Why did you do this, man?

[youngborean]

Two current events that bug me:

1. The nuclear problem. Our progress has only been negatively affected by this scientific achievement. Now it is the greatest problem, that could never go away in our lifetime.

2. Sending a satellite to Saturn. 4 billion was spent on this project. Could the money not have gone to debt relief for the 3rd world?

So my questions for debate are:

Does man have his priorities in order?

Are these examples of scientific discovery in no way benefiting humanity?

[Vladd44]

The bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki were acts of war not terrorism, this was warfare before the advent of smart weaponry. At the time japan was preparing their citizenry for the final conflict, even school age children were being prepared to be kamikaze.

Did you just take a page from a bush speech and change it to kamizakes and japanese instead of muslims and suicide bombers?

Spare me.

I know the knee jerk reaction is to villify the enemy and make them subhuman. But the truth is, we slaughtered many people who were guilty of no greater offense than being Japanese.

We were dead wrong to do what we did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They may have been acts during wartime, but they were still unethical and amount to nothing more than state organized terrorism.

The Japanese were a beaten foe, and we could have at least attempted a demonstration before such mayhem was unleashed upon a CIVILIAN population and a target with minimal military value.

I find it ironic, that the USA, the only nation to attack another nation with nuclear weapons seems to think we should decide what nations should/shouldn't have the same rights of self determinatation regarding nukes.

For the USA to defend the Israeli duplicity as they have for almost 40 years, while condemning nations such as Iran for seeking these weapons only widens our credibility gap in the region. If I had Israel as an admitted enemy, India, Pakistan to my east, and Russia to the North, I would not hesitate to seek weapons that could protect my right of self determination.

The christian bible talks about reaping what you sow. Science teaches that for every action there is an equal, opposite reaction. Personally, I am not looking to reap the reward of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and our policy of double standard regarding Israel.

[Wyvern]

The bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki were acts of war not terrorism, this was warfare before the advent of smart weaponry. At the time japan was preparing their citizenry for the final conflict, even school age children were being prepared to be kamikaze.

• Did you just take a page from a bush speech and change it to kamizakes and japanese instead of muslims and suicide bombers?

I find it interesting that you try to bring current events into what i stated. However the statement was merely stating the facts as they were at the time, we were at war with the japanese and they made increasing use of the tactic of kamikaze. If you would have paid attention to the rest of my earlier post, you might have noted the reasoning that was made for dropping the bomb, primarily it was a numbers game, an invasion would have cost too much in american lives, secondly it was considered important to end the war before the soviets inserted themselves into the situation. In hindsight this was a good thing considering what the soviet union did to eastern europe.

• I know the knee jerk reaction is to villify the enemy and make them subhuman. But the truth is, we slaughtered many people who were guilty of no greater offense than being Japanese.

During times of war it is not a knee jerk reaction it is systematic. If you are going to state the truth please state the whole truth, yes america killed many japanese, on the other hand the japanese killed many chinese, koreans, british, burmese and others. Instead of killing them for who they were they mostly were killed for what they weren't, i.e. japanese.
A demonstration couldn't happen because the two that were dropped were the only two we had at the time. Hiroshima and nagasaki were not targets of minimal value, both were and are major industrial centers. Warfare between states has more to do with eliminating the others ability to wage war than simply killing soldiers, which is why the attack at pearl harbor happened as it did(i'm not saying they intended a surprise attack, that happened due to their timetable being too tight and not allowing for any delays). The japanese strategy was to knock out our pacific fleet right away, then they would have a minimum of two years before america could get a significant force in place.[/list]

[BeHereNow]

Professors who taught me the truth in many things, taught me that the war was as good as over, no need for using the bomb. It was merely an opportunity (for a real word test) too good to pass up. I have found much (indirect) supporting evidence for this position.
Certainly this is a case where the truth is gray.

[Dilettante]

If deliberately targetting civilians is terrorism, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings fit the description, no matter how we rationalize it. Intention and consequences are irrelevant. No need to reopen old sores, but it was still wrong.

[Vladd44]

I find it interesting that you try to bring current events into what i stated.

And I find it interesting that the same weak rationales are still being bandied about as excuses.

If you would have paid attention to the rest of my earlier post, you might have noted the reasoning that was made for dropping the bomb, primarily it was a numbers game

If you would quit making assumptions about what I read, you may be able to realize that the rationalization for murdering people guilty of only being japanese is not a legitimate excuse.

If you are going to state the truth please state the whole truth, yes america killed many japanese, on the other hand the japanese killed many chinese, koreans, british, burmese and others. Instead of killing them for who they were they mostly were killed for what they weren't

It would serve you well not to bother with such a poor attempt at misdirection. I never said anything in support of the Japanese position in WW II. People were killed of many ethnic backgrounds, and I abhor the loss of all life.

However such realities do not justify the actions of any particular group of individuals. If you want to claim moral justification for an act, you cannot simply say, "they did it too". Sorry, but that is the justification for the amoral, not a position of ethics.

While I would not even dare to suggest that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was a good thing. It was an attack on a legitimate strategic position. In fact it was the most legitimate target in the pacific. Add that to the psychological impact of an actual attack on us soil, it was a dereliction of duty for Pearl Harbor not to be better prepared. But then again, I am short sighted enough to believe that the odds are FDR had forewarning of the attack.

A demonstration couldn't happen because the two that were dropped were the only two we had at the time.

So civilians became expendable because they didnt fit the US timetable? Please.

Hiroshima and nagasaki were not targets of minimal value, both were and are major industrial centers.

So are you saying that the WTC was a legitimate target? After all it was not exactly a building of trivial importance to the US Corporate World. I would hope you would realize that significance as an industrial center wouldnt make the murder of civilians an acceptable option.

[AlAyeti]

The condition of Japan today rests on the shoulders of the beautiful American and his idea of liberty.

Germany is a free nation as is all of Europe by the beauty that lies in the actions of free American people acting towards a vanquished and shattered foe unlike anything the history of the world has ever known.

We would all be speaking Japanese, German or Russian (those of us not slaughtered), as slaves, if the tables were turned.