People's Ignorence - See what I have to say

[Zeljko]

In those countries which had not been Communist or Socialistic most people dont even know what Socialism is all about. When someone mentions the word "Communism" in front of them their first association is the III world war in which the Russians will launch projectiles from Cuba to their homes, orphanages, and hospitals.They think that's monstruous, huh, but what about Yugoslavia where their "precious land of freedom" atacked mostly civilian targets like national TV, suburban districts, hospitals (they bombed the hospital that was only for pregnant women and children-it was even called that way:institut za majku i dete - The institut of mothers and children.
They hit the Chinese Ambassy for Christ's sake!!
And not to mention their nuclear attacks on Japan. Do you know what Hitlers right hand Gering said at the Nirnberg trial (i am not a nazi or anything, i'm just telling what he said and he was right): "You're calling us a monsters?! What about Japan?! Why didn't you attack Germany? I will tell you why: it was easier to kill 10000 yellow babies instead of one white! And you dare to refer to us as rasists?"
Here, you see? And those farmers from US don't know what communism is all about. Their fat leaders told them "Communism is evil" And they accepted that for granted without even questioning why are their leaders against communism. They don't know that a socialistic society will overthrow those fat capitalist's and that the power will go to people and will be for the people.
I sincerely hope that one day they will realise their mistake and atone for it by fighting for Social justice.

[Sabocat]

Maybe things are changing slowly. Some American farmers are starting to push for selling food (grains, corn, etc) to Cuba and asking for an easing of the embargo. Hopefully, that will be the start of normalized relations. Probably a long way off though unfortunately.

[kelvin]

Quote: from Zeljko on 11:36 am on June 27, 2003
In those countries which had not been Communist or Socialistic most people dont even know what Socialism is all about. When someone mentions the word "Communism" in front of them their first association is the III world war in which the Russians will launch projectiles from Cuba to their homes, orphanages, and hospitals.They think that's monstruous, huh, but what about Yugoslavia where their "precious land of freedom" atacked mostly civilian targets like national TV, suburban districts, hospitals (they bombed the hospital that was only for pregnant women and children-it was even called that way:institut za majku i dete - The institut of mothers and children.
They hit the Chinese Ambassy for Christ's sake!!
And not to mention their nuclear attacks on Japan. Do you know what Hitlers right hand Gering said at the Nirnberg trial (i am not a nazi or anything, i'm just telling what he said and he was right): "You're calling us a monsters?! What about Japan?! Why didn't you attack Germany? I will tell you why: it was easier to kill 10000 yellow babies instead of one white! And you dare to refer to us as rasists?"
Here, you see? And those farmers from US don't know what communism is all about. Their fat leaders told them "Communism is evil" And they accepted that for granted without even questioning why are their leaders against communism. They don't know that a socialistic society will overthrow those fat capitalist's and that the power will go to people and will be for the people.
I sincerely hope that one day they will realise their mistake and atone for it by fighting for Social justice.


That is some very interesting points. Can you help point me towards some sources and links, especially the the Nuermberg.

[Loknar]

Zeljko

Tell me: What would have happened if we decided not to use atomic bombs on Japan?

And would someone actually look at the cold war more objectively and point out Russia's bad acts as well?

(Edited by Loknar at 2:33 am on June 28, 2003)

[Red Comrade]

Oh yeah, that quote is from the tv movie "Nurembourg".

[Loknar]

Was it the one with Alec Baldwin or was it the older one? Or perhaps another one I havent seen?

[Vinny Rafarino]

Loknar,


If you did not use nuclear weapons on Japan the US might have had a bit of international respect. Even today you considered the scum of the earth for that.

You know what would have happened?

More military personel would have been killed, saving the murder of hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians

jackass.

[commie kg]

Just out of curiosity, Zeljko, are you from a former Yugoslav republic? If so which one?
My family is from Slovenia, and they seem to share your anti-US sentiments.

[Loknar]

Quote: from COMRADE RAF on 3:35 am on June 28, 2003
Loknar,


If you did not use nuclear weapons on Japan the US might have had a bit of international respect. Even today you considered the scum of the earth for that.

You know what would have happened?

More military personel would have been killed, saving the murder of hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians

jackass.


Please pick up a history book about Japenese culture and Japenese militarism of the era. Schools were being fortified, children were ready to die for the Emperor. The death rate would have been higher than both Atomic bombs combined. Plus the Japenese had police units ready to shoot anyone who ran, kind of like the NKVD in Russia.


jackass

(Edited by Loknar at 6:53 am on June 28, 2003)

[Loknar]

Can someone tell me what was wrong with bombing Yugoslavia? the EU requested our help-with ou a SC resolution-so you can blame them just as much.


And way more people died under Tito than NATO bombings.

(Edited by Loknar at 6:57 am on June 28, 2003)

[Unrelenting Steve]

Quote: from Loknar on 1:32 am on June 28, 2003
Zeljko

Tell me: What would have happened if we decided not to use atomic bombs on Japan?

And would someone actually look at the cold war more objectively and point out Russia's bad acts as well?

(Edited by Loknar at 2:33 am on June 28, 2003)


Yeah, I think people have left out the fact that while Russia wanted to have Nuclear silos in Cuba (the war mongering bastards) America already had the capability to hit most of Russia and Moskow (thats the capital of Russia for you Americans) with its Silos in Terkey. Stupid Russia for wanted a stabilizing force and not just accepting domination- why does America always belive its justified in enforcing everyone else takes whatever it hands out with no respite.

[Unrelenting Steve]

They requested your help, they didnt request mass killings, Im sure if they knew you were going to fuck up like you did they wouldnt have asked- dont be such a fucking dumbass, balme the UN for what you guys did, what a weak rebuttle

(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 5:11 pm on June 28, 2003)

[Loknar]

Quote: from Unrelenting Steve on 6:07 pm on June 28, 2003

Quote: from Loknar on 1:32 am on June 28, 2003
Zeljko

Tell me: What would have happened if we decided not to use atomic bombs on Japan?

And would someone actually look at the cold war more objectively and point out Russia's bad acts as well?

(Edited by Loknar at 2:33 am on June 28, 2003)


Yeah, I think people have left out the fact that while Russia wanted to have Nuclear silos in Cuba (the war mongering bastards) America already had the capability to hit most of Russia and Moskow (thats the capital of Russia for you Americans) with its Silos in Terkey. Stupid Russia for wanted a stabilizing force and not just accepting domination- why does America always belive its justified in enforcing everyone else takes whatever it hands out with no respite.


I'm not talking about placeing silos in Cuba. I was thinking about the crushing of Czech independance fighters and Hungarian independance fighters, the occupation of afghanisan (Russia's Vietnam BTW) ect...

[187]

--deleted double post--

(Edited by 187 at 4:49 am on June 29, 2003)

[187]

"More military personel would have been killed, saving the murder of hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians"

The Japenese civilians and military, including women and children, were being trained pre-hand to fight off an allied invasion with bambo sticks, suicide attacks and other crude weaponary. The plan known as Ketsu-Go(Japan's final defense plan) called for countless suicide attacks and other high casuality inflicting activity in the event of an invasion. It would have been a horrific slaughter(and much more civilian as well as military casualties would have been inflicted) if they had not droped nuclear bombs on Japan. This is evident in that Japan was ready to use anything and anyone at its disposal to fight of an invasion...They went by the slogan:The sooner the Americans come, the better...One hundred million die proudly. So I wouldn't say that lives would have been saved if the aggressing nation wasn't bombed.

Japan was even warned(Potsdam Proclamation) that if they did not surrender they would face "total destruction," and yet they persisted.

"...Three days later, the Japanese governmental news agency broadcast to the world that Japan would ignore the proclamation and would refuse to surrender. During this sane period it was learned -- via monitoring Japanese radio broadcasts -- that Japan had closed all schools and mobilized its schoolchildren, was arming its civilian population and was fortifying caves and building underground defenses."
http://www.waszak.com/japanww2.htm

---information---

http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/arens/chap4.htm <info on ketsu-go> The last few paragraphs are especially interesting.


The US also was instrumental in helping japan get back on its feet after the war... Widley known as Japans "economic miracle."

(Edited by 187 at 4:46 am on June 29, 2003)

[187]

"Moskow (thats the capital of Russia for you Americans)"

LOL. You take a shot like that, and you can't even spell moscow properly... let alone capitol.

[Zeljko]

You know what? American liders,especially your dear president were just a bunch of cowards.They weren't able to defeat Japan on the battlefield so they attacked their homes and cities which had most people. Nagasaki was NO military target, you can see that by reading a little more Geography books.And you have read how many books which weren't necessary for the school?
And about Tito
What do you know about Tito anyway?
I'm not denying that many people died under his regime, but those weren't innocent civilians. Most of them were nationalists who wanted the great Yugoslavia to fall apart. Back in SFRY no man told another from a different rebublic :"You Crotian bastard!" or "I'm gonna slay your damn Serbian children!" like they did in the Civil war which occured in 1991.
Do you wan't me to tell you the war broke out?
The war broke out because some of the elements who were in jail of Dugi otok returned to their provinces and started to spread nationalism, shovinism, separatism, and iredentism.The motto: "Brotherhood and unity" was forgotten and I don't wanna speak about the common pain of all the people from former YU 'cause you wouldn't understand anyway.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Quote: from Loknar on 6:52 am on June 28, 2003

Quote: from COMRADE RAF on 3:35 am on June 28, 2003
Loknar,


If you did not use nuclear weapons on Japan the US might have had a bit of international respect. Even today you considered the scum of the earth for that.

You know what would have happened?

More military personel would have been killed, saving the murder of hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians

jackass.


Please pick up a history book about Japenese culture and Japenese militarism of the era. Schools were being fortified, children were ready to die for the Emperor. The death rate would have been higher than both Atomic bombs combined. Plus the Japenese had police units ready to shoot anyone who ran, kind of like the NKVD in Russia.


jackass

(Edited by Loknar at 6:53 am on June 28, 2003)


Bullshit.

[Al Khabir]

I fail to see why so many jump immediately to Japans defence. The USA was as usual showing itself to be a right bastard by the NUclear bombings, but what Japan did in China was just as bad, if not worse than what Germany did in occupied Europe. In general we are always too ready to defend the actions of reactionary regimes just because they are anti american. They are necessary for the destruction of Capitalist power, but we should never accept them into the fold- they are just as dangerous as the imperialists.

