Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
Re: Communism [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #1212598 -

Quote:

The USSR did not ever use nuclear weapons on civilians,

The U.S. used nuclear weapons on Japan to end the war. Given how
tenacious Japanese resistance had been(even after the war was
obviously lost), it is reasonable to assume that by dropping those
bombs, we ended the war sooner. President Truman thought that
in the long run, this would actually end up saving lives.



I'm not in the least bit interested in this thread, and disagree with eric's loopy Marxist-Leninist dogmatism, but I really can't let this assertion go unchallenged.

The scientists working on the Manhattan Project did so with the understanding that the bomb would not be used on civillians. They thought it would be detonated in an uninhabited area to demonstrate to the Japanese the precise nature of its destructive potential. Truman betrayed them.

The United States COULD have dropped the first bomb on uninhabited (or sparsely populated) territory within Japan. If Japan had still refused to surrender after being given enough time to adequately survey the damage, then and only then would the US have had any justification for dropping an atomic bomb on a city. As it was, the US dropped both nukes on cities, killing over two hundred thousand non-combatant human beings.

Your casual, offhanded justification of this kind of unnecessary slaughter is really worthy of an Osama Bin Laden. You're on the same moral plane. It's sickening, really. You and other deluded "patriots" may forgive the US government for that crime against humanity, but history in the long run will not.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: EchoVortex]
    #1212757 -

Quote:
The United States COULD have dropped the first bomb on uninhabited (or sparsely populated) territory within Japan. If Japan had still refused to surrender after being given enough time to adequately survey the damage, then and only then would the US have had any justification for dropping an atomic bomb on a city. As it was, the US dropped both nukes on cities, killing over two hundred thousand non-combatant human beings.


The US could've dropped it on island to demonstrate the destruction but Japan didn't surrendur after the first bomb. Not until the second nuke did they got a reality check and surrendured. At least that way, a shitload of our troops didn't have to get killed.

Dilauded

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: Dilauded]
    #1212768 -

Quote:
At least that way, a shitload of our troops didn't have to get killed.


...just a couple of innocent civilians. :wink: 

I hear ya though, not saying I totally agree, but I understand your point.


--------------------
Re-Defeat Bush in '04

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: Dilauded]
    #1212846 -

The US could've dropped it on island to demonstrate the destruction but Japan didn't surrendur after the first bomb

Not sure if the US would've accepted a surrender until they'd experimented on the two different cities anyway. Each city had value for the research they wanted to do.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: Dilauded]
    #1212885 -

Quote:
The US could've dropped it on island to demonstrate the destruction but Japan didn't surrendur after the first bomb. Not until the second nuke did they got a reality check and surrendured. At least that way, a shitload of our troops didn't have to get killed.




The first bomb was dropped on August 6th, the second on August 9th. Hardly enough time for the reality to sink in as to exactly what this bomb could do.

On August 9th, Truman made a radio address to the American people. In it, he lied and said that Hiroshima was "a military target." Clearly he understood in his heart of hearts that what they had done was inhuman--why else would he have to lie about it?

There is a GREAT deal of evidence that the Japanese would have accepted the peace terms that were eventually offered after the bombings: the thing they were most interested in was keeping the emperor. Under those terms they would have surrendered. They were afraid that uncondtional surrender would result in the emperor's execution as a war criminal. Unfortunately, the peace terms that were eventually decided on (letting the emperor off) were NEVER OFFERED to Japan before the bombings. Truman had no interest in giving diplomacy a chance.

Generals Eisenhower and MacArthur, as well as Admiral William Leahy, were AGAINST the bombings. So were the scientists who had worked on the project.

Dropping the bombs had nothing to do with saving lives. Here is a good summary of why it was done: the desire to avenge Pearl Harbor, the desire to frighten the Soviet Union (which didn't work--all it did was make the Soviet Union desperate to get its own nuclear weapons, which they did, which lead to the arms race), anti-Asian racism, and Truman's desire to prove that he wasn't a "wimp."


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: EchoVortex]
    #1212911 -

Interesting, I always thought we bombed and they didn't surrendur, then we bombed again and they did.

Off the subject: I can't get over how Truman withdrew MacArthur from N Korea.

Interesting
Dilauded

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: EchoVortex]
    #1213220 -


Your casual, offhanded justification of this kind of unnecessary slaughter is really
worthy of an Osama Bin Laden. You're on the same moral plane. It's sickening,
really.

Now that you have given me some more information, I see a different perspective.
If I had been in charge, I probably would have blown it up in an uninhabited
area to "prove my point". But, given how stubborn the Japanese were, I
don't know if that would have done anything.


You and other deluded "patriots" may forgive the US government for that crime against humanity, but history in the long run will not.

I am not deluded. I think two-hundred thousand dead Japanese civilians is
better than hundreds of thousands of dead American troops, hundreds of
thousands of dead Japanese troops, hundreds of thousands of dead Japanese
civilians, and a completely devastated and ruined Japan, that would have
resulted from a land invasion.

RandalFlagg

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: silversoul7]
    #1213957 -

Well....maybe you would like to explain your politics and how exactly im making "leftists" look stupid.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: silversoul7]
    #1213979 -

Really....what did i say that wasnt true? I dont see you coming out in defense of marxism or against capitalism!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: Eric]
    #1214032 -

"A collectivized economy looks at need, rather then profit"

DEFINE NEED

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #1215026 -

Quote:
I am not deluded. I think two-hundred thousand dead Japanese civilians is
better than hundreds of thousands of dead American troops, hundreds of
thousands of dead Japanese troops, hundreds of thousands of dead Japanese
civilians, and a completely devastated and ruined Japan, that would have
resulted from a land invasion.


If dropping two bombs on cities or launching an immediate land invasion were the only two options available to Truman, yes, you would be correct. The apologists for the bomb like to claim that those were the only two options, but that is not correct.

If they were the only two options, why would Eisenhower and MacArthur of all people have been against it? Why? So they could see tens or hundreds of thousands of their own troops get killed? Obviously, they realized that other options were available. Those options included diplomacy, test demonstrations of the bomb on uninhabited territory or even on purely military targets, or, best of all, a combination of those two. The belief that the Japanese would have fought to the last man, woman, and child to protect the archipelago from invasion is nothing other than propaganda. When the US did finally occupy Japan the locals were completely compliant and cooperative, and its not because they were afraid the Americans were going to drop another A-Bomb on them. The reason is because the Emperor was allowed to live.

All the US had to do to stop the war was to offer peace terms that allowed the Emperor to stay alive. Under those terms the Japanese would have readily surrendered. And since THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED ANYWAY, what was the point of dropping the bomb? Even with the two bombs, the US occupation authorities realized that trying the Emperor for war crimes would have made their job in Japan infinitely more difficult. As long as they let him stay, everything was smooth as butter.

The US never offered peace on those terms before the bombs were dropped. In fact, the US never made ANY diplomatic peace overtures at all before the bombs were dropped. To say that the Japanese would have fought to the end is an easy lie to propagate because the Japanese were never even given a warning or a chance to surrender. The US just dropped one bomb on a city, killing 140,000, waited three days, and then dropped another one, killing 70,000.

Truman did what he did for the reasons I listed in the previous post. In fact, he had standing orders to bomb TWO MORE cities in Japan as soon as the bombs became available. This is blatant disregard for human life.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: Viveka]
    #1215275 -

Quote:
"A collectivized economy looks at need, rather then profit"

DEFINE NEED



For example, if a railway link is needed to connect a town to a city, it'll be built, or if housing is needed for the homeless...under a planned economy, those options will be availible regardless of profitabilty, which does not look at need, but rather the abilty to profit.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: Eric]
    #1215295 -

Quote:
which does not look at need, but rather the abilty to profit. 

Its called incentive, look into it. 

If I had a nice house, what would make me get off of my stoned ass to build a house?  Ding, ding, ding, money so I could buy more weed to get stoned. :wink:


--------------------
Re-Defeat Bush in '04

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: Eric]
    #1215456 -

Quote:
Really....what did i say that wasnt true? I dont see you coming out in defense of marxism or against capitalism!


While I happen to disagree with Marx on many points, I do have great respect for him and his political philosophy. I have, on many occassions spoken out against the evils of capitalism on this board. Just not so much on this thread. Your posts are naive and you seem to lack original thought. You treat the Communist Manifesto the way Christian fundamentalists treat the Bible. However, that book, like the Bible, has fallicies which you fail to comprehend, yet rather than admit that, you just become stubborn.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: silversoul7]
    #1215715 -

If you had disagreements, you are free to discuss them, and should have done so rather then just tell me to "shut up" for defending my politics. A world socialist revolution is the only way to build a classless, egalitarian society based on the rule of the working class, and this is what marxists fight for. I dont just sit here and post messages on the internet, i actually dont have much time for that. But i'd rather not discuss political activity or affiliations online for personal security concerns.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: Larrythescaryrex]
    #1215734 -

HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT: visit a Communist country and report back if you liked it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: Eric]
    #1215744 -

If by now you actually think there will be a world revolution, then you are naive. It would be nice if there was, but it's just not that way. Most poor people would rather just watch MTV Cribs and fantasize about being rich than standing up against their oppressors.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: silversoul7]
    #1215768 -

Most poor people would rather just watch MTV Cribs and fantasize about being rich than standing up against their oppressors.

Nah, there are millions upon millions of poor people fighting to make the world a better place every day. It just isn't something the mainstream media are ever going to report since it might encourage everyone else.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: silversoul7]
    #1215802 -

IN LIFE there's smart people and stupid people.

I'M MOVING TO CUBA,
Dilauded

Edited by Dilauded (01/13/03 09:54 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Communism [Re: silversoul7]
    #1216190 -

That is the exactly the problem!!! There is just enough gratification that people think they are truly free.


--------------------
I may not always tell the truth, but atleast I'm honest
-----------

I see what everyone is saying. It is so hard to form an opinion when you see both sides so clearly!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Memorial Planned For Victims Of Communism
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )		 lonestar2004 6,228 132 11/18/05 07:09 PM
by bukkake
* marxism.
( 1 2 all )		 Anonymous 3,033 37 02/04/04 05:53 PM
by Tao
* Communism / socialism
( 1 2 3 all )		 overgrower 5,456 58 12/18/04 06:04 AM
by vampirism
* Artificial Desire
( 1 2 3 all )		 Sclorch 3,624 48 01/08/04 08:56 PM
by phreakyzen
* Karl Marx was wrong
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )		 Sclorch 8,530 122 08/17/03 03:43 PM
by d33p
* Karl Marx's Anti-Semitism lonestar2004 1,356 10 07/28/06 11:40 AM
by Vvellum
* communism vs. socialism vs. the welfare state Anonymous 1,485 12 08/31/03 12:35 AM
by Malachi
* Soviet Union/Downfall of Communism/Actions in the Middle Eas TrueBrode 833 10 11/07/03 02:43 AM
by zeronio

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
16,172 topic views. 2 members, 33 guests and 29 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.029 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 16 queries.