Several explosions on London Underground

[Tacet_Blue]

The thread is about "if terrorist actions are justified." The title says nothing about England. The constitution relates to how the children of an opressive empire formalized their the values they held most dear in response to that opression.

I have to laugh at your inability to read again

Thread Title: "Several explosions on London Underground"

Try get at least one thing right

 

[rk]

I have to laugh at your inability to read again

Thread Title: "Several explosions on London Underground"

Try get at least one thing right

Not only did you have to laugh, you had to post it. Ask sukerkin, or your dad, what that means.

 

[ledhed]

New revelations about Britains home grown terrorist . Seems one of the captured bombers was on welfare for a few years before he tried to blow up a bunch of fellow Britishers . Ironic to take succor from the state you wish to destroy .....wonder what the Koran says about that ? I guess that falls under the Al - Queda directive to use western society's own rules to destroy it or something . How many terror teaching Mosques are there in Britain ? I know that the old famouse one in London is under new management . What has taken its place ?

More on Pakistans sudden realization that terrorist are in their country and use it to recruit and organize and train... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4734311.stm

Nice to know that the Saudis ...our erstwhile allies are supporting terror groups all over the world and funding the wahhabis ...guess they do not see the link .

On Sunday, Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon said ministers were to investigate how Hussain was able to leave the UK after the attacks.

He said extra passport checks for those leaving the country were being considered

Well DUHHHHH ! Why not after the bombings when you are LOOKING FOR TERRORIST TO TRY TO ESCAPE ??? DUHHHHHHHH .......

1: Yasin Hassan Omar, 24, wanted over bomb attempt on a Tube near Warren Street, arrested in Birmingham
2: Muktar Said Ibrahim, 27, suspected of attempting to bomb a No 26 bus in Shoreditch, arrested in North Kensington, London
3: Ramzi Mohammed, wanted over failed attempt to bomb a Tube near Oval, arrested in North Kensington, London
4. Osman Hussain, 27 (also known as Hamdi Isaac) wanted over the Shepherd's Bush attack, arrested in Rome

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4721645.stm


List of the bomb blast victims
Police have named all 52 known victims of the London bombers.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4668245.stm

 

[Tacet_Blue]

Not only did you have to laugh, you had to post it. Ask sukerkin, or your dad, what that means.

er Ok....

Meanwhile, try to pay attention.

 

[rk]

New revelations about Britains home grown terrorist . Seems one of the captured bombers was on welfare for a few years before he tried to blow up a bunch of fellow Britishers . Ironic to take succor from the state you wish to destroy .....wonder what the Koran says about that ? I guess that falls under the Al - Queda directive to use western society's own rules to destroy it or something . How many terror teaching Mosques are there in Britain ? I know that the old famouse one in London is under new management . What has taken its place ?

I consider it ironic that someone so well informed knows his enemy so poorly. Have you ever read even any part of the Koran, i.e. "The Terrorist Operations Manual"? you may be surprised to learn that Islam uses the same Old Testament that the Christians and Hebrews use. You know, Moses, the Ten Commandments, Noah's Ark, all that stuff. They, like the Jews, believe that Jesus waas a prophet but not the divine son of God. The choose to emulate the teachings of Mohammed, another prophet, who came after Jesus; it is in this aspect that the religions diverge. Many, no, most Islamic religious leaders decry the use of the Koran in the name of killing, most passages that allude to such action were ment to insure the piety of warriors who fought for these people, usually in defence against Christian incursions, remember the crusades?
You clearly have never been so without means as to need social support. If you had, you would have a broader perspective on the subject of welfare. I have been very close in my life to such circumstance and it is a desperate state to be in. I am thankful to say that I have never taken return on my taxation from the state in that way, but I have worked in food kitchens and lived amongst those who have, they have a completely different attitude, one you serve yourself well for understanding.
I know, it is likely too many ideas for one who sees the world like a black and white chessboard, if even that is too sophisticated; I don't think they have a Playstation chess game...

 

[Tacet_Blue]

Excellent news, thanks to the cooperation of the Italian police Hussein Osman has been charged with international terrorism and could be deported in a matter of days.
His defence will be trying to drag his extradition out for months and months.

