Quake3World

http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/0000000CACD0.htm

a pretty succinct summary of the racial attitudes which led to the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, but not to A-bombs in Nazi Germany

there was a quote in the Globe and Mail the other day from Prime Minister Mackenzie King that went something like "it gladdens me to see thing that the atom bomb was used against the japanese rather than the white races of europe."

although, call me a prick, i woulda dropped the bomb too. "That's what you get for fuckin pearl harbour, cunts."

prick

pearl harbor
tch, thats nothing compared to what happened in europe
bunch of whiny cunts :icon32:

that article is sooooooooo slanted it isn't funny.. and no that's not a racial slur..

sliver wrote:
although, call me a prick, i woulda dropped the bomb too. "That's what you get for fuckin pearl harbour, cunts."

yes, you are certainly a prick, luckily someone like you is never going to have any chance of having power beyond typing shit in a chatroom.

sliver wrote:although, call me a prick, i woulda dropped the bomb too. "That's what you get for fuckin pearl harbour, cunts."

1 - you're a prick
2 - you're canadian, so why do you give a fuck about pearl harbor anyway?
3 - a-bombing two cities full of civilians is not even remotely commensurate with a conventional attack on a naval base (leaving aside the fact that the justification for the attack - pre-emptive self-defence - is the same justification now being used by bush regards iraq. presumably the iraqi resistance has the right to nuke washington and new york now?)

Dek wrote:that article is sooooooooo slanted it isn't funny.. and no that's not a racial slur..

well that's a fascinating assertion with no argument or evidence to back it up whatsoever. in what way is it slanted?

in no way do i condone using the a-bomb, but one has to wonder,
what if the shoe was on the other foot?
do you think hitler or his ilk would have pondered the humanity before using it if he/they could have?
to some degree i feel sorry for the japanese non combatants that suffered,but did the japanese soldiers feel sorry for murdering innocents ?
i highly doubt it.

seremtan wrote:

Dek wrote:that article is sooooooooo slanted it isn't funny.. and no that's not a racial slur..

well that's a fascinating assertion with no argument or evidence to back it up whatsoever. in what way is it slanted?

If you are so blind you can't see the slant in that article you are more of a ignorant person then I ever thought of you.

busetibi wrote:in no way do i condone using the a-bomb, but one has to wonder,
what if the shoe was on the other foot?
do you think hitler or his ilk would have pondered the humanity before using it if he/they could have?
to some degree i feel sorry for the japanese non combatants that suffered,but did the japanese soldiers feel sorry for murdering innocents ?
i highly doubt it.

First, eye for an eye is always wrong. Just because someone did something to you doens't mean we can do it to them. You're even taking it a step further, you're actually saying that the bomb should've been dropped because they could potentially do the same if they had an atomic bomb (which I might add, they did not).

Additionally, you're saying their lack of remorse for killing warrants the US to kill them as well. You're portraying this lack of remorse as something evil. Doesn't that make the US similarly evil then?

Dek wrote:If you are so blind you can't see the slant in that article you are more of a ignorant person then I ever thought of you.

So what if he's ignorant? What does it matter? If he's ignorant, then enlighten him and point out why this article is "slanted".

Name-calling doesn't really put any weight to your claims.

busetibi wrote:in no way do i condone using the a-bomb, but one has to wonder,
what if the shoe was on the other foot?
do you think hitler or his ilk would have pondered the humanity before using it if he/they could have?
to some degree i feel sorry for the japanese non combatants that suffered,but did the japanese soldiers feel sorry for murdering innocents ?
i highly doubt it.

if the shoe was on the other foot, any japanese/german responsible for nuking the alies would have been considered a war criminal for such an act.

I imagine on both sides, some troops felt sorry for the people they killed, some enjoyed it, some didnt give a fuck and just followed orders.