[187]

"You know what? American liders,especially your dear president were just a bunch of cowards.They weren't able to defeat Japan on the battlefield so they attacked their homes and cities which had most people."

The bottom line is, lives were saved on both ends. let it go.

[Unrelenting Steve]

Shit 187, you know alot about the rubbtle for a nuclear strike on Japan. Almost like its been taught to you backwards, I wonder what your history classes consist of; justifuication and self glorifications. Saying that the Japanese would have faught to the point where there would be more deaths than your route is utter speculation, and I hope when America falls the instigator would assume you all to be too arragant to ever surender and therefore annihilate all Amreicans- It will save the world more grief in ignorance and stupidity.

And saving more military lives in the end is not a justification for breaching the Geniva convention. Civilians are not to be touched. I hope someone fights you through hitting your civilians; oh wait they have- and what do you call them; cowards - you stupid American COWARDS.

deal with what youve done, dont try to justify it

(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 5:50 pm on June 29, 2003)

[Sandanista]

It's idiotic to even suggest that the nuclear strikes on hiroshima and nagasaki were jutifiable, even to day children in japan and around the world die because of the after effects of these monstrous weapons.

The fact that anyone would want to stock let alone create these weapons knowing their capabilities must be fucking stupid whether they were Spamerican or United State Capitalist States of Russian Imperialism.

[187]

"Shit 187, you know alot about the rubbtle for a nuclear strike on Japan. Almost like its been taught to you backwards, I wonder what your history classes consist of; justifuication and self glorifications. Saying that the Japanese would have faught to the point where there would be more deaths than your route is utter speculation, and I hope when America falls the instigator would assume you all to be too arragant to ever surender and therefore annihilate all Amreicans- It will save the world more grief in ignorance and stupidity.

And saving more military lives in the end is not a justification for breaching the Geniva convention. Civilians are not to be touched. I hope someone fights you through hitting your civilians; oh wait they have- and what do you call them; cowards - you stupid American COWARDS."

Blah blah blah blah.... Come up with real arguments against my statements.

(Edited by 187 at 7:51 pm on June 29, 2003)

[Unrelenting Steve]

My second paragraph does just that; just because you cant percieve and or contradict it with reason doesnt mean its not there, just that your a retard

[Al Khabir]

Its part of Marxist philosophy that the few must sacrifice (or be sacrificed) for the good of the majority. If You bloody yanks had sacrificed your few in Japan like we did in Europe and the east then we wouldnt need to have a discussion about your retardedness.

[Loknar]

Quote: from Al Khabir on 9:37 pm on June 29, 2003
Its part of Marxist philosophy that the few must sacrifice (or be sacrificed) for the good of the majority. If You bloody yanks had sacrificed your few in Japan like we did in Europe and the east then we wouldnt need to have a discussion about your retardedness.

Do you know how many people were in Japan? Or what was left in the Japenese arsenal? 5 Army GROUPS, thousands of aircraft, tanks ect. Urban fighting isnt easy., ever heard of the Battle of Stalingrad? Also we shouldnt have to sacrafise anyone holding that island together, as they were the ones bombed us.

[Loknar]

Quote: from COMRADE RAF on 3:32 pm on June 29, 2003
[quote]Quote: from Loknar on 6:52 am on June 28, 2003
[quote]Quote: from COMRADE RAF on 3:35 am on June 28, 2003
Loknar,

Bullshit.

Wow, that just blew my argument out of the water. Read about the battle of Okinawa.

[Loknar]

Quote: from Unrelenting Steve on 6:46 pm on June 29, 2003
Shit 187, you know alot about the rubbtle for a nuclear strike on Japan. Almost like its been taught to you backwards, I wonder what your history classes consist of; justifuication and self glorifications. Saying that the Japanese would have faught to the point where there would be more deaths than your route is utter speculation, and I hope when America falls the instigator would assume you all to be too arragant to ever surender and therefore annihilate all Amreicans- It will save the world more grief in ignorance and stupidity.

And saving more military lives in the end is not a justification for breaching the Geniva convention. Civilians are not to be touched. I hope someone fights you through hitting your civilians; oh wait they have- and what do you call them; cowards - you stupid American COWARDS.

deal with what youve done, dont try to justify it

(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 5:50 pm on June 29, 2003)



Ever heard of Total War? People like you like to scream war crime allot. And I can tell by your post that you know barely anything about WW2 or warfare since the Geneva Conventions were created.

Read-

Battle of Stalingrad
Fall of Berlin
Fire bombing of Dresden
Battle of Okinawa
Battle of Britain
Bombing of Pearl Harbor

I bet you couldn’t tell me how many Japanese died in each blast, but you sure can cry about how wrong it was.

[Zeljko]

I can't believe how ignorant and stuborn can you be?
I bet that when you think about about Japan you think about a nation of insects who live only for their insect Queen(in this case,emperor).
And I'm pretty sure that you imagine the Hiroshima bomb explosion like a big spraying for insects.
Pray to your capitalist god that you never find out how is it like to have your children radiated and see the purple wounds bleeding on their body in front of you.
You Americans think: "Japanese people, yeah, i know,
they are not like us. They are extremists who would kill us all if we hadn't bombed them".
You say that they would sacrifice themselves if it would come to the occupation of their country.
Well, wouldn't you give your life if someone would threaten to enslave your people? You would probably run into the mountains and worship your "god", begging him that the invader runs away.
You killed civilians, and no matter what you say it can't be forgiven or even justified.
Civilians are the most sacred thing by the Geneva convension.Have you ever even looked at it?
And don't you wave with your books in front of me.
I bet that they are all written by American authors.
You should the history books of those countries which are attacked, and not some propaganda books.
And about the attack on Yugoslavia:
The European Union didn't give the authorisation to the US to perform the operation, and let alone the EU "asking" the US for an intervention.
Neither did they had the authorisation for attack on YU, nor did they had the authorisation to attack Iraq in 2003.Bush used the assault on WTC to justify the attack on any country he would think of as "the axis of evil". Hah! "Evil", what is this? the 11th century? are these countries maybe servants of the devil??!
Hitler did the same thing when the German parlament went up in flame.He said the Jews did that and he had the reason to start the Holocaust.
People seem to have forgoten history and the worst events are repeating themselfs.

[Loknar]

Quote: from Zeljko on 2:02 pm on June 30, 2003
I can't believe how ignorant and stuborn can you be?
I bet that when you think about about Japan you think about a nation of insects who live only for their insect Queen(in this case,emperor).
And I'm pretty sure that you imagine the Hiroshima bomb explosion like a big spraying for insects.

No I don’t.


Pray to your capitalist god that you never find out how is it like to have your children radiated and see the purple wounds bleeding on their body in front of you.

Your thinking is very concealed. Did you know that if they didn’t surrender we were going to drop thousands of pounds of chemical weapons on them?


You Americans think: "Japanese people, yeah, i know,
they are not like us. They are extremists who would kill us all if we hadn't bombed them".
You say that they would sacrifice themselves if it would come to the occupation of their country.
Well, wouldn't you give your life if someone would threaten to enslave your people? You would probably run into the mountains and worship your "god", begging him that the invader runs away.

'enslave'? what the hell is wrong with you? Did we enslave the Germans? NO. The war was forced upon us BTW. And this 'enslave' business reminds me allot about the battle of Okinawa, the Japanese spread propaganda, claiming that Americans would rape they women and kill the children. SO during the battle many of the inhabitants killed their children fearing the worse. And don’t throw that 'enslave' bullcrap at me, in fact can you at least try to come up with something better to say?

And if you think Americans are cowards all I can say is this: Attack America directly and see what happens. We love our country too much to allow it to be conquered. America will fall from internal problem not external.


You killed civilians, and no matter what you say it can't be forgiven or even justified.

Name me 1 nation that is not guilty of this.


Civilians are the most sacred thing by the Geneva convension.Have you ever even looked at it?

Yes I've looked at it, the laws of war are one of my interests. And did you know there is more than civilians to the convention?


And don't you wave with your books in front of me.
I bet that they are all written by American authors.
You should the history books of those countries which are attacked, and not some propaganda books.

Come up with something knew. In America you can print what ever book you like. And my favorite book


And about the attack on Yugoslavia:
The European Union didn't give the authorisation to the US to perform the operation, and let alone the EU "asking" the US for an intervention.

Then why did they help out?


Neither did they had the authorisation for attack on YU, nor did they had the authorisation to attack Iraq in 2003.Bush used the assault on WTC to justify the attack on any country he would think of as "the axis of evil". Hah! "Evil", what is this? the 11th century? are these countries maybe servants of the devil??!

You don’t need the UN to authorize a war. In fact it is really stupid considering that they out-lawed war and nobody really cares. The UN is a joke, Zimbabwe and Libya are on the human rights council.


Hitler did the same thing when the German parlament went up in flame.He said the Jews did that and he had the reason to start the Holocaust.

I believe it was a Belgian Communist is my memory serves.


People seem to have forgoten history and the worst events are repeating themselfs.

What specifically?

[Sabocat]

Quote: from Loknar on 1:52 am on June 28, 2003

Quote: from COMRADE RAF on 3:35 am on June 28, 2003
Loknar,


If you did not use nuclear weapons on Japan the US might have had a bit of international respect. Even today you considered the scum of the earth for that.

You know what would have happened?

More military personel would have been killed, saving the murder of hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians

jackass.


Please pick up a history book about Japenese culture and Japenese militarism of the era. Schools were being fortified, children were ready to die for the Emperor. The death rate would have been higher than both Atomic bombs combined. Plus the Japenese had police units ready to shoot anyone who ran, kind of like the NKVD in Russia.


jackass

(Edited by Loknar at 6:53 am on June 28, 2003)


These are all very odd "facts" when you consider that the Japanese had been trying to surrender for a year before the actual surrender. The only condition was that they wanted to keep the emperor in place (who was revered like a religious figure) to which the U$ refused and would accept complete and unconditional surrender.