Where do they find lawyers willing to represent people like this

Full Story

Carrying a rucksack full of highly unstable explosive into a crowded area and setting a detonator charge off next to it, doesn't quite fit with his story of "I only meant to scare people"

He was tracked by his mobile phone and positively identified by Italian police when UK police described an injury to his foot he had sustained in the attempted bombing.

 

[ledhed]

I consider it ironic that someone so well informed knows his enemy so poorly. Have you ever read even any part of the Koran, i.e. "The Terrorist Operations Manual"? you may be surprised to learn that Islam uses the same Old Testament that the Christians and Hebrews use. You know, Moses, the Ten Commandments, Noah's Ark, all that stuff. They, like the Jews, believe that Jesus waas a prophet but not the divine son of God. The choose to emulate the teachings of Mohammed, another prophet, who came after Jesus; it is in this aspect that the religions diverge. Many, no, most Islamic religious leaders decry the use of the Koran in the name of killing, most passages that allude to such action were ment to insure the piety of warriors who fought for these people, usually in defence against Christian incursions, remember the crusades?
You clearly have never been so without means as to need social support. If you had, you would have a broader perspective on the subject of welfare. I have been very close in my life to such circumstance and it is a desperate state to be in. I am thankful to say that I have never taken return on my taxation from the state in that way, but I have worked in food kitchens and lived amongst those who have, they have a completely different attitude, one you serve yourself well for understanding.
I know, it is likely too many ideas for one who sees the world like a black and white chessboard, if even that is too sophisticated; I don't think they have a Playstation chess game...

You assume a lot about how informed I may be . Maybe you should read some of my other post on the subject of terrorism as well Islamic fundementalist . I would like other opinions and .........NEWS FLASH TO rk ...............you wont get them if you already know it all . Or just come off as if you do .

A ) . I have a very good understanding of the Koran as well as the history of Islam and terrorism of all types . I count as freinds muslims who have taken as a goal to correct any misperceptions I may have .

B ) . I work in the mental health industry among the poorest and most forgotten and ill served people in the US . Its a non profit comunity care center for mentaly disabled and drug addicted along with developementaly disabled located in the inner city ( phila. ). I know more about the state of the welfare system in the US than I ever cared to learn . Dont preach to me .

C. ). How does your post answer the questions in my post that you quoted ? Or do you generaly just like to see what you typed ...like listening to yourself talk ?

 

[rk]

A ) . I have a very good understanding of the Koran as well as the history of Islam and terrorism of all types .

B ) . I work in the mental health industry among the poorest and most forgotten and ill served people in the US .

C. ). How does your post answer the questions in my post that you quoted ? Or do you generaly just like to see what you typed ...like listening to yourself talk ?

I was in no way attempting to answer your question, sorry if you misunderstood me. I also would be very glad if you displayed a wordly view that your experience seems to indicate you would have. I understand that we tend to adopt roles here, although I could never honestly play the hardline conservative part, I do have exposure to that side of the world (I attended private schools and was raised in an exclusive community). I feel it is my role to bring balanced awareness and perhaps I can be somewhat zealous, I know it convinces some among us.
I applaud your efforts with your friends and your chosen occupation.

 

[ledhed]

I take a hard line veiw on terrorist and terrorism . Just because you understand a cause or political stance . Or just because you think you know the why of things doesnt make you obliged to take a non conservative or so called hard lined stance . Its because I understand the threat and reasons behind the threat that I feel so strongly about the response . Find them and those who support them and kill them . If you do not they will kill you . Or make you wish they had . Peace love and understanding will not work with those that would blow up thousands of innocents to advance a cause or for simple revenge . Two bullets in the head will .

 

[rk]

I take a hard line veiw on terrorist and terrorism . Just because you understand a cause or political stance . Or just because you think you know the why of things doesnt make you obliged to take a non conservative or so called hard lined stance . Its because I understand the threat and reasons behind the threat that I feel so strongly about the response . Find them and those who support them and kill them . If you do not they will kill you . Or make you wish they had . Peace love and understanding will not work with those that would blow up thousands of innocents to advance a cause or for simple revenge . Two bullets in the head will .

