May the Gods forgive us.
POSTED BY: Fremdfirma
UPDATED: Friday, August 15, 2025 14:25
VIEWED: 4059
PAGE 3 of 4
PirateCrap:
Go ahead, call me a "lyen Yankee" some more. Nothin's better than being called a "winner" by someone who thinks they're trying to insult you - or have you forgotten who WON that little tiff? Yeah... that'd be the side my family fought on. I've still got my great-great-great-grandfather's Springfield rifle that he carried into the war against those filthy rebel scum, too.
Once again you've shown yourself to be a traitor to your country, backing those who would secede and attack the country they supposedly "love".
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by PirateCat:
Agent, so did Ike. It's apathy like yours that it happens in the first place.
No, it's scumbag "my country right or wrong" nationalist pricks like you that cause shit like that to happen in the first place. Hitler didn't come to power because of "apathy" - he came to power on a wave of rampant nationalism, ushered in as the conquering hero by a group of rabid scumbag nationalists who decided that ANYTHING their country did was automatically okay, because they were somehow special and above everyone else in the world.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by PirateCat:
Agent, so did Ike. It's apathy like yours that it happens in the first place.
So my opposition to ANYone being raped and murdered is the kind of apathy that caused ww2?
Good to know.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Well said.
Hitler didn't come to power because of "apathy" - he came to power on a wave of rampant nationalism, ushered in as the conquering hero by a group of rabid scumbag nationalists who decided that ANYTHING their country did was automatically okay, because they were somehow special and above everyone else in the world.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
ANTHONY
Quote:
Frem, before I decry that statement as a very narrow read in the history of dirty deeds, I will wait for you to elucidate.
And I appreciate it, especially watching the authoritarian lapdogs have their little hissy over what they THOUGHT I meant, rather than what I did - despite me having stated this objection before.
My objection isn't to the bombings per se, my objection is a RELIGIOUS objection in point of fact.
Using the fire of the gods to power our cities is hubris and usurpation, which humans being humans is perhaps forgiveable and does come with it's own consequences and risks...
But using our stolen fire as a weapon against each other ?
No, there's no way I can find that acceptable in ANY way, it's sacreliege, blasphemy of the highest order, and the really obvious horrific consequences of doing so even without any moral implications behind it means we damn well ought to have the good sense to leave well the hell enough ALONE when it comes to weaponising things we weren't meant to have quite yet.
And yeah, the fact that it killed well over a hundred thousand people in the blink of an eye isn't lost on me neither, but I think folks fail to understand the NATURE of my objection, which of course isn't the only one I have against the idea, it's just the deepest and strongest.
AGENTR
Quote:
Does it ever enter your mind that some things are just wrong, no justification necessary? If it's wrong when the Nazis did it, it's wrong when the Russians did it. Or anyone else does it.
Very cogent, and exactly my point.
Oh, and for those little lapdogs barking madly at me blaspheming the destruction they worship as god ?
I am initially from MARYLAND, specifically Baltimore - you know, the folks who wanted to kill that insane meglomaniacal bastard Lincoln who decided to wipe his ass with the Constitution, and lynch his fucking Pinkerton goons besides, and got right pissed when his cowardly little lying ass creeped through like a burglar in the night, which was about on par for the rest of his monstrous actions.
We're the folk who brought you Ex Parte Merryman you assholes, in response to your "hero" Lincolns attempt to bring the terror of the midnight knock to America while reducing it to a fascist dictatorship, to which Lincoln had the typical tyrannical temper tantrum (not surprising as the mercury laden 'Blue Mass' pills he was takin were eatin holes in his brain) and tried to have Taney arrested too!
That fucker arrested our mayor, city council, police commissioner, tossed any legislator or news editor who disagreed with his insanity in the brig with em, and to hell with the Constitution, Maryland has not forgotten this.
We didn't want any part of that stinkin war, and in the end, what caused Maryland to have primarily southern sympathies was the simple fact that the Confederacy left us be, while Lincoln and his damn blue suited goons felt some pressing NEED to grind their fucking boot in our face cause we weren't all hoo-rah and subservient to an obviously idiotic plan, especially given the fairly obvious (at the time) thought that it'd be OUR state which would bear the brunt of the damage, not the opulent estates of the Lincoln and his pre-corporate robber baron supporters, oh no.