Its unrealistic to imagine the someone just because they were fighting for a certain country is an evil murdering bloodthirsty cunt, while troops fighting for another country were all patriotic heros, who cried every time they have to take a life.

well ive never heard of any allied troops gassing german civilians or allied troops chopping off heads with swords

busetibi wrote:well ive never heard of any allied troops gassing german civilians or allied troops chopping off heads with swords

And that's exactly what makes the allies better than the nazi's in that aspect. But if the allies respond to such atrocities with other atrocities, then the allies are just as bad as those that opposed them.

You can't warrant atrocities by claiming they were done in response to other atrocities. Something like that is happening in Israel with the Palestinians. A muslim blows himself up in Israel and Sharon responds with a major display of military power. In return, another muslim blows himself up. They ended up in a spiral of violence.

The winners of any war are the ones who get to write history..


War is hell.. seriously.. it's not a bunch of teddy bears and candy canes.

Do some research. The U.S. was trying to stay completely out of the war. They didn't get fully involved until attacked at Pearl Harbor.

It's stupid to think that it was simply a race war due to the fact that japenese is not a race, just as chinese and german isn't a race.

So, why didn't we hit China? They are asian..

Japan hit us, we hit them back a few years later in repayment.

Japan now leads the US in almost every way technology because of the time and money the 'US' put back into the Japan economy to rebuild it over the last 40 years.

The US used the bomb to show that if/when attacked that the US would not be afraid to use any means necessary to repay our attackers. Japan was the enemy in WW2, not just the military all of Japan was our enemy.

I would have dropped the bomb too, but 60 years later it doesn't matter. All that does matter is the U S of A saved you Euros from Ze Germans.

Dek wrote:The winners of any war are the ones who get to write history..


War is hell.. seriously.. it's not a bunch of teddy bears and candy canes.

Kicking someone that's down on the floor is still not very honorable.

Dek wrote:Do some research. The U.S. was trying to stay completely out of the war. They didn't get fully involved until attacked at Pearl Harbor.

True, but when the US government knew they had already won the war, then why would they drop a bomb, other than a simple display of destructive power?

Dek wrote:It's stupid to think that it was simply a race war due to the fact that japenese is not a race, just as chinese and german isn't a race.

So, why didn't we hit China? They are asian..

The Chinese were not involved in the war. (edit: yes, they were involved in the war but not as aggressor nor against the allies as far as I'm aware) I'm not saying that the reason the bombs were dropped were for racial reasons, but it's very well possible that Japan was chosen as target because of that.

I strongly believe that dropping the bombs wasn't a strategic decision to end the war sooner.

Dek wrote:Japan hit us, we hit them back a few years later in repayment.

Japan now leads the US in almost every way technology because of the time and money the 'US' put back into the Japan economy to rebuild it over the last 40 years.

And I'm sure they're grateful for the help, but that doesn't do anything about the fact that the US dropped two nuclear bombs on Japan when they knew Japan was ready to give up.

:icon22: @ Dave
bwahahahahaha

the exact thing the russians say

Eraser wrote:The Chinese were not involved in the war.

The Chinese weren't involved in the war? Rape of Nanking ring a bell?

busetibi wrote:the exact thing the russians say

I guess they have us both to thank

What I mean is that (AFAIK) they never fought against the allies

Eraser wrote:
The Chinese were not involved in the war.

oh my,
Eraser,
try googling " Nanjing Massacre"

busetibi wrote:

Eraser wrote:
The Chinese were not involved in the war.

oh my,
Eraser,
try googling " Nanjing Massacre"

Eraser wrote:What I mean is that (AFAIK) they never fought against the allies

busetibi wrote:well ive never heard of any allied troops gassing german civilians or allied troops chopping off heads with swords

perhaps not gassing civilians, but did you ever read about the dresden fire bombings? Those bombings killed more people in a single night than both the a-bombs together...

r3t wrote:

busetibi wrote:well ive never heard of any allied troops gassing german civilians or allied troops chopping off heads with swords

perhaps not gassing civilians, but did you ever read about the dresden fire bombings? Those bombings killed more people in a single night than both the a-bombs together...

Possibly untrue, possibly not. Read the discussion of deaths here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of ... rld_War_II