They attack us because our leaders provoke them. If we put as much energy into defense as we put into offence, and had the non-intervention mindset that was prevalent before WWII, we would be free from fear. That is why countries like Canada and Sweden are unmolested, they don't have to worry about receiving two bullets or the morals of using two bullets. They can sit back and watch the rest of the world annihilate itself. Part of the problem is that to be a capitalist, you must capitalize.

To turn something to one's advantage; benefit: capitalize on an opponent's error.http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=capitalize

Islamics in particular have trouble with this issue because it is often related to usury, to which they are fundamentally opposed.

 

[ledhed]

The moral choice is to protect the people of the US and any other innocent victims by putting at least two bullets into the heads of the terrorist and the people who are supporting them . That frees me of any possible fear nicely although lately I have not been around many terrorist so I get mainly pissed off . There is no provocation ..NONE .....nada...nicht ....to justify terrorism that targets specificaly innocent civilians .
Dont make excuses or justifications for acts that are unexcusable nor justified . I feel as much moral outrage at killing a rodent as I do at seeing these terrorist dead . They declared war . So unless you are prepared tp submit to their demands , learn to fight back or run and hide ...or just sing koombiya and keep ranting while they laugh at what they percieve as a typical weakness .


This makes me sick . You voted this way for what ever reason . Maybe you should be put into a room full of body parts and internal organs and blood and bones with shrapnel and other debris from the results of a teerorist attack targeting a school bus or a bunch of kids getting candy....how can you say its justified ?

Terrorist Actions Can Be Justified ( 7 ) 9.86%

Try to explain your vote.

 

[Solid Fro]

They attack us because our leaders provoke them.

Incorrect.

Terrorists, of the radical Islamic type, attack western countries because we do not divulge in their corrupt vision of Islam. According to them, anyone who does not follow is considered an Infidel and must be destroyed.

If we put as much energy into defense as we put into offence, and had the non-intervention mindset that was prevalent before WWII, we would be free from fear.

Just like on September 10th, right?

That is why countries like Canada and Sweden are unmolested, they don't have to worry about receiving two bullets or the morals of using two bullets.

Is that why countries like Canada are safe havens for known terrorists? Do you think when "Muslims to March on the White House and Turn It into the Muslim House" and when "Islam Will Conquer All the Mountain Tops" will Canada be safe from radical Islam?

 

[ledhed]

I have been thinking a long time on the question : " can terrorist actions be justified " .
As much as my heart is telling me " no way " .... my head is saying the aswer is yes .
When I look back to the firebombings of Dresden and Hamburg and Tokyo in WW2 I can describe them as " terror" attacks on civilians conducted by the military . Deliberate pre meditated designed attacks to terrorise the population into quitting the war .
And then we have the two atomic bombs the ultimate terror attack . I have myself justified these attacks many times . So I have to in all honesty say that yes IMO terrorist acts can be justified.

 

[Tacet_Blue]

I have been thinking a long time on the question : " can terrorist actions be justified " .
As much as my heart is telling me " no way " .... my head is saying the aswer is yes .
When I look back to the firebombings of Dresden and Hamburg and Tokyo in WW2 I can describe them as " terror" attacks on civilians conducted by the military . Deliberate pre meditated designed attacks to terrorise the population into quitting the war .
And then we have the two atomic bombs the ultimate terror attack . I have myself justified these attacks many times . So I have to in all honesty say that yes IMO terrorist acts can be justified.

Whilst those acts were truly terrifying, they did however take place when we were at war. All parties involved knew that they were at war, these were not sneak attacks in peace time.
The actions of legal combatants with the backing of their government cannot be compared to the indiscriminate killing of civilians by breakaway groups that have no support from their government.

Besides I would not say that the bombs dropped on Japan were to terrify, they were a show of strength to bring an END to a war, not to start one.
It worked, and brought about an unconditional surrender. That is not the goal of the terrorist at all.

 

[ledhed]

The question was not "are these terrorist attacks justified " or "are terrorist attacks outside of a declaration of war justified " If I am being forced to answer the question " can terrorist actions be justified " Then if I am being honest to myself I have to answer yes .
There are no qualifications to that question . Do you think the Japanese were not " terrified " by our " show of stregnth " ? It was not the first time that we decided to make " war so terrible to the civilian population that they would rise up against their government and demand an end to it " ( See Shermans march to Atlanta in the American Civil War ) And do not terrorist by their actions seek to bring an end to what they consider a war against them ? And did not Al Queda on more than one occasion declare war ? What is a Jihad considered besides a "holy war " ? I cant make the twisted steps in logic to aggree with the terrorist justifications to attack us but thats not important . Its only important to the scumbags who are strapping the bombs around themselves and walking onto a train and blowing it to atoms .

Its important to see what our enemy is like so that we can make better efforts to destroy them .

 

[rk]

Incorrect.

Terrorists, of the radical Islamic type, attack western countries because we do not divulge in their corrupt vision of Islam. According to them, anyone who does not follow is considered an Infidel and must be destroyed.



Just like on September 10th, right?



Is that why countries like Canada are safe havens for known terrorists? Do you think when "Muslims to March on the White House and Turn It into the Muslim House" and when "Islam Will Conquer All the Mountain Tops" will Canada be safe from radical Islam?

There are hardliners on both sides of the issue. If believed, your disinformation continues to conflagurate the issue, the ultimate result would be that only the strongest survives, some world we'd have made for ourselves.

ledhead:In my opinion, your two most recent posts are possibly the most lucid and intelligent entries I have read on this forum, exceeding even my own humble attempts, especially post #554. I agree, defend yourself if necessary, but by all that represents the decency of humanity, learn and understand if it is necessary.

Tacit_Blue: Based on our "declaration of war" on terrorisim, your argument about "sneak attacks" is invalid. it is a known fact that the inhabitants of Hiroshima and nagasaki had absolutely no forewarning, eyewittness accounts say they thought the planes were US weather surveys, they watched in wonderment as the bomb laden parachutes drifted down, they didn't even have an opportunity to shield their eyes as their kin were literally transformed into shadows.

 

[Tacet_Blue]

Tacit_Blue: Based on our "declaration of war" on terrorisim, your argument about "sneak attacks" is invalid. it is a known fact that the inhabitants of Hiroshima and nagasaki had absolutely no forewarning, eyewittness accounts say they thought the planes were US weather surveys, they watched in wonderment as the bomb laden parachutes drifted down, they didn't even have an opportunity to shield their eyes as their kin were literally transformed into shadows.

I think you'll find that Japan had declared war on the US...

 

[rk]

I think you'll find that Japan had declared war on the US...

True, and please don't assume I condone what has happened in the tubeways recently. I believe war should be reserved for the battlefield, if indeed there must be war. In fact, although I have stated otherwise and it goes against my own personal ethics, you and I both could be surprised to witness me sacraficing myself and role as a father to prevent such atrocities, I'd hope my son would understand.

 

[Zardoz]

In case anyone may somehow be interested, here are some blurbs that may help us understand what motivates "them" to wrap themselves in explosives and detonate them, ending their lives just so they can inflict some harm on "us":

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1603178.stm

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5513.htm

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/697586/posts

If these articles conflict with anyone's long-standing preconceived notions, I apologize in advance. God forbid we should learn anything about what is really going on in their minds, and why these people actually do these horrendous things.

 

[Tacet_Blue]

True, and please don't assume I condone what has happened in the tubeways recently. I believe war should be reserved for the battlefield, if indeed there must be war. In fact, although I have stated otherwise and it goes against my own personal ethics, you and I both could be surprised to witness me sacraficing myself and role as a father to prevent such atrocities, I'd hope my son would understand.

I didn't think you would get my point.
I was getting ready to remind you that the US did not declare war on Afghanistan before the Taliban decided to fund the biggest attack on civilians during peace time ever.

If these fundamentalists are aggrieved or provoked by our government, then I suggest a more productive route would be through diplomacy.

