Page 10 of 20 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 191

Thread: Iran passes redline, has enough U235 for Bomb

  1. #91
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: Iran passes redline, has enough U235 for Bomb

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    The only thing disturbing is the fact you canont read what was said earlier. The comment said earlier was that civilian deaths is ok as long as if warning (as obscure as it can be) is ok as long as it saves lives on YOUR side. This comment was not made by me.

    Way to jump in and put your foot in your mouth. Scourge yourself to another thread or pay attention.
    Civilian deaths caused by the targeting of infrastructure are discouraged in total war scenarios between STATES but are tolerated under certain circumstances. Attacks by stateless militias are dastardly and usually nothing but pathetic attempts to gain publicity for self righteous causes. States can be held accountable for their actions and thus allow equal and fair reciprocation during conflict where as stateless militias cannot.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  2. #92
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Iran passes redline, has enough U235 for Bomb

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    Civilian deaths caused by the targeting of infrastructure are discouraged in total war scenarios between but are tolerated under certain circumstances.
    I bolded this part. For emphasis. Who determines these "circumstances", the U.S.? Gimme a break.

    The fact is you are for killing civilians as long as it approves YOUR agenda, but then you say others are not allowed to have the same agenda.

    I keep consistent by saying the deliberate targeting of civilians is wrong. You, however, do not. The dropping of the two atomic bombs deliberately targeted civilians.

    There is no getting away from the truth.
    Last edited by TheNextEra; 03-13-09 at 01:57 AM.

  3. #93
    Sage
    Khayembii Communique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,881

    Re: Iran passes redline, has enough U235 for Bomb

    How about if you considered fact that all projections regarding the invasion of the Japanese home islands was going to cost over five million casualties on both sides (i mean total)? Does your awestruck mind suddenly see the light and realize that the use of the bomb was the best option?
    Surrender was on the table; there was no need for either nuking Hiroshima/Nagasaki or for any such invasion.

    The Potsdam Declaration was initially rejected on the grounds that it was unconditional, but this did not mean that the Japanese were not willing to discuss the terms of surrender; it meant that the allies (particularly the US) were not interested in pursuing that as an option.

    In fact, Japan was in discussions with the USSR about possible conditions of surrender, and Tōgō even openly expressed a willful desire to surrender by the emperor, but just that they could not accept surrender unconditionally. In the end, the only condition that they required in order to accept the Potsdam Declaration was retaining the emperor.

    Even many Allied commanders recognized this.

    Intersting.

    Which nation is al Qaeda working for?
    The statement still definitely stands, as the means by which the President has "his people" declared is about as arbitrary as that of any non-state group, including al Qa'ida.

    As for the Bush knew thing, he knew that it was a possibilty of terrorists using planes, that should have at least warranted elevated levels at airports should it not?
    The main fault for the gap in intelligence is due to failures on the part of the NSA to pass information they had on to other groups (the CIA and FBI). This failure prevented them from being able to "connect the dots".

    As for "elevated levels of airport security," in case you haven't noticed airport security is pretty terrible and probably wouldn't have mattered.

    and we can bomb their nation to sometime before the stone age.
    Your contempt for innocent civilians is pretty disgusting.

  4. #94
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: Iran passes redline, has enough U235 for Bomb

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    I bolded this part. For emphasis. Who determines these "circumstances", the U.S.? Gimme a break.
    The powers at be of course. The conglomeration of states of a majority of the world have agreed that uniformed state military is required for certain rights such as those specified in the Geneva Conventions.

    What? Were you hoping for me to say God or something? Sorry, but no objective authority exists. Only those which wield the power of our time does and luckily the ones who do have created a rational and logically consistent (for the most part) set of rules regarding warfare.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    The fact is you are for killing civilians as long as it approves YOUR agenda,
    Whats my agenda? Scorched earth polices have been tolerated since time immemorial including in WW2 as legitimate military operations as long as the conflict between states has escalated to a defensible point. Nothing is set in stone but the guidelines are established nonetheless.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    and the but then you say others are not allowed to have the same agenda.
    Stateless militias do not have the same rights as recognized state militarys, you are correct. I would hope this would never change for obvious reasons but perhaps you look forward to such a day?

    The rapid increase in destructiveness and miniaturization of devastating weaponry has only exacerbated this threat.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    I keep consistent by saying the deliberate targeting of civilians is wrong. You, however, do not. The dropping of the two atomic bombs deliberately targeted civilians.
    So Hiroshima contained no military value at all? Is that your assertion? There was someplace better to drop a nuclear weapon to force a Japanese surrender or to cripple the Japanese? Please enlighten me on a better place to bomb with the 2 and ONLY nuclear weapons we possessed, oh great military strategist.... the clock is ticking
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  5. #95
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Iran passes redline, has enough U235 for Bomb

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post

    I keep consistent by saying the deliberate targeting of civilians is wrong.
    Are you against deliberate targeting of civilian services?

