's true, but not the primary reason why we used them.

And the fact that dropping them was the right thing to do doesn't change the fact that it was a horrible thing.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
To put what they were told in perspective, we did not, as a rule, take prisoners in the Pacific theater.

Not after Bataan.