Become a part of the TranceAddict community!Frequently Asked Questions - Please read this if you haven'tSearch the forums
TranceAddict Forums > Other > Political Discussion / Debate > North Korea did Nuclear tests 10.8.06
Pages (5): « 1 2 3 4 [5]   Last Thread   Next Thread
Share
Author
Thread    Post A Reply
Fir3start3r
Armin Acolyte



Registered: Oct 2001
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada

quote:
Originally posted by Magnetonium


I would still disagree.

Basically you said it was OK that USA lowered itself to the Japanese military criminals levels and used a terrible weapon without using the language of dimplomacy first. No excuse for dropping a nuclear weapon. And no excuse for Japanese war atrocities either.

In any case, even if Americans wanted an quicker end to the war - but I will never ever accept that it was the right decision to drop the second nuclear bomb, only days after the first one. American military instead of settling for peace decided to use this terrible weapon to force Japs to surrender.

Oh, and by the way, it was the Americans who armed the Japanese and with American weapons did the Japs commit all the crimes.

Just like the Americans sold military equipment to Nazis before they joined the war. Thats why they were reluctant to enter the war in first place.


What diplomacy????
They were at WAR.
The Japanese were NEVER going to open up talks in any hint or suggestion of anything BUT victory, their honor-valued system would never allow for it.
Tell me, how does one negotiation with an ideology that won't accept surrender?
Were they supposed to have some sort of epiphany in the middle of it all and get together for tea?
I'd love to live in this post-fairy-tale land in which you live.

You don't have to like what the Allies (let's not single out the U.S. shall we? It was hardly just them involved in this) did but it was effect enough to save lives AND convince the Japanese that they indeed, had no choice.
Why did they do it twice? Because they HAD to.

Other than winning the war, the other great thing that came from it was the total global unwillingness to use such a horrible weapon again.
It was only ever legitimate because it was never used before and there was no opinion on something that never existed before.
You might question of course, well does that make it right?
At the time, yes.
It's easy to look back and suggest they should have never used it, however, taking into consideration the circumstances for what they were at the time, it cores out any argument you want to wrap around the use of the bombs.


___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."

Old Post Oct-10-2006 23:55  Canada
Click Here to See the Profile for Fir3start3r Click here to Send Fir3start3r a Private Message Add Fir3start3r to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Magnetonium
Dubstep = Douchestep



Registered: Sep 2001
Location: Port Burwell, Ontario, Canada



Alright, I wont bother arguing ... but are you against the use of nuclear weapons then? Or do you think some countries might be entitled to use them when their own existence is threatened ...


___________________
Whenever you go and buy something, you are affecting someone somewhere, be it environment, a person, or a community - you're making a statement with what you buy. So make it a smart choice ... Its a big picture

Old Post Oct-10-2006 23:58  Canada
Click Here to See the Profile for Magnetonium Click here to Send Magnetonium a Private Message Visit Magnetonium's homepage! Add Magnetonium to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
occrider
Traveladdict



Registered: Oct 2000
Location: New York

quote:
Originally posted by Moongoose
Just to get off topic for a little bit here. While considering the casualties the other choice would bring the bomb seems like a reasonable alternative, but i wonder if Hiroshima and Nagasaki were really necessary targets. What im trying to say is, if your trying to demonstrate the power of a nuclear bomb you dont really have to level a couple of citys to do so. Sent the japs a message saying "If you want to see something cool take your binoculars and look out to sea at this time and place" then after your demonstration send another message saying "That was cool wasnt it. We have many more and next time we will aim for something more important than some sea water".
A simple threat of such a massive force unleashed on their land would surely convince japs to surrender, especialy if they thought that you could level their entire contry in one bombing run.


Well I think that concept is somewhat at odds with the total war. You don't gamble with a "demonstration" of how powerful you are, particularly when you only have two bombs in your arsenal and another would be many months away. The goal wasn't to obliterate Japanese leadership and pulverise them in a war of attrition. If that were the case they would have bombed tokyo but that was ruled out due to the presence of the emperor. The goal was to inflict maximum shock value to end the war without an invasion. As commander in chief I would make the decision to actually use them because when I'm making a gamble to end the war and save potentially up to a million of my countrymen that I'm supposed to protect, I'm going to throw as much energy and shock value into my punches so that there isn't a second thought asides from surrender. It was more so the shock value than the loss of human life that allowed the Japanese doves to win out over the hawks. After all, far more loss of civilian life were sustained in campaigns such as the firebombing of tokyo. Can we confidentely say for certain that bombing an empty target would have provided enough shock value even with 20/20 hindsight vision?

quote:
Lets see it. I missed it.


Sure. I guess I first laid out my theory in this thread:

http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...ighlight=atomic

Bits and pieces have since been refined or enhanced in random threads as I've read more contextual historical accounts (such as the Japanese coup attempt to capture the emperor and prevent the announcement of the surrender).


___________________
Retro ...

Old Post Oct-11-2006 03:08  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for occrider Click here to Send occrider a Private Message Add occrider to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Krypton
83.798 g/6.022x10^23



Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Texas

I heard they havn't detected any radiation. This is all speculation.
Source

I also heard the North Koreans are building tunnels under the DMZ.
Source

China even supports punitive actions against the NK

The North Korean government has gone mad. Bush is not the violater of human rights the left rhetorically claim he is. It's Kim Jung MENTALLY Ill!!

Old Post Oct-11-2006 03:45  Korea-Democratic Peoples Republic
Click Here to See the Profile for Krypton Click here to Send Krypton a Private Message Visit Krypton's homepage! Add Krypton to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message

TranceAddict Forums > Other > Political Discussion / Debate > North Korea did Nuclear tests 10.8.06
Post New Thread    Post A Reply

Pages (5): « 1 2 3 4 [5]  
Last Thread   Next Thread
Click here to listen to the sample!Pause playbackNeed track ID [2004] [0]

Click here to listen to the sample!Pause playbackWizzy Noise - Aegean Sunrise [2006]

Show Printable Version | Subscribe to this Thread
Forum Jump:

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:58.

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
 
Search this Thread:

 
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict

Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
Support TA!