    Because that's what we did against Milosevic. We bombed Serbia back to the stone age by destroying bridges, water, communications, electricity, power plants, transformers, many things a society views as necessary to living a civilized life.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  6. #96
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: Iran passes redline, has enough U235 for Bomb

    Quote Originally Posted by Khayembii Communique View Post
    Surrender was on the table; there was no need for either nuking Hiroshima/Nagasaki or for any such invasion.
    Hmmm, me thinks you don't understand( or purposely downplay) how divided the Japanese leaders were about surrender.

    A coup against the emperor was attempted to ensure surrender was not an option. And remember it didn't take 1 bomb, it took two. REPEAT: not ONE bomb, TWO!!! Do I need to repeat it again. Perhaps the first bomb was a joke?

    Surrender was considered by the Japanese but a fight to the bitter end was still a favored alternative by most of the military.

    Quote Originally Posted by Khayembii Communique View Post
    The Potsdam Declaration was initially rejected on the grounds that it was unconditional, but this did not mean that the Japanese were not willing to discuss the terms of surrender; it meant that the allies (particularly the US) were not interested in pursuing that as an option.
    I was under the impression that when you are winning you dictate your terms to the enemy, not the other way around. Perhaps you are confused on the goals of the US during WW2?

    Quote Originally Posted by Khayembii Communique View Post
    In fact, Japan was in discussions with the USSR about possible conditions of surrender, and Tōgō even openly expressed a willful desire to surrender by the emperor, but just that they could not accept surrender unconditionally. In the end, the only condition that they required in order to accept the Potsdam Declaration was retaining the emperor.

    Even many Allied commanders recognized this.
    yes, yes. The leaders had talks about surrender. Whoop-de-****in-do. Talk is cheap.

    Who doesn't contemplate and lay out possible plans for surrender in such a scenario?
    Last edited by scourge99; 03-13-09 at 03:45 AM.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  7. #97
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Iran passes redline, has enough U235 for Bomb

    The fact is you are for killing civilians as long as it approves YOUR agenda, but then you say others are not allowed to have the same agenda.
    Nobody has placed any importance on the origin of the agenda. The only relevant factor is the reasoning behind the agenda. If the agenda is rational and just then it is obviously more legitimate than an agenda which is crazy and evil.

    You can make an appeal to moral relativism if you like, but I think Western civilization has a better grasp of right and wrong than does the rest of the world. In the grand scheme of things, I'm much more comfortable with Western society dictating the necessity and legitimacy of utilizing nukes. Not sure why that is such an objectionable thought to some.

  8. #98
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Iran passes redline, has enough U235 for Bomb

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    It's called the news. If the President can't watch the news, then there are more problems at hand.

    Any idiot could see it was a threat. The problem is the U.S. underestimated them. BIG MISTAKE.



    Bush DID know that there was a legitimate threat. He may not have known which airport, but it did warrant elevated levels. Again, the fact Clinton and Bush underestimated the enemy is the problem, but then you are one of those that blame Clinton for everything and give Bush a free pass right?
    As predicted, you still can't come up with an answer to the question.

    Typical.

  9. #99
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Iran passes redline, has enough U235 for Bomb

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    The only thing disturbing is the fact you canont read what was said earlier. The comment said earlier was that civilian deaths is ok as long as if warning (as obscure as it can be) is ok as long as it saves lives on YOUR side. This comment was not made by me.
    What's disturbing about stating facts, outside of the other fact that you can't refute it, because it's a fact?

    We were at WAR with Japan. We were at war with an enemy who's first action was an underhanded cowardly sneak attack, and whose later actions at Bataan and other places showed the value they placed on the lives of those they capture, and whose resolve to die to last man at Tarawa, Iwo Jima, Okinawa, and elsewhere convinced their enemy that the war could only be ended by the sternest means possible.

    Now, you can't claim ignorance and say that the US should have fired bombed more cities like Kyoto, forever and ever, until they finally gave up at some untold cost to them and us. That wasn't practical.

    But we toasted two their cities with two bombs, and poof! they surrendered like a shot.

    But, you want to argue that killing five million or more people is somehow less horrible than frying 1/20th of that in a mircowave, that's your problem.

    Sane people disagree with you.

    As for al qeada, they're criminals, not a national military, and come under different rules.

  10. #100
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Iran passes redline, has enough U235 for Bomb

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    Civilian deaths caused by the targeting of infrastructure are discouraged in total war scenarios between STATES but are tolerated under certain circumstances.
    Depends on the extent of the war, true.

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    Attacks by stateless militias are dastardly and usually nothing but pathetic attempts to gain publicity for self righteous causes. States can be held accountable for their actions and thus allow equal and fair reciprocation during conflict where as stateless militias cannot.
    "Stateless militia" - a fancy term for "criminals".

Page 10 of 20 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •