The Hiroshima Myth

[77zach]

Well, I am a pacifist and I carry a firearm. Pacifism doesn't have to imply a belief that violence or war cannot be justly carried out in self-defense.

I tell folks that pacifism is meaningless, a trendy affect of hippies and the like, without the teeth to defend peace.

I agree 100%

 

[MamabearCali]

I agree that facts are "nuanced" and tend to fall on both sides of the fence. Hearing this come from you, I'm a little surprised at your opposition to some of these ideas.

However, most of this post is a deflection from the valid and, yes, simple point that the more we poke our nose into others' business, the more we give them reason to hate us. All the nuance in the world doesn't make that any less true.

And the more we stay out of the world the more those who hate us smell weakness and are emboldened to attack. They will not leave us alone just because we leave them alone. They will not stop hating us becausse we find mercy in our hearts for them. Sadly, it does not work like that. It is like holding a wolf by the ears. We cannot keep on holding it (meddling in everyone's affairs) but we cannot let go either (suddenly pull back dramatically). Our enemies are not going to be content to leave well enough alone. The sitaution is fraught with danger and is very very complicated.

The best I can think of is we need to stop funding people who say they hate us, and if our friends want a loan from china they should go to them not get money from us to cause us to borrow money from China. By I have no hope of this actually happening.

I am opposed to accepting this work as gospel because I am a fan of the facts. At this time I do not think the facts support his assertions.

 

[MamabearCali]

What about ending prohibition? Mightn't that obviate the issue entirely?

Remember what I said about false dilemmas.

We could end prohibition right now and these cartels would still be in business with just a different product. They would just move on to whatever we still don't allow. Child prostitution, human trafficking, arms trafficking. They are criminals and will continue their reign. I am in favor of the decriminalization of possession of most drugs and legalization of a few. I am favor of that because I think we are doing more harm than good with the drug war on our own people. I have no delusions that this will stop the cabal on the border.

 

[77zach]

And the more we stay out of the world the more those who hate us smell weakness and are emboldened to attack. They will not leave us alone just because we leave them alone. They will not stop hating us becausse we find mercy in our hearts for them. Sadly, it does not work like that. It is like holding a wolf by the ears. We cannot keep on holding it (meddling in everyone's affairs) but we cannot let go either (suddenly pull back dramatically). Our enemies are not going to be content to leave well enough alone. The sitaution is fraught with danger and is very very complicated.

The best I can think of is we need to stop funding people who say they hate us, and if our friends want a loan from china they should go to them not get money from us to cause us to borrow money from China. By I have no hope of this actually happening.

I am opposed to accepting this work as gospel because I am a fan of the facts. At this time I do not think the facts support his assertions.

This US.gov has 10,000 hydrogen bombs. No 1st world government is going to attack the "homeland". So, you must mean the middle eastern "terrists"? Keeping in mind that you're more likely to be killed by slipping in the shower than by them, how do you propose we stop them? Surely invading secular nations like Iraq and installing radical Muslims isn't going to work. The supposed "terrists" who carried out "nineleavin" were all from Saudi Arabia, whose leaders Bush kisses and Reischmarshall Obama bows down to. Nonintervention is the only sane route.

 

[marshaul]

And the more we stay out of the world the more those who hate us smell weakness and are emboldened to attack. They will not leave us alone just because we leave them alone.

I suppose that's why Switzerland is the target of so many invasions, amirite?

I'm going to have to disagree with this oversimplification in the strongest terms.

You're (intentionally, I suspect) conflating being intimidating with being aggressive.

Ever hear anyone talk about rattlesnakes?



It's entirely possible to be intimidating to would-be opportunists, while minding one's own business. OCers do this every day.

As a country, I'd say we have that covered several times over:


http://www.rickety.us/2011/06/2010-defense-spending-by-country/

We could end prohibition right now and these cartels would still be in business with just a different product. They would just move on to whatever we still don't allow. Child prostitution, human trafficking, arms trafficking. They are criminals and will continue their reign. I am in favor of the decriminalization of possession of most drugs and legalization of a few. I am favor of that because I think we are doing more harm than good with the drug war on our own people. I have no delusions that this will stop the cabal on the border.

You think the cartels could afford to be what they are without drug profits? Everything else you mention are mere side business to them.

 

[MamabearCali]

I am going to reply to both of you in this post.

As for the Islamic terrorists. I don't think you can stop them because I think they are insane. When a whole group of people love the death of their enemy more than they love their own children I think they are insane. I think we can stop funding them. I think we can stop importing them into our nation (not opposed to immigration at all--just if your momma hates the US and you are still best friends with her maybe we should not let you in!). I generally think that if they want to live in a hell-hole we ought to let them. I just don't want to pay for it.

Switzerland is comparing apples and oranges. It is a small land locked country with limited resources. It is not a very tempting or soft target. The US is huge with many resources, and many many many soft targets.

The mob's main product was alcohol. When prohibition ended did the mob's influence end? Nope, they moved on to other things. The cartels are amoral horrible people, they are not stupid.

