Stupid bitch who deserves to die

[Shiro_Ryuu]

Ok, so I'm still on my trip to Japan [going pretty good w/ her btw], and I go on a trip to Hiroshima. Now, we all know what happened there like 63 years ago, in World War II. Ok, so I'm aware that this'll be a flame war here, but ok, just want your opinions on this. In the trip, we all went to a museum that was dedicated to the memory of those who were killed in the atomic bomb attack. This girl who was in our group was saying that she hated being here because she hated how the video was trying to make the Japanese look like victims. She even went on to say that the victims of the Hiroshima bombings even DESERVED that punishment. Ok, what the FUCK is wrong with this stupid bitch? Ok, yeah, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in a suprise attack, yeah, they attacked military targets and stuff in an attempt to destroy the fleet. Yeah, thats bad. Ok, 4 years later, Americans fucking threw a fucking atomic bomb on a city that had mostly, if not, only civilians. Innocent people, children, babies, etc were all fucking killed by that evil fucking demonic bomb, which didn't even be needed to be used since America was winning the war for the most part, and Japan was cornered, having to deal with America, Soviet Union, China, and Britain, all against like a half-dead Japanese army, and America goes on and throws a fucking bomb of the fucking devil. All that, and this bitch says "Oh, I don't care about what happened, in fact, I think they deserved it."

I mean, there was a person who would have been more deserving of her spot in this group which had limited spots, and instead of that more deserving person, this bitch comes along. Now, she always rubbed me the wrong way, but saying that innocent people deserved to be hit by a fucking demonic weapon just pushed me to my limit. I'm usually a passive person, but man, I just can't stand this person. I didn't like her, but this just pushes it for me. This person is a cold, heartless, bitch. Hell, if you even see her in person, you'll even doubt that she's even female, so its like she's ugly AND a bitch, the worst female human being that can possibly exist.

Yeah, a whole bunch of cursing, not what I'm accustomed to. By the way, here's what I think of this bombing. I just wish that something like this never happens ever again.

http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa23/White_Dragon_album/P1010094.jpg?t=1182091355



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Shiroryuu on 2007-06-17 08:04 ]</font>

[FOAtHeart]

I mean, I think you could have phrased things better.

"This person deserves to die because she said these people deserved to die!"

Anyway, she is probably just an ignorant girl; I don't know why it bothered you so much!

[KodiaX987]

On 2007-06-17 08:45, FOAtHeart wrote:
I don't know why it bothered you so much!


Rants forum. Case closed.

[Sayara]

Japan could of surrendered at any time if it wanted to before and during the first bomb strike. They didn't though.

Lets not forget civilians were also killed in Pearl Harbor who had nothing to do with the war also.
the US could of did a Siege like they did for the south islands but that could of been more timely/expensive/less successful, I'm not saying i support the idea; but at a time of war any expensive needed to be taken for "the world"

[Solstis]

The Japanese were kinda, how to put it, douchebags, but didn't really deserve the whole bomb thingy, especially because none of the people responsible for the war crimes and cultural eliminations of the region were at the cities. Besides, I heard that the bombs just killed a bunch of Korean workers. Poo.

Also, I'm pretty sure that the Japanese people are just doing the finger thing to humour you.

[DurakkenX]

Those that died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki deserve a so much more honor and respect than they are given, and they don't receive it mainly because most people are taught patriotic history rather than the truth.

Truman did the right thing in dropping those bombs. It may have been horrible but it was a good call. Why?

Germany was only months away from having the atomic bomb.
If the war had continued far more people would have died.
It has prevented all out nuclear war due to everyone not having them and gave everyone a chance to reflect.

So in other words, while the event may have been horrid and grotesque all of us owe our lives to those who died in those blasts as well as those who fought in WW2, including hitler for if he wouldn't have started the war we would probably have gone into a full nuclear war later on when all of us didn't know what the consequences are.

also, i don't think all of them are doing it just to humour him, but prolly the vast majority of them are.

[Chii]

I believe it was wrong to have taken so many lives but it was our only choice at the time to bring the war to an end as fast as it did.

You also have to remember that the intention of the bombings were not to cost lives, because for who knows how long before the bombings (two weeks I think?). Fliers were dropped by our planes detailing exactly what would happen, and as a result some people did heed this warning and leave the area. But others did not, and as a result they got to see the horrors of the bomb up front.

But sadly, there was still a huge loss of life. And the effects of this bomb was felt both immediately and for many years after the bombing. Immediately because as soon as the bomb hit, the person who dropped it was quoted as saying "Oh my god, what have I done."

Later it was also seen and felt through the high incidence of cancer, the poisoned food and water, and the high rate of birth defects.

But for better or worse, as the person said in the post below mine. We cannot take all the blame, because part of what forced the decision was the efforts that Japan was putting into this war, which showed that they had no intentions of stopping any time soon. Some of this can be seen, not only with the bombings that happened, but with the constant stream of kamikaze bombings that happened. Which also posed a problem, to the US forces which was this... How do you fight an enemy that uses their lives as the ammunition to their weapon?

Not to mention the Japanese population was not the smallest population in the world, so there were plenty of these zeros turned flying bombs whose sole intention was to collide into the nearest enemy structure.

So as a result the Truman saw this as a way to put a stop to things once and for all. In the end it may not have been the best solution but it was an effective one given the cirumstances.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Chii on 2007-06-17 11:48 ]</font>

[Wyndham]

neither side was free of fault. that's all I'm going to say.

[AlexCraig]

Yeah... I agree with Oran...
They killed, we killed...
Both sides were, as he put it, not free of fault

[CupOfCoffee]

I don't have much to add to the whole bombing thing, but I think everyone's confused on the picture he posted. That's actually him, Shiro Ryuu, and I'm pretty sure he's not Japanese.

[Ithildin]

oh ffs... they tried to get me to go to rehab, but i said no no no...

[Solstis]

On 2007-06-17 12:17, CupOfCoffee wrote:
I don't have much to add to the whole bombing thing, but I think everyone's confused on the picture he posted. That's actually him, Shiro Ryuu, and I'm pretty sure he's not Japanese.



No, I know that's him. I saw all his pics in the RL Pic thread, and I assume that the Japanese are just humouring everyone.

Japanese tourists abroad might do the finger thing, but probably not in their own country.

[Sinue_v2]

No offence, but if you think the dropping of Nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the worst tragedies to befall the Japanese in WWII, then you are a fucking idiot. The impact of the bombs wasn't the devistation they caused in total, or the loss of life. It was the fact that all that destruction came from ONE bomb. At the time, carpet bombing was a standard practice for nearly everyone - and the fear was that weapons of this power would eventually be used in carpet bombing raids. Indeed, America started cooking up all sorts of nuclear weapon devices from small scale anti-troop atomic cannons, to air-to-air anti-aircraft atomic missles, to long range surface-to-surface missles. Nuclear arms didn't become a really fearsome "doomsday" weapon until the development of H-Bombs which made Fat Man and Little Boy look like fucking sparklers.

And the bombs weren't dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki to end the war in the pacific. At least, not solely. The dropping of the Atomic Bombs on those cities were signals to the Russians not to fucking push us in the Pacific like they did in Berlin. Russia wanted a piece of Japans ass badly over disputed territories in the Russo-Japanese war, not to mention that China was leaning more and more towrads Communism - and you KNOW they wanted a piece of Japans ass after WWII.

The dropping of the Atomic Bombs on Japan wasn't so much about the closing shots of WWII - but the opening shots of the Cold War.

Do yourself a favor and start reasearching the firebombing raids we conducted against Japan in which we leveled their cities, several times a week, with incidiary bombs causing firestorms so intense that it would litterally light fleeing civilians up like human candles.

Also - read this site...

http://www.godhatesjanks.org/

-- or better, head to Gifu and talk to the man personally. I'm sure he'd have a lot to say to you.


