Go Back   Freethought Forum > The Public Baths > News, Politics & Law

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #8  
Old 08-09-2005, 12:12 AM
Ari's Avatar
Ari Ari is offline
I read some of your foolish scree, then just skimmed the rest.
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bay Area
Gender: Male
Posts: XMCMLVII
Blog Entries: 8
Default Re: 60th anniversary of a-bomb attack

A reply to Al against my better judgement.

Quote:
Duh! What other targets were left in 1945 Japan?! We’d already firebombed every thing else. Why not shed your crocodile tears over those civilian deaths that far exceeded the deaths of both a-bombs put together? I know. It’s cuz it’s more cool to be against the deaths caused by a non-PC a-bomb than it is to be against deaths caused by plain old conventional bombs.
You ignored what I said but call us dumb. Ok, whatever.
Guess what I said? "I don't think most people are against the A-bomb being a large bomb."
So yes, I am obviously against the A-bomb because it's cool to be against big bombs.
I am also saddened by other civilian death, but this thread is about the A-bomb, so stay on topic.

Quote:
Since Sherman’s march to Savannah, there has been no such thing as a war in which civilians are considered off-limits.
So I shouldn't complain about targeting civilians because other people have done it. What great logic.

Quote:
The only question is whether or not combatants make attempts to discriminate between industrial and civilian targets, to maximize the former and minimize the latter. That we did in every war we fought
Not reading the thread against, Tisk tisk.
What did I say?
"What they are against is the fact America purposefully chose a civilian target to bomb."
Whatever we did in "every war" we chose to maximize civilian casualties when dropping the A bomb (the current topic), not minimize them.

Quote:
Pray tell Mr. Living in La La Land, exactly what kind of targets do you have in mind that don’t involve civilian damage?
Hey look, another bit of not reading the thread.
Civilian damage is inevitable. But "The only question is whether or not combatants make attempts to discriminate between industrial and civilian targets, to maximize the former and minimize the latter"
In this case we didn't choose to minimize the latter but maximize it. There were quite a few military targets still available but the military felt they wouldn't show off the bombs maximum power and wouldn't provide enough civilian casualties.

Quote:
I hope you are simply ignorant, for the alternative is that you are mentally ill.
Should you really be saying this when you ignored the majority of my post? Exactly what does attacking people directly gain? On a message board you can't bully people to your side, but you can make yourself look foolish.
Reply With Quote
 

  Freethought Forum > The Public Baths > News, Politics & Law


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Page generated in 0.95569 seconds with 13 queries