Would you flip the switch?

[PLAYER57832]

(Not who you were talking to, but I want to interject.)
The U.S. officials said they could have won the war by going after mainland Japan, but it would cost (as an estimation by the U.S. commanders) 1 million more U.S. lives. The bombing of Japan was in order to quickly end the war without the loss of of thousands of lives. Nobody knew the kind of effect those missles would have on the world, nor did they know it would be so devastating, so you could say the bombing of Japan was completely justified. Not that it was right, but justified.

Not only US lives, but Japanese lives as well... people like to forget that part.
I am by no means a war monger, but to go back and claim that, because our morals are now different, and we know a lot more, the decision was wrong is the worst kind of revisionist history. We need to remember what actually was, not some painted over version. We need to see the ugliness on all sides and why these things were done.

[AAFitz]

areas of government set up to actually help real people with real struggles.

I'm not sure this phrase is accurate. It's at least debatable whether the government has any of these programs.

Accurate it is not. I can testify to the absurdity of that statement both from people who receive such "help" and from my own personal experience. It's designed to keep people "in need" because if you somehow find that you no longer need "help" you will no longer support the party that champions free handouts! Thus, you must keep them down in order to secure their votes. And this is about as sick and corrupt as politics can get.

Whats absurd is your notion that these programs are designed to get votes and an scheme to keep people down. What is accurate is that the vast majority of the wealth is simply held by too small a percentage of the population, and they are simply using their power to keep these people down, and have not been made to pay their fair share.

Again, I can only pity the ignorance, but have no choice but to point out your willful denial, which is most certainly against the very principles you often pretend to believe in.

[jay_a2j]

areas of government set up to actually help real people with real struggles.

I'm not sure this phrase is accurate. It's at least debatable whether the government has any of these programs.

Accurate it is not. I can testify to the absurdity of that statement both from people who receive such "help" and from my own personal experience. It's designed to keep people "in need" because if you somehow find that you no longer need "help" you will no longer support the party that champions free handouts! Thus, you must keep them down in order to secure their votes. And this is about as sick and corrupt as politics can get.

Whats absurd is your notion that these programs are designed to get votes and an scheme to keep people down. What is accurate is that the vast majority of the wealth is simply held by too small a percentage of the population, and they are simply using their power to keep these people down, and have not been made to pay their fair share.

Again, I can only pity the ignorance, but have no choice but to point out your willful denial, which is most certainly against the very principles you often pretend to believe in.

I have talked to people on welfare who WERE TOLD not to get a job. Let me humble you by unveiling your ignorance. There are countless stories of the total idiocy of the welfare system. If you believe that the motivating factor of the social service system is to help the poor YOU are a tool! There are far more "lifetime" welfare recipients than there are of those who moved into success because of the program! It doesn't work. All it has done is create a class of DEPENDENTS. But that is their intent, not to "help" but to maintain dependence on government. Not to mention all the other programs that are overrun with fraud. Workman's compensation? Oh don't even get me started, I could give you a list of people who know Dr. Summer Off.

[PLAYER57832]

I have talked to people on welfare who WERE TOLD not to get a job. Let me humble you by unveiling your ignorance. There are countless stories of the total idiocy of the welfare system. If you believe that the motivating factor of the social service system is to help the poor YOU are a tool! There are far more "lifetime" welfare recipients than there are of those who moved into success because of the program! It doesn't work. All it has done is create a class of DEPENDENTS. But that is their intent, not to "help" but to maintain dependence on government. Not to mention all the other programs that are overrun with fraud. Workman's compensation? Oh don't even get me started, I could give you a list of people who know Dr. Summer Off.

There are many problems with the welfare system. That said, to go from "there are problems" to "political conspiracy to create dependents" shows a distinct lack of logic.

[Woodruff]

I have talked to people on welfare who WERE TOLD not to get a job. Let me humble you by unveiling your ignorance. There are countless stories of the total idiocy of the welfare system. If you believe that the motivating factor of the social service system is to help the poor YOU are a tool! There are far more "lifetime" welfare recipients than there are of those who moved into success because of the program! It doesn't work. All it has done is create a class of DEPENDENTS. But that is their intent, not to "help" but to maintain dependence on government. Not to mention all the other programs that are overrun with fraud. Workman's compensation? Oh don't even get me started, I could give you a list of people who know Dr. Summer Off.