Germany was only months away from having the atomic bomb.
If the war had continued far more people would have died.

Germany had surrendered LOOOONG before the bombs dropped in Japan. We weren't even fully commited to the War in the Pacific until the war in Europe was pretty much over.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Sinue_v2 on 2007-06-17 13:06 ]</font>

[Solstis]

Well, that's what happens when symbolism gets in the way of events. As if events were real, anyway.

What I don't get is why Dresden is nearly forgotten. I mean, that place was absoultely devastated. Firebombing was old news by the time we got to Japan, I guess. The nukes were necessary as a symbolic gesture.

Okay, I basically just ended up repeating what Sinue said, but vaguely and without background citations, BUT WHATEVER OKAY?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Solstis on 2007-06-17 13:17 ]</font>

[roygbiv]

Edit: Aimed at Durakken's post earlier.

Ok I don't totally disagree with your conclusions... but you are talking out of your ass.


On 2007-06-17 10:10, DurakkenX wrote:
Those that died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki deserve a so much more honor and respect than they are given, and they don't receive it mainly because most people are taught patriotic history rather than the truth.

Wait what? Are you talking about foreign conceptions of the victims of the bombings or Japanese conceptions of their own history?

The usual american public school take on the matter can hardly be called patriotic or callous. Especially when many places emphasize anti-war books in their literature classes (catch 22, slaughterhouse 5, all quiet on the western front), and historic accounts of the event highlight the cost of war suffered on all sides.

Japanese accounts of their own history, however, are notoriously controversial. Accounts of the bombing + victims of the attack, while neglecting any mention of Japanese war crimes does not live up to the standards of the US and Germany in coming to terms with the devastation inflicted upon their enemies.




Truman did the right thing in dropping those bombs. It may have been horrible but it was a good call. Why?


Germany was only months away from having the atomic bomb.

WOAH WOAH WOAH! Slow down. That's not just bad logic, it's also flat out wrong. First off if you weren't aware the war ended in Europe long before the bombs were dropped on Japan. Obviously you know this, which is why it hurts when you bring it up as justification for dropping the bomb. At the point when the decision was made it really didn't matter how far along the German weapon program had gotten did it?

Furthermore, it wasn't like we were worried about the Japanese developing one. Japan didn't have the resources for building an A-bomb, and didn't make any noticeable progress in creating one. From the most basic level we weren't worried about their weapons program at all. 1. They had no access to the resources they needed for the project 2. They had no method of delivering said weapon to any US target worth hitting. (At this point in the war they were crushed militarily, their navy was in ruins, and they were more concerned with defending the mainland than anything else... and they are going to somehow get a bomb to... LA?) 3. Hitting a US city with said imaginary bomb would stop the US forces at their doorstep HOW?

This wasn't even remotely viewed as a possibility. After the defeat of germany the motivation of the scientists at Los Alamos changed completely, and the race to develop the bomb continued out of inertia more than anything else.

Finally your assertion that Germany was months from the bomb is historically innacurate. Wow! Where did you get that? If you had done any research on the German weapons program you would have found out very fast that Heisenberg made some major fuck ups early on in their program which effectively ruined their program. [First by overestimating the amount of uranium you would need and viewing the project as infessible, and secondarily by not conveying to the nazi administration the potential or need for such a device... limiting the scope of the program] By most accounts the nazi scientists seemed to be a lot more interested in nuclear power than nuclear bombs. Yeah they were a couple months off from clean efficient energy! LOL!

[furthermore the state of the nazi weapons program was not totally unknown to the US gogo spies!]



If the war had continued far more people would have died.

This is probably true, you would have to make a hard argument to say that less life would have been lost in an invasion of the japanese mainland... or that japan would have just simply magically surrendered.



It has prevented all out nuclear war due to everyone not having them and gave everyone a chance to reflect.

Which is why Russia went head first into developing Nuclear bombs and the US only took a breather of a few years before going all out to make a H-bomb.





So in other words, while the event may have been horrid and grotesque all of us owe our lives to those who died in those blasts as well as those who fought in WW2, including hitler for if he wouldn't have started the war we would probably have gone into a full nuclear war later on when all of us didn't know what the consequences are.

what? You don't know that. Nobody knows that... you are just talking out of your ass.



also, i don't think all of them are doing it just to humour him, but prolly the vast majority of them are.



[End Edit: and like 50 people post before me but whatever... it makes me feel good that total bullshit is not tolerated]


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: roygbiv on 2007-06-17 13:28 ]</font>

[Banish]

On 2007-06-17 13:12, Solstis wrote:
Well, that's what happens when symbolism gets in the way of events. As if events were real, anyway.

What I don't get is why Dresden is nearly forgotten. I mean, that place was absoultely devastated. Firebombing was old news by the time we got to Japan, I guess. The nukes were necessary as a symbolic gesture.

Okay, I basically just ended up repeating what Sinue said, but vaguely and without background citations, BUT WHATEVER OKAY?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Solstis on 2007-06-17 13:17 ]</font>


That was then, this is now.

[Solstis]

On 2007-06-17 13:25, Fujita wrote:

On 2007-06-17 13:12, Solstis wrote:
Well, that's what happens when symbolism gets in the way of events. As if events were real, anyway.

What I don't get is why Dresden is nearly forgotten. I mean, that place was absoultely devastated. Firebombing was old news by the time we got to Japan, I guess. The nukes were necessary as a symbolic gesture.

Okay, I basically just ended up repeating what Sinue said, but vaguely and without background citations, BUT WHATEVER OKAY?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Solstis on 2007-06-17 13:17 ]</font>


That was then, this is now.



What does that even mean? +1 post count?

"Man, I felt really sick from that bagel yesterday."

"That was then, this is now."

"That's just a stupid, poetic phrase!"

Summary: What? Are you a farmer's almanac?


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Solstis on 2007-06-17 13:33 ]</font>

[AlexCraig]

I think Roy hit the nail on the head here. I also hold true to what I said earlier. Yes, Japan bombed us killing our people. But it is also true that we blasted them as well. Its six in one, half dozen in the other. If you think about it in population percent, we did far more to them than they did us. And even IF they were somehow capable of dropping a bomb on us, we still had more people in America than they did in Japan. Yet we DID drop the bombs.
Like I said before, they killed our people, we killed people.

Getting back to the original topic, I think that lady should simmer down a bit. As said earlier, it was over 60 years ago.

[Sinue_v2]

By the way, here's a small visual aid to demonstrate a point.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v203/Sinue/1177346962293.gif

And technically, the Tzar Bomba was designed for a 80-100 Megaton payload, twice the size shown in the graph. It was only tested with a 50 Megaton warhead though because the Russians actually feared the environmental repricussions.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Sinue_v2 on 2007-06-17 14:15 ]</font>

[Weeaboolits]

I don't care how terrible someone's opinions are on this type of thing, I don't think that they deserve to die for it. Be disliked? Yes. Die? No way.

[Sinue_v2]

I don't care how terrible someone's opinions are on this type of thing, I don't think that they deserve to die for it. Be disliked? Yes. Die? No way.

http://us.st11.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/yhst-34640480252896_1953_1168714

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Sinue_v2 on 2007-06-17 14:26 ]</font>

[Banish]

On 2007-06-17 13:31, Solstis wrote:

On 2007-06-17 13:25, Fujita wrote:

On 2007-06-17 13:12, Solstis wrote:
Well, that's what happens when symbolism gets in the way of events. As if events were real, anyway.

What I don't get is why Dresden is nearly forgotten. I mean, that place was absoultely devastated. Firebombing was old news by the time we got to Japan, I guess. The nukes were necessary as a symbolic gesture.

Okay, I basically just ended up repeating what Sinue said, but vaguely and without background citations, BUT WHATEVER OKAY?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Solstis on 2007-06-17 13:17 ]</font>


That was then, this is now.



