Which country will deploy nuclear warfare ?
- Thread starter alpha85
- Start date
Re: I don't like Truman
Interesting links but the articles are not written by some official and reknown historians so they can't be considereated as trustworthy or reliable sources. Hirohito approved attacks against America despite he was a figurehead in Japan.
just my opinion on these links
regards
georges
Interesting links but the articles are not written by some official and reknown historians so they can't be considereated as trustworthy or reliable sources. Hirohito approved attacks against America despite he was a figurehead in Japan.
just my opinion on these links
regards
georges
Re: I don't like Truman
a) America has a nuclear straegic force, strategic bombers, ICBMS, ohio class subs that are enough to reply strongly and fiercely in case of being attacked.Nothing wrong with pre emptive action, the best defense is to take measures before being seriously attacked.
b) because you think other countries have never manipulated the media, you are so naive.
c) It is better to be patriotic than not patriotic. In a period of war, you should support your troops and not be so damn ungrateful towards the country that gave you your actual citizenship despite I find you personnally very unamerican and ungrateful towards America. It is better to be patriotic than not especially in period of war. People who dislike and think they are all allowed in USA can leave it if they dislike it.
d) because the official version according to the liberal medias is always accurate? damn on which earth are you living.
e) people made choices and decided to sacrifice their lives for their country and for a cause they find just, yet you have the nerve to criticize them, disrespect them or even insult them. You wouldn't have done what they have done and you wouldn't have the courage to do what they did. I bet you would have criticized in the same way the GIs, pilots and marines who sacrified their lives for freeding Europe from nazism. Under Mc Carthy, you would be either put in jail or in a disciplinarian camp, you don't live in the Mc Carthy so please quit complaining. You are however having some very far left wing /communistic ideas.
f) I have an opposite opinion about this.
g) You don't trust the country that has given you your citizenship????
h) Europeans weren't present in the pacific front so they don't know.
i) Having responsability for words is important and so is having respect for the people who fight for your country and its values as well as having respect for the country that has given you your citizenship.
sorry for bing redundant but I needed to be clear
regards
georges
a) I do. What I was trying to say was, if America was genuinely attacked - I mean, an attempted invasion - then the invading party would be destroyed, nuked, blasted to hell and taken over. No-one dares take on America, even if they wanted to, because America has vast amounts of money, infinitely advanced weaponry, and the cold survivalist streak to arrange programs such as "mutually assured destruction" (you destroy us, our weapons destroy you from remote locations), and now the sickening "pre-emptive" action, which basically means, if we think you might attack us (or rather if we can convince our public you are a threat), we will attack you. Wouldn't you agree that America would "take everyone down with the ship" if it were ever under attack on many fronts from some sort of consortium - a la Iraq in the Gulf War. Never gonna happen: despite the fact that the WHO and other respected world organizations frequently define American military operations throughout the past 60 years as terrorist activities.
b) America is the richest country in the world by a mile, no matter which way you look at it. Thinking we are in economic crisis when we lead the world in every financial category and are not losing ground, is another example of those that feed us the data and the information manipulating us to keep us in fear, to keep us ready to work hard and fight harder, and to keep us under pressure when really, we are comfortably dominating global politics with no regard for the rest of the kids at the party.
c) There's nothing moral about it: in America, education is decidedly and clearly and frequently acknowledged to be highly patriotic, and extremely pro-American (and never anti-American) especially in some states. In Britain half - and I mean HALF - of our teachers were not only anti-British government, anti-establishment, anti-nuke (even in WWII), anti-war, and anti-patriotism. It was a completely different way to grow up. The Sun, unfortunately, counterbalances the highly UNpatriotic way we are taught in school, and regrettably, since the majority of the Sun readers never listened in school (if they attended), we do have a culture of undereducated overworked "British patriots" against those who honestly seem not to value England any more highly, and often more lowly (perhaps because it is not exotic, and because many of them hated Thatcher, Major and now Blair), than any other country in the world. This level of patriotism and one-sided historical perspectives is only so strong, brash, and open in the seemingly closed society that is the USA. Whoever designed this to turn out "patriots" that fire first and ask questions later, for fear of being deemed unpatriotic, was a genius... an evil, controllig genius.
d) I don't deny the version exists, I just deny that any one version is "true", more likely the truth is somewhere between all versions. The official American version, as far as I'm concerned, is almost NEVER accurate, because there always seems to be - always - some kind of agenda.
e) Yes, of course, but where are they now? Over time, the patriots drown them out and they sink into the background. Their sons and daughters join the army and we call them heroes. You describe yourself as anti-war or anti-military these days in America and you are branded a coward, unpatriotic, unAmerican (who defines what THAT means?), and most worryingly, a "terrorist". It sounds exactly like the McCarthy era, only for terrorist, read Communist. Nothing has changed.