There are many problems with the welfare system. That said, to go from "there are problems" to "political conspiracy to create dependents" shows a distinct lack of logic.

You misspelled "sanity".

[targetman377]

Actually, US was wrong here. Japan was ready to surrender, but on certain terms. The US said "screw that" and demanded unconditional surrender. Japan said no. the US could only either bomb Japan or invade the mainland, as I stated earlier. The US generals wanted to end it their (as you showed), but the US demanded unconditional surrender. The president also wanted to intimidate Stalin, keep him out of the Pacific war (He planned on invading Japan), and deny him a share of the peace that the US was supposedly going to impose on Japan.
Edit: for some reason, it wouldn't let me qoute, but I meant to qoute "Million US live is rubbish".

Yes your compleatly right we should have let them surrender CONDITONAL MEANING THE EMPIRE would still be in power. the same Empire who attacked us. America fought the most devastating war its every fought (not including the civil war) and we where not going to accept anything but unconditional surrender. If you where a soldier living in that time and japan sued for peace with conditions and your government accepted them you would feel betrayed after your brothers gave there life what did they fight for? it would have been considered a loss.

[Woodruff]

America fought the most devastating war its every fought (not including the civil war)

Good Lord, find an education. (That comment does NOT have anything to do with your spelling.)

and we where not going to accept anything but unconditional surrender. If you where a soldier living in that time and japan sued for peace with conditions and your government accepted them you would feel betrayed after your brothers gave there life what did they fight for? it would have been considered a loss.

You do not have the first understanding of what those soldiers would feel.

[targetman377]

America fought the most devastating war its every fought (not including the civil war)

Good Lord, find an education. (That comment does NOT have anything to do with your spelling.)

and we where not going to accept anything but unconditional surrender. If you where a soldier living in that time and japan sued for peace with conditions and your government accepted them you would feel betrayed after your brothers gave there life what did they fight for? it would have been considered a loss.

You do not have the first understanding of what those soldiers would feel.

What war would be more devastating to America than world war 2 to America? well? and NOTICE I say civil war would have been worse! and that's how i would feel. I do feel Japan should have unconditional surrounded.

[Symmetry]

America fought the most devastating war its every fought (not including the civil war)

Good Lord, find an education. (That comment does NOT have anything to do with your spelling.)

and we where not going to accept anything but unconditional surrender. If you where a soldier living in that time and japan sued for peace with conditions and your government accepted them you would feel betrayed after your brothers gave there life what did they fight for? it would have been considered a loss.

You do not have the first understanding of what those soldiers would feel.

What war would be more devastating to America than world war 2 to America? well? and NOTICE I say civil war would have been worse! and that's how i would feel. I do feel Japan should have unconditional surrounded.

I'm just going to ask this once- are you sure about your claim to be a history major? This stuff is just gibberish, and you're confusing past and perfect/future tenses.

[targetman377]

America fought the most devastating war its every fought (not including the civil war)

Good Lord, find an education. (That comment does NOT have anything to do with your spelling.)

and we where not going to accept anything but unconditional surrender. If you where a soldier living in that time and japan sued for peace with conditions and your government accepted them you would feel betrayed after your brothers gave there life what did they fight for? it would have been considered a loss.

You do not have the first understanding of what those soldiers would feel.

What war would be more devastating to America than world war 2 to America? well? and NOTICE I say civil war would have been worse! and that's how i would feel. I do feel Japan should have unconditional surrounded.

I'm just going to ask this once- are you sure about your claim to be a history major? This stuff is just gibberish, and you're confusing past and perfect/future tenses.

Yes i am. and as such most things in history are up for debate as you can argue them many different ways. So just cause some one told you in grade school this is how it is. Most of the time its not.

and maybe i can see the Vietnam, world war and civil war being the worst wars we have ever fought and i could make a case for all of them.