What does that even mean? +1 post count?

"Man, I felt really sick from that bagel yesterday."

"That was then, this is now."

"That's just a stupid, poetic phrase!"

Summary: What? Are you a farmer's almanac?


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Solstis on 2007-06-17 13:33 ]</font>


Then go with your summary, and you will never see anything.

I don't really give a shit, it's over and I don't really see the point in fighting over it...whatever.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Fujita on 2007-06-17 14:53 ]</font>

[Solstis]

On 2007-06-17 14:46, Fujita wrote:

Then go with your summary, and you will never see anything.

I don't really give a shit, it's over and I don't really see the point in fighting over it...whatever.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Fujita on 2007-06-17 14:53 ]</font>


A penny saved is a penny earned. Be sure to floss at least once a day. Don't spit in the wind. The past is a grotesque animal. Soylent Green is people. Don't pee on an electric fence.

Man, I wish I lived on a higher spiritual plane.

But, yeah, wishing that people would die just because they're historical jerks is mean, especially because of some japanophilia.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Solstis on 2007-06-17 15:07 ]</font>

[TheyCallMeJoe]

Then go with your summary, and you will never see anything.


The one-liners aren't packing the punch you're hoping for. Cut back on being mysterious and actually post a real point, if you have one.

The lil lady wasn't even alive when any of this happened (I don't think, and if she was then I guess old mindsets die hard). Pointing fingers in war means more war. She was shortsighted and had a loud mouth...ignorant people with radical opinions are better just ignored. Unless they're a world leader with a military under their command -_-

[Shiro_Ryuu]

Yeah, just the fact that the Soviet and the States were both making even MORE powerful weapons is something that sickens me to my stomach. Besides, its not only the bombing, this person that I'm talking about has really been getting on my nerves since like the 1st week of this trip. I mean, her bitchiness has been getting on my last nerves, and saying something as horrible as what she said in Hiroshima just drew the line for me. I'm sorry for the way I came off, but I feel that someone needs to put her in her place. I'm not sure if I can do that today since I'll be too busy talking to the girl that I like who's the direct opposite of the girl I'm talking about in this thread, getting hooked up with that Japanese girl I'm talking about in my other rant is more important than shutting up that stupid bitch I'm talking about in this one.

[VIRIDIA_HUNTER]

dood this one mexican general from the mexican american war once said, "Americans are vicious people of lazy character" or was it "lazy people of vicious character?" i duno but i think i got my point across


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Dr_Montague on 2007-06-17 15:46 ]</font>

[VIRIDIA_HUNTER]

and ya i think the americans were fucked up u no to bomb like 100,000+ ppl mainly innocent civilians for peral harbor where like about a couple 1,000 US solisres died. So much 4 revenge, thats wat i call fuckd ppl of vicious character

[TheyCallMeJoe]

Actually, your point got a little hazy from the grammar. And it wasn't revenge, the US didn't use the atom bomb because of Pearl Harbor. We entered World War II because of Pearl Harbor, and bombed the Japanese because they refused to disassemble their army after Germany had surrendered to the Allies.

[Mystil]

I just dont like how people poke fun at the Hiroshima incident.

[Sinue_v2]

We didn't enter WWII because of Pearl Harbor - we entered because we (spearheaded the effort, but weren't the only ones) chocked the Japanese War Machine dry of materials, resources, and munitions. Weither or not Japan had intended to attack the US eventually doesn't matter. They saw us as a direct and hostile threat, and felt they had to attack us to knock out Navy in the pacific so that we couldn't effectively stop their imperialist expansion.

We had to enter the war, because without our intervention the Japanese would have spread further into China and Manchuria - and would have eventually made a grab for the entire pacific, including Australia who was helping to fund the war in Europe. If the Japanese had captured China, they and Germany would have have split the Russian front and allowed the axis powers complete control over Asia, Russia, and Europe. I don't know if the war would have been winable at that point. As it was, Germany postponed Operation Sealion and wasn't allowed to take total control over Europe because of their focus on the Russian front, and the UK was retained as a launching pad for the allied invasion.


and ya i think the americans were fucked up u no to bomb like 100,000+ ppl mainly innocent civilians for peral harbor

We weren't targeting civilian populations. We were targeting their military and industrial centers. The problem is, we didn't have sophisticated targeting systems. Alot of it was done with primitive sighting equiptment and guesswork. Thus, we carpet bombed to ensure that as long as we blanketed a large area with bombs - we could be relatively sure we knocked out the objective. Many of these bombing raids were done at night, under enemy fire, sighting targets by eyeballing them through clouds of smoke and blinding search lights. So yes, civilian casualties were high. That was the reality of war back then, and both sides engaged in it.

Japan, by the way, didn't just hit military installations at Pearl Harbor. They also attacked civilian centers on Oahu, likely by mistake as well.


Yeah, just the fact that the Soviet and the States were both making even MORE powerful weapons is something that sickens me to my stomach.

It wasn't just us. China, England, France, India, and Pakistan have also been engaging in the arms race to build bigger and better bombs. America and Russia were just at the forefront of this movement. As much as you don't like it, Mutually Assured Destruction is a necessary policy in todays world, and it has kept us out of a full blown nuclear war for nearly half a century - which is why the missle sheild in Europe is deeply unstabalizing move for such an ineffective system. I would hope Bush has the common sence to work with Putin on this to develop a sheild that only protects (and protects parts of Russia as well) against nukes from rouge states, rather than being an affront to each sides retaliatory capability.

The downside of this policy, unfortunately, is the implimentation of proxy wars in which the Allies and the Commies use other people's armys and other people's conflicts to fight each other - such as Korea and Vietnam.

But yeah... anyhow, at the heart of the matter is that people die in war. People suffer in war. Economies are ruined, and nations are deeply scarred - or possibly destoryed outright. Is the agony of the Japanese farmers on the outskirts of Hiroshima any greater than the agony of an Iraqi civilian who looses their family to an erronious, or terrorist bombing? Are the 64,000 civilian deaths at Nagasaki really that much more tragic and deserving of pity and sympathy than the 65,000 civilian Iraqi casualties over the last four years?

If you're looking at Hiroshima and Nagasaki from the point of view just body counts and devistation - you're looking at it from the wrong viewpoint. That's war, and devistation like that happens reguardless - be it through Atomic weapons or convention weapons.

[McLaughlin]

Well, Sinue's knowledge on WWII far exceeds my own, so I'm just going to let him continue. >_>

If anyone wants to discuss WWI though, I'm game.

[DurakkenX]

First off if you weren't aware the war ended in Europe long before the bombs were dropped on Japan. Obviously you know this


Wow... it's amazing how you know what I know even though nothing I stated indicated I know that which shockingly I didn't. Regardlessly, the point still stands... Even though the war had ended there will always be hold overs especially after the war just got over and even more so when there is still a chance for revival.



what? You don't know that. Nobody knows that... you are just talking out of your ass.


Hitler was a student of the type of mind and just happened to come along at that time. People in that position are easily riled to arms. Had it not bee right then it would have been a few years later and more than likey they would have advanced further in technology and would have developed the bomb quicker most likely. The benefits of WW2 far outway the problems it created.

back to everyone else...

I have no sympathy for civilians that died during that time. They did not "deserve" to die, but they did nothing to prevent it as like was said the US dropped leaflets all over the city weeks before giving the date. They had time to leave. Likewise I have no sympathy for the OMG THEY ATTACKED US?!!? thing for pearl Harbor... It was a well known fact that there was a note saying we are going to bomb pearl harbor and like the residents of hiroshima and nagasaki it was laughed at.

The arms race is a necessary evil as stands. No one can really disarm as it would create a power problem. The only real way to get out of the way it is is to create easily manufactured and distributed as well as cheap and able to be quickly made shielding system that is distributed to all governments at once.