f) You must also remember that I separate the America (leaders) that I dislike from the America (the people and the land) that I love and cry for. When I insult America, which is not what I intend to do, it is ALWAYS and ONLY reserved for the leaders and those that manipulate and control the information. I have nothing but respect and anxiousness for the American people, of which I am now one.
g) But remember, that's the American version of what would have happened. The official version. How do we know that would have happened?
h) In other parts of the world, Europe, Asia for example, equally viable as THAT official story is the well-publicized theory that Japan was broken and stifled and literally on the verge of surrender. Whether they were or not, it is hard to determine, there are so many conflicting versions of the state of Japan on the day those bombs were dropped. I tend to think the war was already won and believe the popular theory that Japan was days away from an unconditional surrender, which is why those bombs were dropped. Initially, they were described as an "accident". It was clearly a test, as far as I'm concerned, in a war that was already over. If it was to end the war, why were there no well-publicized warnings and why was Japan not threatened with this horrible fate before the fate was exacted? I'm sure there are some versions of propaganda - I mean, events - which claim that America warned Japan. But there are some versions that claim Japan had already surrendered and that the official surrender by the Emperor was not publicized precisely so this test could be carried out. Crazy theory, but still a possibility. WHO KNOWS.
i) Thanks for the chat, and peace. We should try not to get angry, not that you have, but only because none of us wants to be banned - I know these kinds of threads stir up heavy emotions, and I am trying to be as objective and as un-insulting as possible, while still giving my point of view on the topic. Be aware that it is just that: an opinion, which none of you should take personally.
Fox
a) America has a nuclear straegic force, strategic bombers, ICBMS, ohio class subs that are enough to reply strongly and fiercely in case of being attacked.Nothing wrong with pre emptive action, the best defense is to take measures before being seriously attacked.
b) because you think other countries have never manipulated the media, you are so naive.
c) It is better to be patriotic than not patriotic. In a period of war, you should support your troops and not be so damn ungrateful towards the country that gave you your actual citizenship despite I find you personnally very unamerican and ungrateful towards America. It is better to be patriotic than not especially in period of war. People who dislike and think they are all allowed in USA can leave it if they dislike it.
d) because the official version according to the liberal medias is always accurate? damn on which earth are you living.
e) people made choices and decided to sacrifice their lives for their country and for a cause they find just, yet you have the nerve to criticize them, disrespect them or even insult them. You wouldn't have done what they have done and you wouldn't have the courage to do what they did. I bet you would have criticized in the same way the GIs, pilots and marines who sacrified their lives for freeding Europe from nazism. Under Mc Carthy, you would be either put in jail or in a disciplinarian camp, you don't live in the Mc Carthy so please quit complaining. You are however having some very far left wing /communistic ideas.
f) I have an opposite opinion about this.
g) You don't trust the country that has given you your citizenship????
h) Europeans weren't present in the pacific front so they don't know.
i) Having responsability for words is important and so is having respect for the people who fight for your country and its values as well as having respect for the country that has given you your citizenship.
sorry for bing redundant but I needed to be clear
regards
georges
*edit*
First off, the key to understanding history is to not demonize people. It's requires one to understand why. If you note in all my comments on everyone -- from W., to Clinton and all the way back to Monroe, Washington and Madison -- I will never demonize people or their actions. That's rhetoric. I try to understand people, social-economic systems and see patterns over time.
[ HINT: I actually studied engineering in college, which is the study of systems -- not technology (which is not engineering), but systems -- including socio-economic systems (although typically more micro than macro). ]
Secondly, other than 1 history class in middle school, I had only 2 classes in any "social study" in my life -- both in college (which I couldn't clep out of). I took both of those classes at the college level while in high school. And I don't know how many times my 2 instructors would say, "I never thought of it that" when they tried to explain factors -- especially in knowing historical figures, cultures, etc... It really goes back to my 8th grade history teacher. He flat out told myself and my parents that I was far too well and broadly read to be fed the unilateral history taught in public school. In fact, the reason I didn't have 7th grade history was because the instructor failed me after my first semester (my only F, on a report card of straight A's), and that was that for my parents.
I never, ever even have a single geography class in my entire life -- no joke! Not in grade or high school, nor college. I even had a hard-ass high school guidance counselor get on my case, until I started challenging her with basic US geography, and really up'd-the-ante by throwing world geography at her. My father was a civil engineer, and I was studying maps (and doing trignometry) before my age hit double digits, it was a major past-time. In college, my dean allowed me to take a graduate course in geo-environmental study, instead of the mandatory freshman geography 101 class. That, combined with several environmental engineering courses, really taught me to despise "popular environmentalism" (before then, I was a typical Gen-X environmentalist).
It's always been a my hobby and interest. I don't think I can be a responsible American without knowing why all the Amendments exist, and not subscribing that some "are stupid" while others are not. I wanted to know more about the early 20th century American Imperialism into the Phillipines and other places, and how they were similar but different from "Old Europe" Imperialism. I wanted to understand why the US did what it did, and why other nations challenged it.
I don't believe I am always correct. But I do believe I never stoop to the level of demonizing people, leaders or other non-sense. There is much to be said about understanding the interests of nations and their leaders.
People can instantly point at me and say, "he didn't study history, he doesn't know anything." Sigh, it's always been my pastime. Hell, I taught middle school kids for half a year and got into major trouble for having an extra credit project involving the OMB charts 1971-2000. I let the kids draw their own conclusions, but those results pissed off the liberal administration.
Especially when many of the kids, who were in gifted algebra, were actually using basic first-order differential calculus fundamentals with areas to show trends. There's nothing more ugly than that downward slant that Clinton left for W. in 2000.
hopefully this link may deter some votes from america, maybe after this some heat may be taken away from eye-ran and channelled to north korea.
Smithi
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/5403550.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/5403572.stm
Smithi
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/5403550.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/5403572.stm
This has been long in coming. They had the bomb in 1999, although probably not in a form that could be feasibly delivered in that time other than via a heavy bomber. It will be interesting to see what improvements they have made since then. If it's something they can mount atop of a ballistic missile, then it's going to be a rather interesting show down.
But at least with North Korea, we know what they want. They want money and materials. That's why the US is very unlikely to use any military action -- unless Kim is really stupid and deploys them along the border. Then the US would pre-emptively attack and take them out.
With Iran, there is far less certainty, especially with their declared policies to eradicate any Zionist entity. But Iran has never invaded another sovereign nation, and been the victim of many incursions.
North Korea has, but never surrendered under terms that forbid many things.
well, and sadly this thread just turned in a a stupid WW2 disscusion.....anyaway to think that US dropped the bomb to save more amerian/japanese ppl, is pretty stupid, since the peace was already compromised before that, actually some historians says that the US droped the bomb before the agreed peace sign date , only to warn the soviet union to dont take japan
anyway NK and Iran have all the right to get their nukes actually to avoid that........
"Then the US would pre-emptively attack and take them out."
go figure that...........
anyway NK and Iran have all the right to get their nukes actually to avoid that........
"Then the US would pre-emptively attack and take them out."
go figure that...........
Huh?
The Russians couldn't take Japan any more than we could without countless losses -- especially Japanese civilians. Now there is some truth to the fact that we did not want to see Japan conditionally surrender, namely to the USSR. But there is no way they could "take Japan" by signing an agreement. They had no such positon.
If DPRK and Iran deployed them within striking distance of neighbors, yes, the US would. That's its national security policy -- and hasn't changed in decades (i.e., W. didn't introduce the idea). Just the THREAT of this is the necessary evil to DETER the DPRK and Iran from doing such.
It's been a problem ever since the Cuban Missile Crisis. E.g., Turkey felt like the US "sold it out" for its own safety. It has nothing to do with the US, but the ALLIES of the US.
Different types of nuclear usage ...
I guess you don't know much about tactical nukes used under-ground/under-water. Mass destruction requires air-burst. If the US uses tactical nukes, they will not be air-burst.Actually it really doesn't matter WHO will depoy nuclear warefare because we will all lose!
Personaly, I think the whole world is fucked and the sooner we blow ourselves all up, or someone does it for us, the better off things will be.
Forget I said that! I was drunk when I posted that!:eek:
It's OK! These things happen!
North Korea ...
Bah! It's all hindsight now.
Actually, I was reading a bit on North Korea last night from several sources. I never knew that Gore disagreed with Carter and Clinton on the 1994 resolution (although Clinton disagreed with Carter's engagement). And he had a big "I told you so" before Clinton was out of office.
Bah! It's all hindsight now.
I need to fuck more before it happens..
I can't see any country firing off a nuke.....but I can see a dirty bomb going off somewhere unfortunately...
I sure as hell hope no one uses a nuclear bomb. The US used atomic bombs on Japan and those are far weaker than the nuclear bombs that are availabe today :eek: . Just imagine the untold horrors those things caused in Japan, and understand that today's nuclear bombs are 50 to hundreds of times more powerful than those. I shudder anytime I think about the fact that we are in the nuclear age. We live in a dangerous world, and everyday I pray for our descendants .Similar threads