As soon as an organisation goes down the route of violent protest or simply violence, as far as I'm concerned they forfeit their civil rights and should no longer treated as such. (Translated: hunted down and killed...a bit strong ...ok, jailed then )

We had 30,000 soldiers stationed in N Ireland at the height of the trouble there (it's a tiny tiny country), and for all the mortar bombs and booby traps and nail bombs the IRA used to kill and maim our soldiers it is only now through a statement, discussion, the Good Friday agreement, and a promise to destroy arms that the figure is now down to 10,000.
Getting the troops out of Ireland was one of their objectives...if only they had thought of destroying their weapons earlier, hundreds may still be alive now.

No one wants to see an Islamic Fundamentalist campaign against the west last for the next 40 years (the Easter Rising was in 1914..so our soldiers have been targets for 91 years )
Diplomacy should be their route if they have any genuine gripes or concerns about our foreign policy...
...but as far as I can see, it's just that we are all evil infidels, and that we deserve to be beheaded.
It's not so easy to bring that argument to the diplomatic table.

PS. Do yourself a favour get a spellchecker...not being nasty, it's just I thought you were about 12 when I first started reading your posts
It spoils your posts.

PPS. I'm sure your son would be proud.

 

[Solid Fro]

Tacit_Blue: Based on our "declaration of war" on terrorisim, your argument about "sneak attacks" is invalid. it is a known fact that the inhabitants of Hiroshima and nagasaki had absolutely no forewarning,

President Truman warned the Japanese empire that a new weapon of great power would be used against them if they did not surrender unconditionally. Of course, the Japanese ignored the warning.

eyewittness accounts say they thought the planes were US weather surveys,

Really? There must have been some ignorant people down there to think the Enola Gay was a "weather survey" plane.

they watched in wonderment as the bomb laden parachutes drifted down,

Both the Fat Man and Little Boy were free-fall bombs, no parachutes. Where are you getting these statements?

they didn't even have an opportunity to shield their eyes as their kin were literally transformed into shadows.

No ****.

 

[rk]

President Truman warned the Japanese empire that a new weapon of great power would be used against them if they did not surrender unconditionally. Of course, the Japanese ignored the warning.



Really? There must have been some ignorant people down there to think the Enola Gay was a "weather survey" plane.



Both the Fat Man and Little Boy were free-fall bombs, no parachutes. Where are you getting these statements?



No ****.

Man you are completely bonkered on this one. Read the book "Hiroshima," by John Heshey and correct your histoical facts. One of which: The US completely controlled the airspace over Japan by the day of the bombing, the end of the war was inevitable. Aerial overflights were commonplace. The "justification" for dropping the bomb was to save American lives that would be lost to suicide, er, kamikaze attacks during a conventional invasion.
The bombs had to be parachuted down to allow the lumbering B-29's (which had been lightened in every conceivable way, including removal of armored bulkheads and defensive guns) time to get away. Even still, the flash was blinding to the crew and they were washed with massive doses of gamma radiation, just like the "test" soldiers in the Nevada desert who could see their own bones through their closed and shielded (by hands) eyelids.
There are those who believe the bombs were completely unnecessary, just another test on the effects on a real, live city...
Some members (at least one) understand my penchant for WWII aviation and things related, if an avation event was historically documented, I have probably read it.
And Truman was intentionally vague, just specific enough to save face in the eyes of the remainder of the world, the targets weren't even militarily oriented in the slightest.
Advice: if you debate facts on this one, you'll get "egg on yer face."

Of all the important cities in Japan, only two, Kyoto and Hiroshima, had not been visited in strength by B-san, or Mr. B, as the Japanese, with a mixture of respect and unhappy familiarity, called the B-29...the continued abstinence of Mr. B with respect to Hiroshima had made its citizens jittery; a rumor was going around that the Americans were saving something special for the city.(pgs 2&3)http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0679721037/?tag=gtplanet-20

As they started up a valley from the tight ranked houses, the all-clear sounded. (The Japanese radar operators, detecting only three planes, supposed they comprised a reconnaissance.)...Then a tremendous flash of light cut across the sky. (pg 5)

And here is a very concise article about why the bombing was not (strategically) necessary:http://www.doug-long.com/hiroshim.htm

And so from November 1944 onward, Japan was the subject of numerous large-scale B-29 non-nuclear bombing raids (Robert Butow, Japan's Decision To Surrender, pg. 41). When Air Force chief General Hap Arnold asked in June 1945 when the war was going to end, the commander of the B-29 raids, General Curtis LeMay, told him September or October 1945, because by then they would have run out of industrial targets to bomb (Sherry, pg. 300 & 410(143n)).

