70 Years Since Hiroshima

POSTED BY: Magonsdaughter
UPDATED: Saturday, August 8, 2026 10:26
VIEWED: 23968
PAGE 15 of 16

PREV PAGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 NEXT PAGE

1KIKI

Monday, August 24, 2015 3:01 AM

To sum up: Kiki has no fucking clue.

YAY for you! Showing off yet again what a troll you are! Keep ignoring content and context in order to do absolutely fucking nothing but snark!

Fly that troll flag proudly like the bitchy little troll you are!

SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

SIGNYM

Monday, August 24, 2015 11:59 AM

KPO is a sick person who justifies firebombing of Dresden with the idea that

1) It served an overall military objective, and therefore the firebombing of a civilian city center was collateral damage, and

2) It wasn't personal, it was "just" war.

I think KPO has pretty much eliminated himself as a moral person who has anything of importance to say on ANY ethical matters, especially on the matters of war, terrorism, and civilian deaths. Whatever he might say about Russian invasion of anywhere, we should all bear in mind that his ethics are extremely bendable, especially when it comes to justifying the actions of "his" side.

Also, KPO is a propagandist who want to control what people read and hear, because if they stray from KPO_approved "pure" sources they (in KPO's mind) are exposing themselves to unacceptable propaganda (as opposed to acceptable propaganda, I suppose).

Just my $0.02.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

KPO

Monday, August 24, 2015 4:46 PM

It's funny that the only reason Signy and kiki haven't called me a Nazi yet is because they've both been caught out being devoted fangirls to a neo-Nazi website.

Here it is, for posterity: http://www.hellstormdocumentary.com/

"Kyle Hunt is an American broadcaster and founder of Renegade Broadcasting, a documentary filmmaker, and a White advocacy activist. His newly-released documentary, Hellstorm (based on historian Thomas Goodrich’s book, Hellstorm: The Death of Nazi Germany, 1944-1947) presents in graphic detail the many heretofore rarely mentioned horrors inflicted upon the German people during and after the Second World War."

It's not personal. It's just war.

SECOND

Monday, August 24, 2015 5:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
It's funny that the only reason Signy and kiki haven't called me a Nazi yet is because they've both been caught out being devoted fangirls to a neo-Nazi website.

It's not personal. It's just war.

Maybe they are looking for a different slur to call kpo. Maybe "Neocon" fits better than Nazi.

I saw a little article that was describing what is wrong with Neocon thinking. Do any of these shortcomings fit kpo thinking?
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/08/21/neoconservatives-so-wrong-for-so-l
ong-iraq-war-iran-deal/

Quote:
So Wrong for So Long - Why neoconservatives are never right.

. . . The neoconservative worldview also exaggerates the efficacy of military force and downplays the value of diplomacy. Military force is an essential component of national power, of course, but neocons tend to see it as a magical tool that can accomplish all sorts of wonderful things (such as the creation of workable democracies) for which it is not really designed. In reality, military force is a crude instrument whose effects are hard to foresee and one which almost always produces unintended consequences (see under: Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, etc.). So it was in Iraq, and the results of a direct military conflict with Iran would be equally unpredictable.

Moreover, neocons believe military force is a supple tool that can be turned on and off like a spigot. If the United States uses force and things go badly, they seem to think the nation can just pull out quickly and live to fight another day. But that’s not how things work in the real world of politics: Once forces are committed, the military brass will demand the chance to win a clear victory, and politicians will worry about the nation’s prestige and their own political fortunes. The conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, and Somalia should remind us that it’s a lot easier to get into wars than it is to get out of them, but that lesson has been lost on most neoconservatives.

Third, the neoconservatives have a simplistic and ahistorical view of democracy itself. They claim their main goal is spreading freedom and democracy (except for Palestinians, of course), but they have no theory to explain how this will happen or how toppling a foreign government with military force will magically cause democracy to emerge. Instead, they believe the desire to live in freedom is hardwired into human DNA, and all one has to do is remove the bad guys at the top. Once they are gone, the now-liberated population will forget past grievances, form political parties, embrace tolerance, line up for orderly elections, accept the resulting outcomes willingly, and offer grateful thanks to Uncle Sam.

It would be nice if that Pollyannaish scenario were accurate, but such views betray near-total ignorance of the prerequisites for meaningful democracy and the actual history of democratic growth in the West itself. In fact, the development of liberal democracy was a long, contentious, imperfect, and often violent process in Western Europe and North America, and anyone familiar with that history would have known the neocons’ formula for democratic change was doomed from the start.

Fourth, as befits a group of armchair ideologues whose primary goal has been winning power inside the Beltway, neoconservatives are often surprisingly ignorant about the actual conditions of the countries whose politics and society they want to transform. Hardly any neoconservatives knew very much about Iraq before the United States invaded — if they had, they might have reconsidered the whole scheme — and their characterizations of Iran today consist of scary caricatures bearing little resemblance to Iran’s complicated political and social reality. In addition to flawed theories, in short, the neoconservative worldview also depends on an inaccurate reading of the facts on the ground.