The Japanese were completely defeated and were ready to surrender. Also don't foget the U$ had fire bombed Tokyo and that had the effect of completely destroying any hope that even the Japanese military might of had.

The atomic bombing of the civilian population was nothing more than an experiment to see the effectiveness between uranium and plutonium bomb. It was also to serve notice to the "communists" and the world that we had it.

[Xprewatik RED]

This is a sticky issue, but as hard as it is for me to say it the American is right. I lived in Japan and went to Japanese public school I know Japanese culture so listen up. On the southern most Island called Kyushu at the beach of Miyazaki the Americans were planning to land. The beach is dirt black and the water crashes against the beach with much agony. American soldiers would first march up the beachhead into the city of Miyazaki who's inhabitants would immediatly be annihialated. As these Japanese dissillusioned by military honor would fight till the death. Next marching along the road toward the area of Fukuoka over a million poeple would die as well as in the metropolises that are near the crossing toward that Japanese midland. Next their would be a bloody crossing to the second island, which would annhilate many metropolises. As they marched on the road to Tokyo they would encounter the Japanese army and a large amount of civilians, who would be annhilated by air-support. Tokyo would be another bloody battle, which would be rememebred in history. Estimated amount Japan:12million US: 600,000-1million(the Pentagon was constructed initially as a hospital for these people) Also it prevented a Communism take over, which would have devistaed the country(because Russia was already Island hopping in the North)

[Unrelenting Steve]

Quote: from Loknar on 12:24 am on June 30, 2003

Quote: from Unrelenting Steve on 6:46 pm on June 29, 2003
Shit 187, you know alot about the rubbtle for a nuclear strike on Japan. Almost like its been taught to you backwards, I wonder what your history classes consist of; justifuication and self glorifications. Saying that the Japanese would have faught to the point where there would be more deaths than your route is utter speculation, and I hope when America falls the instigator would assume you all to be too arragant to ever surender and therefore annihilate all Amreicans- It will save the world more grief in ignorance and stupidity.

And saving more military lives in the end is not a justification for breaching the Geniva convention. Civilians are not to be touched. I hope someone fights you through hitting your civilians; oh wait they have- and what do you call them; cowards - you stupid American COWARDS.

deal with what youve done, dont try to justify it

(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 5:50 pm on June 29, 2003)



Ever heard of Total War? People like you like to scream war crime allot. And I can tell by your post that you know barely anything about WW2 or warfare since the Geneva Conventions were created.

Read-

Battle of Stalingrad
Fall of Berlin
Fire bombing of Dresden
Battle of Okinawa
Battle of Britain
Bombing of Pearl Harbor

I bet you couldn’t tell me how many Japanese died in each blast, but you sure can cry about how wrong it was.



You ignorant retard, now you are ignoring the facts at the time; this was no total war, Germany had fell, the Japanese where on the run. You where going to win, everyone could see that; you didnt have to drop the nuclear bomb on Japan to ensure the freedom and continuance of American life. You idiot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can you actualy construct an argument that might actualy be plausible. Everyone knows the real reason for the Nuclear bomb being used: to scare the communists, to re-enforce the iron curtain with a threat that the Russians at the time could not match. This of course is not a very good justification, so just take the blame and the shame.

(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 9:24 pm on June 30, 2003)

[Unrelenting Steve]

'enslave'? what the hell is wrong with you? Did we enslave the Germans? NO. The war was forced upon us BTW. And this 'enslave' business reminds me allot about the battle of Okinawa, the Japanese spread propaganda, claiming that Americans would rape they women and kill the children. SO during the battle many of the inhabitants killed their children fearing the worse. And don’t throw that 'enslave' bullcrap at me, in fact can you at least try to come up with something better to say?

And if you think Americans are cowards all I can say is this: Attack America directly and see what happens. We love our country too much to allow it to be conquered. America will fall from internal problem not external.



Again you show your ignorance, Japan was turned into a little american dynamo, Macarthey (however u sepll it) took the Japanese nation and molded it to America's will- disgusting if you ask me, slavery is indeed a plausible way of discribing what hapened, Im sorry if you lack the language skills to percieve this.

[Loknar]

You ignorant retard, now you are ignoring the facts at the time; this was no total war, Germany had fell, the Japanese where on the run.

Really? Why did the Russians have to capture Manchuria and North Korea and why were they island hopping in northern Japan if they were on the run? The Japanese still possessed- even after the surrender of the army in Manchuria- 5 or 6 army groups. Also, allot of midget subs, perfect for suicide attacks.


You where going to win, everyone could see that; you didnt have to drop the nuclear bomb on Japan to ensure the freedom and continuance of American life. You idiot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can you actualy construct an argument that might actualy be plausible.


How about this, more people would have died if it weren’t for the A-bomb droppings. If you knew Japanese culture of the era you wouldn’t even dispute this.


Everyone knows the real reason for the Nuclear bomb being used: to scare the communists, to re-enforce the iron curtain with a threat that the Russians at the time could not match. This of course is not a very good justification, so just take the blame and the shame.

(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 9:24 pm on June 30, 2003)


Really? What do you base this on?

(Edited by Loknar at 11:58 pm on June 30, 2003)

[Loknar]

Again you show your ignorance, Japan was turned into a little american dynamo, Macarthey (however u sepll it) took the Japanese nation and molded it to America's will- disgusting if you ask me, slavery is indeed a plausible way of discribing what hapened, Im sorry if you lack the language skills to percieve this.


McArthur. I find is amusing that you call me ignorant and yet know nothing about the war in the Pacific.

Anyway, we won they lost., You don’t actually expect us to leave such a culture in place do you? Hell Prussia-the source of German militarism- wasn’t even disbanded after WW1, it took WW2 to accomplish that,

And what about the SU enforcing their government on the Bloc nations? Hell if that isn’t 'enslaving' I don’t know what is.

Did you know that Russia did the same things America did? Did you know that BOTH sides acted in disgusting manners?


(Edited by Loknar at 12:12 am on July 1, 2003)

[Unrelenting Steve]

Quote: from Loknar on 12:08 am on July 1, 2003


Again you show your ignorance, Japan was turned into a little american dynamo, Macarthey (however u sepll it) took the Japanese nation and molded it to America's will- disgusting if you ask me, slavery is indeed a plausible way of discribing what hapened, Im sorry if you lack the language skills to percieve this.


McArthur. I find is amusing that you call me ignorant and yet know nothing about the war in the Pacific.

Anyway, we won they lost., You don’t actually expect us to leave such a culture in place do you? Hell Prussia-the source of German militarism- wasn’t even disbanded after WW1, it took WW2 to accomplish that,

And what about the SU enforcing their government on the Bloc nations? Hell if that isn’t 'enslaving' I don’t know what is.

Did you know that Russia did the same things America did? Did you know that BOTH sides acted in disgusting manners?


(Edited by Loknar at 12:12 am on July 1, 2003)


What the hell has that got to do with anything- I do not see a contradiction there, only a feeble cover up that you were wrong.

[187]

"My second paragraph does just that; just because you cant percieve and or contradict it with reason doesnt mean its not there, just that your a retard"

Lets analyse your last paragraph....

"And saving more military lives in the end is not a justification for breaching the Geniva convention."

It saved lives on both ends(maybe if you actually read what I wrote, as well as the sources I listed you may have understood this better), and if the Geneva convention is going to disrupt plans(no matter how horrible they may seem at first)to save lives then it should be breached.

"Civilians are not to be touched."

But civilians would have been touched if we had landed... Much more infact, than the bombs touched. Civilian casualites are a fact of war, and japan was preparing its own civilians to fight to the death!

"I hope someone fights you through hitting your civilians; oh wait they have- and what do you call them; cowards - you stupid American COWARDS"

Useless.

Now I would like you to counter some information I have stated (with both facts and reasoning) rather than repeating what you've heard, or stating what you think you should say.

[Unrelenting Steve]

Quote: from Loknar on 10:51 pm on June 30, 2003



You ignorant retard, now you are ignoring the facts at the time; this was no total war, Germany had fell, the Japanese where on the run.

Really? Why did the Russians have to capture Manchuria and North Korea and why were they island hopping in northern Japan if they were on the run? The Japanese still possessed- even after the surrender of the army in Manchuria- 5 or 6 army groups. Also, allot of midget subs, perfect for suicide attacks.


You where going to win, everyone could see that; you didnt have to drop the nuclear bomb on Japan to ensure the freedom and continuance of American life. You idiot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can you actualy construct an argument that might actualy be plausible.


How about this, more people would have died if it weren’t for the A-bomb droppings. If you knew Japanese culture of the era you wouldn’t even dispute this.


Everyone knows the real reason for the Nuclear bomb being used: to scare the communists, to re-enforce the iron curtain with a threat that the Russians at the time could not match. This of course is not a very good justification, so just take the blame and the shame.

(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 9:24 pm on June 30, 2003)


Really? What do you base this on?

(Edited by Loknar at 11:58 pm on June 30, 2003)




You school teachers you that the Japanese would rather die than surrender- that is simply not true, their surrender proves this. If you are too dumb or indoctrinated to see that, then just bugger off.
They were already negotiating surrender through Russia at the time of the bombing, something that remains undeniable true even through the haze of American propaganda. And I saw that on Discovery Channel, so even your own sources contradict you.
Now, what do I base that on……. Well its called an intelligent assumption based on insight, I know that Americans can only believe something after its been passed by the CIA, but one day I’m sure you’ll be evolved enough to progress passed that and be able to conclude things that lie beyond the assumption that America is only THE HOME OF THE FREE AND THE BRAVE blah blah TRUTH AND LIBERTY, you know just because its written down somewhere on a big statue doesn’t make it true, just a very big joke, perhaps someday you will laugh too, until then piss off u retard! At least until you can mutter anything resembling reasonable thought.

[Loknar]

You school teachers you that the Japanese would rather die than surrender- that is simply not true, their surrender proves this. If you are too dumb or indoctrinated to see that, then just bugger off.


You obviously didn’t look up the battle of Okinawa so I‘ll break it down for you; 120,000 Japenese defending, only 8,000 surrendered, this type of fighting was normal f the Japanese. The Emperor had to force the militarists to surrender. Government officals-many militarists- had a meeting after the first drop and concluded that it wasn’t enough to force a surrender. The Emperor finally took charge and decided to surrender stating (I am paraphrasing) 'continuing to fight would lead to the extinction of the Japanese people'.

