|
|
arachnid
Promising
Famous Hero
|
posted July 29, 2002 01:28 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Lith-Maethor you are an insensitive ignorant prick. "the 9/11 thing"...what a total loser you are! To trivialize such a horrendous event is past compare. What are you some sort of anti-American pro-terrorist freak?
What a f*cked up world we live in, when saying "the 9/11 thing" gets this sort of reaction but the Hiroshima Bomb that killed 200,000 people can be put down as an "error of judgement" without anyone even making a single comment.
____________
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
posted July 29, 2002 01:53 AM |
|
|
whoah there m8
Hiroshima was a calculated attack - from what the allies knew the Japanese would fight for every inch of their land, killing maybe 4 times that number of their own people (many of whom would be citizens) and perhaps a similar number of allied soilders. The allies took the decision that rather than that something drastic was needed to stop the war.
What you can argue is that the Nagasaki bomb, a few days later was unjustified. The Japanese were going to surrender, but the western Allies knew that Russia had just attacked the Japanese in Manchuria and dropped the bomb to force the Japanese into surrendering before more land came under Russian Control.
September 11th would hardly be seen as a error to whomever was responsible as it acheived many things that those twisted sickos would be aiming for ie cause terror and force America to reconsider it's stand on Israel. It is completely different from Hiroshima because that attack was designed to save lives in the long run. Can you say the same thing about september 11th?
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
bort
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Discarded foreskin of morality
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 03:37 AM |
|
|
Quote:
the Hiroshima Bomb that killed 200,000 people can be put down as an "error of judgement" without anyone even making a single comment.
I was wondering how long it would be before this was brought up...
It actually took me quite a long time to decide that the Hiroshima bomb was not an actual atrocity. I spent many long periods in my government class my senior year vehemently arguing with virtually the entire rest of the class that the Hiroshima bomb WAS an atrocity. I eventually came to the conclusion that it was not. "Error of judgment" may have been a bit weak, but I couldn't figure out something between that and atrocity that I felt fit (hey, at least I didn't refer to it as a "foible"). I don't think it was an atrocity because of the context of World War II. The US was killing Japanese, Japanese were killing Americans and Chinese and the Germans were killing Russians and the Russians were killing Germans and the British were killing Italians and the Italians were killing Ethiopians. Now, I don't mean to imply that all that killing was okay, but the Hiroshima bomb was just the most devastating single bombing run that had happened so far. In comparison to the other events of World War II, I don't feel that the Hiroshima bomb was any less morally justified. Do I think it should have been done? No - I think a public demonstration of the bomb's capabilities at an unpopulated site would have been better (but that's only in hindsight, which is 20-20 - at that point the US only had 2 or 3 atomic bombs and "wasting" one in a demonstration would have really screwed us if either a. it turned out to be a dud or b. it didn't cause an immediate surrender). Thus, I stand by my statement that it was an error in judgement and not an actual atrocity.
I do, however, feel that the Nagasaki bomb was inexcusable.
|
|
bort
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Discarded foreskin of morality
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 03:55 AM |
|
|
Quote:
What is so wrong with not wanting sensless and unescessary killing?
Absolutely nothing. Which is why, now, before I kill somebody I first scream "Oh my god! He/She/It is attacking me." This way it is self defense which makes it both sensible and necessary. (With special thanks to South Park, where I lifted that joke from)
Quote:
In what way will killing more people than the opposition help matters?
Well, you can win that new gameshow on Fox called "Who wants to kill a boatload of people?"
Quote:
What is wrong with a desire for peace?
The source of all suffering is desire - don't make Buddha have to break his foot off in yo' behind!
Quote:
If peace is now wrong, then humanity is dead.
Oh the HUMANITY!!! (Sorry, couldn't resist)
|
|
Snogard
Known Hero
customised
|
posted July 29, 2002 07:57 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I spent many long periods in my government class my senior year vehemently arguing with virtually the entire rest of the class that the Hiroshima bomb WAS an atrocity. I eventually came to the conclusion that it was not.
Is it absolutely necessary to label that event as "atrocity" or "an error of judgement" or anything at all? Is it not enough just to know the causes and effects of that event? I suppose the tens of thousands of comfort women still suffering (if they still knew what sufferings were) that morning would tell you that that is no atrocity; just as the mum of the Japanese boy, whose lunch box she prepared get "fried" would disagree with "an error of judgement"!
I'm sorry, I know it is necessary to make a stand in acedemic studies, but it's just that I can't understand it... ...
