Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   War and Morality. Al Qaeda v USA
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 106 of 175 (621881)
06-29-2011 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by Phat
06-29-2011 11:42 AM


Re: Distinctions
A house and a Nation State are not synonymous.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Phat, posted 06-29-2011 11:42 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 107 of 175 (621887)
06-29-2011 12:29 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Nuggin
06-29-2011 3:35 AM


Re: Soft Targets vs Terrorism
Oh trust me, I see your point of view. And it is the same one shared, I'm assuming, by those who ok'd the dropping of those two bombs.
But it means, when you say that everyone becomes a soldier, that you hold no regard for human rights or care about the civilian casualties. I get that you decided to label them something else, but that in and of itself is the point where you disregard them as civilians and disregard their individual human rights. Surely you see that, right?
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Nuggin, posted 06-29-2011 3:35 AM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by Nuggin, posted 06-29-2011 1:33 PM onifre has replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 108 of 175 (621897)
06-29-2011 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by onifre
06-29-2011 12:29 PM


Re: Soft Targets vs Terrorism
Oh trust me, I see your point of view. And it is the same one shared, I'm assuming, by those who ok'd the dropping of those two bombs.
But it means, when you say that everyone becomes a soldier, that you hold no regard for human rights or care about the civilian casualties. I get that you decided to label them something else, but that in and of itself is the point where you disregard them as civilians and disregard their individual human rights. Surely you see that, right?
Nope. You are trying to paint every conflict and every people with the same brush.
The situation in Imperial Japan was a very specific one. They were fighting for a God-King. They were resisting to the last man on each and every island we had to take.
Given their behavior, there's no reason to suddenly assume they were *** about what it would be like trying to take mainland Japan.
We dropped two bombs instead of thousands.
Had we had to go door to door, like the Japanese were TELLING US we would have to do, it would have been a far more brutal affair.
The goal of war is to break the spirit of your opponent so they will surrender.
Japan was losing the war - BIG TIME - and yet their spirit was unbroken. They were flying planes into ships. They didn't care at all if they lived or died, so long as they killed us in the process.
It's fun to sit and whine about how unfair it was for us to drop those bombs, but if you were on a boat chugging across the Pacific, ready to be the first wave of men onto Okinawa, knowing full well that you were likely to die simply because the enemy was too prideful to admit defeat, I suspect you would be singing a different tune.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by onifre, posted 06-29-2011 12:29 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by fearandloathing, posted 06-29-2011 1:53 PM Nuggin has not replied
 Message 110 by onifre, posted 06-29-2011 2:38 PM Nuggin has replied
 Message 119 by dronestar, posted 06-29-2011 4:47 PM Nuggin has replied
 Message 122 by frako, posted 06-29-2011 5:18 PM Nuggin has not replied

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4144 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 109 of 175 (621899)
06-29-2011 1:53 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by Nuggin
06-29-2011 1:33 PM


Re: Soft Targets vs Terrorism
They were resisting to the last man on each and every island we had to take.
Does resisting include women and children throwing their babies and themselves off cliffs?
Some of these people thought we were pure evil because of propaganda, they were not resisting, they choose to die because they thought it was better than what we would do to them.
The Japanese soldiers were somewhat brain washed with a BS version of the warriors code, Bushido. We had no choice but to kill them.
I do think the Bombs have served many purposes through the years. I hate nukes but do think that they probably did save countless lives on both sides regardless of the reasons they were really dropped. JMO

"I hate to advocate the use of drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they always worked for me." - Hunter S. Thompson
Ad astra per aspera
Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Nuggin, posted 06-29-2011 1:33 PM Nuggin has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


(1)
Message 110 of 175 (621906)
06-29-2011 2:38 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by Nuggin
06-29-2011 1:33 PM


Re: Soft Targets vs Terrorism
They were resisting to the last man on each and every island we had to take.
Non-combatants, women and children, were not resisting. Their government was, and so were their troops.
It's fun to sit and whine about how unfair it was for us to drop those bombs, but if you were on a boat chugging across the Pacific, ready to be the first wave of men onto Okinawa, knowing full well that you were likely to die simply because the enemy was too prideful to admit defeat, I suspect you would be singing a different tune.
Well, first of all, I'm not whining about whether or not it was unfair.
I'm pointing to the fact that a country that drops two bombs like that killing 200,000-250,000 civilians, cannot be considered a country that holds high regards for individual human rights and civilian casualties.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Nuggin, posted 06-29-2011 1:33 PM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-29-2011 2:43 PM onifre has replied
 Message 112 by Nuggin, posted 06-29-2011 3:05 PM onifre has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 111 of 175 (621909)
06-29-2011 2:43 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by onifre
06-29-2011 2:38 PM


Re: Soft Targets vs Terrorism
I'm pointing to the fact that a country that drops two bombs like that killing 200,000-250,000 civilians, cannot be considered a country that holds high regards for individual human rights and civilian casualties.
It could if they did that to save millions of others...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by onifre, posted 06-29-2011 2:38 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by onifre, posted 06-29-2011 3:14 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 112 of 175 (621912)
06-29-2011 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by onifre
06-29-2011 2:38 PM


Re: Soft Targets vs Terrorism
I'm pointing to the fact that a country that drops two bombs like that killing 200,000-250,000 civilians, cannot be considered a country that holds high regards for individual human rights and civilian casualties.
First off, who gives a crap if people think we're moral or not. The rest of the world bitches endlessly about America while accepting charity from us.
There's literally no action or inaction that America can take that will make the Arabs like us.
If we get involved in Libya, we're interfering.
If we don't get involved in Libya, we're turning a blind eye.
If we give Egypt a BILLION dollars in aid, it's not enough.
If we give Israel a BILLION dollars in aid, it's too much.
If we're going to be accused of evil despite spending hundreds of trillions of dollars on weapons designed to reduce civilian casualities, despite literally going in and upgrading a country's infrastructure while ours collapses, despite giving aid to virtually every country on the planet -- then I say "fuck it, let's take off the kid gloves and give them something to really bitch about".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by onifre, posted 06-29-2011 2:38 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by onifre, posted 06-29-2011 3:16 PM Nuggin has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 113 of 175 (621914)
06-29-2011 3:14 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by New Cat's Eye
06-29-2011 2:43 PM


Re: Soft Targets vs Terrorism
It could if they did that to save millions of others...
Trading civilian lives for other civilian lives only makes it a bias concern for human rights a civilian casualties. That's the same thing Al Qaeda is doing, and every other terrorist group. Theirs is just religiously motivated so it's their religion that they're protecting.
Fight it's government not it's people.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-29-2011 2:43 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-29-2011 3:22 PM onifre has replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 114 of 175 (621915)
06-29-2011 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Nuggin
06-29-2011 3:05 PM


Re: Soft Targets vs Terrorism
First off, who gives a crap if people think we're moral or not. The rest of the world bitches endlessly about America while accepting charity from us.
There's literally no action or inaction that America can take that will make the Arabs like us.
If we get involved in Libya, we're interfering.
If we don't get involved in Libya, we're turning a blind eye.
If we give Egypt a BILLION dollars in aid, it's not enough.
If we give Israel a BILLION dollars in aid, it's too much.
If we're going to be accused of evil despite spending hundreds of trillions of dollars on weapons designed to reduce civilian casualities, despite literally going in and upgrading a country's infrastructure while ours collapses, despite giving aid to virtually every country on the planet -- then I say "fuck it, let's take off the kid gloves and give them something to really bitch about".
America FUCK YEAH!!!!
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Nuggin, posted 06-29-2011 3:05 PM Nuggin has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 115 of 175 (621917)
06-29-2011 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by onifre
06-29-2011 3:14 PM


Re: Soft Targets vs Terrorism
It could if they did that to save millions of others...
Trading civilian lives for other civilian lives only makes it a bias concern for human rights a civilian casualties. That's the same thing Al Qaeda is doing, and every other terrorist group. Theirs is just religiously motivated so it's their religion that they're protecting.
Hmm, are you agreeing with me?
Fight it's government not it's people.
That depends on what color they are

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by onifre, posted 06-29-2011 3:14 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by onifre, posted 06-29-2011 3:51 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 116 of 175 (621923)
06-29-2011 3:51 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by New Cat's Eye
06-29-2011 3:22 PM


Re: Soft Targets vs Terrorism
Hmm, are you agreeing with me?
If you are also saying that the US doesn't hold a high regard for human rights and civilian casualty - other than our own and that of our interests - just as every other nation, country, state, and political organization - then yeah, we are in total agreement.
Note: I'm not saying this is wrong, lets just stop pretending we are more moral than any one else.
That depends on what color they are
Absolutely! You gotta draw the line somewhere.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-29-2011 3:22 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-29-2011 4:12 PM onifre has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 117 of 175 (621926)
06-29-2011 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by onifre
06-29-2011 3:51 PM


Re: Soft Targets vs Terrorism
If you are also saying that the US doesn't hold a high regard for human rights and civilian casualty - other than our own and that of our interests - just as every other nation, country, state, and political organization - then yeah, we are in total agreement.
Note: I'm not saying this is wrong, lets just stop pretending we are more moral than any one else.
Certainly not every one is equally moral. I suppose there's some out there that are less moral than us. Is Al Qaeda one of them? It seems like it to me but I don't know shit about it.
Absolutely! You gotta draw the line somewhere.
Yeah, we should draw a line IN THE SAND

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by onifre, posted 06-29-2011 3:51 PM onifre has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 118 of 175 (621928)
06-29-2011 4:19 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Nuggin
06-29-2011 10:32 AM


Re: Soft Targets vs Terrorism
Nuggin writes:
There are no civilian casualties if an enemy claims they will fight to the last. At that point, they are all soldiers.
Straggler writes:
I am sure that those dangerous pre-lingual toddlers were literally seething with anti-American thoughts.
Nuggin writes:
And there are no babies in the American Northwest? Don't pretend the Japanese were innocent in this encounter.
I'm not pretending anything. You are pretending that "there are no civilian casualties".......
Obviously any major military conflict entails civilian casualties and to pretend otherwise is frankly dishonest.
Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Nuggin, posted 06-29-2011 10:32 AM Nuggin has not replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


(2)
Message 119 of 175 (621937)
06-29-2011 4:47 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by Nuggin
06-29-2011 1:33 PM


Re: Soft Targets vs Terrorism
Nuggin writes:
Japan was losing the war - BIG TIME - and yet their spirit was unbroken.
unbroken?
1. america intercepted messages from Japan to Russia indicating JAPAN WANTED to SURRENDER.
2. Japan had already considered surrendering if america would just allow Japan's Emperor to keep his seat on the throne. america said no, but AFTER bombing Negasaki and Hiroshima, america gave into Japan's request.
3. america knew japan would surrender unconditionally when Japan found out that Russia would join the fight. So, america hastened the two bombings BEFORE Japan COULD surrender for an american show of power toward Russia.
4. if ANY regards towards human life was any factor at all, america could have detonated the first bomb over water as a deterent/warning.
5. The second, even more unnecessary, bomb was completely and utterly criminal. All communication was broken in Japan and america gave no time for the Japanese to assess the first bomb's damage before detonating the second.
If one adds up all the civilian deaths from toppled democracies and supported dictators that america has caused around the world in the past century, there isn't a terrorist group anywhere that could compare. america is really number one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Nuggin, posted 06-29-2011 1:33 PM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by Nuggin, posted 06-29-2011 5:05 PM dronestar has not replied
 Message 124 by fearandloathing, posted 06-29-2011 5:48 PM dronestar has replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 120 of 175 (621943)
06-29-2011 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by dronestar
06-29-2011 4:47 PM


Re: Soft Targets vs Terrorism
America is mean
You're free to leave. There are boards both north and south

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by dronestar, posted 06-29-2011 4:47 PM dronestar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by jar, posted 06-29-2011 5:29 PM Nuggin has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024