[freezie]

And I hope you are never ordered to kill your family.

why would i be ordered to do that? We live in America i know how much u conspiracy people think the government is out to get everyone. when in reality the government does not care or take that much interest in your life. And if i was ordered to kill my family there would be good reason and would be told about it in my bribing. Yes it would still be hard i would most likely warn them BUT SEEING as how my family are all citizens of this country they have RIGHTS!!! and must be TRIALED IN COURT!!!! EVEN IF your not a citizen you still have rights!!1 The government does not go around killing it's citizens. Do you honestly believe that they would even give me that order? Every herd of conflict of interest? (this is if the government did kill my family) WHY THE HELL WOULD THEY PICK ME TO CARRY IT OUT. your statement is false and just plain dumb on so many different levels.[/quote]


Plz tell me why you would press the button to kill 10 millions people when you beleive that all these people have rights? Shouldn't they have a chance, just like your familly would?

Contraditions contradictions...

[targetman377]

Plz tell me why you would press the button to kill 10 millions people when you beleive that all these people have rights? Shouldn't they have a chance, just like your familly would?

Contraditions contradictions...

the only way America would launch a nuclear weapon is if we where losing a war or it was launched on us first as for where it would it first and foremost the attacks would be on key military complexes, buildings, other things of that nature war is not pretty and civilians die that is the fact of life. If a nuclear bomb was launched at us would you guys still not launch? well would you or would you not

[natty dread]

your statement is false and just plain dumb on so many different levels.

Please list what those levels are.

[Eddy_26]

I wouldn't. I think I could, but I don't see launching a nuclear missile as being logical in any situation I can think of. Feel free to point one out.
My thinking is that the main idea behind these is mutually assured destruction. If they launch theirs, you launch yours. So, a few million of your (innocent) citizens are dead, and a lot of your land is going to be screwed up. But what purpose does it serve to do the same to theirs? It's basically a case of "If I go down I'm taking you half a country of innocent people with me". You're effectively holding a bunch of their citizens hostage. You're threatening to kill them for a decision they had nothing to do with.
I can see the use of tactical nukes in war, when you're close to defeat, but missiles targeting cities? No.

[targetman377]

I wouldn't. I think I could, but I don't see launching a nuclear missile as being logical in any situation I can think of. Feel free to point one out.
My thinking is that the main idea behind these is mutually assured destruction. If they launch theirs, you launch yours. So, a few million of your (innocent) citizens are dead, and a lot of your land is going to be screwed up. But what purpose does it serve to do the same to theirs? It's basically a case of "If I go down I'm taking you half a country of innocent people with me". You're effectively holding a bunch of their citizens hostage. You're threatening to kill them for a decision they had nothing to do with.
I can see the use of tactical nukes in war, when you're close to defeat, but missiles targeting cities? No.

Interesting point. why defend ourselves at all? Who cares if we are overrun. As for you innocent civilians some countries Elect there leaders what if they attacked us then would they still be innocent? I agree with you guys if a president went crazy i would not launch it but lets face in reality that would never happen.

[freezie]

Plz tell me why you would press the button to kill 10 millions people when you beleive that all these people have rights? Shouldn't they have a chance, just like your familly would?

Contraditions contradictions...

the only way America would launch a nuclear weapon is if we where losing a war or it was launched on us first as for where it would it first and foremost the attacks would be on key military complexes, buildings, other things of that nature war is not pretty and civilians die that is the fact of life. If a nuclear bomb was launched at us would you guys still not launch? well would you or would you not

Once again you're assuming stuff. The question NEVER specified a thing about what you're saying.

It says 10 millions people. Not military complex. Not 10 millions armed to teeth barbarians runing to get you.

Just 10 millions people wirh rights, like yourself.

You're 1 life that is willingly going to end 10 millions others simply because you're told to, without any background info at all. That is what scares me.

If a nuclear bomb was launched at us would you guys still not launch? well would you or would you not

I wouldn't get in the situation of having a nuclear bomb in the face to begin with, as I am against such weapons that can do way too much damage than is needed.

[Haggis_McMutton]

Plz tell me why you would press the button to kill 10 millions people when you beleive that all these people have rights? Shouldn't they have a chance, just like your familly would?

Contraditions contradictions...

the only way America would launch a nuclear weapon is if we where losing a war or it was launched on us first as for where it would it first and foremost the attacks would be on key military complexes, buildings, other things of that nature war is not pretty and civilians die that is the fact of life. If a nuclear bomb was launched at us would you guys still not launch? well would you or would you not

Once again you're assuming stuff. The question NEVER specified a thing about what you're saying.

It says 10 millions people. Not military complex. Not 10 millions armed to teeth barbarians runing to get you.

Just 10 millions people wirh rights, like yourself.

