The US military INTENTIONALLY KILLS innocent people??? Where?? When???

by Stan Conroy 84 Replies latest social current

  • Simon
    Simon

    Ahh ... "Enola Gay"

    As the falconer man who cleaned the house at night sang: **

    Enola Gay, you should have stayed at home yesterday
    Ah-ha words can't describe the feeling and the way you lied

    These games you play they're going to end in more than tears some day
    Ah-ha Enola Gay it shouldn't ever have to end this way

    It's eight fifteen and that's the time that it's always been
    We got your message on the radio
    Conditions normal and you're coming home

    Enola Gay, is mother proud of little boy today
    Ah-ha this kiss you give, it's never ever gonna fade away

    Enola Gay, it shouldn't ever have to end this way
    Ah-ha Enola Gay, it shouldn't fade in our dreams away

    It's eight fifteen and that's the time that it's always been
    We got your message on the radio
    Conditions normal and you're coming home

    Enola Gay, is mother proud of little boy today
    Ah-ha this kiss you give, it's never ever going to fade away

    A great song.

    ** Hawk-Kestral Man Hoovers in the Dark = Orchestral Manouvers in the Dark = OMD = 80's pop band

  • StinkyPantz
    StinkyPantz

    I LOVE these threads. .they have that special way of bringing folks together. I am SO glad that we get to talk about these issues so often. Does everyone see the value that I see? I know that some think that the same ol' issues get brought up over and over and over and over again, but I think we Americans get a little cocky from time to time. I personally need to be reminded that the country I live in has done some bad stuff. We all need reminders. For example, don't many of you love it when your parents or spouses bring up your bad decisions from the past on a regular basis? I do. I LOVE having my mistakes thrown up in my face periodically. It helps me not to forget.

    So thank you once again for this thread. . there's so much love surrounding me!!

  • Gamaliel
    Gamaliel
    the war did range on for many years after the bomb was dropped

    Are you in some alternate universe with a different history? If it did go on for years then how can you declare that it ended the war? That doesn't make sense

    Simon,

    I think it would have made more sense if you had noticed that the "rolling eyes" might have applied to that part of the post, too.

    Gamaliel

  • Simon
    Simon

    jelly, look at the quotes - leading American generals and historians:

    In a 1986 study, historian and journalist Edwin P. Hoyt nailed the "great myth, perpetuated by well-meaning people throughout the world," that "the atomic bomb caused the surrender of Japan." In Japan's War: The Great Pacific Conflict (p. 420), he explained:

    The fact is that as far as the Japanese militarists were concerned, the atomic bomb was just another weapon. The two atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were icing on the cake, and did not do as much damage as the firebombings of Japanese cities. The B-29 firebombing campaign had brought the destruction of 3,100,000 homes, leaving 15 million people homeless, and killing about a million of them. It was the ruthless firebombing, and Hirohito's realization that if necessary the Allies would completely destroy Japan and kill every Japanese to achieve "unconditional surrender" that persuaded him to the decision to end the war. The atomic bomb is indeed a fearsome weapon, but it was not the cause of Japan's surrender, even though the myth persists even to this day.

    In a trenchant new book, The Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb (Praeger, 1996), historian Dennis D. Wainstock concludes that the bombings were not only unnecessary, but were based on a vengeful policy that actually harmed American interests. He writes (pp. 124, 132):

    ... By April 1945, Japan's leaders realized that the war was lost. Their main stumbling block to surrender was the United States' insistence on unconditional surrender. They specifically needed to know whether the United States would allow Hirohito to remain on the throne. They feared that the United States would depose him, try him as a war criminal, or even execute him ...

    Unconditional surrender was a policy of revenge, and it hurt America's national self-interest. It prolonged the war in both Europe and East Asia, and it helped to expand Soviet power in those areas.

    General Douglas MacArthur, Commander of US Army forces in the Pacific, stated on numerous occasions before his death that the atomic bomb was completely unnecessary from a military point of view: "My staff was unanimous in believing that Japan was on the point of collapse and surrender."

    General Curtis LeMay, who had pioneered precision bombing of Germany and Japan (and who later headed the Strategic Air Command and served as Air Force chief of staff), put it most succinctly: "The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war."

  • Simon
    Simon
    I LOVE these threads. .they have that special way of bringing folks together. I am SO glad that we get to talk about these issues so often. Does everyone see the value that I see? I know that some think that the same ol' issues get brought up over and over and over and over again, but I think we Americans get a little cocky from time to time. I personally need to be reminded that the country I live in has done some bad stuff. We all need reminders. For example, don't many of you love it when your parents or spouses bring up your bad decisions from the past on a regular basis? I do. I LOVE having my mistakes thrown up in my face periodically. It helps me not to forget.

