Forums | MacLife

I think the bombings of civilians should stand as lessons of not the passing morality of that age, but the enduring immorality of war.

And what lesson of immorality does that teach? 

Sacrifice a few for the good of the many?

If we didn't drop both bombs,we could of extended the war well into the next decade if we didn't drop them. And the casualties would of been beyond the less than 1/2 a million dead on both sides, instead of one. Potentally that part of the war could of been the bloodiest part of our history, instead of the ending point of the war. 

Think of it, we could of dwarfed the Civil War numbers of US casulties, if we went in a land strike...D-day theoretically looked like a walk in the park compared to what they would of had to do for the land invasion of Japan.

If the option of nuking Japan, or doing a land invasion today, the same responce would probably of been made again...

That doesn't really justify bombing civilian targets, though. Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren't even major industrial sites. We could have bombed a military base just as easily. It would have received the same amount of "shock and awe."

If you want the biggest impact where do you aim... where the most population is.  And it was not as if we didn't warn them to get out before hand.  We dropped pamphlets. They choose to ignore them.

Sounds like Osama talking about 9/11.

The sad part is it's true in war. 

War is not what it use to be, at least for the US, and the "civilized countries" it has become an art.  It has become that we can throw a missile into a door, and blow the door out, but keep the windows intact....

WWII, we use to carpet bomb targets, in hoping the target was destroyed.  If we got civilians it was part of war, regrettably, but it was part of war, and a nasty part of it.

Now if we kill a SINGLE civilian, we are called barbarians... yet the other side if given the chance would wipe us out the minute they got a chance... every woman, man and child, military or not. Proof of that is 9/11

Now tell me why should we respect their lives, if they don't respect ours.

Are you arguing the side of the US or Osama bin Laden?

Both.

I think the bombings of civilians should stand as lessons of not the passing morality of that age, but the enduring immorality of war.

And what lesson of immorality does that teach? 

Sacrifice a few for the good of the many?

If we didn't drop both bombs,we could of extended the war well into the next decade if we didn't drop them. And the casualties would of been beyond the less than 1/2 a million dead on both sides, instead of one. Potentally that part of the war could of been the bloodiest part of our history, instead of the ending point of the war. 

Think of it, we could of dwarfed the Civil War numbers of US casulties, if we went in a land strike...D-day theoretically looked like a walk in the park compared to what they would of had to do for the land invasion of Japan.

If the option of nuking Japan, or doing a land invasion today, the same responce would probably of been made again...

That doesn't really justify bombing civilian targets, though. Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren't even major industrial sites. We could have bombed a military base just as easily. It would have received the same amount of "shock and awe."

If you want the biggest impact where do you aim... where the most population is.  And it was not as if we didn't warn them to get out before hand.  We dropped pamphlets. They choose to ignore them.

Sounds like Osama talking about 9/11.

The sad part is it's true in war. 

War is not what it use to be, at least for the US, and the "civilized countries" it has become an art.  It has become that we can throw a missile into a door, and blow the door out, but keep the windows intact....

WWII, we use to carpet bomb targets, in hoping the target was destroyed.  If we got civilians it was part of war, regrettably, but it was part of war, and a nasty part of it.

Now if we kill a SINGLE civilian, we are called barbarians... yet the other side if given the chance would wipe us out the minute they got a chance... every woman, man and child, military or not. Proof of that is 9/11

Now tell me why should we respect their lives, if they don't respect ours.

Are you arguing the side of the US or Osama bin Laden?

Both.

Me no like.

You aren't suppose to like war. One side, or both always loose.

I think the bombings of civilians should stand as lessons of not the passing morality of that age, but the enduring immorality of war.

And what lesson of immorality does that teach? 

Sacrifice a few for the good of the many?

If we didn't drop both bombs,we could of extended the war well into the next decade if we didn't drop them. And the casualties would of been beyond the less than 1/2 a million dead on both sides, instead of one. Potentally that part of the war could of been the bloodiest part of our history, instead of the ending point of the war. 

Think of it, we could of dwarfed the Civil War numbers of US casulties, if we went in a land strike...D-day theoretically looked like a walk in the park compared to what they would of had to do for the land invasion of Japan.

