you're still hanging on to one phrase out of a whole sermon, hell a whole career. he's inciting hate, what do you think those people did when they went home from church, rioted, or ate dinner with their families
Can anyone point me to a transcript (not video) of the God Damn America sermon? It is surprisingly hard to find.
He didn't incite hate, and he certainly didn't incite violence. Pacifism doesn't preclude hate. Pacifist protestors can hate the racists and racism they are protesting about. They can say crazy things, and hatefilled words aimed at the things they are portesting against, but until they advocate violence they can still be pacifists.
First To the OP. You are highly UNeducated on WWII. Mix in a book or two. Weslinder If our Navy's incompetence in taking islands is any indication ("ok there it is USMC. Bombs? uh yeah we bombed it.") then we would have lost many many lives taking down japan's empire. At any rate I think dubious is to strong a word. FB If japan wanted to surrender they sure forgot to tell the japanese fighting to their death refusing to surrender on all the islands. And finally my own commentary- 1. Look at total deaths from wars plotted over time. The number increases tremendously until........... Russian Civil War - 9 million Taiping Rebellion - 30 million WWI - 20 million deaths WWII - over 65 million -insert bomb- Korean War - 3 million Vietnam - 2.8 million Iran-Iraq - 1 million Humans are no longer putting it all on the line for wars. 2. Yeah civilian targets are bad, but if the OP had any knowledge of how japan treated people during occupation, it would be obvious that the hiroshima and nagasaki bombings were far from the worst part of the 65 million dead!
that depends on what the purpose of the speech is. some people are stating their views. some people are manipulating others into violent acts. they are different things. it's up to the people who listen to the speech regarding the violence. you can't just say someone yell out "f*** you" is going to do the act, when they only meant for you to know their feelings.
i agree with you. but the numbers there doesn't mean much. after the bombs, the wars were limited to regional wars. and plus the modern health care and tech, the death was much less. a lot of the death pre-bombs, were due to starvation, disease, and such.
what part of the: 1 fight to the death 2 kamikaze 3 chinese are: not humans, make good practice for my bayonet mindset are you missing. Japanese soldiers were starving on islands far from home without any contact and still refused surrender.
disagree. health care did not advance that much in 20 years. Plus the reason they are regional wars is because no major power blocks want to fully commit due to nuclear threat. starvation killed off most of the people in the various african wars but the numbers are still very low.
yeah, at least one could make some pretty rational arguments regarding our policies in that era - and i'd agree... but to imply that dropping those bombs on japan were somehow "terroristic" in nature is faulty reasoning based on ignorance.
Dear rockets3forlife2, Half of my family thinks you're a complete uneducated, inexperienced idiot. The other half thinks you're a complete uneducated, inexperienced idiot. I think you're just now learning to live by headlines. Your Half Japanese/Half American BBS mate, Lou Haveman aka, RocketRaccoon PS. My family & I insulted you. For that, I gave you my name.
There were a bunch of proxy wars during the Cold War which historian Niall Ferguson has called The Third World's War. The total death count numbers around 30-50 million. Sure, we didn't annihilate each other with nukes, but the powers found other means to play global chess. I've grown up highly resentful of the Japanese refusing to acknowledge their criminal acts during WW2, but this idea that "if they were inhuman during the war, then we're allowed to be inhuman too" resonates with me less and less as I get older. It isn't a mutually exclusive argument. Acknowledging Japanese civilian casualties doesn't mean you can't put the heat on the Japanese government for their active denial. We incinerated and irradiated their people and cities back to the stone age. I had a hard time viewing those gruesome pictures, but as an American I share some responsibility for its legacy. My duty isn't to revise history, but rather to make sure I've done my part not to let us do it again. I've participated in debates where both sides use death tolls and inhuman acts as chips in an abstract poker game, but it's really a morbid waste of time. There's a reflexive guilt among us for using a WMD on another people...twice. It doesn't jive too well with our cultural ideologies and it shouldn't. They lived in a time where war wasn't an option, and as the facts present, ideological attitudes were thrown out the window and choices were taken that made us as inhuman as the other side. It's a consequence of a prolonged war, and it's something Americans forget too easily in our rush to promote peace and prosperity. I recommend Niall Ferguson's book The War of the World, where he attempts to pin how the 20th century was the bloodiest century (so far), the causes for conflict and why our humanity was stripped away the more we fought.
If we have another WW (III) , that will pretty much be the end of human civilzation. I am not sure we can avoid that either because mankind always want to go to war to solve their differences.
These death numbers seem extremely high. If millions of deaths in africa from starvation are included I don;t think it even hits close to that. most of the cold war "wars by proxy" were listed Soviet war in Afghanistan 1 million Korean Vietnam Cuba etc. Plus you realize were are talking about a period of 65 years or so. The previous 65 years saw over 130 million die when we had a much smaller global reach and population (about 7 times smaller) I also don't deny that the bomb was terrible and have heard the stories of babies burning and moms not saving them then feeling so bad about it. The point of the matter is that it was a counter attack. End of story. I recommend you add up some numbers of these wars of proxy.
BS, since the bomb has been around no superpower will fully commit to a war. Plus the control of land is no longer as important in todays economy (unless it has oil)
It's also easy for you to say you don't give a da%m about them people, because it didn’t happen to you...Try talking to some of the people families' who were affected by this incident directly. It’s too sides to every story and a lot of innocent women and children were eradicated. There government made a bad decision therefore, a lot of innocent were wiped out! When a natural disasters happen in other countries, we cut on our TV, read about it and go “wow”, then turn the channel back to ESPN. Why? Because it didn’t happen to us, and it’s not our problem; therefore we are not as sympathetic. I posted a video of the civil rights movement in the 60s and a few people said I was spreading hate. I wanted everybody to be open, and I had hoped that the ones who were ignorant of these facts would take the opportunity to look, listen, and learn. There is no need to get offended or to resort into to slurs or to make derogatory remarks because you don’t agree. If I am wrong fine! Debate me in an intelligent way as a man, and maybe I will understand your point of view. We as a people, not just American people, but all gods’ people need to try to put ourselves into other people’s shoes for a change. We could have easily nuked Afghanistan after 911, do you think that would have been the right thing to do?
he didn't state his feelings on "dem people". What would you have preferred the Alies to do if not use the bombs? Seriously I want your alternative plan. also you do know that it is two = 2 right?
Rocket3forlife2.....have you ever studied world war 2? like read books or taken actual classes on it?
