Was Hiroshima an act of terrorism?

Darth Hussein Omar said:
No, you throw words like 'innocent' around like no one is supposed to question it. However 'innocent' the Japanese citizens at the time were, let's at least stipulate that they were decidedly 'less innocent' than the inhabitants of the Twin Towers on 9/11.

Should the degree of the victim's innocence factor into this little game, or not?
Click to expand...

Stipulate they were less innocent? I would never stipulate to that. It's not even a fair comparison.
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
Well, you're the one determined to cover all of them under the blanket term 'innocent'. My point is there were no doubt a large number of them involved in the war effort.

The radical Muslim greviences with the West and the US date back to the Crusades; and their religious justifications for making war against the infidel are clearly outlined in their religious texts.

Had we never been involved in the region they still would have found some pretext to attack us. Of course, OBL and later propagandists would claim otherwise *because they want us to think if we cease doing this or start doing that* hostilities in the form of terrorism would cease. I'd like to think by now we'd know better.

The whole point of propaganda is to affect political change.
Click to expand...

That's a pretty bold statement, maybe you can back it up with something factual.
 
christiefan915 said:
Yes, we entered the war with Japan because of Pearl Harbor but that was a military strike on a military base. It didn't justify our dropping the bomb on civilians only.
Click to expand...
Hiroshima was also a garrison. port, and industrial base.
You know the details better then I do - being versed in this debate.

The argument seems to be Russia was ready to declare and the Japanese looking for terms, so somehow we should have just waited it out
or went for a conventional invasion.
Truman's duty as POTUS was to end the war as quickly as possible, and with as little US casualties as possible.
Which is what he did.
 
christiefan915 said:
I would have listened to my generals and not dropped the bomb.
Click to expand...

Actually, I'm rather convinced you and Thing never would have built one to begin with. The glaring problem with that is the technology existed for one to be built: it was just a question of who was going to build it first...and then deploy it.

I'm sorry for what happened to Japan. But I'm not sorry it was the US, and not Germany, not the Soviets, not Japan and sure as hell not Iran or some other Islamist regime that built it first.
 
anatta said:
Hiroshima was also a garrison. port, and industrial base.
You know the details better then I do - being versed in this debate.

The argument seems to be Russia was ready to declare and the Japanese looking for terms, so somehow we should have just waited it out
or went for a conventional invasion.
Truman's duty as POTUS was to end the war as quickly as possible, and with as little US casualties as possible.
Which is what he did.
Click to expand...

Truman was a weak and vacillating nobody with a violent temper. He fired MacArthur while drunk, it's said.
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
Actually, I'm rather convinced you and Thing never would have built one to begin with. The glaring problem with that is the technology existed for one to be built: it was just a question of who was going to build it first...and then deploy it.

I'm sorry for what happened to Japan. But I'm not sorry it was the US, and not Germany, not the Soviets, not Japan and sure as hell not Iran or some other Islamist regime that built it first.
Click to expand...

Russia has never dropped the bomb during wartime. That dubious honor belongs to the US alone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top