I find it hilarious how certain of us have such quaint ideas about war. War isn't quaint. It doesn't have your notions of honour or etiquette. There isn't a right way to kill someone and a human being doesn't stop being human just because it wears a uniform.
War will kill, maim, destroy with little regard for whoever is in its path. No-one is guilty and no-one is innocent because war doesn't presume to make such judgements. Murder, rape, torture. Travesties when performed by the other side but conventionally ignored when performed by our own. We will decorate those who we would call murderers in any other circumstance. Only in this moral vacuum where human nature is allowed to run amok would this be permitted.
War brings death on a massive scale for very little reason other than someone didn't agree with something or other, that is the only certainty war brings. If that is sufficient reason to us to ensure such an event taking place then all moral judgements thereafter are null and void. The one that counts has already been decided and not for the better but for the worse.

Quote:I find it hilarious how certain of us have such quaint ideas about war.

Killing is never 'right', but there are times when the realistic alternatives are much worse. I believe this is perhaps the biggest example in human history. It should be on everyone's conscience, not just America's for having used the bomb but for Japan for provoking the war in the first place and subjecting her citizens to death and destruction from an enemy who would have otherwise left her alone.

This is a issue which, for me, transcends right and wrong. It's far too complex for there to ever be such a simple answer. There's no way to ever know for sure, but I do believe that the course of events, as they happened, resulted in many less human deaths than may otherwise have been the case.

(September 12, 2012 at 7:43 pm)Ryantology Wrote:

Quote:I find it hilarious how certain of us have such quaint ideas about war.

Killing is never 'right', but there are times when the realistic alternatives are much worse. I believe this is perhaps the biggest example in human history. It should be on everyone's conscience, not just America's for having used the bomb but for Japan for provoking the war in the first place and subjecting her citizens to death and destruction from an enemy who would have otherwise left her alone.

This is a issue which, for me, transcends right and wrong. It's far too complex for there to ever be such a simple answer. There's no way to ever know for sure, but I do believe that the course of events, as they happened, resulted in many less human deaths than may otherwise have been the case.

The wars were all dick measuring contests of countries governments. The first world war especially so. Everyone wanted to prove how big and powerful they were even before the assassination of Ferdinand but they weren't ready for it. They didn't realize war had changed and that even the most unskilled of peasants given a gun could easily kill the most seasoned of war veterans. It was a slaughter.
After we put such heavy fines and restrictions on the Germans that caused the depression which gave rise to Hitler a second world war was inevitable. Every conflict could of been avoided but our governments thought pursuing honour, grudges and power was more valuable than the lives of its citizens.

Tyrants and murderers, all of them. Don't fool yourselves into thinking your governments care about you.
It only does so far as you are a commodity, a human resource to be used, expended and disposed of.
In the same situation with that power at their disposal any government at that time would of done the same thing without a second thought. They'd do anything to win as quickly as possible with minimal time and resources spent.
If the opportunity ever arose any one of them would sacrifice billions upon billions more for global supremacy and we all know it. So no, its not a morale issue.
Our governments are in no way, shape or form moral. If we are to look at our collective histories and recent circumstance we can in no way fool ourselves into thinking they are.

(September 12, 2012 at 7:24 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote: I find it hilarious how certain of us have such quaint ideas about war.

Don't be a prat. Knowing that certain acts of war are just plain horrendous does not make one's notions quaint.

Quote:War isn't quaint. It doesn't have your notions of honour or etiquette.

Actually, military personnel are quite often held to a higher standard of honor and etiquette. You should see the rules the army has for how soldiers are supposed to treat civilians, even state side.

Quote:There isn't a right way to kill someone and a human being doesn't stop being human just because it wears a uniform.

Funny. No one so much as hinted that there was. However, there are weapons that are too vast in their scope to be legitimately used in war. We learned that. If it was so fucking right, why haven't we used them again?

Quote:War will kill, maim, destroy with little regard for whoever is in its path. No-one is guilty and no-one is innocent because war doesn't presume to make such judgements. Murder, rape, torture.

That's a load of bullshit perpetuated by shitty war movies. If there are no guilty and no innocent, why are their war criminals? It is not somehow deep to look at the horror of war as unavoidable. It's actually dismissive and weak.

Quote:Travesties when performed by the other side but conventionally ignored when performed by our own. We will decorate those who we would call murderers in any other circumstance.

This is what the "quaint" people are pointing out, you little contradictory butthead.

---

Seriously, greneknight, you realize that Jap is a racial slur, right? Fuck's sake, it is impossible to take you seriously when you sound like a fucking hillbilly.

---

(September 12, 2012 at 6:35 pm)greneknight Wrote: I totally disagree. It was an act which was the lesser of two evils. You probably do not know the evil atrocities committed by the Japs on many Asian countries and what the US did was wonderful in the eyes of the tortured victims. Without these two A-bombs, Japan would never have gone down on its knees. The people of Japan prior to the A-bombs were all for the war and their Emperor. The mushroom clouds were a symbol of hope and salvation for many innocent people in Asia whose families were massacred by the Japs. I've seen a documentary on this.

As I have said, the Japs continue to worship their Class A war criminals and torturers in their Yasukuni shrine. It's a sign that they are unrepentant which is why they are not allowed to build up their military to this day. They can't be trusted. Imagine if Hitler's shrine is venerated in Germany. No, the Germans are decent people, unlike the Japs.

Cute. You ignored the atrocities committed by China on the Japanese. Nearly every, if not every, country on this planet is responsible for something similar. Do not pretend that the Japanese are somehow worse.

(September 12, 2012 at 8:06 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote: Our governments are in no way, shape or form moral. If we are to look at our collective histories and recent circumstance we can in no way fool ourselves into thinking they are.

... I don't think I was doing that? Was I?

I'm confused.

(September 12, 2012 at 8:43 pm)Shell B Wrote: That's a load of bullshit perpetuated by shitty war movies. If there are no guilty and no innocent, why are their war criminals? It is not somehow deep to look at the horror of war as unavoidable. It's actually dismissive and weak.

There has to be a question over the validity of this statement as, as far as I know war criminals of the winning side do not seem to get prosecuted.

Quote:It was not immoral. But it was much worse than wrong. It was a colossal blunder.

Yes. Japan lost the war when the first plane cleared the deck of the first carrier because they had no chance to win. But in a very fine history called "The Rising Sun" by the late John Toland he explains that a big part of the motivation of the Japanese military was that if they did not strike quickly, before the effects of the oil embargo kicked in, they would not be able to fight at all - EVEN THOUGH MOST KNEW THEY WOULD LOSE.

A fascinating book in many respects. The Japanese mindset is completely different to our own.

(September 12, 2012 at 8:43 pm)Shell B Wrote: Cute. You ignored the atrocities committed by China on the [b]Japanese[/i]. Nearly every, if not every, country on this planet is responsible for something similar. Do not pretend that the Japanese are somehow worse.

Which ones were those? I can't recall any major conflict between china and japan in which china was the aggressor or committed atrocity against the japanese on japanese territory since the 1300s.

But if we take the view that any victim is equally human regardless of whether the victimizer is of the same nationality as the victim, and those who victimize people of other nationality is in principle no worse than those who victimize his own nationality, then we might relevently point out the Chinese committed worse atrocities on other Chinese than ever did the Japanese to the Chinese.

Well, when they happen is irrelevant. Any war crimes in history would count as a black mark, yes? Regardless, I am talking about how they treated prisoners of war during the second Sino-Japanese/World War II.

I think it is futile to compare the behavior of one nation to another. Really, none is without blame for some disgusting or inhumane act. The only reason I argue the point is that this whole "Jap" this, "Jap" that spewing out of what's his name reeks of racial motivation. Maybe that doesn't make his argument less valid, but it sure makes it sound more biased than average.

---

(September 12, 2012 at 9:05 pm)jonb Wrote: There has to be a question over the validity of this statement as, as far as I know war criminals of the winning side do not seem to get prosecuted.

Maybe not all the time, but they sure do. I know that the U.S. prosecuted the perpetrators of two massacres of Germans during WWII. Granted, they did a shit job of it, but they did it. That being said, you clearly did not read the statement I was responding to properly. I was not arguing that war criminals on the winning side do not get punished. I was arguing that war is not free of guilt simply because it is violent by nature.

Chuck has a point about the chinese not being aggressors against the Japanese. Indeed the last time that I can think of is the attempted invasion of Japan by the manchu dynasty back in the 13th century (which failed when a typhoon hit the invasion fleet)