 

[marshaul]

Switzerland is comparing apples and oranges. It is a small land locked country with limited resources. It is not a very tempting or soft target. The US is huge with many resources, and many many many soft targets.

So, are the terrorists insane, or are they suicide bombing us because they want our resources?

You're right, it is apples and oranges. Switzerland has no enemies at all. Whereas we make a new enemy every month.

If you want to claim there's no causal relationship between, on the one hand, Switzerland minding their own business and having no enemies, and on the other hand, us constantly meddling and having countless enemies... And that the US represents a "soft target" (see above chart of military spending)? I don't even know what to say... it seems like denial at this point. I don't believe reason can sway you.

The mob's main product was alcohol. When prohibition ended did the mob's influence end? Nope, they moved on to other things.

*Ahem*... Yeah, drugs. :lol:

I would call this deflection, except it led right back to my original argument.

 

[carolina guy]

I am going to reply to both of you in this post.

As for the Islamic terrorists. I don't think you can stop them because I think they are insane. When a whole group of people love the death of their enemy more than they love their own children I think they are insane. I think we can stop funding them. I think we can stop importing them into our nation (not opposed to immigration at all--just if your momma hates the US and you are still best friends with her maybe we should not let you in!). I generally think that if they want to live in a hell-hole we ought to let them. I just don't want to pay for it.

Switzerland is comparing apples and oranges. It is a small land locked country with limited resources. It is not a very tempting or soft target. The US is huge with many resources, and many many many soft targets.

The mob's main product was alcohol. When prohibition ended did the mob's influence end? Nope, they moved on to other things. The cartels are amoral horrible people, they are not stupid.

The two main reasons we have a "problem" with the Islamic terrorists is that we KEEP meddling in their affairs. True, if we pull out, they are not going to immediately stop being upset with us, but if you give it a generation, it is unlikely that the same level of animosity will still be present. Keep in mind that we have been helping the British and the French meddle in that region since the late 1800's and continue to do so actively. At some point, you have to say that enough is enough. If we had stopped after WWII, it is unlikely that the majority of them would even be aware of the USA.

Also, what resources are the terrorists going to come to the USA or Switzerland to acquire?? Targets of opportunity, yes, resources, not likely.

Once the USA stops the century old economic imperialism, the better. The ONLY reasons for such a large military, spread so far and abroad is to maintain the economic empire and line the pockets of the people/corporations that supply that military.

 

[MamabearCali]

They are suicide bombing us because their interpretation of their religion tells them to do so. They also do so because they believe that we are evil. They believe this not because of our meddling (thought that does not help) but because of how are are portrayed in our own entertainment and movies. You and I know that what we see in the movies is not real, they don't know this. I know this because I have actually befriended some Islamic people and have asked them pertinent questions.

One fellow thought that all birthday parties involved strippers and drugs. Another person thought we all kept porn in our homes for the children to digest. Our foreign policies are a pain but they do not do near the damage that the movie industry does to our public image.


As far as waiting a generation and the anger will subside.......fat chance. Islam and the west have been in conflict for 1300 years. I do not expect it to end any time soon. Unless of course we are willing to bow to sharia.

People other than the Islamics would have their eyes on our resources.....china and Russia come to mind. Our missiles keep us relatively safe from them.


Switzerland also counts on the US and other allies in case of attack.

As far as the cartels go.
And when drugs are legal they will move on to something else or onto a drug that is not legalized. We legalize marijuana, they move to importing cocaine, we decriminalize possession of cocaine they move to meth and on and on we go. There is always a road too far. Something we will not permit and they will take advantage of this.

 

[carolina guy]

They are suicide bombing us because their interpretation of their religion tells them to do so. They also do so because they believe that we are evil. They believe this not because of our meddling (thought that does not help) but because of how are are portrayed in our own entertainment and movies. You and I know that what we see in the movies is not real, they don't know this. I know this because I have actually befriended some Islamic people and have asked them pertinent questions.

One fellow thought that all birthday parties involved strippers and drugs. Another person thought we all kept porn in our homes for the children to digest. Our foreign policies are a pain but they do not do near the damage that the movie industry does to our public image.


As far as waiting a generation and the anger will subside.......fat chance. Islam and the west have been in conflict for 1300 years. I do not expect it to end any time soon. Unless of course we are willing to bow to sharia.

People other than the Islamics would have their eyes on our resources.....china and Russia come to mind. Our missiles keep us relatively safe from them.


Switzerland also counts on the US and other allies in case of attack.

As far as the cartels go.
And when drugs are legal they will move on to something else or onto a drug that is not legalized. We legalize marijuana, they move to importing cocaine, we decriminalize possession of cocaine they move to meth and on and on we go. There is always a road too far. Something we will not permit and they will take advantage of this.

Islam and the Catholic Church were in conflict that far back, and the majority of the "soldiers" were from the Western European countries...not the US. Can't argue much about the "quality" of Hollywood products, but a physical MILITARY and political presence in their country, towns and houses speaks FAR louder than schlok from Hollywood.

For now, I think that Russia and China pose a larger risk to each other and to SE Asia than to us. Russia has been catching China poaching resources in Siberia lately...if you can, watch 1TV to get a different perspective on what Russia thinks. Aside from the missiles, the Pacific poses a pretty big barrier to their expansion towards the US.

I would highly suggest that the older European countries/empires would be a bit less active in the Middle East, Asia and Africa if they couldn't count on the US coming in a helping when needed. But again, it is easy to poopoo the idea of pulling back and not meddle with the affairs of other people and countries. What hasn't been tried is actually pulling back and seeing if it is effective, yet it is so popular to just dismiss it as "foolish". We don't because there is FAR too much money to be made to keep these areas of the world as unstable as possible.

 

[rushcreek2]

Perhaps the best measure of the "wisdom" of dropping 2 Atomic bombs on Japan - would be to consult the " Gold Star Mothers" - who had tired of being informed that their sons had been blown to bits while trying to capture some God-forgotten volcanic islands in the Pacific. Like my paternal grandmother who lost one U.S. Marine son while he was still defending Ft. McKenzie in Manila in May 1942 - long after Gen. Douglas McArthur had departed. ( My Mom once danced with Gen. McArthur BTW at an officer's club ). My father was a captain in the U.S. Army at the time.

I spent 5 years in Japan during the 1960's. Learned to speak Japanese fairly well. Came close to marrying a very beautiful Japanese woman. I even met with her family in Hirosaki, Japan in 1963. They were polite, respecful - not to cool about their daughter/sister hooking up with a " Geijin" - but they were respectful, and shared with me their yet unresolved hatred for the U.S. as a result of Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. The Japanese have never - and never will -accept the pleadings about the " necessity" for the use of those 2 bombs on civilians. Had we dropped one on Iwo Jima - they would have understood.

If my comments appear to be somewhat disjointed, confused, unsettled, and of no practical use in resolving this debate - perhaps that is because - as they say - war is Hell.

 

[77zach]

capture some God-forgotten volcanic islands in the Pacific[....] still defending Ft. McKenzie in Manila in May 1942

This settles the issue for me. It is difficult to imagine circumstances where I would leave the vicinity of US waters in the name of defending it. I resent the fact that $ is taken from me for foreign adventures. I would never let my children be kidnapped (NewSpeak="drafted") to serve the elites interests, possibly being killed, maimed, or mentally maimed in the process.

 

[MamabearCali]

Rush creek that is prob a pretty good explanation on both sides.

 

[MamabearCali]

77zack. I would never ever support a draft.

Boys it has been fun. Very stimulating. Real life calls. Take care.

 

[Deanimator]

Duh, no one wants to surrender "unconditionally", that is a tyrannical thing to ask for.

Nobody gave a damn what the Japanese wanted.

I don't now.

They started the war. We ended it. If they didn't like how we ended it, they could have surrendered sooner or simply not started it at all.

Treating the perpetrators of the Rape of Nanking like delinquent hubcap thieves is despicable.

 

[Deanimator]

How U.S. Economic Warfare Provoked Japan's Attack on Pearl Harbor.

All of that swill is premised on the "argument" that the United States had a DUTY to sit back while Japan attacked a friendly country. It's an argument well beloved of neo-Nazis and ultra-rightwing Japanese. It makes perfect "sense"... if you believe that a rapist has a right to rape, but a bystander has no right to intervene.

Revisionism is the result of recognizing that history is written by the victors, and there's often something to learn by considering the other side. That's all I'm after.

Revisionism is the result of equal parts self-loathing and colossal historical ignorance.

 

[marshaul]

All of that swill is premised on the "argument" that the United States had a DUTY to sit back while Japan attacked a friendly country. It's an argument well beloved of neo-Nazis and ultra-rightwing Japanese. It makes perfect "sense"... if you believe that a rapist has a right to rape, but a bystander has no right to intervene.


Revisionism is the result of equal parts self-loathing and colossal historical ignorance.

I hope you don't expect me to respond meaningfully to your truckload of emotional appeals, misleading vividness, straw men, implied ad hominem attacks, and outright falsehoods. If you can't even attempt to make an argument before resorting to all that crap, you must not have one.

 

[OneForAll]

I hope you don't expect me to respond meaningfully to your truckload of emotional appeals, misleading vividness, straw men, implied ad hominem attacks, and outright falsehoods. If you can't even attempt to make an argument before resorting to all that crap, you must not have one.

Honestly, it seems like you can not handle being opposed in your opinion when someone else has a better argument.

 

[marshaul]

Honestly, it seems like you can not handle being opposed in your opinion when someone else has a better argument.

:lol: I missed the part were he actually made an argument.

I was perfectly willing to engage you and MamaBearCali when you had something worthwhile to say, so don't give me that.

 

[OneForAll]

:lol: I missed the part were he actually made an argument.

I was perfectly willing to engage you and MamaBearCali when you had something worthwhile to say, so don't give me that.

His argument was against what you and 77zach keep going on about. (read your post) I was not willing to debate with someone who can not except they are wrong.