Last but not least, the neoconservatives’ prescriptions for U.S. foreign policy are perennially distorted by a strong attachment to Israel, which Max Boot

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

1KIKI

Tuesday, August 25, 2015 12:00 AM

It's funny that the only reason Signy and kiki haven't called me a Nazi yet is because they've both been caught out being devoted fangirls to a neo-Nazi website.

AAAaand ... Once again devoid of response to the factual content of our actual posts. kpo's motto - ANYTHING but THAT!

kpo meets the firefly definition of a troll: "and I refuse to chase others in a mindless, endless circle of " debate " on the internet. If I 'bitch out' of a discussion, I've said all I'm going to say on the matter, my views have been presented, and there's nothing left to add." (rappy)

SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

JAYNEZTOWN

Saturday, May 13, 2023 12:30 AM

White House Spokeswoman Jean-Pierre Says President Biden Is To Travel To Hiroshima, Japan For The G-7 Summit

https://www.benzinga.com/economics/macro-economic-events/23/05/3237005
2/white-house-spokeswoman-jean-pierre-says-president-biden-is-to-travel-to-hiroshim

JAYNEZTOWN

Monday, June 30, 2025 6:07 PM

Trump compares Iran air strikes to bombings of Hiroshima, Nagasaki
https://japantoday.com/category/world/comparing-us-iran-strike-to-hiro
shima-trump-plays-down-intelligence-report2

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Tuesday, July 1, 2025 10:08 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
The point of the allied bombing campaigns was generally to degrade the enemy's ability to wage war. Destroy its factories, munitions stores, transport hubs, military facilities etc. Bombing targets were always chosen with these things in mind.

The allied bombing campaigns might seem cold-blooded and vindictive, and to an extent they probably were. But that doesn't mean they were pointless slaughter. They undoubtedly shortened the war and thereby saved lives, possibly even more than they killed.
Yes, that's how slaughter is usually justified.

Yes, that is why you Aussies are always speaking German, or Italian, or Japanese...Oh, wait...
Quote:
I'm sure that 9/11 was carefully and strategically planned with a particular outcome in mind, but because Americans were the target, the loss of thousands of civilian lives is regarded as an abhorence rather than a necessity.
Of course everybody knows that The Twin Towers, and The White House, and the Capitol Building had gobs of Military hardware inside them, like bombs, tanks, fuel, munitions, aircraft, submarines and surface ships, missile launchers and silos - that was what made them all such qualified military targets, unlike when the same are targeted by 21st century nations. Your point seems nullified by reason and common sense.

Quote:
Acts of military violence/terrorism generally serve a purpose. Whether you can justify them or not, depends on which side you are on.

Dresden was a controversial exercise in use of military force - because the idea was to cause choas due to civilian evacuation, but also because the city had "100,000 and 200,000 refugees fleeing westwards from advancing Soviet forces were in the city at the time of the bombing."

Also evidence that strafing of fleeing civilians was part of the stragegy ordered " British historian Alexander McKee in Dresden 1945 (1982) quotes eyewitnesses who state that strafing did occur.[65] According to an RAF webpage on the history of RAF Bomber Command, "[p]art of the American Mustang-fighter escort was ordered to strafe traffic on the roads around Dresden to increase the chaos and disruption to the important transportation network in the region". "

Although there is a later claim that Dresden was chosen due to its military and industrial targets, the method of incendiary bombing meant that the whole city was turned into a firestorm and destroyed. There is little doubt that vengence also played a part in this strategy.

I guess its hard to look down the years of history and second guess decisions made in the light of the desperation, fear and hatred experienced by those involved, but I think we need to be careful, more careful, to avoid seeing it in a black and white manner, ie that all Allied actions were justified, even the purposeful mass slaughter of innocents, because in the end that what tyrannies everywhere always do....justify the abhorrent.
Quote:
Quote:
Operation Gomorrah killed 42,600 people, left 37,000 wounded and caused some one million German civilians to flee the city.[3] The city's labour force was reduced permanently by ten percent.[3] Approximately 3,000 aircraft were deployed, 9,000 tons of bombs were dropped and over 250,000 homes and houses were destroyed. No subsequent city raid shook Germany as did that on Hamburg; documents show that German officials were thoroughly alarmed and there is some indication from later Allied interrogations of Nazi officials that Hitler stated that further raids of similar weight would force Germany out of the war.
Other things that need to be considered when looking back at this controversial aspect of history:

1. WWII was total war - countries throwing everything they had at each other in a life or death struggle (particularly in the case of Britain which faced down Nazi Germany almost alone at one point). You don't sweat too much about enemy civilian casualties when your entire nation

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME