|
|
CBS obtains photos showing alleged abuse (Page 10)
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Over there...
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by BRussell:
Therefore humility is in order, if not an apology.
I agree. This is the least one can do under these circumstances. It shows honesty, accountability, and gives credibility to whatever measures will be taken further on.
|
"******* politics is for the ******* moment. ******** equations are for ******** Eternity." ******** Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Over there...
Status:
Offline
|
|
This is not getting better...
From: USAToday
At least 3 prisoners killed by U.S. personnel
By Dave Moniz, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON � The growing scandal involving abuses of Iraqi prisoners reached a new level Tuesday when top Army officials acknowledged that three detainees have been killed, including one who was trying to escape, and 10 other cases of prisoner deaths are under investigation.
The killings were uncovered by Army criminal investigators who had been asked to look at 35 cases, including the deaths of 25 prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan since December 2002.
In one case, an Army soldier was convicted of using excessive force for fatally shooting a prisoner who was throwing rocks at him. The killing took place at an unidentified detention center last September. The soldier was reduced in rank to private and given a less than honorable discharge from the service.
A second homicide involved a CIA contract employee who killed a prisoner at Abu Ghraib prison outside Baghdad in November. That case has been turned over to the Justice Department for prosecution because the military cannot bring a civilian to trial. The military did not disclose details of the case.
|
"******* politics is for the ******* moment. ******** equations are for ******** Eternity." ******** Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Taliesin:
I don't care for sides, if someone from "the other side" has made a good posting I applaud it.
Besides there is no smackdown in it. He said that every nation on earth has done its massacres sometime in history, perhaps you are reading only the first two lines?
Do you want to read a real smackdown? I didn't want to bring it on, but you wanted it so:
Everyone is saying that the 10,000-20,000 Kurds and Shia that Saddam Hussein has killed are a genocide, civilians killed by chemical weapons, women and children, men and elderly, but what about the 100,000 civilians or more the USA killed by dropping an atom-bomb on Nagasaki, and an additional 100,000 civilians or more killed by dropping an atom-bomb on Hiroshima?
You will probably justify it by saying: Oh, that was a war, Japan vs. USA.
The Kurds and Shia also led a war or rather a rebellion against Hussein.
What about the civilians the USA killed in vietnam by napalmising whole villages? How many were killed there?
Don't misunderstand me, I'm really against Hussein, but the USA didn't do its job there because he commited a genocide or rather a massacre, since the USA itself has done massacres and genocides at least 10-times.
Taliesin
Did Saddam drop leaflets and warn all those victims to leave the villages or else face the consequences?
See, the difference is that we warn people first. If they decide to stay then they reap what they sow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by BigMeatyChunks:
Did Saddam drop leaflets and warn all those victims to leave the villages or else face the consequences?
I don't know, did he?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Over there...
Status:
Offline
|
|
From: InformationClearinghouse.info
U.S. Troops Mistreat Elder Iraqi_woman_
By SUE LEEMAN, Associated Press Writer_
Wed May 5, 2004: LONDON - U.S. soldiers who detained an elderly Iraqi woman last year placed a harness on her, made her crawl on all fours and rode her like a donkey, Prime Minister Tony Blair 's personal human rights envoy to Iraq said Wednesday._
|
"******* politics is for the ******* moment. ******** equations are for ******** Eternity." ******** Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Word has it that Bush tore Rumsfeld a new asshole for not telling him about the details of the entire issue (Bush only first saw the photos when they were on TV). I like Rummy, and I think he has done some great work, but a screwup of this magnitude is pretty bad.
I don't know if Rumsfeld was aware of the photographs, but whoever the highest-level officials were who knew about them should begin revising and preparing their resume(s).
Regardless, it looks like this issue is fully in Bush's control now. He could shine here and do the overall mission a great justice.
(
Last edited by spacefreak; May 6, 2004 at 12:38 AM.
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: :ИOITAↃO⅃
Status:
Offline
|
|
New photos from the Washington Post (click to open):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: with stupid
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Mithras:
New photos from the Washington Post (click to open):
wow talk about short stuff hehe
|
What you don't see with your eyes, don't invent with your mouth. Yiddish proverb
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cupertino, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Mithras:
.. image link ..
There's something wrong about seeing these kinds of images with a huge, flashy banner ad right underneath...
MSN ad tho, figures...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by BigMeatyChunks:
Did Saddam drop leaflets and warn all those victims to leave the villages or else face the consequences?
See, the difference is that we warn people first. If they decide to stay then they reap what they sow.
I'm pretty sure, noone warned Nagasaki and Hiroshima.
Taliesin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status:
Offline
|
|
http://www.taiwandocuments.org/potsdam.htm - read down to annex II, part b.
Offers Japan the chance to surrender and warns of the consequences if Japan does not. Make sure you read the last sentence of part 13. It isn't spelled out, but then neither were the people of Hawaii warned on December 7th 1941.
|
If this post is in the Lounge forum, it is likely to be my own opinion, and not representative of the position of MacNN.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by BigMeatyChunks:
Did Saddam drop leaflets and warn all those victims to leave the villages or else face the consequences?
See, the difference is that we warn people first. If they decide to stay then they reap what they sow.
Translation:
It's okay to kill 10,000+ people, AS LONG AS YOU TELL THEM FIRST!
What kind of inhuman bastard would kill a bunch of people without informing them of their fate beforehand?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by vmarks:
but then neither were the people of Hawaii warned on December 7th 1941.
Not by design but because the clerk at the Japanese embassy couldn't type the Ultimatum fast enough!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Troll:
Monaco? The Grimaldis stole the whole kingdom, took it by force ...
...which would be before the country's history started.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Sherwin:
...which would be before the country's history started.
Hmmm, not sure that Monaco only become a country after the Grimaldis. It actually never became a country. It's a principality.
Reminds me of a joke we used to have in South Africa. If a kingdom is ruled by a king, a principality is ruled by a prince and a monarchy is ruled by a monarch; makes you wonder what this country is run by.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by vmarks:
http://www.taiwandocuments.org/potsdam.htm - read down to annex II, part b.
Offers Japan the chance to surrender and warns of the consequences if Japan does not. Make sure you read the last sentence of part 13. It isn't spelled out, but then neither were the people of Hawaii warned on December 7th 1941.
I read it, and yes Japan was warned, but Hiroshima and Nagasaki wasn't warned, and espescially they didn't know of the atom-bomb, or they didn't believe the USA had such a weapon.
And even when Japan was warned and even if Hiroshima and Nagasaki was warned, the USA had no right to attack civilian targets, espescially considering that the USA knew exactly well what devastative effect the atom-bomb has.
And one might add that Japan was losing the war before the "genocide" commited in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and Japan offered capitulation before the dropping of the atom-bombs.
Everyone knows nowadays that the USA didn't have to drop these atom-bombs on civilians to win the war within days/weeks/months. Japan already capitulated, but USA wanted to show espescially to the Soviet-Union what power the USA had.
Taliesin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Taliesin:
I read it, and yes Japan was warned, but Hiroshima and Nagasaki wasn't warned, and espescially they didn't know of the atom-bomb, or they didn't believe the USA had such a weapon.
And even when Japan was warned and even if Hiroshima and Nagasaki was warned, the USA had no right to attack civilian targets, espescially considering that the USA knew exactly well what devastative effect the atom-bomb has.
And one might add that Japan was losing the war before the "genocide" commited in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and Japan offered capitulation before the dropping of the atom-bombs.
Everyone knows nowadays that the USA didn't have to drop these atom-bombs on civilians to win the war within days/weeks/months. Japan already capitulated, but USA wanted to show espescially to the Soviet-Union what power the USA had.
Taliesin
Why is it ok for your terrorist buddies to kill civillians, but when the USA takes steps to END a war and liberate the world from the clutches of evil, you chide us (albeit 60 some years ago). I really wish you would simply admit that you just don't like the USA.
As for your assertion that we did not need to use the Atom bombs...you are wrong. There were too many fronts to the war. We had to eliminate one in order to focus on Europe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Troll:
Monaco never became a country. It's a principality.
Public health warning:
Don't be standing near any Welshmen when you come out with observations like that, 'kay?
Originally posted by Troll:
Reminds me of a joke we used to have in South Africa. If a kingdom is ruled by a king, a principality is ruled by a prince and a monarchy is ruled by a monarch; makes you wonder what this country is run by.
Heh. Yeah, that one's been resurfacing lately with President Blair as the "victim".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by eklipse:
Translation:
It's okay to kill 10,000+ people, AS LONG AS YOU TELL THEM FIRST!
What kind of inhuman bastard would kill a bunch of people without informing them of their fate beforehand?
Muslim bastards. They didn't warn the people in the World Trade Center before they ran jets into it. Palestinians who bomb civilians.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Orion27:
Muslim bastards. They didn't warn the people in the World Trade Center before they ran jets into it. Palestinians who bomb civilians.
You're right, they should phone ahead - then all would be forgiven.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by eklipse:
You're right, they should phone ahead - then all would be forgiven.
No, nothings forgiven. We just decided to take the phone off the hook and come visit in person. Nothing like a face to face, don't you think?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alexandria, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Troll:
Hmmm, not sure that Monaco only become a country after the Grimaldis. It actually never became a country. It's a principality.
Monaco may be absurd, but it is considered an independent state, and therefore a country.
In 1861, Monaco relinquished one-half of its territory to France in exchange for cash and independence. On the throne at this time was Prince Charles III. He realized that most of Monaco's natural resources had been lost with the land and something had to be done to reestablish an economic base in the Principality. He decided that the answer was_tourism and gambling. In 1863, he established the Societe des Bains de Mer. The company consisted of a handful of hotels, a theater, and a casino, which would soon flourish and become the foundation of the magnificent district of Monte-Carlo._
Prince Rainier III ascended to the throne in 1949 and later caught the world's attention with his storybook marriage to actress Grace Kelly. Today, Monaco still stands as a proud monarchy with H.S.H. Rainier III as its head of state. In 1997, the Grimaldi family celebrated the 700th anniversary of its reign in Monaco.
Official Monaco tourism site.
Monaco is also a member of the UN. United Nations site (pdf) And yes, Monaco has sat on the Security Council.
Maybe you had in mind The Duchy of Grand Fenwick?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: zurich, switzerland
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Sherwin:
Public health warning:
Don't be standing near any Welshmen when you come out with observations like that, 'kay?
There are people that would want to stand next to Welshmen at any other time?
|
weird wabbit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: zurich, switzerland
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Orion27:
Muslim bastards. They didn't warn the people in the World Trade Center before they ran jets into it. Palestinians who bomb civilians.
Would defeat the whole idea, wouldn't it?
|
weird wabbit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Lol. The Duchy of Grand Fenwick!
What I meant is that Monaco isn't a country in the sense that it isn't ruled by a ... although ...
Actually I think the joke confuses two things. Aren't Grand duchies, monarchies etc. governmental systems rather than descriptions of statehood? So, Monaco is both a country and a principality. That would explain a lot about its ruler
France may actually reannex Monaco now that they're doing so well in the Champions League!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alexandria, VA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Troll:
Lol. The Duchy of Grand Fenwick!
What I meant is that Monaco isn't a country in the sense that it isn't ruled by a ... although ...
Actually I think the joke confuses two things. Aren't Grand duchies, monarchies etc. governmental systems rather than descriptions of statehood? So, Monaco is both a country and a principality. That would explain a lot about its ruler
France may actually reannex Monaco now that they're doing so well in the Champions League!
I'm not sure what the definition of country really is. I'd say it's more of a traditional term than anything else. After all, Wales is a country, but it's not self-governing.
Monaco qualifies as a state. I'm not sure if it qualifies as a nation the way people like Ernest Gellner might define it. But even though it is a principality it is a state -- albeit a really silly one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
But even though it is a principality it is a state -- albeit a really silly one.
Nowt silly about somewhere where the inhabitants don't have to pay taxes for government services which they neither want or need.
(Hmmm. Back on thread? If the US and the UK didn't charge tax in the same way that Monaco doesn't charge tax, would this thread exist?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: zurich, switzerland
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Sherwin:
Nowt silly about somewhere where the inhabitants don't have to pay taxes for government services which they neither want or need.
(Hmmm. Back on thread? If the US and the UK didn't charge tax in the same way that Monaco doesn't charge tax, would this thread exist?)
No, but it wouldn't be missed.
|
weird wabbit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by eklipse:
Translation:
It's okay to kill 10,000+ people, AS LONG AS YOU TELL THEM FIRST!
What kind of inhuman bastard would kill a bunch of people without informing them of their fate beforehand?
They wouldn't get killed IF THEY MOVED OUT OF THE WAY would they?
Whose fault is that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by BigMeatyChunks:
They wouldn't get killed IF THEY MOVED OUT OF THE WAY would they?
Whose fault is that?
Whoever killed them?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by eklipse:
Whoever killed them?
If you are standing in the street and I am driving a vehicle and I scream through a speaker to get the hell out of the way and you refuse then the responsibility for your death falls only on you because you were warned to get the hell out of the way. It's not as if I suddenly and without warning flattened you like a pancake.
People in Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki were warned. They refused, so, they died. Tough but that's the way the cookie crumbles when inhabitants refuse to heed the warning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by dcolton:
Why is it ok for your terrorist buddies to kill civillians, but when the USA takes steps to END a war and liberate the world from the clutches of evil, you chide us (albeit 60 some years ago). I really wish you would simply admit that you just don't like the USA.
As for your assertion that we did not need to use the Atom bombs...you are wrong. There were too many fronts to the war. We had to eliminate one in order to focus on Europe.
First regarding your resistance-fighter-argument: Well, they want to retaliate for killed civilians, so they have to kill civilians in return.
Japan on the other hand didn't kill any civilians on US-soil, Pearl Harbor was a military target, so the retaliation-aspect is gone in this case.
Second, regarding your argument that the US fought war on too many fronts, and so the USA was forced to eliminate the one in order to concentrate on the war against Hitler-Germany:
Sorry that's totally wrong: Hitler-Germany capitulated on 5/7/1945, and was then occupied by the allied forces, while the atom-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki fell on 8/6/1945 and 8/9/1945 respectively whole three months after the war was ended in Europe.
No, the reason for the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was to teach the Soviet-Union (Stalin) a lesson, so that they don't dare to start a new war in Europe, so that they stay right where they are in east-Germany and east from that point, and not trying to move further west.
The civilians in Nagasaki and Hiroshima (more than 200,000 killed) had to pay the price for a psychological game USA played on the Soviet-Union.
Taliesin
P.S.: I used the american format for dates, so that there is no confusion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Taliesin:
No, the reason for the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was to teach the Soviet-Union (Stalin) a lesson, so that they don't dare to start a new war in Europe, so that they stay right where they are in east-Germany and east from that point, and not trying to move further west.
Hiroshima was a military supply base for the Sino-Japanese war and continued that role until blown into oblivion. It was a legitimate target during wartime. You act as if we just randomly came out of nowhere and bombed Hiroshima to cut off the Japanese Army's supply of ramen noodles.
Nagasaki's main industry was ship building. The most effective way to paralize an island nation is to cripple the shipbuilding industry.
These were legitimate military targets, not some far-off places where the Japanese Emperor went for noodles and sushi on the weekend.
The civilians in Nagasaki and Hiroshima (more than 200,000 killed) had to pay the price for a psychological game USA played on the Soviet-Union.
The civilians in Nagasaki and Hiroshima paid the price for their country's military aggression against the United States. Had Japan not attacked Pearl Harbor then the atomic bombings wouldn't have happened.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by BigMeatyChunks:
Hiroshima was a military supply base for the Sino-Japanese war and continued that role until blown into oblivion. It was a legitimate target during wartime. You act as if we just randomly came out of nowhere and bombed Hiroshima to cut off the Japanese Army's supply of ramen noodles.
Nagasaki's main industry was ship building. The most effective way to paralize an island nation is to cripple the shipbuilding industry.
These were legitimate military targets, not some far-off places where the Japanese Emperor went for noodles and sushi on the weekend.
The civilians in Nagasaki and Hiroshima paid the price for their country's military aggression against the United States. Had Japan not attacked Pearl Harbor then the atomic bombings wouldn't have happened.
All true, very well said.
|
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by BigMeatyChunks:
Hiroshima was a military supply base for the Sino-Japanese war and continued that role until blown into oblivion. It was a legitimate target during wartime. You act as if we just randomly came out of nowhere and bombed Hiroshima to cut off the Japanese Army's supply of ramen noodles.
Nagasaki's main industry was ship building. The most effective way to paralize an island nation is to cripple the shipbuilding industry.
These were legitimate military targets, not some far-off places where the Japanese Emperor went for noodles and sushi on the weekend.
The civilians in Nagasaki and Hiroshima paid the price for their country's military aggression against the United States. Had Japan not attacked Pearl Harbor then the atomic bombings wouldn't have happened.
Off course these towns played a role in supplying the japanese warmachinery. But and this is the point, the war-machinery was already stopped, Japan capitulated well before the atom-bombs fell on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.
Another point is that the USA didn't have to use atom-bombs to destroy the military industries of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, they could have done it with normal bombs.
The USA had spy-planes that could find out where the military industries were located and then call the bombers.
No, the real reasons for dropping the atom-bombs was the Soviet-Union. The USA wanted to show Stalin that it would not tolerate any expansive ambitions in Europe beyond what the Soviet-Union has achieved until then, and that the USA has the potential to punish the Soviet-Union.
Taliesin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cupertino, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Taliesin:
No, the real reasons for dropping the atom-bombs was the Soviet-Union. The USA wanted to show Stalin that it would not tolerate any expansive ambitions in Europe beyond what the Soviet-Union has achieved until then, and that the USA has the potential to punish the Soviet-Union.
Wow, this might be the first time I agree with Tal... I don't think that was the only reason, but I do agree that Stalin was looming large in Truman's mind when he made the decision. OTOH, I don't think it qualifies as a terrorist act, taken in context, but I'll leave it there because I'm not of the mind to make that argument again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Taliesin:
[B]Off course these towns played a role in supplying the japanese warmachinery. But and this is the point, the war-machinery was already stopped, Japan capitulated well before the atom-bombs fell on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.
No, it did not surrender until after the bombs fell. Get your facts and history and dates straight.
Another point is that the USA didn't have to use atom-bombs to destroy the military industries of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, they could have done it with normal bombs.
Japan also didn't need to attack Pearl Harbor, either.
The USA had spy-planes that could find out where the military industries were located and then call the bombers.
And use what, massive munitions, firebombs, etc? Smart bombs didn't exist yet and the only mentality the Japanese would understand was a strong and massive response to cause them to give up. You are talking about a people who thought the Emperor was a God and would have given their lives in defense of the country. Only something as massive in destruction as the atomic bombing caused them to think twice.
No, the real reasons for dropping the atom-bombs was the Soviet-Union.
The real reasons for the atomic bombings:
Japan attacked us first.
Japan refused to surrender.
Japan refused to take our warning seriously.
Japan got bombed.
Japan then refused again and was bombed a second time.
Japan then surrendered.
And the most important reason was to save American lives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by itai195:
Wow, this might be the first time I agree with Tal... I don't think that was the only reason, but I do agree that Stalin was looming large in Truman's mind when he made the decision. OTOH, I don't think it qualifies as a terrorist act, taken in context, but I'll leave it there because I'm not of the mind to make that argument again.
The greatest irony is that Stalin knew every detail about the US nuclear program LONG before the bombs were dropped.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by BigMeatyChunks:
The real reasons for the atomic bombings:
Japan attacked us first.
Japan refused to surrender.
Japan refused to take our warning seriously.
Japan got bombed.
Japan then refused again and was bombed a second time.
Japan then surrendered.
And the most important reason was to save American lives.
That's the version of history you find in highschool-history-books, but if you would go the extra-mile and read more ambitious and more thorough history-books, history-books used in universities for example, you would discover that the history played a whole lot different:
Japan declared war against the USA because the USA successfully installed an economy-embargo upon Japan, because Japan expanded in east-asia.
The USA did this because they wanted to enter worldwar2 against Hitler-Germany. But the USA-public was against any intervention, and wanted to stay isolated. The USA chose Japan as the perfect help to achieve a change in the public's opinion. The secret agencies assured the US-president that an economic embargo against Japan would be seen as a war-declaration by Japan, and would lead them to attack the USA.
It worked, Japan declared war and flew with its planes to Pearl Harbor and destroyed a fleet stationed there. That was the obvious military target for Japan as it lay east of Japan not too far away, and it was the fleet the USA would have send to attack Japan.
Japan destroyed that fleet without the help of atom-bombs and without any intelligent rockets..
The USA-government had finally what it wanted a change in public's opinion, and the USA could take part in the worldwar against Hitler-Germany.
The allies against Hitler-Germany were Britain and the Soviet-Union. France was already occupied by Germany, and Italy changed sides in mid-war and fought then against Germany.
Against Japan the ally was China.
After Hitler-Germany was defeated the war against Japan was quickly won, Japan was defeated, and they gave up, and capitulated, but the USA had a new enemy, that was the Soviet-Union under Stalin, and the USA had a new weapon it wanted to show in full effect to Stalin so that he stops the expansion in Europe..
Japan capitulated, so the USA asked something of the emperor of Japan that the USA knew he wouldn't do. They asked him to officially declare on TV to the japanese that he weren't a God.
They knew he wouldn't do it because of the special honour-system the japanese had. If he did it, he would declare himself as a liar, and would lose his face and more.
So, eventhough Japan capitulated, the emperor didn't want to humiliate himself.
You know then what happened, Hiroshima was atom-bombed, the emperor still didn't want to do it, Nagasaki was atom-bombed, the emperor finally gave in, and did it.
Stalin and his Soviet-Union were kept in check by these demonstrations of a new and powerful weapon.
Taliesin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: :ИOITAↃO⅃
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by BigMeatyChunks:
The civilians in Nagasaki and Hiroshima paid the price for their country's military aggression against the United States. Had Japan not attacked Pearl Harbor then the atomic bombings wouldn't have happened.
Just like the civilians on flight 77 paid the price in the legitimate strike against the military target of the Pentagon, which needn't have happened if the U.S. didn't support military aggression against Palestinians?
NOTE: I do not agree with the above sentiment. Casual forgiveness of enormous civilian casualties is an abhorrent mentality, wherever it is found.
Anyway. I'd say that with discussion of Nagasaki this thread has officially jumped the shark.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Over there...
Status:
Offline
|
|
To quote MacNamara,
"How much Evil must you do to do Good?"
The bombardment of Nagasaki and Hiroshima proceeds from the same reasoning leading to the abuse of Iraqi soldiers;
A show of credibility as a just power by an extreme display of force.
In Japan, during WWII, it was first with the very efficient dropping of several tens of thousands of incendiary bombs, especially on the civilians whom were the real targets (because of their dry wood and paper houses).
Japan, in its folly, was to surrender, but what was requested was TOTAL surrender.
If the U.S. had not used the bombs, the government would have been at a loss of credibility because of the huge amount of money involved for a chancy scientific venture (versus more troops, more equipment, etc.) ands there was also a need to make a show of force to the Russia, a then growing threat suspected to have such a similar scientific venture... (the book " The Making Of The Atomic Bomb").
The situation involving the Iraqi prisonners is vitually the same. Another display of credibility because of a self-glorifying perception of being Right and therefore beyond accountability, by abusing powerless people.
Basic bullying.
|
"******* politics is for the ******* moment. ******** equations are for ******** Eternity." ******** Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Taliesin:
Japan declared war against the USA because the USA successfully installed an economy-embargo upon Japan, because Japan expanded in east-asia.
All because Japan was invading places it had no business being in the first place. Manchuria, the Republic of China...
The USA did this because they wanted to enter worldwar2 against Hitler-Germany.
That's the most ridiculous insinuation I've ever heard.
But the USA-public was against any intervention, and wanted to stay isolated. The USA chose Japan as the perfect help to achieve a change in the public's opinion. The secret agencies assured the US-president that an economic embargo against Japan would be seen as a war-declaration by Japan, and would lead them to attack the USA.
Oh, whatever. So now you are insinuating that Pearl was all part of a carefully crafted scheme to get the U.S. involved in another European war?
Japan destroyed that fleet without the help of atom-bombs and without any intelligent rockets..
Japan destroyed that fleet only by using the element of surprise. It's much harder to attack someone who is already expecting to defend an installation.
You know then what happened, Hiroshima was atom-bombed, the emperor still didn't want to do it, Nagasaki was atom-bombed, the emperor finally gave in, and did it.
Japan was bombed precisely because the head of the government refused to surrender.
Stalin and his Soviet-Union were kept in check by these demonstrations of a new and powerful weapon.
Stalin and the USSR were kept in check by America keeping soldiers in Europe, Japan, Taiwan, and other places for the entirety of the Cold War.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Over there...
Status:
Offline
|
|
From the LA Times: (free registration).
U.S. authorities, reeling from revelations of physical and sexual abuse at the lockup, invited the media Wednesday to the sprawling compound 25 miles west of Baghdad. The tour would be the outside world's first look at the jail since the devastating scandal broke.
But the situation quickly spun out of military control as prisoners � including the disabled in an area of the facility for injured inmates � abandoned their outdoor tents in the midday sun and approached journalists. They were eager to voice their grievances, even from behind barbed wire.
Using a U.S.-issued megaphone, a man read from a legal pad brimming with accusations. "The problem of the Iraq prisoners is not only what is written in the news," he said.
It was clear that accounts of the scandal had reached the nearly 4,000 prisoners held at this jail, which once included torture chambers used by Saddam Hussein's interrogators.
After the prisoners' outburst, Army officials hastened to usher the members of the media back into a pair of buses, refusing to let journalists interview any inmates or photograph them, even though some prisoners appeared eager to talk. Officials cited prisoners' rights under the Geneva Conventions.
Please do not limit yourself to this quote, the rest of the article is very interesting.
|
"******* politics is for the ******* moment. ******** equations are for ******** Eternity." ******** Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Over there...
Status:
Offline
|
|
A chronological account of the abuse from Sept 2, 2003 and now, with quotes from Bush's declarations.
here
It shows how the U.S. President seemed to be totally unaware of what was happening.
This level of disconnection is amazing to me...
|
"******* politics is for the ******* moment. ******** equations are for ******** Eternity." ******** Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Status:
Offline
|
|
Good ol' girl who enjoyed cruelty
POINTING crudely at the genitals of a naked, hooded Iraqi, the petite brunette with a cigarette hanging from her lips epitomised America's shame over revelations US soldiers routinely tortured inmates at Abu Ghraib jail near Baghdad.
Lynndie England, 21, a rail worker's daughter, comes from a trailer park in Fort Ashby, West Virginia, which locals proudly call "a backwoods world".