You mentioned "The source of all suffering is desire", but can we human beings (that is before becoming buddha  ) do without desire? Seems like "the second best thing" resides in the choice of the desire.
____________
Seize The Day.
|
|
dArGOn
Famous Hero
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 10:10 AM |
|
|
Private hudson I personally think the USA’s lack of earlier involvement in WW II was outlandish and PH was almost the cost for our insensitivity. But there again is the rub for USA….don’t get involved and we are Isolationist…get involved and we are the World Police.
You stated “The fact that you Americans give and accept more is only indicative of your larger GDP and country!”…well that begs the question about whether we are caring nation…because we have a bigger GDP we necessarily HAVE to give humanitarian aid..I think not…it is the result of a generally caring population.
You stated “remember that one of the reasons the War on Terrorism couldn't start straight away was because Bush was rushing around desperately trying to get countries such as Russia and Pakistan to support them”….well isn’t that wise? That is prudent leadership….very prudent given the pressure here to kick some major butt and spill blood for the slaughter of innocent thousands.
I tended to really find we were on a common page regarding Sadam….when will people wake up…do others think Hitler started out by cooking millions of Jews….nope there was a methodical process towards his diabolical plans that started out in small increments so as no one would object till it was too late.
Cat mighty feisty for what appeared to me to be a pacifist mindset…I guess your pacifism only starts at actual violence and doesn’t mind attacking others verbally
You stated “I simply believe in justice and not needless slaughter. However, if you believe my remarks were pacifist, then that would make you a advocate of needless violence, surely?”….yes of course I am just totally against justice and enjoy needless slaughter…come on....lets be reasonable here!
Of course nothing is wrong with a desire for peace….but understand history and learn from it…there are evil people who don’t give a crap about your desires for peace and diplomacy and will destroy whatever they can…the only response to such evil is taking a stand that will at times include violence and killing….and given that nobody has yet to perfect the “art of war” yes innocents will die unfortunately.
|
|
dArGOn
Famous Hero
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 10:19 AM |
|
|
Yet another who missed the point
arachnid you TOTALLY missed the point....NO ONE is mocking what happened in Hiroshima....but that guy was belittling and mocking what happened in the USA. Your response would make a lot more sense if someone on this thread starting joking..."yeah I dropped the bomb on Hiroshima.
|
|
Dar_Kraven
Bad-mannered
Adventuring Hero
Finally Sober
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 02:02 PM |
|
|
lets get down to the point.
Osama bin laden Sucks huge ass
____________
|
|
Nidhgrin
Honorable
Famous Hero
baking cookies from stardust
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 03:12 PM |
|
|
I think no one has the right to take another human life. No person has the right to deliberately bring harm to another living creature (yes, that includes animals).
There are no terrorists in this world, only people fighting for their beliefs. When the beliefs of two nations/groups conflict and clash, things are usually fought out with arms, the aggressive way. Though sad it may be, it is reality. Most of us still have a cavemen attitude underneath our shiny suits. You take my meal or touch my mate? I'll smash your brains in with my club. Extremely primitive, but unfortunately very human.
Good and evil? Crap, those things don't exist! It's all a matter of different morals. We see canibalism as utter evil, buddhists see people keeping livestock and eating them as bad. We follow leaders or religions (and television, radio...) because we believe they are right and know what is best for us. People from other beliefs also do this. When those leaders decide to start a war, we automatically assume that every inhabitant of that country is bad or evil. How much further could we be from the thruth? Life is not black and white, it's a mixture of various shades of grey, not meaning that the darker shades are therefor worse, only different.
Crashing planes into buildings is an inhuman act of violence. Violence in any form is bad, and should not be. But so is bombing poor countries back into the stone age, killing friend or foe alike. Did you ever realize that so called terrorists have kids and families too, what of them? Any act of agression is bad, whether it is a direct attack or an act of retribution/revenge. The attack on the states on 11/9 is probably an act of vengeance as well.
How can people be against a whole nation? For crying out loud, 'I hate americans', what the hell are people saying that thinking. Do you know any americans, have you ever really spoken to them? I do, and I can only say that there are many different types of them, as there are many kinds of people over here in Belgium. Some are nice, and I get along with them very well. Some are not so nice. I do believe the us is suffering from the worst leadership in ages, but many americans share that opinion. Every country, every leader makes mistakes, sometimes mistakes costing millions of lives. Don't hate the countries for it, hate the regimes if you want to hate something.
I just want to say that so called terrorism is actually guerilla warfare. Underdogs trying to hurt the ego (and citizens cfr. Palestian situation) from more powerful nations. The bigger nations fight back more openly, more direct, not sneakish and stealthily as the smaller nations do. Both sides consider the other nation to be cruel and evil. They're both right and wrong. In wars, there are hardly any rules at all, and offensive acts of the enemy can be very different than our own arsenal of offensive moves. Crashing planes into buildings is not exactly something the us army would ever do. So is bombing NY with bomber planes for the al qayda militia.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not minimizing the events of 11/9 or saying you're all wrong. Acts like this hurt a nation deep, even the world holds his breath when something like that happens. It's catastrophic, unforgivably and very tragic. But so is the reaction of the us. Afghanistan is gone, the Russians didn't leave it in a good shape. Now no two stones stand on top of each other anymore and there's no food or water. If there's one thing evil on this world, it's violence, in any form. Peace and forgifness would then be good.
Look at things from different angles, see things in perspective (millions of people die of starvation each day), not only from your own point of view. People dying anywhere from unnatural causes is tragical, of course it hurts more if it happens near you. But it hurts equally much for people all around the globe. Respect each other, only good things can come of it.
____________
~Vegetables don't spam~
|
|
2XtremeToTake
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 03:31 PM |
|
|
i dont know how you guys do it you write those 6 or 7 full length paragraphs how do you do it?? i cant even get to 2 paragraphs in any of my posts
____________
I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met.
|
|
Cat
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Gonna Get Dirrty...
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 03:36 PM |
|
Edited By: Cat on 29 Jul 2002
|
DraGOON
I understand more than you do historically it seems. You cannot just define an evil mindset.
In any case, surely camp X-ray is evil using that point of view? Not to meantion Cambodia, if we want to drag through the Annales of history. The US government actually admitted that what they did in Cambodia was an act of "pure evil" and "terrorism", yet Kissinger has not been given a show trial and executed as popular culture seems to dictate.
It seems to me you see one evil for others and another to apply to yourself. This is called a double standard. Do not drag history into it... I will win hands down on those grounds.
I would also like to examine the lack of POW status and legal representation to these individuals, in a clear breach of human rights. POW status would push them into UN jurisdiction.. I think this may be why it has been refused. If Bush does not want ICC jurisdiction, hwe obviously has something to hide. Not to meantion the fact that they have been denyed lawyers, there is no evidence, and even a show trial hasn't been put together.
I also notice, even though you seem very self-rightious about "evil", the US did nothing to assist the extradition and trial of general Pinochet.
____________
 Diwethaf Gloau Sylw y Gymreag
http://aozos.com/phpBB2/index.php
|
|
Bartrex
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 03:59 PM |
|
|
I couldn't agree more with Nidhgrin, but Cat, please explain how Nidhgrin is defining evil at a double standard. If you really are drudging through (US) history could you also please focus on the whole and not just the negative? Show me a history without "good and evil". Was it evil when a US pilot was stabbed and dragged through streets of Iraq? How about the wall steet journal reporter Daniel Pearl being decapitated as a "message", was that evil? If you want a double standard, how about regimes refusing to help or participate with the US in it's "war against terrorism" then demanding they get a say in how or who controls the prisoners of that war.
____________
 "In God we trust, all others bring data"
|
|
Cat
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Gonna Get Dirrty...
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 03:59 PM |
|
|
|
Bartrex
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 04:02 PM |
|
|
Cat,
blah  , sorry
anyway, the point being if everybody played heroes the world would be a better place
edit can be a great thing eh?
____________
"In God we trust, all others bring data"
|
|
Cat
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Gonna Get Dirrty...
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 04:03 PM |
|
|
*riases hand*
I am a britton, and Tony Blair is helping so much in Bush's Phoney war, the UK is prsctically living up his arse.
I do not think wanting a say is unreasonable here, do you?
____________
Diwethaf Gloau Sylw y Gymreag
http://aozos.com/phpBB2/index.php
|
|
Cat
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Gonna Get Dirrty...
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 04:04 PM |
|
|
|
Bartrex
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 04:09 PM |
|
|
Cat,
Well no that's not unreasonable, but don't you think the US has "alittle" more reason to be incontrol of the prisoners.
and what's with this bhaal guy? he was supposed to get my coffee like and hour ago....evil b*?tard
____________
"In God we trust, all others bring data"
|
|
bort
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Discarded foreskin of morality
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 04:14 PM |
|
|
Quote:
DraGOON
I understand more than you do historically it seems. You cannot just define an evil mindset.
In any case, surely camp X-ray is evil using that point of view? Not to meantion Cambodia, if we want to drag through the Annales of history. The US government actually admitted that what they did in Cambodia was an act of "pure evil" and "terrorism", yet Kissinger has not been given a show trial and executed as popular culture seems to dictate.
It seems to me you see one evil for others and another to apply to yourself. This is called a double standard. Do not drag history into it... I will win hands down on those grounds.
I would also like to examine the lack of POW status and legal representation to these individuals, in a clear breach of human rights. POW status would push them into UN jurisdiction.. I think this may be why it has been refused. If Bush does not want ICC jurisdiction, hwe obviously has something to hide. Not to meantion the fact that they have been denyed lawyers, there is no evidence, and even a show trial hasn't been put together.
I also notice, even though you seem very self-rightious about "evil", the US did nothing to assist the extradition and trial of general Pinochet.
Hmm... You know I love you Cat, baby, but I think you're getting dangerously close to "America has done x,y and z in the past so there!" Every single point you listed here is correct, but other than camp X-ray (which I am also uncomfortable about, for the record) I'm not sure if they're relevant other than as a "well look at what the US has done! They're worse than Hitler and Osama's baby would be!"
On another note, I think Nidhgrin has made some excelent points, but I do resent the implication that there is some sort of moral equivalency between the US actions and Al Qaeda's actions. I'll grant you that the Palestinian suicide bombers, for instance, are fighting for their homeland and, although I also thoroughly dissapprove of their actions I will place them on a higher moral ground (and yes, I know that I'm not the end all judge of what is right and wrong, but I'm allowed to express my opinion) than Al Qaeda (and I know there is some overlap between the two groups, but they're not the exact same group). However, Al Qaeda (or at least Mr. Bin Laden's) seems to have the goal of "destroy the western world." When they destroyed the World Trade Center, what was the goal, really, other than to kill people and strike at a symbol? For there to be some moral equivalency, I think our counterstrike would have had to be nuking Mecca or something like that. (and yes, I know that would have been wrong and evil and a terrible atrocity, which is exactly my point).
|
|
Cat
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Gonna Get Dirrty...
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 04:15 PM |
|
|
It's that mephisio who gets me... he didn't even tell my sorc she looked cute in her mini skirt... lol
(and many american people also call for them to be made POW's.. )
____________
Diwethaf Gloau Sylw y Gymreag
http://aozos.com/phpBB2/index.php
|
|
Juulcesaar
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted July 29, 2002 04:18 PM |
|
|
Yes absolutly! kill the opressor. Away with him. The world isn't large enough for 2 men.'kill he who have dared to attack the symbols of the New God'. Strike, ...
This is Armageddon news at 7 o'clock. Today's headlines.
Another 50000 men have been executed by the ministery of Internal Affairs. All of these men where muslim, and were conspiring in 20 mosques in a part of Pakistan.
In Washington Internal affairs have killed a terrorist. He was armed with a nailcutter and was on his way to the local shop. ...
I mean with this that there isn't something as bad as paranoia and repression. If you let your feelings guide you in this matter, I fear a conflict is never far away. People don't like the unknown, as they don't like the fact someone takes their belief away. Who had ever tought that it was going to happen? Not even a politician, eager to get more votes or to get profit from this conflict would be quiet if he knew what was going to happen. But it has happened, and the best way toprevent it from happening again is by talking, not loosing control and increase Defence budgets over and over. Do you think any action would stop by 'bombing a country back to the stone age'? No, but it also doesn't stop by sitting back. The only reason that this is possible is because the target country is (really crude said) 'sticking their noses in every case where profit can be made'. I would first make sure that life is pleasant, that people have jobs, and that you can come outside without having to be armed. Later on, you can try to negotiate with the rest of the world, and HELPING the rest, not robbing it with profitable treatys. Why does the oil have to be that cheap? Look at Europe, where the oil is more then twice the price of the USA. Why needing a rocket shield if there aren't any hostile nations to fire the rocket? Why making sure you're the mos wealthy man on earth? To go in space? T go golfing? To have you pool a square meter larger then the neighbour's? This is more a way of making enemys. Jealousy, the this-can't-be-tolerated longer feeling? The same goes for the Gulf. Why assasinating S Hussein? To make oil cheaper? To kill any opposing forces?
____________
I do no longer exist...
Check 'reynaert' if you want to see me...
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