You're 1 life that is willingly going to end 10 millions others simply because you're told to, without any background info at all. That is what scares me.

Exactly. Well said.
Not only is he willing to do that, but he thinks that not doing that would make one a coward and unpatriotic.
Well, I guess rational thought does tend to get in the way of patriotism.

If a nuclear bomb was launched at us would you guys still not launch? well would you or would you not

So your question is: "If another government decided to attack us, would you kill 10 million of their civilians as retaliation?"
Hey, and eye for an eye, right? ...

The only point in launching the bombs would be if they somehow destroyed all the enemies nuclear capabilities. Otherwise, by responding with senseless deaths of civilians of a nuclear power, you've probably just assured the end of humanity.
But hey, who cares about that when you get to hit your chest and shout your contry's name.

[targetman377]

[quote="freezie]


Once again you're assuming stuff. The question NEVER specified a thing about what you're saying.

It says 10 millions people. Not military complex. Not 10 millions armed to teeth barbarians runing to get you.

Just 10 millions people wirh rights, like yourself.

You're 1 life that is willingly going to end 10 millions others simply because you're told to, without any background info at all. That is what scares me.
[/quote]

Yes there might be Innocent people to die. And the question does not say that are not armed? does it? To be honest i would not feel like it was my fault as per said before authorization from the president and Secretary of defense. I was just following orders (i think this is important Principal. What if the city you grew up in and all your family where killed by a nuclear bomb from a foreign enemy would you still not launch? I am not saying that I would not have serious problems with the morality of the decision i made but and i would live with the rest of my life.

[quote="freezie]
I wouldn't get in the situation of having a nuclear bomb in the face to begin with, as I am against such weapons that can do way too much damage than is needed.[/quote]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutally_as ... estruction
because of nukes we never went to war directly with Russia during the cold war. Humans are violent creatures and the only way for peace is to have weapons that could kill millions cause then the first party will not attack.

[targetman377]

well then lets stop prosecuting murders, serial killers heck get raid of the justice department cause if some country uses nukes on us lets all take it! yeah and they will just stop attacking us and killing us? WOW SOUNDS LIKE A GRAND FUCKEN IDEA! right. Do I believe everyone has rights? no Only people who fight for there rights have rights. The assumption you make is that America just decided to go off and start a war with nukes THIS SIMPLE WOULD NOT HAPPEN. how many times do i have to say this? If we where attacked and you did nothing there would be America. what about the war of 1812 lets just not do anything right? not defend what is ours hell i want your house you will not do anything. OH WAIT YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEFEND YOURSELF!!! I do believe being patriotic is an important thing but and supporting Americana is good. And i understand you do still need to be critical of your government

and if those 10 million people elected a leader that launched a nuke on us hell yeah i am going to push the button why should they have the right to take away my life?

[BigBallinStalin]

well then lets stop prosecuting murders, serial killers heck get raid of the justice department cause if some country uses nukes on us lets all take it! yeah and they will just stop attacking us and killing us? WOW SOUNDS LIKE A GRAND FUCKEN IDEA! right. Do I believe everyone has rights? no Only people who fight for there rights have rights. The assumption you make is that America just decided to go off and start a war with nukes THIS SIMPLE WOULD NOT HAPPEN. how many times do i have to say this? If we where attacked and you did nothing there would be America. what about the war of 1812 lets just not do anything right? not defend what is ours hell i want your house you will not do anything. OH WAIT YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEFEND YOURSELF!!! I do believe being patriotic is an important thing but and supporting Americana is good. And i understand you do still need to be critical of your government

and if those 10 million people elected a leader that launched a nuke on us hell yeah i am going to push the button why should they have the right to take away my life?

How "free" are those elections?

Besides, how accountable can the people of a nation be held for their government's actions?

For example, I'll vote for certain people, and I'm against all current US-involved wars and the continuation of those wars. Am I to be held responsible for the actions of my government?

What if I voted in some Republican senator for my state because he best represents my interests, but he votes FOR some war? I didn't want him to do that, but I really had no say in the matter. I can't predict what certain presidents will even do. Why should I be held fully accountable?

And I can't even stop this madness (except maybe later in life through writing about it), but for now, I can't really do much about it, except express my disagreement over such policies over a cup of coffee.

[Woodruff]

America fought the most devastating war its every fought (not including the civil war)

Good Lord, find an education. (That comment does NOT have anything to do with your spelling.)

What war would be more devastating to America than world war 2 to America? well? and NOTICE I say civil war would have been worse!

I did notice. That was the point of my comment. You said "the most devastating war it's ever fought!" and then you said "well...except for". GET A FREAKING EDUCATION!

[Woodruff]

Plz tell me why you would press the button to kill 10 millions people when you beleive that all these people have rights? Shouldn't they have a chance, just like your familly would?
Contraditions contradictions...

the only way America would launch a nuclear weapon is if we where losing a war or it was launched on us first

You keep saying this, and yet it continues to be a load of horse manure. Are you really so stupid? I cannot imagine that an actual history major would believe this is the case, when it is demonstrably false using...you know...actual history.

[targetman377]

well then lets stop prosecuting murders, serial killers heck get raid of the justice department cause if some country uses nukes on us lets all take it! yeah and they will just stop attacking us and killing us? WOW SOUNDS LIKE A GRAND FUCKEN IDEA! right. Do I believe everyone has rights? no Only people who fight for there rights have rights. The assumption you make is that America just decided to go off and start a war with nukes THIS SIMPLE WOULD NOT HAPPEN. how many times do i have to say this? If we where attacked and you did nothing there would be America. what about the war of 1812 lets just not do anything right? not defend what is ours hell i want your house you will not do anything. OH WAIT YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEFEND YOURSELF!!! I do believe being patriotic is an important thing but and supporting Americana is good. And i understand you do still need to be critical of your government

and if those 10 million people elected a leader that launched a nuke on us hell yeah i am going to push the button why should they have the right to take away my life?

How "free" are those elections?

Besides, how accountable can the people of a nation be held for their government's actions?

For example, I'll vote for certain people, and I'm against all current US-involved wars and the continuation of those wars. Am I to be held responsible for the actions of my government?

What if I voted in some Republican senator for my state because he best represents my interests, but he votes FOR some war? I didn't want him to do that, but I really had no say in the matter. I can't predict what certain presidents will even do. Why should I be held fully accountable?

And I can't even stop this madness (except maybe later in life through writing about it), but for now, I can't really do much about it, except express my disagreement over such policies over a cup of coffee.

and we are assuming these elections are just like Americas
Well if you disagree with the defense of "i was just following orders" I would awesome you as an vote maybe of the public that elected the leaders are just as responsible as him or her. "As for you should have known better"

also you never addressed my issue with justice? you can't really jail a leader of a country for doping a nuke on you can you know? and if so how are you going to do it? please tell me?

I do agree with you there are times i would not flip the switch IF we where not losing a war or we did not get attack i would not be the first to launch a nuke ok. that has been my whole point but there are times when we need to defend ourselves or should you never defend ourselves?

[targetman377]

America fought the most devastating war its every fought (not including the civil war)

Good Lord, find an education. (That comment does NOT have anything to do with your spelling.)

What war would be more devastating to America than world war 2 to America? well? and NOTICE I say civil war would have been worse!

I did notice. That was the point of my comment. You said "the most devastating war it's ever fought!" and then you said "well...except for". GET A FREAKING EDUCATION!

nuclear weapons where not invented back then so that is not the issue! sorry for the miss clarification That is why i would say America fought its most devastating war and it had nuclear capability. I know what i what i said there smart one

[targetman377]

Plz tell me why you would press the button to kill 10 millions people when you beleive that all these people have rights? Shouldn't they have a chance, just like your familly would?
Contraditions contradictions...

the only way America would launch a nuclear weapon is if we where losing a war or it was launched on us first

You keep saying this, and yet it continues to be a load of horse manure. Are you really so stupid? I cannot imagine that an actual history major would believe this is the case, when it is demonstrably false using...you know...actual history.

yes cause we launched nuke in the KOREN, VIETNAM, The first golf war, the war on terrorism, wow LOOK AT ACTUALLY HISTORY THERE WAS ONLY ONE WAR WE LAUNCHED A NUKE IN WORLD WAR 2 cause we wanted a fast a speedy end and did not want to risk more American lives!

LOOK AT THE CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS WE STILL DID NOT LAUNCH A NUKE!!!!!
tell me to get in education? maybe you should not be so paranoid.