And the surrender you're speaking of was not done by the emperor but other sources in the Japanese government. Himmler offered the surrender of all German armies in the west to the Americans and British. This was expected to happen in Japan as well but it certainly doesn’t mean that the Heads of State approved.

[Unrelenting Steve]

Quote: from 187 on 11:46 pm on June 30, 2003
"My second paragraph does just that; just because you cant percieve and or contradict it with reason doesnt mean its not there, just that your a retard"

Lets analyse your last paragraph....

"And saving more military lives in the end is not a justification for breaching the Geniva convention."

It saved lives on both ends(maybe if you actually read what I wrote, as well as the sources I listed you may have understood this better), and if the Geneva convention is going to disrupt plans(no matter how horrible they may seem at first)to save lives then it should be breached.

"Civilians are not to be touched."

But civilians would have been touched if we had landed... Much more infact, than the bombs touched. Civilian casualites are a fact of war, and japan was preparing its own civilians to fight to the death!

"I hope someone fights you through hitting your civilians; oh wait they have- and what do you call them; cowards - you stupid American COWARDS"

Useless.

Now I would like you to counter some information I have stated (with both facts and reasoning) rather than repeating what you've heard, or stating what you think you should say.


You are saying that dropping two nuclear warheads on cities, totaly decimating them is much better in comparison to fighting people who are actualy militant (and therefore have forefighted there lives due to this choice on their part) Yes now that you spell it out, it is much more justifiable to kill millions of innnocent civilians rather than fighting only the willing with some colateral damage on the side. Yes intentional colateral damage is the way, I see it now.... I hope you recieve a terror attack for each sylable present in your ludicrious inhumane rebuttle, just to edge into your mind how stupid and unrealistic (in how convieniant your thinking is). Yes all Japanese civilians are war crazed mianiacs- is what you really think, and you have to, to maintain your view, this is not true, and if you continue to say it is, where is your evidence?

I will say it again, killing less people in the end is not a justification for breeching the Geniva convention, there is a differance in the cost of civilian death and military causalties. You dont understand that, and therefore I hope you are as hard to the plight of 9/11's grieving families that cry, its not fair, what did we do?

I have never followed the crowd in my life, if you noticed, I have many arguments with the communists on thisw site as well- and the slander is not appreciated, but then what can u expect when dealing with idoctranated American trash

[Loknar]

Quote: from Unrelenting Steve on 12:30 am on July 1, 2003

Quote: from Loknar on 12:08 am on July 1, 2003


Again you show your ignorance, Japan was turned into a little american dynamo, Macarthey (however u sepll it) took the Japanese nation and molded it to America's will- disgusting if you ask me, slavery is indeed a plausible way of discribing what hapened, Im sorry if you lack the language skills to percieve this.


McArthur. I find is amusing that you call me ignorant and yet know nothing about the war in the Pacific.

Anyway, we won they lost., You don’t actually expect us to leave such a culture in place do you? Hell Prussia-the source of German militarism- wasn’t even disbanded after WW1, it took WW2 to accomplish that,

And what about the SU enforcing their government on the Bloc nations? Hell if that isn’t 'enslaving' I don’t know what is.

Did you know that Russia did the same things America did? Did you know that BOTH sides acted in disgusting manners?


(Edited by Loknar at 12:12 am on July 1, 2003)


What the hell has that got to do with anything- I do not see a contradiction there, only a feeble cover up that you were wrong.

I am unsure of what you are refering to exactly.

[Unrelenting Steve]

Quote: from Loknar on 12:26 am on July 1, 2003



You school teachers you that the Japanese would rather die than surrender- that is simply not true, their surrender proves this. If you are too dumb or indoctrinated to see that, then just bugger off.


You obviously didn’t look up the battle of Okinawa so I‘ll break it down for you; 120,000 Japenese defending, only 8,000 surrendered, this type of fighting was normal f the Japanese. The Emperor had to force the militarists to surrender. Government officals-many militarists- had a meeting after the first drop and concluded that it wasn’t enough to force a surrender. The Emperor finally took charge and decided to surrender stating (I am paraphrasing) 'continuing to fight would lead to the extinction of the Japanese people'.

And the surrender you're speaking of was not done by the emperor but other sources in the Japanese government. Himmler offered the surrender of all German armies in the west to the Americans and British. This was expected to happen in Japan as well but it certainly doesn’t mean that the Heads of State approved.


120 000 defenders....those where soldiers then?
The surrender im speaking of was commisioned by the emperor, the Japanese Russian ambassider was concluding the surrendering terms with Russia that would ensure the continuence of the role of emperor. Obviously this is news to you, as it would have been filtered out of your curiculum.

(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 12:41 am on July 1, 2003)

[Loknar]

Quote: from Unrelenting Steve on 1:40 am on July 1, 2003

Quote: from Loknar on 12:26 am on July 1, 2003



You school teachers you that the Japanese would rather die than surrender- that is simply not true, their surrender proves this. If you are too dumb or indoctrinated to see that, then just bugger off.


You obviously didn’t look up the battle of Okinawa so I‘ll break it down for you; 120,000 Japenese defending, only 8,000 surrendered, this type of fighting was normal f the Japanese. The Emperor had to force the militarists to surrender. Government officals-many militarists- had a meeting after the first drop and concluded that it wasn’t enough to force a surrender. The Emperor finally took charge and decided to surrender stating (I am paraphrasing) 'continuing to fight would lead to the extinction of the Japanese people'.

And the surrender you're speaking of was not done by the emperor but other sources in the Japanese government. Himmler offered the surrender of all German armies in the west to the Americans and British. This was expected to happen in Japan as well but it certainly doesn’t mean that the Heads of State approved.


120 000 defenders....those where soldiers then?
The surrender im speaking of was commisioned by the emperor, the Japanese Russian ambassider was concluding the surrendering terms with Russia that would ensure the continuence of the role of emperor. Obviously this is news to you, as it would have been filtered out of your curiculum.



Yes they were soliders. And as I said the Japanese had millions of soliders still in the army.

Answer me this, why was there no surrender to RUssia? Russia was never at war with Japan until after Germany surrendered.

(Edited by Loknar at 1:52 am on July 1, 2003)

[Unrelenting Steve]

Quote: from Loknar on 12:29 am on July 1, 2003

Quote: from Unrelenting Steve on 12:30 am on July 1, 2003

Quote: from Loknar on 12:08 am on July 1, 2003


Again you show your ignorance, Japan was turned into a little american dynamo, Macarthey (however u sepll it) took the Japanese nation and molded it to America's will- disgusting if you ask me, slavery is indeed a plausible way of discribing what hapened, Im sorry if you lack the language skills to percieve this.


McArthur. I find is amusing that you call me ignorant and yet know nothing about the war in the Pacific.

Anyway, we won they lost., You don’t actually expect us to leave such a culture in place do you? Hell Prussia-the source of German militarism- wasn’t even disbanded after WW1, it took WW2 to accomplish that,

And what about the SU enforcing their government on the Bloc nations? Hell if that isn’t 'enslaving' I don’t know what is.

Did you know that Russia did the same things America did? Did you know that BOTH sides acted in disgusting manners?


(Edited by Loknar at 12:12 am on July 1, 2003)


What the hell has that got to do with anything- I do not see a contradiction there, only a feeble cover up that you were wrong.

I am unsure of what you are refering to exactly.


You cried foul at Zeljko calling what happened in Japan slavery

you were wrong, deal with it, dont reply to it.

[Loknar]

Quote: from Unrelenting Steve on 1:51 am on July 1, 2003

Quote: from Loknar on 12:29 am on July 1, 2003

Quote: from Unrelenting Steve on 12:30 am on July 1, 2003

Quote: from Loknar on 12:08 am on July 1, 2003


Again you show your ignorance, Japan was turned into a little american dynamo, Macarthey (however u sepll it) took the Japanese nation and molded it to America's will- disgusting if you ask me, slavery is indeed a plausible way of discribing what hapened, Im sorry if you lack the language skills to percieve this.


McArthur. I find is amusing that you call me ignorant and yet know nothing about the war in the Pacific.

Anyway, we won they lost., You don’t actually expect us to leave such a culture in place do you? Hell Prussia-the source of German militarism- wasn’t even disbanded after WW1, it took WW2 to accomplish that,

And what about the SU enforcing their government on the Bloc nations? Hell if that isn’t 'enslaving' I don’t know what is.

Did you know that Russia did the same things America did? Did you know that BOTH sides acted in disgusting manners?


(Edited by Loknar at 12:12 am on July 1, 2003)


What the hell has that got to do with anything- I do not see a contradiction there, only a feeble cover up that you were wrong.

I am unsure of what you are refering to exactly.


You cried foul at Zeljko calling what happened in Japan slavery

you were wrong, deal with it, dont reply to it.


Yeah we were wrong for occupying an agressive enemy who didnt even declare war on us yet still attacked.

Imagine

You are the President of the US, what would your policy on the war be?

[Unrelenting Steve]

Dont you understand you little retard, this has nothing to do with the merits of occupatoin- that is not the debate. Zeljko compared it to slavery, you said it wasnt slavery. They were enslaved- you dont contradict this because you realsise your wrong, you ***** on about; WHAT DO U EXPECT THE IS PRES TO DO............It doesnt fucking matter, im sorry you cant get to grip with being wrong, shut the fuck up, deal with it, dont reply

[187]

"You are saying that dropping two nuclear warheads on cities, totaly decimating them is much better in comparison to fighting people who are actualy militant (and therefore have forefighted there lives due to this choice on their part)"

Interesting point. But look at the alternative amount of lives lost with an invasion(check previous source). Despite the fact they were currentley non-combatants, the death toll(both civilian and military) would have been much higher had the invasion taken place.

"Yes now that you spell it out, it is much more justifiable to kill millions of innnocent civilians rather than fighting only the willing with some colateral damage on the side."

Millions? Come on steve don't exaggerate. They total death toll was around 200,000.

"Yes all Japanese civilians are war crazed mianiacs- is what you really think, and you have to, to maintain your view, this is not true, and if you continue to say it is, where is your evidence?"

No, not crazed maniacs. Just people that were brought up believing that Japan was truly unconquerable, and that honor to your country(and emperor) was more important than your own life.

evidence to support this can be found with the prvious sources.

"I will say it again, killing less people in the end is not a justification for breeching the Geniva convention"

Well I'm sorry but I don't agree with you.

"and the slander is not appreciated"

When and where did I "slander" you?

[Unrelenting Steve]

"Yes all Japanese civilians are war crazed mianiacs- is what you really think, and you have to, to maintain your view, this is not true, and if you continue to say it is, where is your evidence?"

No, not crazed maniacs. Just people that were brought up believing that Japan was truly unconquerable, and that honor to your country(and emperor) was more important than your own life.

-And so that is your justification for treating them like coalteral damage- rather than innocents that where murdered.


"I will say it again, killing less people in the end is not a justification for breeching the Geniva convention"

Well I'm sorry but I don't agree with you.

Tell me, if your mom and dad where killed by terrorists, would you feel it not just a little bit unfair, and that a soldier fighting in Iraq has more of right to be killed because he at least decided to be the physical manifestation of your government (you see civilians are not agents of the government, merley poeple the nation contains, there is not assumption that a civilian supports his government, this however is implace when you see a soldier that is a soldier during a time where there is no conscription). Is it not then logical that when you destroy a government or particular authority all true agents of that structure then should or might aswell fall by the same sword; this is of course completely seperate and cannot be compared to CIVILIAN life, which cannot be put into this system and measured agianst military life. This way of thinking, or somehting like this was used to to create the Geniva convention, it is one that i support, and is one you country should of lived up to since you where signed into it, just because it is American custom to disregard all morality when its "best" interests are put in jeperdy, is not one simpltons like you can also be expected to defend sucsessfully, so just quit while your ahead and go watch CNN for a moral booster. We wouldnt want you doubting your infallible country, that if has fault is no worse than any other state's.

(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 2:12 am on July 1, 2003)

[187]

"-And so that is your justification for treating them like coalteral damage- rather than innocents that where murdered."

No I was responding to your assumption that I believe that all Japanese people were "war crazed mianiacs."

"Tell me, if your mom and dad where killed by terrorists, would you feel it not just a little bit unfair, and that a soldier fighting in Iraq has more of right to be killed because he at least decided to be the physical manifestation of your government (you see civilians are not agents of the government, merley poeple the nation contains, there is not assumption that a civilian supports his government, this however is implace when you see a soldier that is a soldier during a time where there is no conscription). Is it not then logical that when you destroy a government or particular authority all true agents of that structure then should or might aswell fall by the same sword; this is of course completely seperate and cannot be compared to CIVILIAN life, which cannot be put into this system and measured agianst military life. This way of thinking, or somehting like this was used to to create the Geniva convention, it is one that i support, and is one you country should of lived up to since you where signed into it, just because it is American custom to disregard all morality when its "best" interests are put in jeperdy, is not one simpltons like you can also be expected to defend sucsessfully, so just quit while your ahead and go watch CNN for a moral booster. We wouldnt want you doubting your infallible country, that if has fault is no worse than any other state's."

From what I can gather from this mostly babbled rant(if I have somehow misconstrued anything address it with your usual snide comments and insults) is that you believe the US should have ended the lives of more civilians(armed to the teeth with bamboo sticks and machetees!) and military while also prolongating the entire conflict simply because they were "willing combatants"?

[Unrelenting Steve]

And with that you get no response, you do not deserve to understand the truth, you are a waste of air.

(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 2:59 am on July 1, 2003)

[187]

"And with that you get no response, you do not deserve to understand the truth, you are a waste of air."

Unrelenting steve.......Relents.....lol.

[Loknar]

Quote: from Unrelenting Steve on 2:04 am on July 1, 2003
Dont you understand you little retard, this has nothing to do with the merits of occupatoin- that is not the debate. Zeljko compared it to slavery, you said it wasnt slavery. They were enslaved- you dont contradict this because you realsise your wrong, you ***** on about; WHAT DO U EXPECT THE IS PRES TO DO............It doesnt fucking matter, im sorry you cant get to grip with being wrong, shut the fuck up, deal with it, dont reply



Slaves? No the Chinese were enslaved.

AND if you want to go down trhat road we arent the first people to do this sort of thing. Hell Russia is far more guilty than we are in that area. At least we didnt annex any land like they did. I bet you think that Russia has done no wrong to this planet whie it was under communism.

[elijahcraig]

The Cold War worked like a conspiracy where each country (US and USSR) grabbed as much third world countries they could with the excuse of "freedom", "democracy", and "saving from communism/saving from the US". I won't defend Russia or the US, they were/are both fucked up, but I will fight for a new world free from the heresies against humanity they bring. Communism could work, we've just got work to do. Direct democracy, a real workers' party, not an intellectual master.

[Loknar]

elijahcraig

Thank you, you are %100 correct.

[Al Khabir]

Is it just me or does living in a society where we are indoctrinated from birth to believe we are free, and then told what to buy and what to do, sound much worse than the Japanese society of the time? One that WAS a little twisted but nevertheless based on a belief in honour and loyalty, not the vacuous society of elected oligarchy and globalisation we have today.

[Loknar]

Quote: from Al Khabir on 11:39 pm on July 1, 2003
Is it just me or does living in a society where we are indoctrinated from birth to believe we are free, and then told what to buy and what to do, sound much worse than the Japanese society of the time? One that WAS a little twisted but nevertheless based on a belief in honour and loyalty, not the vacuous society of elected oligarchy and globalisation we have today.

How are we not free and how are we told what to do?

Anyway, it is a matter of opinion whether it is worse than ours or not. However, the Japenese belived in the way of the Samuri who was not supposed to surrender. So the effect it would have on the Japanese people from an invasion is obvious. Once we entered Japans main ring of islands that guarded the homeland they started useing Kamakazi fighters. The Japanese were furious fighters.

[anti machine]

I just think it's rather ironic that a post about people's igonrance has mispelled ingnorance.

That's my two-bits worth. I had to laugh.

[elijahcraig]

Here's a quote on the way America operates as far as freedom is concerned:

Noam Chomsky
The beauty of the democratic systems of thought control, as contrasted with their clumsy totalitarian counterparts, is that they operate by subtly establishing on a voluntary basis--aided by the force of nationalism and media control by substantial interests--presuppositions that set the limits of debate, rather than by imposing beliefs with a bludgeon. Then let the debate rage; the more lively and vigorous it is, the better the propaganda system is served, since the presuppositions (U.S. benevolence, lack of rational imperial goals, defensive posture, etc.) are more firmly established. Those who do not accept the fundamental principles of state propaganda are simply excluded from the debate (or if noticed, dismissed as "emotional," "irresponsible," etc.).

Source: with Edward S. Herman, After the Cataclysm, 1979

[Unrelenting Steve]

Quote: from Loknar on 10:33 am on July 1, 2003

Quote: from Unrelenting Steve on 2:04 am on July 1, 2003
Dont you understand you little retard, this has nothing to do with the merits of occupatoin- that is not the debate. Zeljko compared it to slavery, you said it wasnt slavery. They were enslaved- you dont contradict this because you realsise your wrong, you ***** on about; WHAT DO U EXPECT THE IS PRES TO DO............It doesnt fucking matter, im sorry you cant get to grip with being wrong, shut the fuck up, deal with it, dont reply



Slaves? No the Chinese were enslaved.

AND if you want to go down trhat road we arent the first people to do this sort of thing. Hell Russia is far more guilty than we are in that area. At least we didnt annex any land like they did. I bet you think that Russia has done no wrong to this planet whie it was under communism.

[Unrelenting Steve]

Quote: from 187 on 2:47 am on July 1, 2003
"-And so that is your justification for treating them like coalteral damage- rather than innocents that where murdered."

No I was responding to your assumption that I believe that all Japanese people were "war crazed mianiacs."

"Tell me, if your mom and dad where killed by terrorists, would you feel it not just a little bit unfair, and that a soldier fighting in Iraq has more of right to be killed because he at least decided to be the physical manifestation of your government (you see civilians are not agents of the government, merley poeple the nation contains, there is not assumption that a civilian supports his government, this however is implace when you see a soldier that is a soldier during a time where there is no conscription). Is it not then logical that when you destroy a government or particular authority all true agents of that structure then should or might aswell fall by the same sword; this is of course completely seperate and cannot be compared to CIVILIAN life, which cannot be put into this system and measured agianst military life. This way of thinking, or somehting like this was used to to create the Geniva convention, it is one that i support, and is one you country should of lived up to since you where signed into it, just because it is American custom to disregard all morality when its "best" interests are put in jeperdy, is not one simpltons like you can also be expected to defend sucsessfully, so just quit while your ahead and go watch CNN for a moral booster. We wouldnt want you doubting your infallible country, that if has fault is no worse than any other state's."

From what I can gather from this mostly babbled rant(if I have somehow misconstrued anything address it with your usual snide comments and insults) is that you believe the US should have ended the lives of more civilians(armed to the teeth with bamboo sticks and machetees!) and military while also prolongating the entire conflict simply because they were "willing combatants"?


I am sorry to contradict myslef and come back to actualy say something, but now that I am cooler, perhaps can tolertae more of your stupidity.

Yes and no, I see you where actualy able to grasp what I said, and your snide little remark about this meaning you had to kill all willing combatants- Fuck it I have actualy lost it again, You know that is not required, I was merely pointing out that it would then be on some moral ground(at least the same morality embued in the Geneva convention- which you were signed into!!!!!!!!!!) to kill willing combatants. Now you retard even if you did believe that that was what I meant- this still doesnt let you off the hook of actualy not contradicting my piece, your slander is no substitue for disqualification. You little fucking retard, you cant just utter meaningless lines of rebuke with no substance and then taunt; "what you want to stop conversing?" I did not relent, I left where my argument was laid to bear and totaly untouched by your dimwitted response, I simply left you to wallow in your own ignorance. Fucking stupid cappie- but then you have to be dont you, or otherwise you just wouldnt cope with the guilt in your little self absorbed sociaty......... fuck your a waste of thought.

