Re: => Gray Ghost (Frank) truly an amoral repugnant piece of **** <= in his own words

grey_ghost471-newsgroups@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Gray Ghost) wrote in
news:Xns9AED90C441B3FWereofftoseethewizrd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

> Free Lunch <lunch@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
> news:3db6945dscl4613b12ka2bccsvgf17vf1a@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
> 
>> On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 09:36:13 -0500,
>> grey_ghost471-newsgroups@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Gray Ghost) wrote in alt.atheism:
>> 
>>>Free Lunch <lunch@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>>>news:lq5694loifbg2dvpmge7cv1q0tofh5vn19@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 08:37:34 -0500,
>>>> grey_ghost471-newsgroups@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Gray Ghost) wrote in
>>>> alt.atheism: 
>>>> 
>>>>>"Reality_Check©" <Reality@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in news:6ffgrvFb3rt2U1
>>>>>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
>>>>>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "Gray Ghost" <grey_ghost471-newsgroups@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>>>>>> message 
>>>>>>> "_ Prof. Jonez _" <theprof@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>>>>>>>> Gray Ghost wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "_ Prof. Jonez _" <theprof@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>>>>>>>>>> Harry Callahan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> "_ Prof. Jonez _" <theprof@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>> Chris Morton wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _ Prof. Jonez _ says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chris Morton wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _ Prof. Jonez _ says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pathetic attempt to justify dropping NUCLEAR BOMBS on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CIVILIAN POPULATION CENTERS -- TWICE!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, what you're saying is that whole Rape of Nanking,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pearl Harbor, Bataan Death March, Unit 731, Rape of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Manila thing didn't ... 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have ****-all to do with the amorality of the U$
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deliberately dropping NUCLEAR WEAPONS of Mass Destruction
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> upon CIVILIAN population centers, killing 100,000+
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> innocent men, women and children in the process. 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It has EVERYTHING to do with it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Japan engaged in a brutal and ultimately foolish war of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> genocide and aggression against its neighbors, during
>>>>>>>>>>>>> which it didn't show one iota of mercy to ANYONE, not even
>>>>>>>>>>>>> its own troops and civilians. 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nobody was going to sacrifice the lives of the victims to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> protect the victimizers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Japan made a series of choices.  At the least they should
>>>>>>>>>>>>> man up and own the consequences of those choices.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So it's OK in your rabid Repugnikkkan opinion to commit War
>>>>>>>>>>>> Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity against CIVILIANS, as
>>>>>>>>>>>> long as they deserved it in your infinite wisdom, eh
>>>>>>>>>>>> s***bag? 
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What did the men, women and children of Hanking do to
>>>>>>>>>>> deserve what they got? 
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How does that justify dropping NUCLEAR WEAPONS of Mass
>>>>>>>>>> Destruction upon 100,000+ CIVILIANS. women and children,  in
>>>>>>>>>> Hiro****ma and Nagasaki ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Assuming Hiro****ma was wrong,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And the thousands of innocent civilians, women and children in
>>>>>>>> Nagasaki? 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why does a depraved amoral sack of **** like you attempt to
>>>>>>>> justify dropping NUCLEAR WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION upon a
>>>>>>>> CIVILIAN population centers, killing 100,000+ innocent men,
>>>>>>>> women and children in the process? 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alright then, let's leave Hiro****ma and Nagasaki out of it
>>>>>>> altogether. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> How can one leave Hiro****ma and Nagasaki out of the discussion
>>>>>> about the immorality of dropping NUCLEAR WEAPONS of Mass
>>>>>> Destruction upon CIVILIAN population centers, slaughtering
>>>>>> 100,000+ innocent men, women and children in the process ?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Are you that daft?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>>So there were no other "immoral" acts committed during WWII by
>>>>>anyone exceot the US?
>>>>>
>>>>>The question remains, do you have an opinion on:
>>>>>The Rape of Nanking?
>>>>>The Bataan Death March?
>>>>>The Korean Comfort Women?
>>>>>Unit 731?
>>>>>The Rape of Manila?
>>>>>
>>>>>Surely you can answer this question.
>>>> 
>>>> I certainly can. Each is profoundly wrong. The perpetrators all
>>>> deserved to be tried and punished for them. None of those actions,
>>>> however, justify equivalent responses. 
>>>> 
>>>
>>>Noone is saying that an equivalent response is what is needed. 
>>>
>>>Did we rape the women of a Japanese city?
>> 
>> No, that is good.
>> 
>>>Did we march captured prisoners many miles in sweltering heat without
>>>water and kill ht eones who couldn't make it?
>> 
>> No, that is good.
>> 
>>>Did we kidnap Japanese women for brothels?
>> 
>> And our failure to dehumanize the Japanese in that way was also good.
>> 
>>>Sorry, but total war is just that.
>> 
>> I'm not saying that things like firebombing cities in their civilian
>> areas or ones of no military value is completely indefensible, but I
>> am saying that we managed to become nearly as savage as our opponents
>> in WWII, a war that we were completely justified in fighting. Wars
>> are never good things. There is just a way of looking at how bad they
>> are. The more a country attacks the civilian population, the less
>> they are able to distinguish themselves from those who they consider
>> to have been wrong. WWI, of course, was a great example of everyone
>> being terribly wrong.
>> 
>>>What people seem to miss is that the Axis powers for the most part
>>>beat up on countries that were much weaker than them because they had
>>>resources the Axis partners wanted for themselves. They were the
>>>schoolyard bullies of their. day.
>> 
>> Agreed.
>> 
>>>We did not start this mess. We simply fought it on their terms once
>>>engaged. Ther is no polite way to fight such a war. If you think
>>>there is, you should probably recuse yourself from the conversation.
>> 
>> I'm not arguing that there is a polite way, only that gratuitous
>> violence to civilians, whether firebombing of cities or rape and
>> murder, make it harder to tell the good guys.
>> 
> 
> 
> I thinl the point that many people seem to miss is that WWII was tru;y
> the first "total war".

I doubt many people have missed this.  So you're going with the "total 
war" answer:  finding moral justifications for actions in a total war is 
a fool's errand?

<snip/>
 
> You want to blame someone for Hiro****ma and Nagasaki? Blame the
> Japanese.

So the justification is that "the Japanese" were bad?

<snip/>

> As I have noted before I am a year shy of 50, and I have been reading 
> abouting this serires of events since at least 8. What was done was
> correct. It appeared to one and all that the Japanese would not
> surrender and would fight until held down and choked to death. Given
> the ferocity of Japanese fighting, the sacrifices they made (Yamato's
> insane sortie, the kamikazes) and the clear willingness of the
> Japanese to die in the attempt to kill more Americans really made any
> other choice irresponsible. I wonder wht the mealy mouths would be
> saying today if we had invaded japan and lost a million casualties and
> in the process virtually exterminated the Japanese culture.

So the justification was military necessity?

I'm sure
> they would be be calling us all kinds of barbarians for having done 
> so which leads me to beleive that the only "truth" this bunch cares
> abiout is that the USA is always wrong.

Forty-two years of study and this is the best you can do?
> 
> They of course have the deluded view that there was a third option,
> but the evidence of history suggests that was not the path Japan would
> take.

Ah, the evidence of history.  Good thing you've been studying it for 42 
years.
 
> Frank