    Yes, StinkyPantz ... but the topic was in reply to the opposite assertion

    To use your analogy, it's akin to an abusive parent or school bully coming up to remind you of just how lucky and fortunate you are to have them

    If people don't want to be reminded of things then they should perhaps think twice before coming out with rediculous statements.

  • Hamas
    Hamas

    America has failed in many aspects, but lets face it, if the chinks or the Russians were in charge, it wouldn't be any different.

    If an Islamic empire were in charge, the earth would become an international shithole. As much as America has imperfections, God bless them for what they have done in other aspects.

    I dislike much of American foriegn policy...and I loathe American media, TV and so forth. But I do know that through all this, I would like no other country to be number one.

    Besides, ALL YOU CAN EAT FOR 4 DOLLARS AT SOME STEAK HOUSES ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!

    God bless America ! ( but please, sort the politics out )

  • jelly
    jelly

    Simon,

    I am responding becuase I think this might help you understand history. You must always look at who is talking and what motivation they have.

    For example Douglas MacArthur hated Trumen you know the guy that dropped the Bomb. You think that discrediting Truman might have had something to do with his statement. Always check out your source that way you will not get played.

    Also I sited facts of what happened:

    1. On onkinawa even with a vastly inferior army the loss of life was great
    2. this would indicate that even with a completly reduced or nearly destroyed army the causilties of attacking japan would have been extreme
    3. Even if the Emperor and some millitary and civillian government wanter to surrender they couldnt the army would not let them
    4. Attacking Japan would have cost a terrible amount of lives both American and Japanese

    Alot of you information is quotes of peoples opinions, not the same as evidence. And subject to bias.

    If you can give me the title of one peer reviewed book that supports your claims I will read it and tell you what I think.

    Terry

  • jelly
    jelly

    Hamas, my shock knows no bounds.

    If i was at your house I would look in the closet for pods.

    Terry

  • Simon
    Simon

    jelly, what you are saying is irrelevant.

    How is killing innocent civilians ever justified?

    Change it round: suppose that dropping a nuclear bomb on an American city would save the lives of Iraqi soldiers or some other countries troops. Would this be OK? I suspect that suddenly, it would be horrific.

    The simple fact is that Japan was already beaten and ready to surrender. The reason for dropping the bomb was NOT military but to show the Russians that they had it.

  • AlanF
    AlanF

    Simon, that was an interesting link you posted on why the use of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not necessary. That kind of information is why I have trouble forming an opinion one way or another, because I have no doubt that I could find plenty of discussions taking the opposite point of view and 'justifying' it with all sorts of 'authoritative' quotations. But my feeling is that if I took the time to look up the link's source references in their entirety, and read them in context and especially in their historical context, I would find many instances of misleading, if not outright misrepresentation, just as I found when I did the same with the Watchtower's 1985 Creation book. I also suspect I would find something similar in many articles supporting the opposite view.

    Be that as it may, I want to ask you a few questions that I thought ought to have been answered in the linked article:

    If the Japanese were on the point of surrender on August 6, 1945 (the day the Hiroshima bomb was dropped), then why did they fail to surrender the next day?

    If the Japanese intended to surrender anyway, why did they surrender unconditionally only after two atomic bombs had been dropped?

    If the Japanese sincerely intended to surrender as far back as late 1944, why did they insist that the surrender not be unconditional? Did the leaders not care that perhaps millions more Japanese could be killed if they insisted on surrender with conditions?

    Isn't it rather stupid for a country to insist on conditional surrender when it's virtually completely defeated?

    If the Japanese sincerely intended to surrender, why did they not do so immediately after the massive bombing(s) of Tokyo?

    If the Japanese sincerely intended to surrender sometime after those massive bombings, why did they not simply instruct their armies to lay down their arms and invite Allied forces to come in and take over?

    Was the insistence of the Japanese leaders on the inviolability of the person and position of Emperor Hirohito worth it? Didn't that insistence show the complete fanaticism of the lion's share of Japanese leadership? How is a nearly victorious nation supposed to deal with fanatics -- both leaders and followers -- who have proved themselves willing to die for a stupid idea like "worship of the Emperor"? Doesn't all this show that misplaced national pride was more important to the Japanese leaders than life itself?

    AlanF

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit