Was Hiroshima an act of terrorism?

Mott the Hoople said:
We damned well could have. Nor did we declare war on Germany or Japan in WWII. Those nations chose war as their instrument of national policy, not us.

The legitimacy of the Korean War can be debated. Korea was arguably not a clear and Present danger.

Our attacks on civilian populations in Vietnam and Iraq were unconscienable acts because they were illegitimate and unconscienable wars.
Click to expand...

Korea's really no different from Vietnam. We just like the end-result that we see in South Korea today.
 
christiefan915 said:
What a dumb argument. You think citizens have any say-so when their government wants to go to war?

Tell that to the Iraqi citizens and all the people in the world who opposed the Iraq war.
Click to expand...

Civilians can revolt, flee, engage in sabotage, mass strikes, mass protests.....it just takes courage on the part of the civilians.
 
From a strategic standpoint, if firebombing Tokyo and Nukes were terrorism, how could we have fought (and defeated) Japan without using terrorist tactics?
 
christiefan915 said:
I'm saying nobody could have accurately predicted what would happen if we didn't drop the bomb because there were too many variables to take into account.

And no, I don't defend the fire-bombing either. But when you read the records of how the US wanted to test its new toy, and how civilians were deliberately targeted, that makes us no better than the people we were fighting.
Click to expand...

So you believe it would have been better to have invaded Japan and then used any captured Japanese women as "comfort women" for any soldier to use, throw babies in the air and see if they can be impaled by bayonet or sword, and to use captured soldiers for games where they were beheaded.
 
Thing1 said:
Mott - I understand your general premise that war is hell, and that once you engage in it, you open up the Pandora's Box of potential atrocities.

But frankly, it's a bit of a cop-out. What your essentially arguing is that there should be no rules of engagement, because what's the point? No Geneva convention, no limits on chemical weapons or treatment of non-combatants, nothing.

I am not on the same page as that.
Click to expand...

Why do liberals have to go from 0 to 60, in under 3 seconds.
Where do you see a connection with using the bomb and "using no limits on chemical weapons or treatment of non-combatants, nothing".
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
And the bomb helped them to make that decision.
Click to expand...
Nope, it was the thought of the Russians invading that did it. Why do you dismiss so readily the testimony of the key players of the time? What do you know that Eisenhower, Leahy, McArthur, Churchill, Le May, Marshall et al didn't?

Sent from my Lenovo K50-t5 using Tapatalk
 
Milagro said:
Nope, it was the thought of the Russians invading that did it. Why do you dismiss so readily the testimony of the key players of the time? What do you know that Eisenhower, Leahy, McArthur, Churchill, Le May, Marshall et al didn't?

Sent from my Lenovo K50-t5 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

They only tell part of the story. Part of the subtext to the bombing of Japan so late in the war was that there was a growing mistrust of the Russians. In fact, they were in the very first stages of a nuclear arms race with the Soviets under Stalin...even if they failed to realize it. Whether you think it's was wrong or right, that aspect coupled with the desire to end the war in a single day, factored into the decision.

From that day forward, everyone knew the US had the bomb and no one else did. And guess what, no one has deployed a nuke since. There hasn't been a war on the scale of WWII since...it's unthinkable. But I'm glad the US got it first and not Russia and especially Germany.

At the end of the day, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki served two objectives. And it's hard to argue that they both weren't achieved.
 
Hack Hussein said:
At the end of the day, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki served two objectives. And it's hard to argue that they both weren't achieved.
Click to expand...

Terrorists often achieve their objectives. Look how scared you are, lol.

You applaud terror tactics when America does it.
 
Pan Gender Racialist Hack said:
Terrorists often achieve their objectives. Look how scared you are, lol.

You applaud terror tactics when America does it.
Click to expand...

I thought you were going to move to a country that met your standards, and you're still here, lol.
 
anatta said:
I do not agree. The Japanese Empire (Greater East Asia co-prosperity sphere) was an evil enslavement of China and Indochina.
Do not forget Pearl Harbor, it's not like we were imperialists - they were. We didn't want the war, we were dragged into it by events.
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top