Hiroshima at 75: bitter row persists over US decision to drop the bomb

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Space_Time, Aug 5, 2020.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Antiduopolist

    Antiduopolist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2016
    Messages:
    24,354
    Likes Received:
    10,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'd need far more details to comment on this off-topic claim. Bizarre comment.
     
  2. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,997
    Likes Received:
    11,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    They were shooting at me. Therefore the VC were terrorists. Is that correct?
     
  3. Antiduopolist

    Antiduopolist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2016
    Messages:
    24,354
    Likes Received:
    10,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm sorry to hear that. Were they? Is it?
     
  4. Diablo

    Diablo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2016
    Messages:
    2,772
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There was enough material for 3 bombs. One could have been dropped as a demonstration, maybe over some military-only target, and then a message sent to the Japanese that the next 2 would be cities, 2 weeks later. That way, hopefully the deaths would be averted, and if not then it would be the fault of the Japanese.
     
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2020
    CCitizen likes this.
  5. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,997
    Likes Received:
    11,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You made this claim about an atomic bomb being a terrorist weapon. I am trying to figure out where you draw the line. Many things will kill you. Those rockets could kill me. Why weren't they terrorist weapons>
     
    quiller likes this.
  6. Antiduopolist

    Antiduopolist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2016
    Messages:
    24,354
    Likes Received:
    10,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Incorrect. You're confused by your own straw man. Yes. Yes. Straw man.
     
  7. jay runner

    jay runner Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2017
    Messages:
    16,319
    Likes Received:
    10,027
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It was war. Winning comes by killing. A good science project wouldn't have made any difference imo.
     
  8. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,997
    Likes Received:
    11,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    A strawman is a fictional set of conditions set up to prove a point. No fiction involved. Therefore no strawman.

    They were trying to kill me. Why isn't that terrorism?
     
  9. Antiduopolist

    Antiduopolist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2016
    Messages:
    24,354
    Likes Received:
    10,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You may want to Google straw man. False. Incorrect.

    I'm so sorry to hear that. Straw man.
     
  10. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,997
    Likes Received:
    11,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Stawman according to Webster. Straw man definition is - a weak or imaginary opposition (such as an argument or adversary) set up only to be easily confuted.

    It was neither weak nor imaginary. They really wanted to kill me.

    Now. Why isn't that terrorism?
     
  11. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,312
    Likes Received:
    6,671
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Technically, there are over 100 definitions of terrorism according to wikipedia. Thus it is more than reasonable that Antiduopolist can find one that he agrees with and justifies his opinion. Likewise it is more than reasonable that I can find one that disagrees with that opinion.

    To me it comes down to the fact that all war is horrible and that the only thing good about war is its ending. And thus in general, actions that end a war are justified.

    But.

    You can't justify anything and everything with the reasoning that it "ended a war". Because to do so you could justify things like genocide based on that.

    I don't consider the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki "terrorism"

    But.

    If the U.S. had rejected Emperor Hirohito's surrender and continued to drop atom bombs on Japanese cities as the weapons became available I would freely admit that would be "terrorism" no matter that the Japanese started the war.

    The real world is full of gray areas.
     
    Toggle Almendro likes this.
  12. Antiduopolist

    Antiduopolist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2016
    Messages:
    24,354
    Likes Received:
    10,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Good. :)

    It was a false claim re: atomic weapons; I never made such a comment. Bizarre conflation.

    Then. Straw man.
     
  13. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,997
    Likes Received:
    11,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    We were talking about atomic bombs. You talked about terrorism. I have no idea what you are trying to say.

    Are you saying atomic bombs are terrorist weapons? Are you saying all weapons of war are terrorist weapons? Do you think we should have just turned our other cheek to Japan and not fought back? I have no idea what your position is on any of this is.
     
    Toggle Almendro likes this.
  14. Antiduopolist

    Antiduopolist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2016
    Messages:
    24,354
    Likes Received:
    10,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes. Yes. Clearly.

    They can be. Did I say that? Ditto. Read the thread - my position is incredibly clear.
     
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2020
  15. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If the position on the part of yourself is truly incredibly clear, explain precisely what the united states should have done instead of utilizing nuclear weapons against the nation of Japan. Tell everyone present what the proper course of action should have been.
     
  16. Antiduopolist

    Antiduopolist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2016
    Messages:
    24,354
    Likes Received:
    10,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Japan was prepared to surrender, so many options. Ditto.
     
  17. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Prove such to actually be the case. Prove the nation of Japan was truly prepared to surrender. Show the actual evidence that supports this was the case, rather than being nothing more than more historical revisionism.
     
  18. Antiduopolist

    Antiduopolist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2016
    Messages:
    24,354
    Likes Received:
    10,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Google. Ditto. Ditto.

    Of course, wanton terrorism and unspeakable war crimes are unacceptable regardless.
     
  19. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,997
    Likes Received:
    11,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Your position is not incredibly clear to me and I doubt to anyone else.

    You said the use of the atomic bombs was a terrorist act. Millions were killed in WWII. A relatively small percent were killed with atomic weapons. What makes them special? All those millions are just as dead as those killed with atomic weapons.

    Why wasn't those rockets they tried to kill me with terrorist weapons? I would have been just as dead if I got killed by one of those rockets or by an atomic bomb.
     
    Toggle Almendro likes this.
  20. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Lack of response duly noted.

    Was the Pearl Harbor attack an example of wanton terrorism and unspeakable war crimes? If not then why not? Explain such.
     
  21. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The board has an ignore button for a reason.
     
  22. Antiduopolist

    Antiduopolist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2016
    Messages:
    24,354
    Likes Received:
    10,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Bizarre; wanton terrorism is wrong.

    In these instances. Yes. Yes. Are they? Indeed.

    Straw man/off-topic. Ditto.
     
  23. Antiduopolist

    Antiduopolist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2016
    Messages:
    24,354
    Likes Received:
    10,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Lack of choice to educate oneself sadly noted.

    Not the topic. Ditto. Ditto.
     
  24. Antiduopolist

    Antiduopolist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2016
    Messages:
    24,354
    Likes Received:
    10,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Off-topic/derailing; the only thing more infantile than using the ignore feature is announcing/suggesting that one is using it.
     
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2020
  25. kriman

    kriman Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2018
    Messages:
    26,997
    Likes Received:
    11,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Why was the use of atomic weapons terrorism? That should be easy for you to answer. More people including civilians were killed by other means.

    Why wasn't my real situation terrorism? No strawman. It was real. They were trying to kill me.
     
    Toggle Almendro likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page