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

by Stan Conroy 84 Replies latest social current

  • blacksheep

    “It's a bit precious to complain of anti-Americanism everytime someone makes a criticism. They are in the forefront of the news right now, so they are bound to come up in threads a good deal. Most UK'ers are fond of Americans generally even if we do think that the political angles are a bit weird.

    Mind you, so are ours! At least your bunch don't wear wigs.”

    Hmm…let’s take a good look at your comparison. A country “intentially” kills people versus one who’s judicial bodies wear wigs out of tradition.

    I have a hard time appreciating the logic of someone who makes such ludicrous comments. Some here are attacking the US seriously. You are trying to make light of it, obviously.

  • blacksheep

    “America is simply the "new" and "modern" Rome, that's all. The sun will set on the US as it did in Rome. Perhaps the barbarians the US will face might be the chinese, russians or a combination of the two.
    But, make no mistake, all powers/empires collapse at some point. They reach their peak and begin their decline. I only wonder if we will live to witness part of it.”

    Well, I can say I lived to witness the collapse of the USSR (thanks to the US), the tearing down of the Berlin Wall, the collapse of communist communist China. And frankly, I think we’re beginning to see the ebbing of Europe…I was too young to witness the crush of Nazi Germany, but, I’m satisfied that there was a reason for its fall.

    Great governments, those that respect individual rights and freedoms as well as protect it citizens from threats within and without, are the ones that survive. Yes, it’s a balancing act to do both, as we can see with the major wave of modern day terrorism, but I’m confident we can do it. That is, if we don’t get too concerned about what the rest of the world “thinks of us.”

  • Stan Conroy
    Stan Conroy
    but I think we Americans get a little cocky from time to time

    Thank you for admitting that. I think Yeru was guilty of the above when he made this original inquiry. But that's okay, because what kind of soldier would he be if he was not dedicated to his work? He has since clarified his position (not that I necessarily agree with his revised statement).

    As far as the long debate on whether the atomic bombs ended the war, who cares? The point was that innocent people were intentionally killed by the USA. It happened. The British intentionally killed innocent people. Germany intentionally killed innocent people. All countries do, it's part of warfare.

    I started this post, I would like to end it here.

    Stan (who didn't intent for this post to get this ugly)

  • JT

    This has got to be one of the funniest post i have seen in a while, here we got former jw who are now Flag waving citizens of their perspective country- and what do we see

    RIGHT OR WRONG DAMNIT my country and dare you say something bad about it or my favorite, We didn't do as much dirt as your country did.

    and the funny part is all terriost are the small and weak groups----- flashback- BOSTON TEA PARTY -

    would have been viewed as an act of terroism- of course fast forward 200yrs and now we are the most powerful nation on the planet some would say

    my point is history is the same, the rise and fall of world powers- in the beginning the little group is hated, but once it gains power then it shafts other small groups that it don't agree with-

    this is way "god" is a joke to spend 1000's of years watching mankind struggle like dirt only to raise to the top and make a nother group struggle like dirt and it starts all over again and that has been the history of mankind and that ain'[t gonna change

    i love living here in the USA as a black man, I ain't getting on no ship heading back to the MOTHER LAND no time soon, yet at the same time i see the USA got issues, esp racial ones and others and as a country the usa needs to have its feet held to the fire for it.

    yet the exact same story can be told within Ever nation

    I would love to have a Benz S-600 12 cylinder- yet Benz is reported to have been making $$$ ofF illing jews, but i would still "Pimp" aroundin my benz sitting on "22s" with SPINNER RIMS-

    GIVE IT UP FOLKS no nation got the High moral ground, it's all a matter of whose turn it is in the Sand Box

  • teejay

    Question #1: Is this one of those threads I've heard tell of that "meant something"? If so, I will give my perspective.

    Question #2: Have any of you ever had a "conversation" with someone who had their mind made up already? I have and, not surprisingly, this entire thread reminds me of such an experience.

    Carry on.

  • Yerusalyim

    Since I've asked the question, I reserve the right to rephrase it. Given the times when such bombing were conducted (WW2) would what was done by the Americans have been considered terrorism then? No. Just as in the ancient world when a conquering power sold it's enemies into slavery, and raped the women, that was considered the normal course of warfare.

    We, as a nation, have grown quite a bit. What was acceptable in WW2 would now not likely be acceptable. Terrorism would have been defined differently. Another question that goes hand in hand with the be a country doing it better than the U.S.?

    With the exception of Mia Lai, name an attrocity that occured in Vietnam, for which you have facts. (Remembering that the Mia Lai folks were punished.)

  • StinkyPantz

    I am reading this thread thinking "Will anyone's mind be changed? Hell no!"

    Oh and I really, really, really wish I could get away with saying this to Simon w/o him getting totally pissed off:

    You're sidestepping again, Simon. Are you really that afraid to tackle my questions?
  • Simon
    The question is if America's action resulted in less death or more. Either action (to drop the bomb or not) was going to result in 'innocent' death. My point is the action that results in the least amount of death is the moral act. Sometimes killing civillians is moral when it results in less civilian death later; this is not hard. It just takes the realization that the world is a grey place with no moral absolutes.

    So, what you are saying is that killing innocent civilians was done to save the lives of soldiers?

    Or, to put it another way, America was happy to kill or sacrifice innocent women and children to save the lives of their soldiers?

    You must be so proud.

    I am not sidestepping anything but will not get into "have you stopped beating your wife" type questions. Do I know why they didn't surrender the day after? Well ... maybe they tried. Maybe it wasn't accepted until the second bomb in the expensive project had been deployed as planned.

    This is my point - claims that the bombs were needed to end the war and save lives are bogus because Japan was already beaten and all America had to do was accept the surrender. Instead they decided to kill both innocent civilians AND more of their own troops by prolonging the war so that they could test their new weapon.

    Note that the flights to drop the bombs were unchallenged ... also Tokyo was being 'bombed at will'. The war was already over.

  • jelly

    No Simon thats not what I wrote and you know it. America's actions saved both American and Japanese lives. If you read anything with intelectual honesty you would see that.

    You evidence made up of questionable sources and quotes from generals that hated Truman is a joke. But, it fits with the world view of what you want to believe. You want to see all of Americans actions as evil, if you didnt find evidence in that from you current sources you would find others more towards your taste. Basically, you dont read information to discover what is, you look for sources to reaffirm what you have already chosen to believe.

    Once again I will attempt to explain it to you. If you are confronted with only two choices both of which are bad. Choice 1, kills 200 thousand people in a short period of time. Choice 2, kills 2 million people over years which of the two is the moral. The obvious choice is 1 you however cant stomach that becuase you would be agreeing with Americans so you find a source of wild revisionist history, and single line quotes from generals that hated truman to give you a 'reality' that you find more palatable with your prejudices.


  • heathen

    GIVE IT UP FOLKS no nation got the High moral ground, it's all a matter of whose turn it is in the Sand Box

    I sure wish the US would quit claiming they do . They continue to flaunt these moral issues in front of everyones face like God made them judge ,jury and executioner for the entire planet. It turns my stomach whenever I hear the televangelists and religionist trying to convince people that US military involvement is somehow suiting Gods purpose.

Share this