If the option of nuking Japan, or doing a land invasion today, the same responce would probably of been made again...

That doesn't really justify bombing civilian targets, though. Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren't even major industrial sites. We could have bombed a military base just as easily. It would have received the same amount of "shock and awe."

If you want the biggest impact where do you aim... where the most population is.  And it was not as if we didn't warn them to get out before hand.  We dropped pamphlets. They choose to ignore them.

Sounds like Osama talking about 9/11.

The sad part is it's true in war. 

War is not what it use to be, at least for the US, and the "civilized countries" it has become an art.  It has become that we can throw a missile into a door, and blow the door out, but keep the windows intact....

WWII, we use to carpet bomb targets, in hoping the target was destroyed.  If we got civilians it was part of war, regrettably, but it was part of war, and a nasty part of it.

Now if we kill a SINGLE civilian, we are called barbarians... yet the other side if given the chance would wipe us out the minute they got a chance... every woman, man and child, military or not. Proof of that is 9/11

Now tell me why should we respect their lives, if they don't respect ours.

Are you arguing the side of the US or Osama bin Laden?

Both.

Me no like.

You aren't suppose to like war. One side, or both always loose.

Yeah, but I like to convince myself of the higher moral issues involved, but I guess in war both sides to whatever it takes to smurf up their enemy.

Basically, humanity is smurfed.

I think the bombings of civilians should stand as lessons of not the passing morality of that age, but the enduring immorality of war.

And what lesson of immorality does that teach? 

Sacrifice a few for the good of the many?

If we didn't drop both bombs,we could of extended the war well into the next decade if we didn't drop them. And the casualties would of been beyond the less than 1/2 a million dead on both sides, instead of one. Potentally that part of the war could of been the bloodiest part of our history, instead of the ending point of the war. 

Think of it, we could of dwarfed the Civil War numbers of US casulties, if we went in a land strike...D-day theoretically looked like a walk in the park compared to what they would of had to do for the land invasion of Japan.

If the option of nuking Japan, or doing a land invasion today, the same responce would probably of been made again...

That doesn't really justify bombing civilian targets, though. Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren't even major industrial sites. We could have bombed a military base just as easily. It would have received the same amount of "shock and awe."

If you want the biggest impact where do you aim... where the most population is.  And it was not as if we didn't warn them to get out before hand.  We dropped pamphlets. They choose to ignore them.

Sounds like Osama talking about 9/11.

The sad part is it's true in war. 

War is not what it use to be, at least for the US, and the "civilized countries" it has become an art.  It has become that we can throw a missile into a door, and blow the door out, but keep the windows intact....

WWII, we use to carpet bomb targets, in hoping the target was destroyed.  If we got civilians it was part of war, regrettably, but it was part of war, and a nasty part of it.

Now if we kill a SINGLE civilian, we are called barbarians... yet the other side if given the chance would wipe us out the minute they got a chance... every woman, man and child, military or not. Proof of that is 9/11

Now tell me why should we respect their lives, if they don't respect ours.

Are you arguing the side of the US or Osama bin Laden?

Both.

Me no like.

You aren't suppose to like war. One side, or both always loose.

Yeah, but I like to convince myself of the higher moral issues involved, but I guess in war both sides to whatever it takes to smurf up their enemy.

Basically, humanity is smurfed.

If both sides could think to the point of higher morality, we wouldn't have war, because everything could be talked out, and understood without conflict.

war... the word is used like "ethnic cleansing"

how about invasion, bombing, massacre, overthrow, mass murder, corruption, kickbacks, stealing from taxpayers, gutting the budget, massive debt, and serial killer?

And your point is?

Exactly what I wrote. "War" is a term that's being used to rationalize the list of things I posted. It's being used like "ethnic cleansing" is used to rationalize genocide.

War implies a conflict between two or more countries. We invaded Iraq. There was no conflict prior.

No?  You mean that when Saddam ordered the rockets to be shot at the jet planes going across the no fly zone wasn't conflict?

I think you mean "Is Bush a cereal killer" and the answer may be yes. I have heard that our President really likes Wheaties and Corn Flakes and devours them frequently...as far as "serial" killer...don't think so...unless you mean terrorists!

Camp David

Snack foods on the other hand, are potential bush killers.