RE: the US has to invade Iran

Originally posted by Thegeneral I have already said I am stopping with the French jokes.  Did you not read? Of course countries will put their own intersts in front of what their allies want.  But you must admit, we did come to the Frenchs' aid during WWII when we really had more to lose by helping them.  But we did have our reasons to help. America is on a fine path.  It has not changed from the one that was set hundreds of years ago by our found fathers.  the only differnce is that the publis, culture, and society has changed; for the worst, I must add.

We did not have more to lose by fighting the Second World war in Europe. We only helped our ally when we were attcked at Pearl Harbor, and then only because it was in our interest: if the axis won in Europe, we would have had a circle of enemies all around us. America certainly gained alot, we became the superpower that we are today.

America is not on a fine path, internationally or domestically, certainly not the one intended by the founding fathers: that is another issue though, and I have to leave; deal with that later.

Originally posted by Thegeneral America is on a fine path.  It has not changed from the one that was set hundreds of years ago by our found fathers.

Yes, our forefathers who said all men are created equal, but owned slaves, and only their social class was allowed to vote. You're right, America has not really changed. You see inequality everywhere you go. Its the peoples fault for not speaking up about problems with our nation. Your house, your luxuries, and everything in society is only there to blind you from whats really going on. If you see an inequality, even if it doesnt affect you, how can you not speak up? This is what we fail to do as citizens of this country. Other people would kill to have the freedom to protest and speak out against the government. We have this freedom and we choose not to exercise it because we dont care what happens in the world, as long as it doesnt affect us. Once the world is in chaos, and you are the one being opressed, no one will be left to stand up for you, because you chose not to stand up for them.

I hope people realize this before its too late.

And just to stay on topic, the U.S. doesnt need to invade Iran.

Originally posted by Thegeneral And it is funny how back then France and Britain loved when we entered a war and yet now adays, when we get attacked first, no one decides to help us.

After 9/11 the world came to help America to console them for the 6,000 lives lost. No one mourned the 100,000 Japanese civilians that the U.S. illegally bombed. Or the millions that died during the slave trade. Or the millions of native Americans killed. No one wants the U.S. to join a war because it is an invitation to have mass murders. Just look at our history.


Edited by ArmenianSurvival

Originally posted by Genghis Haha, can you really believe that?  We were at war, in a total war, you sound so absurd saying that.

The Japanese bombed a naval harbor that was controlled by the U.S. military. The U.S. bombed a city full of civilians. I do not sound absurd, i am simply stating facts. What is absurd that the U.S. now condemns terrorist activity because it "harms innocent civilians". We purposely bombed not one, but two cities full of innocent civilians. When its convenient for us we call it war, when someone does it to us we call it terrorism. Call it what you want, it is what it is. Evil.

Those so called "innocent Japanese" were not so innocent.  Had we had to go ashore on the hoem islands millions more for each side would have died.  And had we come ashore every single Jap would have fought to the death because their emperor told them so.  That is not innocent.

TheGeneral, if you talk about ineguality in France compared to the USA. You're taking an unwinable debate. France is a country where the differences (albeit still strong) between social classes are the less important. There is only one region really above the other in term of wealth and it's Ile de France. And there is only one region behind the others in term of wealth and its Corsica.

Beside this, when the USA were attacked by Al Qaeda, the French troops went in Afghanistan, it was even the first mission of the Rafale.

Originally posted by Genghis Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival No one mourned the 100,000 Japanese civilians that the U.S. illegally bombed. Haha, can you really believe that?  We were at war, in a total war, you sound so absurd saying that.

But you can justify every atrocity by saying that.,
Rape of Nanking? Oradour sur Glaine? Bataan Death March? Warsaw Ghetto uprising? the Holocaust? Nothing wrong with all of that, these things happen in a total war.

Catt, i understand your point. Maybe i made it seem like i was bashing the U.S., but that was not the case, but thats my fault for not clarifying. All i was trying to say is that the U.S. bombing not just one, but two cities full of innocent civilians was just too excessive for me. If the U.S. had so much power like you said, they could have completely destroyed military targets in Japan. We could have nuked an army base instead, and done a lot more damage to the actual people that were fighting us.

I simply made the comparison between 1941 U.S. and todays terrorists because they both bomb civilians for a greater purpose, and that is victory. Whether thats good or bad is up to you, but that is what it is.

Bombing innocent civilians is terrorism no matter what time period you live in, it all depends on the context, such as who is doing it and why, and that decides whether it is accepted or not. Whether you choose to believe it was necessary or not is up to you. The U.S. found it necessary during WWII, and it seems to have worked out for us. The terrorists of today believe that it is necessary for them to resort to those tactics. I dont agree with terrorism, just like i dont agree with the nuking of Japan, but they are both necessary depending on which point of view you look at it from. Obviously, terrorism is not necessary to us as Americans, because it is an evil act being committed in our country (and others). But, from their point of view, its very necessary. Terrorism is not a pointless act, just because we dont agree with it doesnt mean theres no purpose behind it. Theres a big difference between supporting terrorism and realizing why it happens.

And the time period matters in many aspects, with that i agree with you. But, if youre looking at the aspect of human psychology and behavior, it has been the same since the beginning of time. The only difference is the technology and the means it is carried out.

Bombing innocent civilians is terrorism no matter what time period you live in, it all depends on the context, such as who is doing it and why, and that decides whether it is accepted or not.

Hurting civilians is distasteful and ethically wrong in principal, but it is not terrorism. Terrorists' aim in hurting civilians is to have a front page story. The atomic bombing had strategic and logistical goals.

The two bombs saved more lives in the long run. The U.S. was planning on fighting Japan for two more years, and predicted that the cost in American and Japanese lives were going to be much higher, judging by the fierce fighting in Okinawa and Iwo Jima. Japan was feared by their suicidal sacrifice on defending itself. After all, they didn�t surrender after the first atomic bomb was dropped. Let us not forget this detail.

Originally posted by hugoestr Bombing innocent civilians is terrorism no matter what time period you live in, it all depends on the context, such as who is doing it and why, and that decides whether it is accepted or not. Hurting civilians is distasteful and ethically wrong in principal, but it is not terrorism. Terrorists' aim in hurting civilians is to have a front page story. The atomic bombing had strategic and logistical goals. The two bombs saved more lives in the long run. The U.S. was planning on fighting Japan for two more years, and predicted that the cost in American and Japanese lives were going to be much higher, judging by the fierce fighting in Okinawa and Iwo Jima. Japan was feared by their suicidal sacrifice on defending itself. After all, they didn�t surrender after the first atomic bomb was dropped. Let us not forget this detail.

quite right, hugoestr, my grandfather was going to be in the second wave of the assault on Japan....the leaders of the army told them to kill anything that moved...anything that moved...man, dog, woman

this was necessary because of the Japanese mentality to fight to end and never give up, a suppression there such as the one in Iraq never would have worked.

now, i ask the bombs or the invasion?

the results would have greatly varied....draw your own conclusions