Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Scabbed Angel

Fahrenheit 9/11

Will you see it?  

43 members have voted

  1. 1. Will you see it?

    • Yes
      23
    • No
      11
    • Don`t know don`t care
      9


Recommended Posts

Grimm said:

A) It was a fucking war. Exactly what do you expect to happen?
B) If you're gonna complain about America's wartime policies, get your shit together. We firebombed Tokyo and lit it up like a fucking torch. Over 10 square miles were burnt to the ground. As many people died as at least one of the nukings , maybe both, and it wasn't, "Oh fuck, that's a bright ligh--", it was a real slow, scary, shitty way to go. And yes I'm taking into account the radiation deaths.

Our use of nukes WAS indeed terrorism, by definition. We wanted them to surrender...we wanted imperial japan to surrender...

terrorism

n : the systematic use of violence as a means to intimidate or coerce societies or governments

I'm not arguing against what happened either. Japan chaged it's ways for the better. And we avoided perhaps, a much longer, drawn-out war.

Share this post


Link to post
Grimm said:

A) It was a fucking war. Exactly what do you expect to happen?
B) If you're gonna complain about America's wartime policies, get your shit together. We firebombed Tokyo and lit it up like a fucking torch. Over 10 square miles were burnt to the ground. As many people died as at least one of the nukings , maybe both, and it wasn't, "Oh fuck, that's a bright ligh--", it was a real slow, scary, shitty way to go. And yes I'm taking into account the radiation deaths.


I'm well aware of the Tokyo firebombings, and bombing is often used as an offensive in wartime. Germany bombed the shit out of England, England bombed the shit out of Germany, and so on and so on.

Nuking Japan, while I agree it (the primary concern was saving American lives and getting Japan to unconditionaly surrender, both accomplished by nuking them), was in fact terrorism to the highest degree because it was not simply a wartime bombing, but a huge devistating strike with a very powerful weapon used in order to get them to agree to exactly what we wanted from them. If that's not terrorism, I don't know what is.

BTW, getting nukes isn't always instant vaporization either. Check out some articles/photos of Hiroshima and Nagasaki after the bombings and tell me that that didn't hurt. On top of that, unlike the firebombings, people were still dying well after the bombings. People who weren't even born at the time died from radiation poisioning in some cases.

Share this post


Link to post

No, I will take dying by nuke in 5 seconds MAX than being trapped inside a burning building, wondering if I'd ever make it out . . . and never making it out. Nukes are much faster, period. You've got people that die so fast it hardly has time to register, and you got the radiation deaths. Firebombing is b u r n i n g to death, or suffocating, or getting trapped under buildings . . . and I'm sure it gets worse.

Also, I don't see how you can consider nukes terrorism but regular bombing not. I've never agreed with bombing. I'm out of time, I'll elaborate later.

Share this post


Link to post
Grimm said:

Also, I don't see how you can consider nukes terrorism but regular bombing not. I've never agreed with bombing. I'm out of time, I'll elaborate later.

It's the methodology and reasoning behind it, how and why it is carried out, and not the means.

Share this post


Link to post
Grimm said:

No, I will take dying by nuke in 5 seconds MAX than being trapped inside a burning building, wondering if I'd ever make it out . . . and never making it out. Nukes are much faster, period.

What about dying of cancer for ten years, you ignorant shit? What about when your skin is flayed from your body by the blast wave and you spend your last hours with grit in between every sinew and muscle of your body? What if you survive the nuke, but your kids are born without arms and legs?

Share this post


Link to post
Cyb said:

(the primary concern was saving American lives and getting Japan to unconditionaly surrender, both accomplished by nuking them)


cough bullshit
all military anaylists predicted that Japan would surrender within several months.
Personally, I think the nukes had to do more with the USSR than with the second world war.

Share this post


Link to post

Perhaps. Recently the bombing of Baghdad (displayed on TV) had a similar effect on Europeans, or whoever was watching; even Americans against the war, for instance. A huge display of force against an already doomed opponent.

Share this post


Link to post

Michael Moore looks like my aunt. Or maybe the other way around. Either way, I cant help but feel something for the guy, my aunt is a nice lady.

Share this post


Link to post

What about dying of cancer for ten years, you ignorant shit? What about when your skin is flayed from your body by the blast wave and you spend your last hours with grit in between every sinew and muscle of your body? What if you survive the nuke, but your kids are born without arms and legs?

Hey fuckwad, guess what, there's still a lot of fucking people dead, in case you haven't noticed. I'm still willing to bet overall more people died in a shitty way from the firebombings, but guess what dipshit? In the end, it doesn't fucking matter now does it? Cuz in the end there's still over 200,000 people dead, and how they died don't really change it.

But guess overcoming your A-bomb fear and actually agreeing with in the simplest way by saying, "Yeah I guess those firebombings sucked a lot too" would be too much, huh asshole?

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×