[McLaughlin]

Like Roy said, the German engineers failed to emphasize the "importance" of a nuclear weapon to Hitler, meaning that the project was always on the back-burners, and the project likely never would have reached completion due to the overestimated amount of uranium required, making the operation unfeasible.

As for Pearl Harbor...there was no warning. That'd kind of diminish the effect of a surprise attack.

By the way, care to explain what good came of the war DurakkenX?

[DurakkenX]

There was warning Obsidian v.v it was just ignored by everyone... this is known.

As far as the good, How bout the economy boost it gave America?

[McLaughlin]

Care to get some proof? I google'd "Pearl Harbor" and got no information. Wikipedia gave me nothing either. None of the documentaries I've seen (or even the movie Pearl Harbor) have ever mentioned it either.

I wouldn't call a single country's temporary economic boost a benefit that far outweighs the millions of lives the war cost us.

[DurakkenX]

There is a whole documentary on that specifically that plays every once in a while on the history channel i believe.

Actually war is beneficial for all countries. It is good for economy and good for morale of a country's population. Also there a bunch of various other benefits i can't think of right now that came about because of WW2. I can't remember right now cuz I haven't looked at the info in a while and my mind just got pumped full of colonial american history ^.^

[McLaughlin]

On 2007-06-17 19:25, DurakkenX wrote:
There is a whole documentary on that specifically that plays every once in a while on the history channel i believe.

Actually war is beneficial for all countries. It is good for economy and good for morale of a country's population. Also there a bunch of various other benefits i can't think of right now that came about because of WW2. I can't remember right now cuz I haven't looked at the info in a while and my mind just got pumped full of colonial american history ^.^



Well, after blowing threw Wikipedia again, all I got was American Intelligence only warned its country that war with Japan was likely in the very near future.

I also still refuse to believe that a country could build morale by losing an astonishing number of men and women. If I remember correctly, the economy crashed soon after the war as all the munitions plants were shut down, putting millions of women out of their jobs. Many of the returning soldiers also came back to find their employers had not held onto their positions for them.

Back to Google I go.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Obsidian_Knight on 2007-06-17 19:36 ]</font>

[Sayara]

Hi Morale building

SUPPORT YOUR TROOPS/Patriotism/War Bonds etc etc

[DurakkenX]

War boosts economy...that is why some wars are fought. No other reason. Also it isn't so much the killing of others that raising morale but rather the feeling like part of a greater whole that is returned to when war starts. It's really odd, but true about human psychology ^.^

[McLaughlin]

By 1941, U.S. signals intelligence, through the Army's Signal Intelligence Service and the Office of Naval Intelligence's OP-20-G, had intercepted and decrypted considerable Japanese diplomatic and naval cipher traffic, though none of those actually decrypted carried significant tactical military information about Japanese plans in 1940-41. Decryption and distribution of this intelligence, including such decrypts as were available, was capricious and sporadic, and can be blamed in part on lack of manpower. At best, the information was fragmentary, contradictory, or poorly distributed, and was almost entirely raw, without supporting analysis. It was also incompletely understood by decision makers. Nothing in it pointed directly to an attack at Pearl Harbor, and a lack of awareness of Imperial Navy capabilities led to a widespread underlying belief Pearl Harbor was safely out of harm's way. Only one message from the Hawaiian Japanese consulate (sent on 6 December), in a low level consular cipher, included mention of an attack at Pearl; it was not decrypted until 8 December.

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

The "benefits" of WWII. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_World_War_II)

I wouldn't call starting the Cold War a benefit.

[HUnewearl_Meira]

There was some warning regarding the attack on Pearl Harbor, but there was no "clear" warning. We did intercept some Japanese communications that didn't get decrypted until far too late. Also, there were a number of unusual calls received by Japanese immigrants in Hawaii; the calls were international, and the immigrants in question were a little confused at randomly receiving a call from a Japanese speaker, just to ask about the weather.

As for the benefits of war... There are a number of them, morbid as they may be. First of all, a traditionally executed war prolongs the onset of overpopulation in the world. War also tends to force advances in technology. Because of World War II, we now have dozens of new materials to work with, such as styrofoam and several other forms of plastic; without that war, the inspiration for those materials may not have come.

My grandfather was a Chief on the USS Farragut stationed at Pearl Harbor, and his name is mistakenly printed on the USS Arizona Memorial wall (if it wasn't a mistake, then there evidently happened to be another Chief Holger Earling Sorensen stationed in Pearl Harbor at the same time). He went on to fight in battles in the Pacific, including, if memory serves, the battle of Midway. Regarding the movie, Pearl Harbor... Fuck the movie, Pearl Harbor. It included a number of antecdotal historical accuracies, but the movie focused on the Army while trying to tell a story about a Naval battle. Go watch Tora Tora Tora!; the bombing of Pearl Harbor was relatively fresh in memory when the movie was made, and it does a much better job of conveying the circumstances of what happened.


Regarding the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki: The conventional view is that by dropping the bombs, we drastically reduced the number of fatalities that would have occurred had the war continued on a more conventional level. The first bomb was meant to make Japan surrender, but instead of surrendering, the Emperor wagered that we could not do it a second time, and opted instead to persue continuing the war. We dropped the second bomb to demonstrate to Japan that we would do it as many times as necessary. The second bombing would never have occured if the Japanese emperor hadn't pushed his luck.

Furthermore, you'll observe that Japan no longer has an emperor. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were seen by many of the Japanese people as the fullfillment of a prophecy, the key points of which were "two great lights in the sky" and the end of Japan's tradition of imperial rule.

[Sinue_v2]

It was a well known fact that there was a note saying we are going to bomb pearl harbor and like the residents of hiroshima and nagasaki it was laughed at.

It's not well known, nor is it a fact. At best, it can be considered revisionist history that borderlines conspiracy - such as the idea that we had radar confirmation of the Japanese fighters and defensive orders were recinded, allowing the Japanese to attack in the hopes it would galvanise our isolationist country behind the war effort. While it is true that Japanese planes were sighted on radar, they weren't identified as enemy planes at the time. In fact, the radar system at the time was quite buggy - and was no telling what those blips could have been. IIRC, we had aircraft carriers out at sea at the time not too far from where the Japanese fleet had entered the harbor from, and it's likely the Japanese fighters were mistaken for our own due to a lack of communication.

As for the note of warning? Pure bullshit. In fact, We had been rigorously engaged in peace talks with Japan up until about two weeks before the attacks. Japan had given U.S. Ambassadors peace medals signifying their disintrest in war with the US. If you've ever seen the movie Pearl Harbor, you'll note a scene in which airmen from Doolittle Company strapping those medals to the bombs we dropped on Tokyo and Nagoya in response to the Pearl Harbor attacks. While the movie is more Hollywood than History, that part was true.

The only warning we had going into the Pearl Harbor attacks was circumstancial. We KNEW an attack was comming - and we KNEW the target was likely Pearl Harbor. We just didn't know when. After peace negotiations stalled in late November of 1941, Roosevelt petitioned the Japanese Emperor for peace, even up to the day before the bombing, but was ignored. We had intercepted coded communiques from Japan to their US embassy, but by the time it was decoded - it was far too late. By December 6th, we had decoded all but the last page of the communique - but the final page which stated that Japan was severing all ties with the US in preperation for war wasn't decoded until 9am on December 7th. By 1pm December 7th, we had incerpeted a message to the Japanese Embassy ordering them to deliver the 14 page communique (that we had already decoded) to the US Government. At that time, we knew an attack was imminent. Washington issued telegraphed warnings to Pearl Harbor, but by the time they reached Hawaii, it was already too late.


Furthermore, you'll observe that Japan no longer has an emperor. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were seen by many of the Japanese people as the fullfillment of a prophecy, the key points of which were "two great lights in the sky" and the end of Japan's tradition of imperial rule.

Hmm.. I thought that the removal of the Emporer was one of the terms of surrender as signed in the Treaty of San Francisco, and that Japan had just grown accustomed to the new government that we helped to establish. Care to elaborate more on that prophecy?


if it wasn't a mistake, then there evidently happened to be another Chief Holger Earling Sorensen stationed in Pearl Harbor at the same time

Sorensen huh? Any relation to Theodore Sorensen (JFK's Special Councel & Advisor/Speachwriter)?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Sinue_v2 on 2007-06-17 22:24 ]</font>

[McLaughlin]

Japan actually quit the peace talks a half-hour before the attack began. It was part of their plan.

[Solstis]

War is a temporary morale boost at best. 50s era TV Shows were not accurate portrayals of the general dissent (Rock n' Roll, stirrings of Civil Rights Movement).

I just wouldn't bother challenging Meira or Sinue in this thread, actually, though I too want to know more about the prophecy. Might have been something like: Oh, our emperor has been removed. Dang, is there a prophecy to make us feel better about this?

[Sinue_v2]

Also, interesting note - I was looking up info on Hirohito to see if I could track down anything about that prophecy Meria mentioned and stumbled upon this. Japan was not ready to surrender to Allied forces following the Nagasaki bombing. Indeed, the Emporer probably would have allowed even more cities to be atomically bombed. His military commanders certainly didn't want to end the war, and even staged a Coup de Teat on the Emporer (which was crushed) over his decision to surrender. The decision was made, not just because of the nuclear bombings, but because the Russians had declared war on Japan. (Remember how I was saying earlier about how Russia wanted a piece of their ass over disputed territories after the Russo-Japanese war?) Japan accepted revised terms of surrender so that they would be placed under American occupation, halting Russia's attack.

Also, I'm still researching, but I was wrong about the Emporer's status after WWII. One of the conditions of surrender that Japan accepted would be that he would retain his office as Emporer. However he was more of a public figurehead, much like the Queen, than the true ruler of Japan. McArthur actually played a large role in keeping Hirohito in office, rather than trying him as a war criminal, so that he could help climatise the Japanese people to US occupation. However, as part of this condition he was forced to reject his claim to divinity.

Also... from what I see it seems as though Japan does still have an emporer. Currently, that is Emporer is Akihito. Though as said before, he's only a sybolic leader - and under the Japanese constitution the majority of the power lies with the Prime Minister and various branches of Government.

[Solstis]

The events Sinue mentioned then led to the Korean War somewhere around 8 years later. Wow, that World War II sure did a lot to... cause the current problems with North Korea. Hey, let's agree to split an already pissed off populace in half and then install some dictators and see what happens!

Oh, that World War II.

[Powder Keg]

It was very ignorant of her to say that, but that's the way things were done before our time. You kill our people, we kill your people so you don't kill ours again. Take a look at how those wars went and look at now, everything is either sugarcoated, half of which we don't know, or we have an opponent who doesn't care about the well-being of their own people.

[Shiro_Ryuu]

Ok, I won't call myself an expert, but I'll say this, the Americans did an evil act with nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Japanese did an evil act with the Nanjing Massacre, the Germans did an evil act with the Holocaust, and this bitch I'm ranting about did an evil act in saying that the civilians of Hiroshima deserved that atomic bomb. Ok, whatever the circumstances, you cannot say that civilians deserved to get what happened to them. Yeah, its war, but the civilians didn't want war, that baby who had half of his face ripped off didn't want war, nor did those people who had their skin and flesh melting off of their bodies, or those people who have been infected with radiation. And if there were warnings, at that time, a threat with nuclear weapons may have been no different from threatening a country that you're gonna drop the sun on them, so of course the Japanese would have either laughed at it or thought that they wouldn't be able to do it, let alone repeat it.

[roygbiv]

On 2007-06-17 18:24, DurakkenX wrote:


First off if you weren't aware the war ended in Europe long before the bombs were dropped on Japan. Obviously you know this


Wow... it's amazing how you know what I know even though nothing I stated indicated I know that which shockingly I didn't. Regardlessly, the point still stands... Even though the war had ended there will always be hold overs especially after the war just got over and even more so when there is still a chance for revival.



what? You don't know that. Nobody knows that... you are just talking out of your ass.


Hitler was a student of the type of mind and just happened to come along at that time. People in that position are easily riled to arms. Had it not bee right then it would have been a few years later and more than likey they would have advanced further in technology and would have developed the bomb quicker most likely. The benefits of WW2 far outway the problems it created.

back to everyone else...

I have no sympathy for civilians that died during that time. They did not "deserve" to die, but they did nothing to prevent it as like was said the US dropped leaflets all over the city weeks before giving the date. They had time to leave. Likewise I have no sympathy for the OMG THEY ATTACKED US?!!? thing for pearl Harbor... It was a well known fact that there was a note saying we are going to bomb pearl harbor and like the residents of hiroshima and nagasaki it was laughed at.

The arms race is a necessary evil as stands. No one can really disarm as it would create a power problem. The only real way to get out of the way it is is to create easily manufactured and distributed as well as cheap and able to be quickly made shielding system that is distributed to all governments at once.



The first part I laugh at... because this definitely crossed my mind. This is basic historic knowledge, and I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you were aware of it. Obviously this was a waste.

Regardless, the point you brought up originally is IRRELEVANT.

The second part is idle speculation that you didn't even attempt to substantiate. AKA TALKING OUT OF YOUR ASS.

Hilarity at it being a well known fact that they were going to attack Pearl Harbor. I think people have addressed this.

Debating the need for a missile shield is a whole clusterfuck in and of itself. Don't even bother.

[Solstis]

Wait, I just read the last part of that post. What are the chances of an evenly distributed shield system? This wouldn't even work in Star Trek.

[DurakkenX]

indeed it wouldn't ^.^ the only other way to get out of it is find aliens and blow them up >.>

[Banish]

and ya i think the americans were fucked up u no to bomb like 100,000+ ppl mainly innocent civilians for peral harbor where like about a couple 1,000 US solisres died. So much 4 revenge, thats wat i call fuckd ppl of vicious character



And even worse, after the damn war was over, people in Japan died from the radiation from the bomb, a double-kill.

[Sinue_v2]

What are the chances of an evenly distributed shield system?

Little. I read last night that Bush refused Putin's offer to use Azerbaijan as the radar station for the missle defense sheild since it would leave Greece, Turkey, Romania, and several other countries unprotected. The Bush administration is still looking into the plan tentatively, but it doesn't look good. It's all just power brokering though, imo, since the effectiveness of these Nuclear Sheilds is rather on the low end - and almost completely useless against newer missles, such as the ones Russia is proposing to build. Not to mention that "Rouge States" will likely not launch missles against Europe - but instead opt for smaller suitcase style bombs that are smuggled in and detonated.


the only other way to get out of it is find aliens and blow them up

If aliens have the technology to cross hundreds (perhaps thousands, or hundreds of thousands) of light to get here - there's absolutely nothing we can do against them. Seriously, our main military force is the gun... essencially, still flinging rocks. Very sharp, very accurate, and very fast rocks.. but still.


the Americans did an evil act with nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Japanese did an evil act with the Nanjing Massacre, the Germans did an evil act with the Holocaust, and this bitch I'm ranting about did an evil act in saying that the civilians of Hiroshima deserved that atomic bomb.

War itself is evil. I still don't see how someone's attitude towards an event can even be compaired to the event itself.


Ok, whatever the circumstances, you cannot say that civilians deserved to get what happened to them. Yeah, its war, but the civilians didn't want war, that baby who had half of his face ripped off didn't want war, nor did those people who had their skin and flesh melting off of their bodies, or those people who have been infected with radiation.

Again, that's war. It happens. If it's not radiation, it'd be a death by fire, bullets, starvation, disease, ect. And you can't make the broad claim that all civilians are against war and are just innocents caught in the middle - no more than you can make the claim that all civilians are for war. People are people, and they have varrying digrees of disposition towards the concept of war. Many of these civilians were farming food for the military, building engines, constructing bombs, ect. In that sence, they weren't innocent - because they supported the war effort. Just as every tax paying American today has the blood of Iraqi citizens on their hands for helping to fund the war in the middle east. Just as every apathetic German has the blood of the jews on their hands for not putting a stop to the madness.

Is it right that civilians suffer in war? No. But you have to understand that there are precious few "innocents" in war as well. Going back to the firebombing of Gifu - the writer of the artical at http://www.godhatesjanks.org assumed that the bombing of Gifu was a spiteful act of American aggression. It wasn't until he was contacted by Rolland E. Ball, who was actually there on the bombing raids set him streight. Gifu was home to the Kawasaki Gifu Aircraft factory and the Akasiti Engine factory, among others, who were building aircraft for the Japanese military.


And if there were warnings, at that time, a threat with nuclear weapons may have been no different from threatening a country that you're gonna drop the sun on them, so of course the Japanese would have either laughed at it or thought that they wouldn't be able to do it, let alone repeat it.

We didn't warn them that we were going to drop atomic bombs. We warned them that we had a weapon that would ensure their complete and utter destruction. They didn't know it was a nuclear weapon until the first bomb dropped. After seeing the bomb in action, Japan still didn't surrender. The second bomb dropped. Japan STILL didn't want to surrender. As said, if the Russians hadn't declaired war on Japan - we likely would have had to drop many more bombs on Japan for them to get the point. And even with Russia's declaration of war, there were many in the Japanese military and government that wanted to fight to very last man standing. As said, they even staged an attempted coup.

[Mystil]

When I saw the title, I thought this had something to do with that girl he met http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/anime2.gif.

[AlexCraig]

It's supposed to, but it looks to have changed.

[Weeaboolits]

On 2007-06-18 16:36, Mystil wrote:
When I saw the title, I thought this had something to do with that girl he met http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/anime2.gif.That's what I was thinking when I first spotted this one, I though maybe he was pissed 'cause he got rejected. http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/anime2.gif

[Gryffin]

I was in a similar...thing.

A kid in my history class, the most racist, redneck, just looking for a fight--- do whatever I can for attention, kind of person was in it with me. Weve known and hated each other forever, but he just is a dick! While we talked about the holocaust and WW2, all he talked about is 'Whatever, I'd kill those people too.'

Who the fuck says things like that!?!

One of his other 'favorite' things to say is 'Im joining th army so I can just go to Iraq and shoot things-- Men, Women, children, Cats, I dont give a fuck who, Im gonna shoot them in the fucking head and watch them bleed'

Such a dick. I hope he falls down a hole and dies.

[AlexCraig]

Tell that guy that I (say someone, not Alex Craig) said "F U Asshole!"



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: AlexCraig on 2007-06-18 20:40 ]</font>

[Daikarin]

She said those people deserved to die, and now you're saying she deserves to die?

You two might have a lot more in common than you think.

[Shiro_Ryuu]

Ok, she doesn't deserve to die, I only said that cuz I was rly pissed and just had to let this out.

[trypticon]

This person is getting on your nerves. You're likely hot for her, and don't think you stand a chance. If this person is bothering you that much, making you think about her that much, there is likely some chemistry going on there. Why don't you persue it and see where it leads? It's probably a lot more real and tangible than the girl from the other thread.

[BogusKun]

There are claims that Japanese killed MILLIONS all over asia for over 40 years... this includes outlying islands, Philippines, Korea, China to name a few... they performed "Maruta" (a word erased from Japanese history)... and planned much more terrifying attacks against United States... It is also said they bombed the USS Panay... but it is unclear in some points that Chinese of the National Socialist movements killed and bombed their own people to use as propaganda against Japan.

I dunno... some people say Japanese did deserve the bombing. It was a wrong thing to do, but was probably the greatest win tactic in any war for America...

Much of the same for Islamic extremists versus Christian America in 9/11.

So which bombing resembles terrorism? I dunno, that's for you to decide.

[AlexCraig]

The definition of Terrorism is the act of inflicting terror upon a large group of people. So, I think we were at as much fault as any other country that goes to war, because what is war but causing terror and fear in a country.

[Niered]

Heres my personal feelings on the whole deal,

There were ALOT of innocent civilians killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It really is a huge tragedy, and saying that "They deserved it" basically makes you a horrible person. It also makes you a total dumbass.

But under the same situation, had I been president, I would have seriously considered this idea, and maybe gone through with it.

The japanese at the time were INCREDIBLY resilient. They were obviously unwilling to give up a lost cause, which is further proven by the fact that they didnt surrender after the first bomb had been dropped. Had the U.S.A. not dropped those bombs, its quite possible that Japan would have continued fighting until its near extinction.

With that in mind, I wonder how different the death tolls would have been had the U.S. not dropped the 2 nuclear bombs. Realistically, you cant say for certain. Would they have been higher? Thats quite possible. Thats the reason the U.S. took such a great risk, it was worried that such a thing would become even more of a bloodbath. They also could have been lower, but the fact remains that Japan was given more than ample warning, and that there emperor's god-king status contributed to the arrogance displayed at the time.

I really cant blame the U.S. anymore than Japan in this situation.

[UnderscoreX]

You said "Ok" 6 times in the first paragraph.

[SolomonGrundy]

Why is it that all the great intellectual debates happen in FKL and Rants? :-/

Regarding war: I'd have to disagree with the prmise that war is evil. Or if it is, it's a neccesary one. There are some facts about life. Here is one - in order to survive one kills other things. It maybe as simple cutting down tree to build a shelter, but most likely many of you wear leather, or eat meat. You think that cow wanted to die so you can have a cool looking belt? Got any down comforters?

On a micro scale, there are simple economics: 10 people want something. there is only 1 of that thing. What will you do in order to attain it?

on a macro scale:
I'm sure quite a few people here believe that a free market/democracy/freedom of various types of expression are all GOOD things. These things could not exist without war. It took a war to win them, and we fight wars all the time to preserve them (though I am aware of the more pragmatic/selfish reasons we fight wars too).

What the historically educated posters here are showing is that these wars are complex animals, the reasons for engaging Japan, or thier eventual surrender were, in all likelihood, a matrix of reasons, followed by someone having the last call - there is very little black and white.


To the poster of the original rant: that person you wished dead is ignorant, but I find your reation quite ironic - a rather extreme reaction to a jackass. Perhaps if you had a simple button you could have pressed to make that person die you would have pressed it? No? Yes?

[Sinue_v2]

Here is one - in order to survive one kills other things.

I don't think we can really make that claim until we have a better understanding of what life is as a whole. We only have one view of life - life on Earth. Life on Earth is a violent and aggressive system of the strong preying on the weak. Survival of the fittest, and the evolution of the weak to counteract the strong. We humans have evolved with intelligence - the latest in a long line of previous evolutions such as poisons, camoflauge, fangs, and echolocation/thermal vision.

We used this intelligence to create our societies, make tools, understand agriculture, and construction. Our societies help keep us safe from the brutality of nature. But we are nature - and the process of evolution and adaptation continues through our creations - such as politics, economics, and war.


these wars are complex animals, the reasons for engaging Japan, or thier eventual surrender were, in all likelihood, a matrix of reasons, followed by someone having the last call - there is very little black and white.

You're right. Cut & Dry explanations to why we wage the wars we do is the province of elementary schools. Real life is almost always far more complex. We live in a dynamic society, but our history is often written very linearly.


Perhaps if you had a simple button you could have pressed to make that person die you would have pressed it? No? Yes?

