|
If you had to fight in Any war from history.... (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| smokeape |
Confederate Cavalry with J.E.B. Stuart. Namesake of my High School...
And yes, our football field was built on a Confederate graveyard as well...
:p
[[[smoke]]] |
|
|
| Spartan |
| I've played on that football field.:thepirate |
|
|
| failsafe |
| TranceVanDyk: Let me get this straight, it's not okay for the terrorists to attack the world trade centers, but it is okay for the americans to fire bomb tokyo, nuke hiroshima, and nagasaki? Because if that's the case you're mentally retarded. You cant say fire bombing a city of mostly woman, childer and elderly at the time, and killing 100,000 of them in one night is even slightly justified if you don't believe the WTC was also justified. |
|
|
| Mebot |
| quote: | Originally posted by smokeape
Saddam's Reich was no different and al-Queda is no less a threat in the Good v. Evil worldwide battle. We're in the and our boys are doing a helluva job. Wars are fought a little differently these days than 60 years ago. Force on force confrontations are over quickly, but insurgencies and terroristic acts persist so you can't get a finality to conflicts like you used to. This doesn't necessarily mean we haven't won though so long as political objectives are achieved.
:D
[[[smoke]]] |
True. I was just about to point out objectivity v. subjectivity until your last sentence. The utalitarianism of each scenario is questionable in my opinion. The actual physicalness of war may be different, but the goal of WWII was a lot more concrete and tangible than the War in Iraq. Basically, you had more people support a war whole-heartedly across the entire nation from 1941-1945 then you do today. The support for the war is split down the middle between those who do support and those who don't.
so I guess while i'm not arguing about HOW the war is fought, I'm arguing about the objectivity and support of it. |
|
|
| Mebot |
| quote: | Originally posted by failsafe
but it is okay for the americans to fire bomb tokyo, nuke hiroshima, and nagasaki? |
To end WWII and prevent Japan from dominating the pacific... yeah i think so. |
|
|
| smokeape |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spartan
I've played on that football field.:thepirate |
And hopefully lost as well...
:p
[[[smoke]]] |
|
|
| failsafe |
| quote: | Originally posted by Mebot
To end WWII and prevent Japan from dominating the pacific... yeah i think so. |
so why isn't alright for terrorits to attack the WTC to prevent americans from messing with their countries? what a bunch of flawed logic. If killing inocents is wrong for terrorists, its wrong for americans to do too. |
|
|
| Spartan |
| quote: | Originally posted by failsafe
so why isn't alright for terrorits to attack the WTC to prevent americans from messing with their countries? what a bunch of flawed logic. If killing inocents is wrong for terrorists, its wrong for americans to do too. |
sorry if trying to help out Israelies that are getting suicide bombed everyday was so evil.
and you act all noble but if Ottowa was attacked one day out of the blue i'm sure you'd have a different take on this. |
|
|
| Mebot |
| quote: | Originally posted by failsafe
so why isn't alright for terrorits to attack the WTC to prevent americans from messing with their countries? what a bunch of flawed logic. If killing inocents is wrong for terrorists, its wrong for americans to do too. |
eh... i'm not saying it's "right" per se... The difference is, the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima occured during times of WAR. September 11th did not.
Arguing about which event is "right" or "wrong" is just plain stupid. They were both horrible events, however the bombings in Japan, in my opinion, were more justified because they precipited in ending World War II. |
|
|
| blazed it |
I'd probably fight as a spartan against the persian army @ the battle of thermopylae.
300 vs. 10,000? bring it.
either that or:
Being a marine and taking Iwo Jima from the Japanese.
btw the nukes weren't necessary. The war would've ended, no way Japan could've won at that point. The nukes were used to end the war in faster manner and also to scare the russians. |
|
|
| Mebot |
Plus, trying to string an analagoy between events 60 years apart is rediculous.
That's like trying to say how come it's justifiable to go and murder people during the Russian Revolution and not justifiable during the Reign of Terror/French Revolution? |
|
|
|
|
