The Cold War

[Chiak47]

http://www.cas.suffolk.edu/history/hansen/...ts_cold_war.htm (http://www.cas.suffolk.edu/history/hansen/ah2_16_hot_spots_cold_war.htm)


FUN Factshttp://www.gunsnet.net/forums/images/smilies/punch1.gif
II. The Cold War
A. The US emerged from WWII the most powerful country in the world.
1. Compared with the Soviet Union – devastated by four years of brutal warfare, much of it on its territories – the US emerged from the war stronger than ever.
2. By the end of 1945, the US had a GNP 3 times that of the Soviet Union, its closest rival.
3. Moreover, it was the only country to possess the atomic bomb, a military trump card that gave the Truman administration a certain swagger.

[Xvall]

A. The US emerged from WWII the most powerful country in the world.

Brilliant, Watson! However; the only reason that the United States emerged as the most powerful nation in the world was because the United States jumped into World War II just as it was ending! Additionally, unlike the Soviet Union, the United States did not suffer over 25,000,000 casualties! I do not understand what you are trying to prove.

Moreover, it was the only country to possess the atomic bomb, a military trump card that gave the Truman administration a certain swagger.

Nice to know that the Truman administration had no problem with decimating entire masses of civilians just to prove a point.

[Chiak47]

Drake,
They attacked us at Pearl.

He knew we would have problems going into Japan.We would have won but more than a few 100,000 people would have died.

It worked.Hell they still were fighting after the first one.It took another one to stop them.

BTW..Lefties and the Imperial Japanese hated one another...Wrong cause buddie.

Thank you,
ME

PS let me hear the stories of how the US staged the attack at Pearl.
Come on we did not want a piece of that war.
They asked for it.
They got it.

[Xvall]

They attacked us at Pearl.

No really? I know that. But guess what; only about 2,000 military personnel died during that attack. It wasn't like the case of the Soviet Union, where their entire country was decimated, and over 25,000,000 people had been killed. The United States suffered less than 500,000 deaths throughout the course of the war. Additionally, there were not really any civilian deaths on the United States part during World War II. Can you say the same about Europe, and Asia? Most certainly not.

He knew we would have problems going into Japan. We would have won but more than a few 100,000 people would have died.

You think 100,000 thousand people is a few? Then I suppose the some 4,000 that died on 9/11 are absolutely nothing, right? I suppose then that there was no need for the War in Afghanistan; and respectively no need for a war in Iraq.

It worked.

Indeed. Then again, Hitler's methods of getting rid of dissent worked as well. This does not mean that they were right.

Hell they still were fighting after the first one.

That was probably because they were under the impression that if they surrendered, you would turn every single on of their cities into rubble. According to none other than Dwight Eisenhower (http://www.doug-long.com/quotes.htm) himself, the Japanese were ready to negotiate a surrender before the atomic bomb was even used.

It took another one to stop them.

Most certainly not. This is horrible logic? The United States attacked Vietnam, and Vietnam never did a thing to the United States. I suppose then, that it would be perfectly fine if the Vietnamese Government decided to park a couple warheads on New York; along with a carpet bombing campaign over Washington DC? Didn't think so.

BTW..Lefties and the Imperial Japanese hated one another...Wrong cause buddie.

I am not arguing that I support the Imperialist Japanese; I am arguing that it is wrong to kill one-hundred thousand innocent civilians just to test out some fancy weapon that the Adiministration cooked up.

Thank you,

You are welcome.

PS let me hear the stories of how the US staged the attack at Pearl. Come on we did not want a piece of that war. They asked for it. They got it.

You are absolutely right. The United States had absolutely every reason to defend itself when the Japanese attacked them. However rounding up Japanese Citizens into camps; and bombing the hell out of civilian cities is uncalled for.

[Dirty Jersey]

damn drake. youre good buddy. i applaud you. that was a great argument.

[Xvall]

Uh. Thanks.

[Chiak47]

IDIOT Detector
[b] . . . | . . . /


1...They attacked us at Pearl.

No really? I know that. But guess what; only about 2,000 military personnel died during that attack. It wasn't like the case of the Soviet Union, where their entire country was decimated, and over 25,000,000 people had been killed. The United States suffered less than 500,000 deaths throughout the course of the war. Additionally, there were not really any civilian deaths on the United States part during World War II. Can you say the same about Europe, and Asia? Most certainly not.


****LOCATION,LOCATION,LOCATION-
If they had the chance there would be US civilian deaths...

2....He knew we would have problems going into Japan. We would have won but more than a few 100,000 people would have died.

You think 100,000 thousand people is a few? Then I suppose the some 4,000 that died on 9/11 are absolutely nothing, right? I suppose then that there was no need for the War in Afghanistan; and respectively no need for a war in Iraq.

***Compared to the civilian Japs and the Americans that it would have cost to invade the mainland..The #'s killed would have been alot higher.

#3...It worked.

Indeed. Then again, Hitler's methods of getting rid of dissent worked as well. This does not mean that they were right.

***How can you compare a blunt end too a war and the innocent members of a religion the same?

#4...Hell they still were fighting after the first one.

That was probably because they were under the impression that if they surrendered, you would turn every single on of their cities into rubble. According to none other than Dwight Eisenhower himself, the Japanese were ready to negotiate a surrender before the atomic bomb was even used.

***I was not aware of that quote.Let me read more about it before I can give my opinion.Thanks for bringing it up.If I am wrong then yes the bomb should not have been used.But we would have had the bomb anyways and I'm sure someone would have used it by now..

#5.....It took another one to stop them.

Most certainly not. This is horrible logic? The United States attacked Vietnam, and Vietnam never did a thing to the United States. I suppose then, that it would be perfectly fine if the Vietnamese Government decided to park a couple warheads on New York; along with a carpet bombing campaign over Washington DC? Didn't think so.

****We were fighting the Commies from taking over.Lets hold this discussion for another thread.

#6...BTW..Lefties and the Imperial Japanese hated one another...Wrong cause buddie.

I am not arguing that I support the Imperialist Japanese; I am arguing that it is wrong to kill one-hundred thousand innocent civilians just to test out some fancy weapon that the Adiministration cooked up.

****Well it is wrong to kill for a "test".If it was used to end the war as I believe it was then It should be used.

Thank you,

You are welcome.

PS let me hear the stories of how the US staged the attack at Pearl. Come on we did not want a piece of that war. They asked for it. They got it.

You are absolutely right. The United States had absolutely every reason to defend itself when the Japanese attacked them. However rounding up Japanese Citizens into camps; and bombing the hell out of civilian cities is uncalled for.


***I agree it's wrong.It happens.War..go figure

[Mazdak]

When i get that feeling, i need sexual healing.

[Just Joe]

i think Mazdaks losing it.

maybe you should let him use the other forums too.