Sup with North Korea's kids?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-04-2013, 08:26 PM
 
RE: Sup with North Korea's kids?
(09-04-2013 10:19 AM)I and I Wrote:  
(09-04-2013 09:37 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Their people are brainwashed to support their government.


many people in the U.S. still believe that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction......so what is your definition of brain washed?

Many americans believe their military is defending freedom and helping people around the world gain freedom.....again what is your definition of brainwashed?

thank you much
Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2013, 08:30 PM
RE: Sup with North Korea's kids?
(09-04-2013 05:29 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(09-04-2013 05:07 PM)Chas Wrote:  It is pretty certain that the use of those two bombs ended the war and saved millions of lives.

that tired exhausted proven false line. Rolleyes

how exactly was dropping the atomic bombs even necessary? The japanese government wanted to surrender but keep their emperor, the U.S. ignores these offers then ends up accepting the condition of maintaining the emperor.

The damage that the two bombs did was nothing compared to what normal bombs dropped in massive amounts were doing to other major cities like Tokyo.

And by accepting the fact that those two towns were not military targets, you are basically saying that it is good to sacrifice a shit load of innocent civillians to win a war, but north korea is crazy and we are sane. Rolleyes what fucking joke


Your grasp of the history of WWII is seriously flawed.

Strategic bombing of cities was accepted military doctrine in WWII. Those two cities were chosen because they were previously undamaged. This allowed the full effect of this new weapon to be clearly demonstrated.

Where do you get the idea that Japan was trying to surrender before this? They were preparing for a to-the-death defense of the home islands. The argument about the emperor was a demand for surrender terms after the bombings.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
09-04-2013, 08:33 PM
 
RE: Sup with North Korea's kids?
(09-04-2013 08:30 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(09-04-2013 05:29 PM)I and I Wrote:  that tired exhausted proven false line. Rolleyes

how exactly was dropping the atomic bombs even necessary? The japanese government wanted to surrender but keep their emperor, the U.S. ignores these offers then ends up accepting the condition of maintaining the emperor.

The damage that the two bombs did was nothing compared to what normal bombs dropped in massive amounts were doing to other major cities like Tokyo.

And by accepting the fact that those two towns were not military targets, you are basically saying that it is good to sacrifice a shit load of innocent civillians to win a war, but north korea is crazy and we are sane. Rolleyes what fucking joke


Your grasp of the history of WWII is seriously flawed.

Strategic bombing of cities was accepted military doctrine in WWII. Those two cities were chosen because they were previously undamaged. This allowed the full effect of this new weapon to be clearly demonstrated.

Where do you get the idea that Japan was trying to surrender before this? They were preparing for a to-the-death defense of the home islands. The argument about the emperor was a demand for surrender terms after the bombings.

every bit the truth, Chas. Hamburg and London are other examples of mass city bombing, although not with nuclear weapons.
Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2013, 08:51 PM
RE: Sup with North Korea's kids?
(09-04-2013 08:33 PM)That Icelandic Wrote:  
(09-04-2013 08:30 PM)Chas Wrote:  Your grasp of the history of WWII is seriously flawed.

Strategic bombing of cities was accepted military doctrine in WWII. Those two cities were chosen because they were previously undamaged. This allowed the full effect of this new weapon to be clearly demonstrated.

Where do you get the idea that Japan was trying to surrender before this? They were preparing for a to-the-death defense of the home islands. The argument about the emperor was a demand for surrender terms after the bombings.

every bit the truth, Chas. Hamburg and London are other examples of mass city bombing, although not with nuclear weapons.

The best example is probably Dresden. A previously untargeted city that was basically melted into glass by the firebombing. If anything the Dresden bombing was worse than either of the 2 atomic devices.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2013, 08:53 PM
 
RE: Sup with North Korea's kids?
"melted into glass"
I like that phrase... thats a good one
Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2013, 09:08 PM
RE: Sup with North Korea's kids?
On one night in March 1945, over 300 B-29s bombed Tokyo with incendiary munitions.
More than 260,000 buildings were destroyed - 25% of the city, over 100,000 people were killed.

This is more devastation than either Hiroshima or Nagasaki experienced.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2013, 09:09 PM
 
RE: Sup with North Korea's kids?
again: true dat
Quote this message in a reply
10-04-2013, 05:58 AM
RE: Sup with North Korea's kids?
(09-04-2013 10:19 AM)I and I Wrote:  
(09-04-2013 09:37 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Their people are brainwashed to support their government.


many people in the U.S. still believe that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction......so what is your definition of brain washed?

Many americans believe their military is defending freedom and helping people around the world gain freedom.....again what is your definition of brainwashed?

I am sorry, direct me to prove that the U.S media outlets that are government-run.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-04-2013, 07:50 AM
RE: Sup with North Korea's kids?
So the effects of radiation of those bombs which will still be around causing problems long after were gone is not ongoing deviation?.

And Japan was on the verge of surrender, the decision to nuke then came in part due to a bad translation

Their main army was cut off in china, supply's had been cut. Even your own military said it was unnecisary "The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in the defeat of Japan." Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet.

"The use of [the atomic bombs] at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons... The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children." Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Truman

Behold the power of the force!
[Image: fgYtjtY.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-04-2013, 08:54 AM
RE: Sup with North Korea's kids?
(10-04-2013 07:50 AM)FSM_scot Wrote:  So the effects of radiation of those bombs which will still be around causing problems long after were gone is not ongoing deviation?.

And Japan was on the verge of surrender, the decision to nuke then came in part due to a bad translation

Their main army was cut off in china, supply's had been cut. Even your own military said it was unnecisary "The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in the defeat of Japan." Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet.

"The use of [the atomic bombs] at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons... The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children." Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Truman

There is no logic behind the "we bombed to save lives" either. That is like saying "hey, tomorrow I am going to cut off your arm but to save me time and you a limb, I am just going to cut your fingers off today, I am cutting your fingers off to save your limb"

Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes I and I's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: