Reply With Quote
Waking up to the real world? The world that has been divided since day 1 by the use of force.
I'm thinkin' your needing some coffee.
Wowie!!
Here, have a kazoo.
Waking up to the real world? The world that has been divided since day 1 by the use of force.
I'm thinkin' your needing some coffee.
So you agree with my point. I never made a moral judgment on it (nice projection there); I merely talked about the elephant in the room which people like to tiptoe around when discussing what made our nation rich.
There was probably a hundred thousand years or so when man was primitive that he lived in peace. He lived for about 25 years then died... but it was in relative peace.
Then came tools and it pretty much all went downhill from there.
Why is us dropping the bomb on Japan a terrorist act??
You put my quote in your signature without even understanding it?
Well, whats the definition of terrorism?
Ah, the myth of the noble savage.
I put the quote there because of how ridiculous it is. I don't need to understand a pedophile to know he is sick in the head and should not be in our society. Your way of thinking is too simple. I doubt you hear it around your inner circle of sophisticated intellectuals like yourself. Please I do not need a lesson and would prefer a direct answer to my question.
You want a direct answer? It fits the definition of terrorism. Its a use of violence intended to incite fear. Its pretty much inline with other US terrorism of WWII such as the fire bombing of Japan.
Why isn't it terrorism when it fits the definition perfectly?
Its funny how you ask for a direct answer when I was giving you one above you just didn't want to go that route. You wanted to get your rant out of the way. Thats why you brought this up in a totally unrelated thread when you could have asked the question when I made my comment in the other thread.
To quote Stephen Colbert... "And there's not even a Quiddich match!"
Every military engagement involves psychological warfare. In your ridiculously broad definition of it, every military war and battle was terrorism. That depreciates the word terrorism (like libs do to the word racist). The definition I have is from the FBI-What America did was not unlawful.Code:The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a Government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
Truman estimated half a million americans dead if we invaded
Andrew Roberts in his book wrote about this: "Others in the (Japanese) Government argued that the Americans (after the A-bomb on Hiroshima) had no more bombs, and that world opinion would anyhow stop the United States from deploying any more."
Our enemy was hoping on the help of people like you. Just like today.
Re: (1502 pages)Finance Committee bill has been filed
This thread is now two pages long.Carry on.Zero posts were on topic.
According to whom?
I mean really, why break the streak at this point?
It couldn't really be that the the Senate health reform bill is so much more important than political soothsaying, primitive ac ulation, horn sections and relitigating WWII.
Could it?
I've tried in the past, but to no avail. No one cares.
Not every military action has a psychological goal. The bombing of an munitions depot or the destruction of a tank are examples. In fact, the vast majority of military operations have specific tactical goals that are not physiological in nature. Your assertion otherwise is simply false.
The problem with using a definition with "unlawful" in it is the objectiveness. What makes something lawful? Do you believe a resident of Hiroshima or Nagasaki believes the use of the bomb was lawful? Do you believe Al-Qeada believes their attacks to be unlawful? Who gets to decide who's laws to use?
Now, here's where your tiny little brain gets tied up in knots. Its funny because no where did I say the use was wrong or bad. I merely pointed out how it fit the definition of terrorism. Yet somehow the enemy was counting on people like me and great Americans like yourself.
This is why I said the nationalism runs deep in your veins. You make stupid assertions that the US keeps the oceans free for trade (so ing laughable) and you can never honestly critique anything the US does because you're automatically disposed to view it in a glorious light. You even managed to spin America's record of genocide earlier in this thread (they were already killing each other!). You do it all the time.
Really whats important about an OP who focuses on the number of pages in a bill that has been released out of committee, WH? Its not the final version of the bill in the Senate, and I really couldn't care less how many pages it took.
Yeah I noticed that too. I was going to say something but now I am an accomplish and partaker in the melee.
Sure. I was just wondering, why even have a topic if you're not going to discuss it?
I guess the answer is, you can have a conversation anyway.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