There is such a button, though it's commonly referred to as a trigger. The question is... if you had a button you could press to make someone die without having to face any personal concequences, would you do it? I would suspect that the number of people who answered Yes to question 2 would be much higher than those who answer yes to question 1.

War, by and large, removes the personal concequences of pulling the trigger, or pushing the button. Indeed, "pushing that button" has made many people heros.


If anyone wants to discuss WWI though, I'm game.

That would be a great discussion. They refer to the "Korean War" as the "Forgotten War", but increasingly it's WWI that is often forgotten in the shadow of WWII and more modern wars. Take this into consideration - there have been roughly 3,500 US deaths in Iraq since the start of the war. In WWI, the Battle of the Somme lasted five months and claimed over a million casualties. The battle of Verdun claimed nearly that many lives (700,000) in a single day. That's more lives than were lost in the totality of the Civil War.

I also find it interesting that pretty much the totality of 20th century history was put into motion by the death of a single, rather ineffectual man. Arch-Duke Ferdinan's death sparked the first World War, who's conclusion saw the treaty of Versailles that laid the ground work for World War II. The conclusion of WWII lead into the cold war, a conflict under which the Korean and Vietnam wars were fought. We also aided rebels and extremeists in their campaigns against the Soviets in Afghanistan - which lead to the current war on terror, partially also due to our support of Isriel which was established after World War II.

These wars and conflicts in which we have become engaged in have driven innovation and expansion of human knowladge. From the internet, to the space race, to can openers. The very nuclear technology used to help pound the Japanese Imperial forces into surrender are now used to provide almost 1/5th of the world's electicity. Japan will proportedly be using Nuclear Power to provide over 40% of that nation's electricity by 2010.

BTW Obsidian, I'll see you (plummeting from the skies in flames) online if and when they ever get around to releasing Red Baron (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Baron_%28game%29) on Xbox Live Arcade.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Sinue_v2 on 2007-06-19 16:18 ]</font>

[Shiro_Ryuu]

On 2007-06-19 07:40, trypticon wrote:
This person is getting on your nerves. You're likely hot for her, and don't think you stand a chance. If this person is bothering you that much, making you think about her that much, there is likely some chemistry going on there. Why don't you persue it and see where it leads? It's probably a lot more real and tangible than the girl from the other thread.




Nope, not at all. I haven't been thinking of her at all the past few days, or even for the most part, other than what she said. I think a whole lot more than the girl in my other thread.

[SolomonGrundy]

I don't think we can really make that claim until we have a better understanding of what life is as a whole. We only have one view of life - life on Earth. Life on Earth is a violent and aggressive system of the strong preying on the weak. Survival of the fittest, and the evolution of the weak to counteract the strong.

Bingo. I was not trying to be philisophic. I was trying to explain the reality of life on earth, and where War fits into that reality.

Things like Democracy, or a Free Market only works because there is enough muscle behind it to make it work. There are plenty of places where these thing fail because this is not so. When you hear the US talk about 'infrastructure' in Iraq, they are not (necessarily), talking about roads and schools.



We humans have evolved with intelligence - the latest in a long line of previous evolutions such as poisons, camoflauge, fangs, and echolocation/thermal vision.

Agree


We used this intelligence to create our societies, make tools, understand agriculture, and construction. Our societies help keep us safe from the brutality of nature. But we are nature - and the process of evolution and adaptation continues through our creations - such as politics, economics, and war.

The interesting thing about intelligence is that is had give us the capacity for self reflection. Things like guilt don't really exist in the animal kingdom (you could argue about love, or family, etc).

I would argue that out societies do not keep us safe from the brutalites of nature, simply that we are the most brutal out there - it's simply not worth it for the lions and tigers and bears (oh my!) to venture into human territory. Only scavengers/pests risk it.


Oh, my point with the button was more that if a person was to simply expire by the pressing of a button (no messy blood, no aiming, etc) - then the barriers to taking a human life boil down to desire and conseqeunce.

[Sinue_v2]

Things like Democracy, or a Free Market only works because there is enough muscle behind it to make it work. There are plenty of places where these thing fail because this is not so. When you hear the US talk about 'infrastructure' in Iraq, they are not (necessarily), talking about roads and schools.

You're right. While roads and schools are being built, when the US refers to an infrastructure - they're talking about building a governmental system that support and defend itself after we leave. Primarily the new Iraqi military and police force.

(I could be wrong here, but I think we have to re-evaluate this policy since the majority of those we're training are Sunni. When we leave, they will likely attack and drive out the Shiites. At this point, I don't think there's much we can do to prevent a Civil War)


The interesting thing about intelligence is that is had give us the capacity for self reflection. Things like guilt don't really exist in the animal kingdom (you could argue about love, or family, etc).

I won't argue further on that point, as it will consist largely of the philosophy behind war and drive the topic even further from the OP's original post. I'm not overly familiar with philosophy, but I know enough about it to know that there's no shortage of philisophical concepts when it comes to war.


I would argue that out societies do not keep us safe from the brutalites of nature, simply that we are the most brutal out there - it's simply not worth it for the lions and tigers and bears (oh my!) to venture into human territory. Only scavengers/pests risk it.

I don't think that LT&B's avoid human society because they conciousally know we'll kill or attack them - but because it's instinct to avoid strange and potentially threatening scenarios. A deep gash on the arm is an easily treatable affliction to a human with medicinal knowladge, but in nature it can be deadly. This is why the strong prey on the weak, rather than the strong. The strong can wound them, and even if they win - they likely might die. You see this often in nature from creatures which increase their body size (fluffed fur, inflation, ect) when threatened, or even on Americas Funniest Animals when you humorously see a bear fleeing from a household cat.

As brutal as we were in the past, nomadic humans have often found themselves as prey to wild animals. Though I do agree that we have the capability to be excessively brutal - usually through our detachment from nature.


Oh, my point with the button was more that if a person was to simply expire by the pressing of a button (no messy blood, no aiming, etc) - then the barriers to taking a human life boil down to desire and conseqeunce.

This is the danger of reducing people to numbers. You can watch a tally of death on a computer screen and feel completely apathetic - but it has a whole other significance when you have to look each of those people and their families in the eye before you decide to kill them. I wonder if war would be less prevelant if those who made the call to arms were the ones who were forced to bury the dead.

Trivia Fun Fact: It only takes one bullet to kill a prisoner/traitor. So why impliment a firing squad? In each firing squad, there is a varrying number of excecutors who are loaded with blanks instead of bullets. Nobody knows who has the loaded guns and who doesn't. The idea behind this is a diffusion of responsibility, to keep the guilt of being the one who shot the prisoner from haunting the excecutors. This is also part of the reason why the all fire in unison, rather than staged, to reduce the capability of the excecutors knowing who fired the fatal shot.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Sinue_v2 on 2007-06-19 17:45 ]</font>

[imfanboy]

Fun fact about the Hiroshima and Nagasaki aftermath deaths: the total deaths in the population were 1.1% annually after 1945, just the same as the rest of Japan. So, statistically, there's no proof that any more deaths were caused by the aftermath of the bomb than by the malnutrition endemic to the Japanese system of society.

Go watch Grave of the Fireflies. You'll weep, but watch it. There were much worse problems in postwar Japan than radiation.

It wasn't that Japan no longer has an Emperor; they do. But he serves much the same purpose as the Queen of England - just a figurehead, with no active role in the government. That was part of the surrender treaty that America put upon Japan, along with not having a military "for other than defensive purposes."

And I believe that nuclear weapons were instrumental in ending fullscale, all-out war like we'd seen for thousands and thousands of years beforehand - Pakistan and India are microcosm examples of this, while the US and the USSR are macrocosm. No one's dumb enough to want to be the first, or even the second, to destroy a city... especially knowing that the next city to go may be your own hometown.