You really wanna get me started on a man who felt the pressing need to drop artillery shells on Americans who didn't wanna shoot their own countrymen, and press them into conscript-slavery as cannon fodder at the point of bayonets, all the while pretending to decry the institution of slavery itself as mere rhetoric ?
The fact that we built statues of that monster instead of the man who rid us of him is just one more example of all that's wrong in the world.
-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh, and just to make it CRYSTAL clear, here's a little visual comparison for you.
BOSTON MASSACRE
NY DRAFT RIOTS
So, other than the color of the uniforms, did anything really change for the people on the recieving end of those volleys ?
Lincoln was a monster, folks - more of a Tyrant than King George could have ever hoped to be.
-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Honda driver.
"Battle of Serenity, Mal. Besides Zoe here, how many-" "I'm talkin at you! How many men in your platoon came out of their alive".
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
I have some thoughts on these issues.
First, the only viable alternative to nuclear arms that I could see for Japan was a naval and aerial siege of the island. This would have minimized American casualties while reducing the inhabitants to a nearly pre-industrial state. It seems likely that if they maintained any semblance of a war footing, the entire island might have starved to death.
Second, while I will agree that Lincoln was a tyrant, I can not agree that he was a monster. The difference is perhaps moot to most. I think he was genuinely trying to do the right thing, but went about it in the wrong way. Time and again. The fact that he won in the end nonwithstanding. It would have been preferable if he'd used economic incentives to unite the nation, and not treated the idea of secession as a horror. Rather, it was the misstep of misguided children. Better to prove that it was a misstep in the fullness of time rather than stab the unruly youngster with a bayonet.
Third, returning to the issue of the A-bomb... while I hold religious convictions of my own, I would be sorely tempted to choose any weapon which ensured the minimal amount of overall casualties. I do not know for certain that I would make the same decision to drop the bomb, because it is a horrible decision. But I would be tempted, ironically, for humanitarian concerns.
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Two Questions
1) Would Lincoln still have the same place in history if he had not have been killed ? Did his death save his legacy and halt the criticism of his policys and the aftermath of them. If Bush the second had of been killed a year ago would that have made him a better president?
2) The decision process to use or not use nuclear weapons has been debated since their use, is this the reason why Americans are so dead set against anyone else having such weapons, as others may use the same logic and morality you have displayed in making the decision to use nuclear weapons against the United States...
" I don't believe in hypothetical situations - it's kinda like lying to your brain "
" They don't hate America, they hate Americans " Homer Simpson
Lets party like its 1939
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
Two Questions
1) Would Lincoln still have the same place in history if he had not have been killed ? Did his death save his legacy and halt the criticism of his policys and the aftermath of them. If Bush the second had of been killed a year ago would that have made him a better president?
2) The decision process to use or not use nuclear weapons has been debated since their use, is this the reason why Americans are so dead set against anyone else having such weapons, as others may use the same logic and morality you have displayed in making the decision to use nuclear weapons against the United States...
" I don't believe in hypothetical situations - it's kinda like lying to your brain "
" They don't hate America, they hate Americans " Homer Simpson
Lets party like its 1939
Hello,
1A) Lincoln would doubtless be remembered as the 'Savior of the Union' by those who cared about such things. The fact that he was assassinated enhances the legend of the man, but prosecuting the war successfully (eventually) would have made him forever remembered and lauded by the majority of Americans regardless.
1B) I do not think that my opinion of Bush would have been enhanced by his assassination. I can not speak for others in this regard. Generally, I think an assassination might serve to make a liked person more liked, but I do not think it enhances the legacy of a disliked person. People say nice things at funerals but those things have no actual impact on their true impressions of a person.
2A) I am not against others having Nuclear Arms. It makes me understandably nervous, but not as nervous as I was during the Cold War when an end-of-world scenario wasn't just possible... It was policy.
2B) I am quite convinced that if anyone has nuclear arms, and deem those nuclear arms as the option which results in the least possible loss of life... That they will employ them. In fact, the best philosophy for all weapons is generally to use the one that will accomplish your goals most efficiently. Fortunately, there are powerful political and ecological considerations that conspire to make sure that the use of Nukes is almost always the wrong decision. I am thankful that there are no more fortress islands warring with us.
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME