US government, friend or enemy ?

[Acriku]

You are bound to come on to good points, so for that I read your posts.

[emprworm]

You are bound to come on to good points, so for that I read your posts.

by the way, Acriku: what is your opinion on these two points:

1. Us Government, friend or enemy?

2. Removing Hussein From Power through Coalition

[thomas]

so whats the plan huh? leave shaddam to himself so he may kill more kurds ( he has already killed 1.2m)? (oh and stop the anti-us we massacare crap, early 1900 russia was WAY the hell worse I'm talking about 20 million civys dead 10k ploish oficers massacared)

[Edric O]

So just because someone is worse, that means it's okay for you to massacre people as long as it's less than the other guys massacre? ::)

[Acriku]

1. It's a bit more complex than that. Local and state are friends, but federal is the kind of friend that is doing what it can do keep national security at whatever cost.

2. Through coalition of the US and UN? I'd say it would be good if that happens, but if necessary without the UN.

[emprworm]

1. It's a bit more complex than that. Local and state are friends, but federal is the kind of friend that is doing what it can do keep national security at whatever cost.

2. Through coalition of the US and UN? I'd say it would be good if that happens, but if necessary without the UN.

thank you, Acriku for sharing that opinion. In all this political mess of threads, i never knew what your views actually were.

[thomas]

So just because someone is worse, that means it's okay for you to massacre people as long as it's less than the other guys massacre? ::)

yea but hte US has only massacared about 2m and that was when we nuked nagasaki and hiroshima and it still saved millions of japanese, russians, and americans

[Edric O]

No it didn't. Japan was ready to surrender, but Truman nuked them anyway.

[Acriku]

Just like they were ready to sign a peace treaty, before they attacked Pearl Harbor ::)

[Miles]

No it didn't. Japan was ready to surrender, but Truman nuked them anyway.

Japan was NOT ready to surrender. In fact it was beafing up it's defenses of the mainland with the notion that, in defeat, they would take out as many americans as possible. They would not even surrender after the first bomb. Where do you get this ridiculous information that you continuously post?

[emprworm]

No it didn't. Japan was ready to surrender, but Truman nuked them anyway.

Japan was NOT ready to surrender. In fact it was beafing up it's defenses of the mainland with the notion that, in defeat, they would take out as many americans as possible. They would not even surrender after the first bomb. Where do you get this ridiculous information that you continuously post?

lol. everytime you quote edric i have to read it. Japan was going to surrender? Please. they were fierce warriors, going so far as to commit suicide before surrenduring. Besides, Edric has stated in this forum more than once given the circumstances and less than a full understanding of Atomic weaponry, the bombs dropped on Japan were not condemnable acts.

i could attempt to dig up those posts, but I'm hoping he will fess up shortly.

[TMA_1]

edric, just because there is great evil in war, doesnt mean that it wont stop now. War itself is evil to begin with. You cannot idealize war as you do. try to not see things so much through rose colored classes.

[Anathema]

Edrics right. The Japanese were ready to negotiate. Not because the nukes that would otherwise follow would kill many civilians, but because the US might consider nuking their emperor.

[emprworm]

Edrics right. The Japanese were ready to negotiate. Not because the nukes that would otherwise follow would kill many civilians, but because the US might consider nuking their emperor.

and how do you know this?

[quoudam72]

::) We have been over this Japan being bombed by the US before it is the same conversation as it was before do we have to have another deja vu?

Why can we not just stay on topic with the ones on the list. Emprworm as Gob pointed out yes I was talking about some of the other situtions where it is not so easy to defend the actions of America.

Brazil, Congo/Zaire, Cambodia, Dominican Republic just to name a few to start. I will have to agree with some eariler posts that this guy might want to look at his information a little better. I think in the way of good information he gets a little carried away. Most of his finger pointing should go towards the early 50' to late 70's with most things happening later because of the US actions during that 20-30 year span.

[Edric O]

lol. everytime you quote edric i have to read it. Japan was going to surrender? Please. they were fierce warriors, going so far as to commit suicide before surrenduring. Besides, Edric has stated in this forum more than once given the circumstances and less than a full understanding of Atomic weaponry, the bombs dropped on Japan were not condemnable acts.

i could attempt to dig up those posts, but I'm hoping he will fess up shortly.

Go right ahead - try to dig them up. You'll find that my understanding of atomic weaponry tends to be very good, thank you very much.

And yes, Japan was ready to negotiate a peace treaty. It wasn't unconditional surrender, though, and that's what Truman didn't like. So he decided to kill a few hundred thousand people to drive the point home... ::)