Of course, you can end up just as dead in a 'police action' as a fullscale war, but if nuclear weapons hadn't been invented then WWIII would have probably been the USSR invading Western Europe in the mid-'60's. Hmm, that might make a fun alternate history novel.

(wow, DurakkenX getting pwnt in another thread... just like the Star Trek debate!)

[SolomonGrundy]

I don't think that LT&B's avoid human society because they conciousally know we'll kill or attack them - but because it's instinct to avoid strange and potentially threatening scenarios. A deep gash on the arm is an easily treatable affliction to a human with medicinal knowladge, but in nature it can be deadly.

Oh it's worse than that I think. remember that US cities are built on lands that use to house mid size cats of prey, and bears. We cut down the trees, tilled the soil, built sturdy dwellings, and want after anything that affected our lively hood. Do the cheetah's form search parties to go after the lions that steal thier prey?

I won't even go into modern society (cars, wide availablity of guns/hunters, toxins, etc.)



This is the danger of reducing people to numbers. You can watch a tally of death on a computer screen and feel completely apathetic - but it has a whole other significance when you have to look each of those people and their families in the eye before you decide to kill them. I wonder if war would be less prevelant if those who made the call to arms were the ones who were forced to bury the dead.

I agree with this, which is one of the reasons americans have favored presidents with a military background. This is one of the reasons I'm surprised Kerry lost in '04.

But there is a second point I was making. The original poster had a visceraal reation to someone else's ignorant comment. Now, I am betting that poster is not a hunter, or a sociopath, and as such hasn't really killed anything. If you removed the distasteful barriers to killing an individual - would that poster, in the moment, have pressed the hypothetical button? You can see how ironic that would be.


@Trivia Fun Fact(s): Ugh, those aren't very fun. I thought you were going to point out the WWII Nazi regime saving bullet's by lining up prisoners in a row (the bullets would sometimes go through and kill 2).

[DurakkenX]

iamfanboy... you still fail at reading...just about everything said supports what i have said v.v

[360NyTeMaRe]

On 2007-06-17 08:01, Shiroryuu wrote:
Ok, so I'm still on my trip to Japan [going pretty good w/ her btw], and I go on a trip to Hiroshima. Now, we all know what happened there like 63 years ago, in World War II. Ok, so I'm aware that this'll be a flame war here, but ok, just want your opinions on this. In the trip, we all went to a museum that was dedicated to the memory of those who were killed in the atomic bomb attack. This girl who was in our group was saying that she hated being here because she hated how the video was trying to make the Japanese look like victims. She even went on to say that the victims of the Hiroshima bombings even DESERVED that punishment. Ok, what the FUCK is wrong with this stupid bitch? Ok, yeah, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in a suprise attack, yeah, they attacked military targets and stuff in an attempt to destroy the fleet. Yeah, thats bad. Ok, 4 years later, Americans fucking threw a fucking atomic bomb on a city that had mostly, if not, only civilians. Innocent people, children, babies, etc were all fucking killed by that evil fucking demonic bomb, which didn't even be needed to be used since America was winning the war for the most part, and Japan was cornered, having to deal with America, Soviet Union, China, and Britain, all against like a half-dead Japanese army, and America goes on and throws a fucking bomb of the fucking devil. All that, and this bitch says "Oh, I don't care about what happened, in fact, I think they deserved it."

I mean, there was a person who would have been more deserving of her spot in this group which had limited spots, and instead of that more deserving person, this bitch comes along. Now, she always rubbed me the wrong way, but saying that innocent people deserved to be hit by a fucking demonic weapon just pushed me to my limit. I'm usually a passive person, but man, I just can't stand this person. I didn't like her, but this just pushes it for me. This person is a cold, heartless, bitch. Hell, if you even see her in person, you'll even doubt that she's even female, so its like she's ugly AND a bitch, the worst female human being that can possibly exist.

Yeah, a whole bunch of cursing, not what I'm accustomed to. By the way, here's what I think of this bombing. I just wish that something like this never happens ever again.

http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa23/White_Dragon_album/P1010094.jpg?t=1182091355



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Shiroryuu on 2007-06-17 08:04 ]</font>


Well, I don't think they deserved it, but I think it was necessary just because it put an end to the war against Japan.

[Dahilia]

That's just your inner weaboo crying. http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_frown.gif

[omegapirate2k]

On 2007-06-17 08:45, FOAtHeart wrote:
"This person deserves to die because she said these people deserved to die!"


Yes, thinking like that is going to get you more enemies than friends, quite frankly.

[Otis_Kat]

I watched a really interesting documentary about the bomb on the History Channel, with footage of the droppings and aftermath. It had view points from many sides, so many it it would be hard to explain them all here. Surprisingly, most of the obviously racist military leaders opposed the dropping of the bomb on Japan. According to the video, the emperor was trying to negotiate a surrender but the military leaders wouldn't let him, and even tried to assassinate him.

Interesting stuff http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_razz.gif



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Otis_Kat on 2007-06-24 11:31 ]</font>

[Shiro_Ryuu]

Pretty interesting what you said Otis, they didn't even bring that up in Hiroshima. But yeah, this girl I'm talking about gets in everyone's nerves, not just mine. And yeah, make fun of me for being a Weeaboo all you guys want, although I'm not so bummbed out about leaving Tokyo right now, I was much more sad about leaving Kyoto to tell you the truth.

[Thalui89]

I've said this before and i'll say it again "the japanese did not deserve to be bombed like they were". yes i understand that the Japanese were insome cases particularly cruel during the war and particularly sly such as the bombing of pearl harbour. However not all japanese were like the stereotypical, villains as often depicted in films. Both sides did wrong but i believe that America errored the most due to the fact they didnt only do it once and learn from the mistake, but they did it twice. Whilst the bombing did enable America to beat the japanese into a surrender which also enabled America to step into battle sin europe in the war aginst Hitler, which eventually led to the end of the war, it still does not justify the extreme loss of life cause din japan. Just because Japan didnt surrender doesnt make them all out villains as i believe that most countries wouldnt back down at first. I really do wish that people would look at how both sides caused evil in the war and not just the narrow minded views that many people share, largely based on the view that 'America did no wrong' when they clearly did. If people want to preach History they should look at both sides of the stories rather than give Biased views and bias information.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Thalui89 on 2007-06-24 15:59 ]</font>

[DurakkenX]

if someone attacks you and you punch them in the face so hard they fall down crying and then get back up and try again...I'm pretty sure you're going to hit them in the face again....and again until they get it in their brain to knock it off or until they are knocked out.

[Allos]

On 2007-06-24 15:56, Thalui89 wrote:
i believe that America errored the most due to the fact they didnt only do it once and learn from the mistake, but they did it twice.

Please read the responses of others.


Whilst the bombing did enable America to beat the japanese into a surrender which also enabled America to step into battle sin europe in the war aginst Hitler, which eventually led to the end of the war,

Hate to break it to you buddy, but the guns in Europe were silenced months before the bombs dropped.



If people want to preach History they should look at both sides of the stories rather than give Biased views and bias information.


And if you want to preach history, you should know the history first.

[Thalui89]

EDIT: Apologies to forum users: It appears my History teacher taught me INCORRECTLY on the latter part of the bombing enabling to end the war. Needless to say its just enforced my point even more about the deaths being needless.




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Thalui89 on 2007-06-24 18:05 ]</font>

[BogusKun]

On 2007-06-19 16:25, Shiroryuu wrote:

On 2007-06-19 07:40, trypticon wrote:
This person is getting on your nerves. You're likely hot for her, and don't think you stand a chance. If this person is bothering you that much, making you think about her that much, there is likely some chemistry going on there. Why don't you persue it and see where it leads? It's probably a lot more real and tangible than the girl from the other thread.




Nope, not at all. I haven't been thinking of her at all the past few days, or even for the most part, other than what she said. I think a whole lot more than the girl in my other thread.



What is she, overweight or something?