She faces a court martial, but at home she is toasted as a hero.
At the dingy Corner Club Saloon they think she has done nothing wrong.
"A lot of people here think they ought to just blow up the whole of Iraq," Colleen Kesner said.
"To the country boys here, if you're a different nationality, a different race, you're sub-human. That's the way girls like Lynndie are raised.
"Tormenting Iraqis, in her mind, would be no different from shooting a turkey. Every season here you're hunting something. Over there, they're hunting Iraqis."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Status:
Offline
|
|
From defensetech.org:
Wanna job softening up Iraqi prisoners for interrogation? Maybe with a little moonlighting in torture? Then CACI, the private military contractor whose employees are at the center of the Abu Ghraib scandal, is looking for you:
Interrogator/Intel Analyst Team Lead Asst. Baghdad, Iraq... Assists the interrogation support program team lead to increase the effectiveness of dealing with Detainees, Persons of Interest, and Prisoners of War (POWs) that are in the custody of US/Coalition Forces in the CJTF 7 AOR, in terms of screening, interrogation, and debriefing of persons of intelligence value. Under minimal supervision, will assist the team lead in managing a multifaceted interrogation support cell consisting of database entry/intelligence research clerks, screeners, tactical/strategic interrogators, and intelligence analyst.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Status:
Offline
|
|
I wonder if she's from Turkey Balls Falls or Coon Slick, West Virginia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Over there...
Status:
Offline
|
|
Now we will see if it is or not an issue of bad genes...
This is a turning point, I believe, where accountability will go on the "blame-shifting" game, with the strong and powerful ones turning to be the right ones, and the weak ones, being the "obvious" culprit...
Stories of "unfit" individuals, who "cheated their way", etc.
Future looks interesting media-wise.
|
"******* politics is for the ******* moment. ******** equations are for ******** Eternity." ******** Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by BigMeatyChunks:
All because Japan was invading places it had no business being in the first place. Manchuria, the Republic of China...
That's the most ridiculous insinuation I've ever heard.
Oh, whatever. So now you are insinuating that Pearl was all part of a carefully crafted scheme to get the U.S. involved in another European war?
Japan destroyed that fleet only by using the element of surprise. It's much harder to attack someone who is already expecting to defend an installation.
You are quite out of date, you should study the historic studies done after the coldwar with the Soviet-Union ended. A lot of information has come out after 1990, a lot of secret-agencies-documentation, etc...(maybe these documentations of the secret-agencies came out because of the amount of time that has passed, and because of that public-information-law that the USA has, I don't know.)
And everything has proven that the USA has provoked Japan to declare war on USA so that the USA could take part in worldwar2 and change public opinion about intervention.
Besides Japan attacking China and the surrounding asian nations is definetly a reason for these attacked nations to lead war against Japan, but not enough reason for the USA to intervene by issuing an economic embargo.
Besides again, didn't the USA also invade some of these asian nations that Japan invaded, like Vietnam and Corea? I can't recall anyone installing a total economic embargo on the USA because of that, do you?
Regarding, the socalled surprise-attack of Japan on Pearl Harbor, it was not a surprise, the USA's spies in Japan informed the USA about the planned attack on Pearl Harbor, and Japan declared war before the attack. There's a nice story about that, but I don't know if it's true or legend: The japanese ambassador in the US wanted to bring over the declaration of war to the US-government, and the government knew that he wanted to bring it over, and they knew that the japanese airforce is already on its way to Pearl Harbor, but they let him wait hours before he could get through, until the attack on Pearl-Harbor was done, so that the attack on Pearl Harbor looked like an evil surprise delivered by an evil Japan.
Taliesin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status:
Offline
|
|
when you assert something wildly different than the truth and assert that 'everything since 1990' shows otherwise, you would do well to show some of that evidence.
|
If this post is in the Lounge forum, it is likely to be my own opinion, and not representative of the position of MacNN.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|