(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 10:50 pm on July 2, 2003)

[187]

"I was merely pointing out that it would then be on some moral ground at least the same morality embued in the Geneva convention- which you were signed into!!!!!!!!!!) to kill willing combatants. "

Our views on morality seem to clash. I disagree that sending more people to die simply because they are willing combatants(and that it agrees with the Geneva convention) has moral ground. I believe that if lives are going to be saved in the long run by taking an action that may seem harsh at first, so be it. You have to remember steve, these civilians were brought up believing in an unrelenting pride for their country with extreme militarism and nationalism. If the Americans were to have landed, the civilians wouldn't have just stood by and watched! I would venture to say that if America were to have been invaded, every(or an overwhelming majority...) civilian would have fought to the death to defend their homeland...and they weren't nearly as hardline as Japan!

"Now you retard even if you did believe that that was what I meant- this still doesnt let you off the hook of actualy not contradicting my piece, your slander is no substitue for disqualification. You little fucking retard, you cant just utter meaningless lines of rebuke with no substance and then taunt; "what you want to stop conversing?" I did not relent, I left where my argument was laid to bear and totaly untouched by your dimwitted response, I simply left you to wallow in your own ignorance. Fucking stupid cappie- but then you have to be dont you, or otherwise you just wouldnt cope with the guilt in your little self absorbed sociaty......... fuck your a waste of thought."

These steve, are "meaningless lines of rebuke with no substance." And by the way, I'm not a cappie, or some sort of ignorant American, who has blind pride in the US, and comes on to this board to defend every American action. Believe me.

[Unrelenting Steve]

Shit your so fucking stupid I dont believe it; I never said it was required to kill willing combabtants only that it was moraly tolerable with the Geneve convention in mind (basicly killing soldiers isnt murder, willing combatants=soldiers)- I have already cleared this up in my last post, do u still fail to understand.

So now this in mind, you cannot weigh the lives of willing combabtants(soldiers) with the lives of innnocent civilians(because the one is murder the other isnt)- which is the whole fucking point of the Genva convention. You cant just kill civilians beacuse its conveniant or because you think them to be war crazed fanatics(because thats how you are justifiying it, you think they are all as good as willing combatants), you cannot assume that everyone living in Japan all agree with Japan and are agents of Japan; you cannot, or then I would find it (and u would have to too if you werent so stupid) that it is moral (in the terms of warfare) to wage a war on civilians for "horrible" acts committed by the country those civilians belong to.

basicly if you agree with the nuclear bombing in Japan then in principal you should not distingush between a country declearing war on you and following the Geneva convention and terrorists blowing up civilian targets in your country(because like you did to Japan we will assume all Americans believe and support and are "agents" of American, just like you did the Japenese (and by the way this is evident in looking at your culture *which is a generalizaion- but what the hell, as I said you did it to Japan, you guys no for a fact that all the Japenese people were all willing combatants in disguise, so we could treat them like we could any other military instalation)

As I have said before, I hope you suffer a terrorist attack for every indoctranation you possess, perhaps after you have endured that you can learn to understand things you sign so you can live up to them and then you can really rightoesly say "terrorist cowards, well get you.........you scum of the earth" without defiling yourself in the same breath.

I will slander your efforts as much as you I like, because unlike your writting mine actualy contains rebuke of substance, the slander is to emphasize your short commings and to vent the anger you cause me through your stupidity, you dont seem to be that ignorant- so im wondering whats your excuse for not getting it right- will we start going in crazy if THE COUNTRY I LIVE IN IS A LIE. And please tell me what actual thing of consequence you dont agree with in your country, or is it just one of those ones which go" I cant stand this, but it will never flinch my undying patritism and devotion to my beloved country" because I cant stand that indoctranated ignorant trash, so if im right dont even answer that part of this post.

(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 1:52 am on July 3, 2003)

[Unrelenting Steve]

(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 2:10 am on July 3, 2003)

[187]

This has nothing to do with ease, cowardice, terrorism, the geneva convention's 'infallible morals', or patriotism. It has more to do with saving lives on both ends. These people wouldn't have welcomed Americans with open arms and gifts. It would have undoubtably been a bloody battle to the last. If you understood the Japanese culture at the time, you would understand why I believe this to be true.

On a side note...I'm having trouble understanding a lot of what you write(is english not your first language?), because it's often incoherant and babbled. Take the time to formulate better sentences and gather your thoughts. If you do so I'll try to take more time/effort in thinking about and responding to what you write. This is not meant to be taken as an insult...

(Edited by 187 at 4:05 am on July 3, 2003)

[Loknar]

Steve, you really need to read about WW2 warfare, neither side was worried about the Geneva Convention, but you're too ignorant to possible know that and that it was a new type of war. And please read about the fights with the Japanese.

Jpenese were tought in schools the way of the Samuri. And maybe you're right about not everyone wanting to fight, (though it should be noted that people may hate their government but they hate to see ther land invaded) however the NKVD in Russia made sure everyone fought, Japan was ready to do the same (which would simply be a choice, either fight, or be shot and you cant run from the front).

[Sabocat]

Quote: from 187 on 10:53 pm on July 2, 2003
This has nothing to do with ease, cowardice, terrorism, the geneva convention's 'infallible morals', or patriotism. It has more to do with saving lives on both ends. These people wouldn't have welcomed Americans with open arms and gifts. It would have undoubtably been a bloody battle to the last. If you understood the Japanese culture at the time, you would understand why I believe this to be true.

On a side note...I'm having trouble understanding a lot of what you write(is english not your first language?), because it's often incoherant and babbled. Take the time to formulate better sentences and gather your thoughts. If you do so I'll try to take more time/effort in thinking about and responding to what you write. This is not meant to be taken as an insult...

(Edited by 187 at 4:05 am on July 3, 2003)



Can we please stop with the American Propaganda lesson? I know it probably helps you sleep at night knowing the all righteous U$ was trying to "save lives", but c'mon. The dropping of the atomic bombs did not save lives on both sides. It's a fallacy. The number of civilians killed may very well have been 200,000 at the time, however, the radiation still causes abnormaly high cancer rates and birth defects to this day. It's cruel and it was un-necessary.

How could the Japanese have continued to fight when they were almost completely out of resources? They had little or no access to oil and metal.

The one other factor that you just don't seem to be hearing, is that they were trying to surrender for up to a year before the bombing. If they were trying to surrender a year before, how could dropping bombs a year later possibly save lives. It's bullshit.

The dropping of the bombs was purely political. It was a message to the world, it was a retaliation for Pearl Harbor (even though that was a military target and killed very few civilians), it was an experiment to find the difference in destruction between uranium and plutonium bombs, it was a psyops operation like Dresden.

[Al Khabir]

Hey, calm down! Slander gets us nowhere, we are all freinds here, just with differing opinions. Remember, the objective is to win them round to your side of the argument, not to insult them and make them stubborn.

As I see it, for what its worth, we have no way of telling what would have happened had America not dropped the bombs. America is certainly guilty to some extent but there are far worse crimes that it has commited.

[Loknar]

Disgustapated


Japan has over 100 million people today. Are you telling me that a population that high would simply welcome us and not fight? 5 Area Armies (Army Groups) still existed. They may have had not too much oil but horse cavalry and guns aren’t hard to come by.


Also you need to understands the Japanese political structure. The emperor was not the man in power like you think. The Emperor may have sent ambassadors to Russia for a surrender but that doesn’ mean that Tojo would've accepted it. And like I pointed out eariler, Himmler was negotiating with the allies through a Swedish Aristocrat but that doesn’t mean Hitler would have allowed it to happen.

[Sabocat]

Quote: from Loknar on 4:57 pm on July 3, 2003
Disgustapated


Japan has over 100 million people today. Are you telling me that a population that high would simply welcome us and not fight? 5 Area Armies (Army Groups) still existed. They may have had not too much oil but horse cavalry and guns aren’t hard to come by.


Also you need to understands the Japanese political structure. The emperor was not the man in power like you think. The Emperor may have sent ambassadors to Russia for a surrender but that doesn’ mean that Tojo would've accepted it. And like I pointed out eariler, Himmler was negotiating with the allies through a Swedish Aristocrat but that doesn’t mean Hitler would have allowed it to happen.

Japan was trying to work out a surrender deal for a year and only stipulated that the emperor be left in place since he is regarded as a religious figure. The U$ rejected it, saying only unconditional surrender. It could all have ended if they had just allowed the emperor to remain.

That surrender, would have ended it and caused fewer deaths by far.

[187]

"Japan was trying to work out a surrender deal for a year and only stipulated that the emperor be left in place since he is regarded as a religious figure."

Can you get me some information on that? Like what "deal for a year"?

[Loknar]

Quote: from Disgustapated on 10:17 pm on July 3, 2003

Quote: from Loknar on 4:57 pm on July 3, 2003
Disgustapated


Japan has over 100 million people today. Are you telling me that a population that high would simply welcome us and not fight? 5 Area Armies (Army Groups) still existed. They may have had not too much oil but horse cavalry and guns aren’t hard to come by.


Also you need to understands the Japanese political structure. The emperor was not the man in power like you think. The Emperor may have sent ambassadors to Russia for a surrender but that doesn’ mean that Tojo would've accepted it. And like I pointed out eariler, Himmler was negotiating with the allies through a Swedish Aristocrat but that doesn’t mean Hitler would have allowed it to happen.

Japan was trying to work out a surrender deal for a year and only stipulated that the emperor be left in place since he is regarded as a religious figure. The U$ rejected it, saying only unconditional surrender. It could all have ended if they had just allowed the emperor to remain.

That surrender, would have ended it and caused fewer deaths by far.



The Japanese emperor was a figure head for which the people rallied around for war. We obviously didn’t want him to remain a religious figure. The Japanese royal family is still in poiwer today, but once Japan surrendered Hirihito( I don’t know how to spell his name) denounced him self as divine as we demanded he do.

But who exactly was trying to negotiate a surrender? The Emperor? Prime Minister?

[Vinny Rafarino]

Emporer Hirohito Signed the treaty surrender while the Japanese military was trying to locate and capure the emporer to avoid a surrender announcement and treaty with the US. General Iforgethisname had a suspicion the yanquees shot their nuclear load and now had a mission to find the Emporer and stop him from signing the treaty. Her almost made it too. The announcement came over the radio as troops were storming the Emporer's location. Not that it mattered. The Red Army had the Japanese too frightened to enter the Eastern Front.

[Loknar]

Quote: from COMRADE RAF on 1:33 am on July 4, 2003
Emporer Hirohito Signed the treaty surrender while the Japanese military was trying to locate and capure the emporer to avoid a surrender announcement and treaty with the US. General Iforgethisname had a suspicion the yanquees shot their nuclear load and now had a mission to find the Emporer and stop him from signing the treaty. Her almost made it too. The announcement came over the radio as troops were storming the Emporer's location. Not that it mattered. The Red Army had the Japanese too frightened to enter the Eastern Front.

The Emperor didn’t sign the surrender document, a civilian representative did. Are you speaking if the ratification perhaps? Anyway, if the Emperor announced it the people would go with it since they are loyal to the emperor.

[Tasha]

Ok I will take this step by step.

We can all agree that the mass murdering of civilians is a wrongdoing.

We can all agree that the nuclear bombings of japan were mass murderings of civilians.

Therefore we can all agree that this was a wrongdoing.

I would like to point out there is no justification for a wrongdoing. Let me just point out another thing speculation is ignorance that can be twisted to anyones will. Let me give an example:

I have heard arguments that we may have lost 12 million people from both sides. Well that could be a probable scenario of course the stems of cases of civilian casualties would be wrongdoings as well. Who is to say that as soon as the first american soldier set foot on japan that they would not surrender? While the probability of these scenarios differ that does not mean that either one is not possible. Was there a possible step that could have ended this war peacefully, why yes there is a possibility to everything. No human being has the right to say that this is what would have happened or no this is what will happen all you can give is your estimation of probabilities. Once a mistake is done it is done there is no speculation on what would have happened had that mistake not been made, there are far too many roots for this and it is simply ignorant to speculate. Which brings the conclusion that murderings of these people was wrong. PERIOD!!!

No ifs and buts. Well russia was bad too or Japan wasnt good. Does this type of argueing have anything to do with these civilians???

Also I would just like to point out that telling someone they are stupid or a retard does not reflect well on the stature of your opinions.

[Loknar]

Tasha, I'll say this: The decision to drop the bomb was correct.

[Tasha]

Do you agree that the mass murdering of civilians is a wrongdoing?

"I would like to point out there is no justification for a wrongdoing. "

[notyetacommie]

Quote: from 187 on 4:13 pm on June 29, 2003
"You know what? American liders,especially your dear president were just a bunch of cowards.They weren't able to defeat Japan on the battlefield so they attacked their homes and cities which had most people."

The bottom line is, lives were saved on both ends. let it go.


You right-wing Americans have very strange views concerning saving lives. Kill a million to save another million or what? You could try that on the military or the emperor, not on civilians.

[notyetacommie]

Quote: from Loknar on 6:10 am on July 4, 2003
Tasha, I'll say this: The decision to drop the bomb was correct.


I guess you are genetically conditioned to take only this kind of decisions- your whole country was created on the bones of Native Americans, after all.

[187]

"You right-wing Americans"

Yes because it was expressely stated that I was right wing. I love how if everything's not a conspiracy theory it's right wing.

"Kill a million to save another million or what?"

Not only were the casualties well below a million, but it was more like sacrificing one for five.

"You could try that on the military or the emperor"

How would that have saved lives?

Relevant article:
http://oror.essortment.com/presidenttruman_rywp.htm

(Edited by 187 at 8:19 am on July 4, 2003)

[notyetacommie]

Quote: from Zeljko on 11:36 am on June 27, 2003
In those countries which had not been Communist or Socialistic most people dont even know what Socialism is all about. When someone mentions the word "Communism" in front of them their first association is the III world war in which the Russians will launch projectiles from Cuba to their homes, orphanages, and hospitals.They think that's monstruous, huh, but what about Yugoslavia where their "precious land of freedom" atacked mostly civilian targets like national TV, suburban districts, hospitals (they bombed the hospital that was only for pregnant women and children-it was even called that way:institut za majku i dete - The institut of mothers and children.
They hit the Chinese Ambassy for Christ's sake!!
And not to mention their nuclear attacks on Japan. Do you know what Hitlers right hand Gering said at the Nirnberg trial (i am not a nazi or anything, i'm just telling what he said and he was right): "You're calling us a monsters?! What about Japan?! Why didn't you attack Germany? I will tell you why: it was easier to kill 10000 yellow babies instead of one white! And you dare to refer to us as rasists?"
Here, you see? And those farmers from US don't know what communism is all about. Their fat leaders told them "Communism is evil" And they accepted that for granted without even questioning why are their leaders against communism. They don't know that a socialistic society will overthrow those fat capitalist's and that the power will go to people and will be for the people.
I sincerely hope that one day they will realise their mistake and atone for it by fighting for Social justice.


Zeljko, you are right! Most if not al of the cappies who post here have never been to a single socialist country. All they know is what they read in their books written by brainwashed writers and censored by CIA.
None of them seems to have ever read a book by a Soviet historian- be it the one from Yugoslavia or from the former USSR.

I feel bad my country has done nothing to stop the USA aggression in Yugoslavia. I think if they had been stopped there, there wouldn't be the Afghanistan war nor the Iraq war. By their talks about Hiroshima they are asking for something like that happening to their own families. I think that the US is now a bigger threat to the whole world, than Japan ever was to the States. Does it mean we should apply the same methods to them? Killing a bunch of American civilians will I'm sure save the lives of hundred of millions of people all over the world. Let's nuke them!

[Loknar]

Quote: from notyetacommie on 7:45 am on July 4, 2003

Quote: from Loknar on 6:10 am on July 4, 2003
Tasha, I'll say this: The decision to drop the bomb was correct.


I guess you are genetically conditioned to take only this kind of decisions- your whole country was created on the bones of Native Americans, after all.


Bringing up the so called native Americans is pointless. Every nation on this planet exists because their peoples moved in and took over.

[CubanFox]

Quote: from Loknar on 3:22 pm on July 4, 2003

Quote: from notyetacommie on 7:45 am on July 4, 2003

Quote: from Loknar on 6:10 am on July 4, 2003
Tasha, I'll say this: The decision to drop the bomb was correct.


I guess you are genetically conditioned to take only this kind of decisions- your whole country was created on the bones of Native Americans, after all.


Bringing up the so called native Americans is pointless. Every nation on this planet exists because their peoples moved in and took over.

That doesn't make it right.

[Al Khabir]

"united we stand, divided we fall" We all unite in our hatred of the U$!

Only two countries in the world have made themselves powerful by exterminating the indiginous peoples- Australia and America. If it hadnt been ruthless British empire building it would have been someone else, but there is still no excuse.

[Tasha]

Whether you believe that the decision was correct or not, I am sure we can all agree that what happened was wrong and that there are possible better alternatives to everything as well as worse.





(Edited by Tasha at 5:07 pm on July 4, 2003)

[Tasha]

Another thing I would like to address that I noticed someone mentioned about. These bombings were a violation of the geneva convention on a humongous scale.

There are no ifs ands or buts in the geneva convention therefore we can all agree that the geneva convention was certainly violated on a large scale due to this act.

[Unrelenting Steve]

Quote: from 187 on 2:53 am on July 3, 2003
This has nothing to do with ease, cowardice, terrorism, the geneva convention's 'infallible morals', or patriotism. It has more to do with saving lives on both ends. These people wouldn't have welcomed Americans with open arms and gifts. It would have undoubtably been a bloody battle to the last. If you understood the Japanese culture at the time, you would understand why I believe this to be true.

(Edited by 187 at 4:05 am on July 3, 2003)


If you truely think this coupled with the fact that the American people are so intertwined with its government (at least as much as it can be assumed the Japense poeple were with theirs) then you must also feel it is as just when terrorists kill your citizens as when military personel kill each other in war.

Do you see your own hippocracy. And how you do not accept your own logic. -unless of course you tell me that you do not see a differance in terrorist attacks and your bombing of Japan.

And as it was pointed out, you could of accepted their surrender. Both sides not keeping to the convention does not clean your hands. And you had no excuse not to keep to the convention.- only feeble reasons that do not hold ground historicaly.

(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 6:42 pm on July 4, 2003)

[Loknar]

Quote: from Al Khabir on 5:03 pm on July 4, 2003

"united we stand, divided we fall" We all unite in our hatred of the U$!

Only two countries in the world have made themselves powerful by exterminating the indiginous peoples- Australia and America. If it hadnt been ruthless British empire building it would have been someone else, but there is still no excuse.


Only 2? HA

Turkey
Ancient Israel
Russia
Germany
Saxons
Britain
Franks
Spain
China
Vandals
Romans
Canada
Huns
Mongols
Hungary
Carthage


These are off the top of my head, I could dig up more.

[187]

"then you must also feel it is as just when terrorists kill your citizens as when military personel kill each other in war."

But are terrorist attacks meant to save lives, and bring an end to war? Or do terrorist attacks seem to create more war? The end seems to have justified the means in this case.

"And as it was pointed out, you could of accepted their surrender."

Why should the aggressor(who sided with genocidal world dominating nazis) be in any position to stipulate on their own surrender/punishment? That's like asking a criminal what type of punishment he sees fit. They knew the alternative to not accepting the Potsdam Proclamation.

[Unrelenting Steve]

"But are terrorist attacks meant to save lives, and bring an end to war? Or do terrorist attacks seem to create more war? The end seems to have justified the means in this case."

The fact that terrorists are not trying to end the war, is not the point- You think that you can interchange civilian lives with millitary lives in war. I do not (you have stated this twice) therefore you must also agree that in war you can target civilians as well as the military- not seeing differances between these two targets.
that we can kill your military as justly as targeting your civilians



"Why should the aggressor(who sided with genocidal world dominating nazis) be in any position to stipulate on their own surrender/punishment? That's like asking a criminal what type of punishment he sees fit. They knew the alternative to not accepting the Potsdam Proclamation"

I thought we were on a crusade to save lives. And to think because they wont meet all your demands; "lets nuke them" is being a little unfair, so you say to the criminal who has committed some minor cime (this is the analedgy) we want you encariseratted for 5 years, he says 4, you cant agree so you shoot him instead.


(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 8:08 pm on July 4, 2003)

[187]

"You think that you can interchange civilian lives with millitary lives in war. I do not (you have stated this twice) therefore you must also agree that in war you can target civilians as well as the military- not seeing differances between these two targets.
that we can kill your military as justly as targeting your civilians"

Since the alternative would have been all out invasion, resulting in the deaths of more civilians and military I support the action. Generally, I would agree that civilians are not a valid military target, but if killing one will save 5, so be it.

"I thought we were on a crusade to save lives."

And 'we' did.

"...so you say to the criminal who has committed some minor cime (this is the analedgy) we want you encariseratted for 5 years, he says 4, you cant agree so you shoot him instead."

That's not the point. They're in no position to stipulate on the surrender. They were warned if they didn't accept the surrender(which if you read it, it was very generous and fair) they would face "utter destruction"...and they accepted utter destrution. So your analogy would ring truer to the actual situation if it were re-written to state, "we want you encariseratted for 5 years, there is no negotiation, accept this or face the death penalty, and the genious says I want 4 years."

[Unrelenting Steve]

""I thought we were on a crusade to save lives."

And 'we' did. "

That is taken out of context.



"That's not the point. They're in no position to stipulate on the surrender. They were warned if they didn't accept the surrender(which if you read it, it was very generous and fair) they would face "utter destruction"...and they accepted utter destrution. So your analogy would ring truer to the actual situation if it were re-written to state, "we want you encariseratted for 5 years, there is no negotiation, accept this or face the death penalty, and the genious says I want 4 years.""

I thought you were on a crusade to save lives. Not make unfair justifications for attrocious actions.



"Since the alternative would have been all out invasion, resulting in the deaths of more civilians and military I support the action. Generally, I would agree that civilians are not a valid military target, but if killing one will save 5, so be it. "

The alternative was to let them surrender. That alternative does not dissapear because you wish to ignore it, or feebly try to hide it.


(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 9:00 pm on July 4, 2003)

[187]

""I thought we were on a crusade to save lives."

And 'we' did. "

That is taken out of context."

my apologies.

Steve, the US gave them the chance to surrender, they responded by arming their civilian population, and outright defiance. Why should the US have made concessions to a nation that sided with the nazi's, as well as slaughtered and enslaved millions? Who knows what would have come next if the US had "let them surrender their way".

(Edited by 187 at 10:12 pm on July 4, 2003)

[Tasha]

I am seeing alot of 5 times more civilians would have died. Can you please explain how you think this many civilians would have been killed?

(Edited by Tasha at 5:05 am on July 5, 2003)

[Unrelenting Steve]

Dont ask him, he as actual got a source that supports this- it also goes on to explain how all re-evaluators of history just cant deal with the facts and that Truemans way actualy did save more lives- it also doesnt even touch the subject of accepting surrender +1 emperor.

Why should of the Japanese have surrendered with you slave owning Southerners, you genocidal bastards (the indians), you selfish cowards that joined the war as late as they couldve, who would not even stand up to Hitler on principle but only through the practicality of being in war against him, who did not bomb the death camps when Churchill even inquired about it.
- I can rant about America like you can rant about Japan, it doesnt make targeting civilians more or less
immoral, something perhaps you will learn to appreciate as more terror attacks occur.

(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 12:02 pm on July 5, 2003)

[Al Khabir]

"Warning: this forum may contain patriotic bullshit"

What about the Yankee imperialism underway in Iraq. At least you didnt violate the Geneva convention as many times as the last Gulf war, but have you got the message yet that the Iraqis dont want you?

And what about Afghanistan? Has it even been mentioned once on AMerican news in the last six months?

[Loknar]

Dont ask him, he as actual got a source that supports this- it also goes on to explain how all re-evaluators of history just cant deal with the facts and that Truemans way actualy did save more lives- it also doesnt even touch the subject of accepting surrender +1 emperor.

Tojo was the Head of Government you moron. The Emperor didn’t have any real power as Head of State. And as I've said it is normal for government officials to try to negotiate a surrender with out permission. Himmler did it for Germany.


Why should of the Japanese have surrendered with you slave owning Southerners,

Old stupid ass news.


you genocidal bastards (the indians),

I don’t care about the Indians. The only thing we did wrong was kill them., they are immigrants to America just as the Euros were. So big deal. You must be a Canadian, am I right? If so you make your self sound really stupid.

This is by far the dumbest statement you've made thus far. You see 1 program on TV and now suddenly you know all about WW2 when in fact you're a very ignorant person. They should surrender to us so they don’t try their crap again. The mistake we made in WW1 was not making Germany surrender unconditionally.


you selfish cowa

Cowards? You need to read a history book my friend. America is far from a cowardly nation.


rds that joined the war as late as they couldve, who would not even stand up to Hitler on principle but only through the practicality of being in war against him, who did not bomb the death camps when Churchill even inquired about it.

Funny how everyone wants our help but when we actually do something we’re branded as imperialists.

And if Churchill wanted the camps bombed he could have ordered it him self. The British had a large bomber fleet.


- I can rant about America like you can rant about Japan, it doesnt make targeting civilians more or less
immoral, something perhaps you will learn to appreciate as more terror attacks occur.


In WW2 we targeted civilians on purpose just like every other country did including Canada. However, the war on terror has shown that we don’t target them on purpose. The Geneva conventions outlaws the deliberate targeting of civilians not accidents.


(Edited by Loknar at 8:48 pm on July 5, 2003)


(Edited by Loknar at 8:49 pm on July 5, 2003)


(Edited by Loknar at 8:50 pm on July 5, 2003)

[Unrelenting Steve]

Loknar, you are really a stupid person.
Its so degrading having to sought through your idiotic "reasoning"


In WW2 we targeted civilians on purpose just like every other country did including Canada. However, the war on terror has shown that we don’t target them on purpose. The Geneva conventions outlaws the deliberate targeting of civilians not accidents.

Your pathetic attempt of a conclution here is quiet funny, you seem to think that because everyone was breaking the Genva convention in WW2 after the war all of it was forgotten, everyone was square; well the loosers of WW2 paid for the war, and for their breaching of certain treaties including the Geneva convention. America paid no such penance, and now its civilians are being targetted by terrorists- serves you right, finaly some justice.

And you little retard, Germany only became a problem twice because you exacted too heavy a toll from it in the first place, breeding resentment that lasted long enough to allow for madmen to get into power through the slogan of revenge. You seem to know nothing about history, or only the warped American kind. When did I say I only had insight into all this throught one Tv program (that last point is rather cheap, but I just thought you could be forced to deal with the kind of crap you always go on at other people about)


(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 8:15 pm on July 5, 2003)


(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 1:14 am on July 10, 2003)

[Unrelenting Steve]

Brittain did not have bombers you idiot, they had the RAF that could hardly contend with the Nazi bombers,
when ever in history did the Brits bomb Germany (in WW2) nowhere, thats also no where to be diverted to destroying the death camps.

I don’t care about the Indians. The only thing we did wrong was kill them., they are immigrants to America just as the Euros were. So big deal. You must be a Canadian, am I right? If so you make your self sound really stupid.

The reason that you killed them was why I pointed it out- what the hell are you on about here, I was making a point, you are commenting on its historical meaning to you- why are you so stupid, if you cannot combat my point or dont understand what I am talking about, please dont say anything, it makes you look dumb and wastes my time having to rebuke such stupidity that should of never found its way past 3rd grade, but then your schooling system is much to be desired.

[Unrelenting Steve]

And as to you not being cowards, I have provided the example that prooves this, how can you refute the truth to its face- You entered the war as late as you possibly could, not to save the Jews, not to save Europe, but because you were forced to.

[Loknar]

Quote: from Unrelenting Steve on 9:26 pm on July 5, 2003
Brittain did not have bombers you idiot, they had the RAF that could hardly contend with the Nazi bombers,
when ever in history did the Brits bomb Germany (in WW2) nowhere, thats also no where to be diverted to destroying the death camps.

Oh man. It is common knowledge that the Brits bombed in the night, and the AMericans bombed in the day. You are speaking of the short airwar over Britain not the entire war. The British has allot of bombers.

http://www.geocities.com/hiway2112/ww2onth...w3/dresden.html (http://www.geocities.com/hiway2112/ww2onthew3/dresden.html)
This should give you an idea of how many.



The reason that you killed them was why I pointed it out- what the hell are you on about here, I was making a point, you are commenting on its historical meaning to you- why are you so stupid, if you cannot combat my point or dont understand what I am talking about, please dont say anything, it makes you look dumb and wastes my time having to rebuke such stupidity that should of never found its way past 3rd grade, but then your schooling system is much to be desired.

I thought you were screaming about us killing AND conquering. My mistake.,

(Edited by Loknar at 9:48 pm on July 5, 2003)

[Unrelenting Steve]

You make alot of mistakes. and I seem to have made one aswell, I also should have specified that the Death camps where in Poland, which must of prevented the Brittish from bombing them while still being possible for the Ameicans, because I am very definate in the fact that Churchill asked Roosevelt to bomb the death camps, and he shrugged it off. I will get a source when I am in contact with my history teacher.

Anyway, I do not see the contradiction of my other points.


(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 9:08 pm on July 5, 2003)

[Loknar]

Quote: from Unrelenting Steve on 10:00 pm on July 5, 2003
You make alot of mistakes. and I seem to have made one aswell, I also should have specified that the Death camps where in Poland, which must of prevented the Brittish from bombing them while still being possible for the Ameicans, because I am very definate in the fact that Churchill asked Roosevelt to bomb the death camps, and he shrugged it off. I will get a source when I am in contact with my history teacher.

Anyway, I do not see the contradiction of my other points.


(Edited by Unrelenting Steve at 9:08 pm on July 5, 2003)


I believe you. Roosevelt was never concerned with the concentration camps. The only moral leader from any nation-Axis or Ally- was Churchill. There was a book out that I wanted to buy but never did, it was called “The Conqueror’s”. It has some theories as to why he didnt.

WHy wouldnt the Russians bomb the concentration camps?

[Tasha]

Id have to disagree with you, churchill was a war criminal and he certainly did not care about the jews as he was anti-semitic as well.