While Japan was being bombarded from the sky, a Naval blockade was strangling Japan's ability to import oil and other vital materials and its ability to produce war materials (Barton Bernstein, ed., The Atomic Bomb, pg. 54). Admiral William Leahy, the Chief of Staff to President Roosevelt and then to President Truman, wrote, "By the beginning of September [1944], Japan was almost completely defeated through a practically complete sea and air blockade." (William Leahy, I Was There, pg. 259).

__________

Zardoz, you are very awesome, this one paragraph sums up what I have been trying to articulate for at least 25 pages of posts:

"The world has changed" Westerners often say, commenting on the events of September 11, but few Muslims echo that view. In dueling statements issued on October 7, the day the war in Afghanistan began, President George W. Bush and Osama bin Laden exemplified this contrast. While the former referred to the "sudden terror" that had descended on the United States just twenty-seven days earlier, the latter reported that the Muslim world had experienced more than eighty years of "humiliation and disgrace" at American hands, during which its sons were killed and its sanctities defiled. Twenty-seven days versus eighty years sums up the difference between a stunned American sense of ruptured innocence and the brooding militant Islamic feeling of epochal betrayal and trauma. For this and other reasons, the Muslim world was not nearly so jolted by the death of over three thousand Americans as was the West.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/697586/posts

 

[Solid Fro]

Ending the war now or let it continue, that was the option for the atomic bomb.

Some people will never get it.

 

[ledhed]

The monday morning quarter backs can debate endlessly about the need to drop the bomb . By western standards Japan was devastated they had no oil hardly enough food to subsist and starvation was a problem no natural resources , no more navy . hardly a city had not been bombed and tokyo was a burned crispy hulk of wasteland . The US could have stayed off shore and lobbed shells and continued to bomb the rubble till WHEN ?
Japan WAS NOT A DEFEATED NATION . They knew the war was lost when the first b 29 s appeared over their Island and their navy was destroyed in the Phillipines . It took hitler till the Russians were at his friggin cellar door entrabce to kill himself and for Germany to admit defeat . BUT ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU EXPECT A NATION WILLING TO TURN PLANES INTO SUICIDE BOMBERS TO SURRENDER ? Are you friggin NUTS ? They refused to surrender unconditionaly they were given chances but THOSE IN POWER the people who could end the war WOULD NOT YEILD .
The people of Japan were prepared to litter the island with their bodies . Anyone who has studied the war in the Pacific should know this . You cannot take a small slice of history ...a small period ...and base your opinion on it you must look at the whole picture .
The US had already fought for years at great sacrifice and was looking at a casualty toll of anything from 500,000 to more than a million DEAD . To take Japan in an invasion . Do you think that after ever inch of Japan sufferred the same type and worse fighting as Iwo and Okinowa that the people of Japan and the people of the US would have come to the same type of understanding as they did after the A bomb ? If you do you are a delusional fool and are only looking to shape your opinion based on a preconcieved notion of what you think should have happened . And what about the Russians ? What would it have cost to get them out of Japan ? and what about the soldiers and the sailors in the feild that had fought for years and wanted to go home . They had to stay in for the most part till the war was over or until they died or were so screwed up they had to be sent home . And how about the cost to keep an army as large as the US feilded active and in preperation for an invasion and a blockade if Japan wouldnt surrender after what how many months or years of blockade and bombardment ? How many Japenese would have died during that time ?
Do you guys think about anything or just read crap and say " this looks good I'll go with this one " ? The US had invested trillions in a weapon to end a horrible war what would the people of the US had done to the fool who did not use it to end the war and stop the slaughter of American Marines sailors soldiers and airmen ? Do you really think Truman or any other american president was not answerable to the people ? The bombs risked only the crews of two friggin planes to end the war . Not hundreds of thousands of US service men . IT was well worth the cost and the results . It saved millions of lives of both Japenes and American and British and even friggin Russians . It saved a situation like Korea and Berlin from Japan . It saved Japan to become the nation it is today because of the insight of Gen McArthur and his treatment of a former enemy . None if it would have happened after a bloodbath of an invasion and bloody conquring . Or a protracted and horrible seige and bombardment .

These are the same idiots that insisted that air forces alone could win wars . And Leahy is just saying we could have won without the bomb ...hell WE WERE winning any fool knows that...except the Japenese did not share his opinion . And guess what........ they count . Almost defeated...it would have only took a few hundred more thousand casualties to be totaly defeated ..in case you have not looked this fact up thats how you win if the other side wont surrender . Alot of these articles have the benifit of what we found out to be true after the war about both the bombs and the conditions in Japan . They are not based on what we knew or understood at the time and even those that claim to be still suffer from the authors bias from what was discovered after the fact .

And here is a very concise article about why the bombing was not (strategically) necessary:http://www.doug-long.com/hiroshim.htm
Quote:
And so from November 1944 onward, Japan was the subject of numerous large-scale B-29 non-nuclear bombing raids (Robert Butow, Japan's Decision To Surrender, pg. 41). When Air Force chief General Hap Arnold asked in June 1945 when the war was going to end, the commander of the B-29 raids, General Curtis LeMay, told him September or October 1945, because by then they would have run out of industrial targets to bomb (Sherry, pg. 300 & 410(143n)).

While Japan was being bombarded from the sky, a Naval blockade was strangling Japan's ability to import oil and other vital materials and its ability to produce war materials (Barton Bernstein, ed., The Atomic Bomb, pg. 54). Admiral William Leahy, the Chief of Staff to President Roosevelt and then to President Truman, wrote, "By the beginning of September [1944], Japan was almost completely defeated through a practically complete sea and air blockade." (William Leahy, I Was There,

Let me know what you find in your " very consise article " that answers the questions I pose above . When you make a decision that " its wrong to drop Atomic bombs " and then go in search of reasons to justify your opinion you get articles like that . Its called bias . I prefer objectivity . I prefer to see both sides ....hell all twenty one sides of the argument .

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/USA-P-Strategy/Strategy-M.html
http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/LitNote/id-14,pageNum-29.html
http://www.cia.gov/csi/monograph/4253605299/csi9810001.html
http://www.mikekemble.com/ww2/downfall.html
http://tigger.uic.edu/~rjensen/invade.htm
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/giangrec.htm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/war/wwtwo/nuclear_02.shtml
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/dr06.htm
http://www.mbe.doe.gov/me70/manhattan/surrender.htm
http://www.instadv.ucsb.edu/pa/display.aspx?pkey=1297
http://members.aol.com/dalecoz/WW2_1297.htm
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/bomb/large/index.php
http://oncampus.richmond.edu/academics/education/projects/webquests/wwii/
http://www.dannen.com/decision/
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/hamby.htm
http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/2010/atomic.htm

read it..... all sides of the argument are in there . I have about 33 more but these should do . I have read them all .

 

[rk]

Ending the war now or let it continue, that was the option for the atomic bomb.

Some people will never get it.

What an annihlist. Kill thousands of innocent civillians or wait patiently for blockades to finish choking the war machine...
The option was "test the ultimate weapon, thus insuring American supremacy for the next 50 years, or finish the war gracefully."

And in response to ledheads post: What an amazing coincidence that before the bomb the Japanese were determined to "litter the island with bodies" (American propaganda, of course) and after the bomb they were willing to turn the same A6M factories, that made the planes that attacked Pearl, into detroit lookalikes. Everyone knew the Zero was made by Mitsubishi (that nowadays is the corporation that is the largest single destroyer of the rainforests), right?

 

[ledhed]

What war are you looking at ? Did you read anything about WWII ? Or do you exist in an alternate universe ? American propaganda created Okinowa and Iwo and Saipan and Palau and Guam and Guadicanal and the Phillipines ..and burma and Nanking and Singapore etc, etc ....? Have you studied the military history of Japan ?

at any rate this is all off topic and should all go in the atom bomb topic .

 

[Solid Fro]

What an annihlist. Kill thousands of innocent civillians or wait patiently for blockades to finish choking the war machine...

Incorrect.

Kill thousands of innocent civilians with the atomic bomb or kill millions of innocent civilians with an invasion of mainland Japan?

What an amazing coincidence that before the bomb the Japanese were determined to "litter the island with bodies" (American propaganda, of course)

Where did you get that quote? You can't quote something if it does not exist. Are you making up quotes now?

and after the bomb they were willing to turn the same A6M factories, that made the planes that attacked Pearl, into detroit lookalikes. Everyone knew the Zero was made by Mitsubishi (that nowadays is the corporation that is the largest single destroyer of the rainforests), right?

Do you have facts to back that statement up? Where does it say Mitsubishi is the largest destroyer of rain forests?

I'm surprised you didn't say it was an American company.

 

[rk]

Incorrect.

Kill thousands of innocent civilians with the atomic bomb or kill millions of innocent civilians with an invasion of mainland Japan?

The US could have just showered them with lead and starved them into begging for our relief, they didn't have to add uranium to the storm. Read the book published, by an American, in 1946 they had already given up. Tito's signature was a formality, as was his obstinance.

Where did you get that quote? You can't quote something if it does not exist. Are you making up quotes now?

The people of Japan were prepared to litter the island with their bodies

Post #564. Do you even read anyone else's posts? Or just mine, that you debate into little pieces, like a dog in too small a yard with a plastic hotdog.

Do you have facts to back that statement up? Where does it say Mitsubishi is the largest destroyer of rain forests?

Are you really so socially conscious that you want to spin this thread even further off topic to learn about heinous global corporations? Perhaps you love and support the Mitsubishi Corporation and hate to see thier reputation challenged by an unsupported allegation. Do you realize everybody who reads these posts knows that your only logical reason for the question is to intentionally discredit the statement in my post above which was made as an aside in parenthesis? You do realize I would have anticipated your reaction...You'd make a lousy chess player, humbly stated in my opinion, of course. I'll let you do this one (as if you ever would). Just go to your Google bar and type "mitsubishi rainforest." I got 62,200 hits; from websites with names like, "greenleft.org" and "arizona.edu", and the quotes are somewhat disparaging. Learn the facts (afore you stick your nose in em).

I'm surprised you didn't say it was an American company.

I am amused you even brought it up. Your mock surprise doesn't characterize me as un-American, I am probably more patriotic than you with your cardboard box morals. I learn what I believe in, you take your ques from pontificators like Rush Limbaugh and Dr. Dobson. I offer as character proof that you don't even bother to read these posts here, ledhed's for example, because you have already decided you agree with him.

I agree with ledhed that the A-bomb was an act of terrorism. Can we try to stick to some semblence of a topic, or are we just going to jump all over anything rk posts. Cause I will gladly keep posting, although I feel a little guilty, it's like poking sticks in ant nests. It does serve to demonstrate to the world the level of thought in some parts of America however...

 

[ledhed]

Back on topic...It seems that the UK is quietly rolling up what was a large terror cell .
How long do you think it will be before new and more stringent laws on immigration and radical organizations will be on the books ?

 

[Solid Fro]

Right.

I don't know about immigration laws, since most of the terrorists involved in the London bombings were British citizens, but cracking down on radical groups who promote murdering civilians and terrorism should be a priority.

Seems like Britons are elite hackers:

MI5 Hacking Al Qaeda

Over the past fortnight Israeli intelligence agents have noticed something distinctly odd happening on the internet. One by one, Al-Qaeda’s affiliated websites have vanished until only a handful remain, write Uzi Mahnaimi and Alex Pell. Someone has cut the line of communication between the spiritual leaders of international terrorism and their supporters. Since 9/11 the websites have been the main links to disseminate propaganda and information.

The Israelis detect the hand of British intelligence, determined to torpedo the websites after the London attacks of July 7.


(Notice: factual statements posted with links that back up those statements)