Was Hiroshima an act of terrorism?

Cancel 2020.1 said:
Pretty straightforward question. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Depends how we're defining "Terrorism." Usually, Terrorism is something done by civilians in order to force political change. When a government uses violence for political change, it's generally not considered Terrorism even if it's considered morally wrong.

Personally, I think the atomic bombing of Japan was a war crime, but not an act of terrorism. Maybe it's just semantics, but that's how I see it.
 
do most people have some kind of moral sense outside of mere legality?

of course they do, that's why we have such battles about what laws should be.

Where does the extralegal moral sense come from?

is it from listening to elderly who have lived life and made the mistakes?

is it from rejecting the wisdom of the elderly because it "no longer applies"?

is it a mix?

do beliefs about behavior matter?

do they matter to you?
 
BartenderElite said:
That's pathetic dishonesty, Dutch.

I just feel bad for you. Politicians aren't soldiers, and regimes aren't civilians.

I'm not going to continue this w/ you. You will keep lying about my position.
Click to expand...

dutch monkey is a bad faith participant. he's a retarded internationalist fascist and is sold out to china.
 
I've just seen some fools on here who think that sending a message saying your going to fry somebody in their house ISN'T terrorism.


Haw, haw.........................................................haw.
 
BartenderElite said:
Dutch Uncle said:
Agreed. Not only is BartenderElite calling American servicemen terrorists, but he's defending a brutal genocidal regime against "terrorists".

https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP3.HTM
From the invasion of China in 1937 to the end of World War II, the Japanese military regime murdered near 3,000,000 to over 10,000,000 people, most probably almost 6,000,000 Chinese, Indonesians, Koreans, Filipinos, and Indochinese, among others, including Western prisoners of war. This democide was due to a morally bankrupt political and military strategy, military expediency and custom, and national culture (such as the view that those enemy soldiers who surrender while still able to resist were criminals).

WTF, Elite? I thought Liberals liked to send the US military in to kill dictators like Gaddafi? Why are you showing favoritism to the Japanese Empire, an empire as brutal as Nazi Germany? Why are you defending facism, brutality and genocide from "terroist attack"?

https://i.imgflip.com/2graru.jpg
Click to expand...
That's pathetic dishonesty, Dutch.

I just feel bad for you. Politicians aren't soldiers, and regimes aren't civilians.

I'm not going to continue this w/ you. You will keep lying about my position.
Click to expand...

Your denial of Japanese atrocities is interesting. When did you start to develop such pro-Japanese, anti-American ideologies?
 
volsrock said:
Another way to put it


If we knew we could bomb all the 9/11 Terrorist and OBL while at a meeting in Afghanistan thus saving the 3000 killed in NYC...but in the process 300 civilians would be killed...would u support it?

Any sane person would say YES
Click to expand...

That would be my position also. It's the most humane way to do it but only after all other reasonable methods have been attempted.
 
moon said:
I've just seen some fools on here who think that sending a message saying your going to fry somebody in their house ISN'T terrorism.


Haw, haw.........................................................haw.
Click to expand...

What about hijacking an airplane and committing mass murder by slamming it into innocent people? Do you justify that over ending WWII?
 
ExpressLane said:
IMHO the Japanese were as bad as the Germans
Click to expand...

The rape of Nanking and the brutal Japanese occupation of China happened in the 1930s, well before the outbreak of WW 2. And even though Americans had reports of what was going on in occupied China and Korea, we were totally isolationist and committed to staying out of direct participation in the war. In the 1930s there was not the slighest hint Americans wanted to wage war on Japan because of the atrocities of the Imperial Japanese Army and the Kwangtung Army.

Therefore, it is disingenuous to point to Japanese atrocities in East Asia as a justification for incinerating two of their cities.

I am on record that the nuclear attacks may have been the least bad option, given the strategic goals of the war.

I also have direct knowledge of life under the Japanese occupation of Manchuria. My grandparents, father, aunt had their house confiscated by the Japanese Army and bore witness to the occupation of Harbin. So I have some skin in the game.

Even so, that does not prevent me from reflecting on what happened to civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. By any conventional use of the word, those attacks were terrorist in nature...they were immoral and were intended to terrorize Japanese. Even if they may have been strategically warranted
 
BartenderElite said:
I'm not a military strategist.

I just think America should stand for something greater. As soon as we adopt the tactics of those we condemn, we are at their level. There is no way around that.
Click to expand...
Agreed to an extent; the extent is that when American lives are dying needlessly for years to come or end the war this week, I'll choose "this week".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top