Hiroshima’s fate, 70 years ago this week, must not be forgotten

income of Poroshenko increased much more than was at Yanukovych
Yes of course, Now in Ukraine peaceful demonstration as though democracy...continuous murders of journalists, politicians and others
[video=youtube_share;YNPUhU-8HDk]http://youtu.be/YNPUhU-8HDk[/video]
yesterday - the capital of Ukraine Kiev.

 

Am I right that Molotov Cocktail is legal when Police shots on you without any reason? Am I right that demonstration is legal when any saying against Yanukovych ends to be jailed and if public servant to be fired?

 

In the moment yes ... but situation in Donbass is the same! Try to demonstrate in Rebel territory for Ukrainian unity and end of civil war if you are willing for suicide! Same of course in Kiev today if you demonstrate for Rebels and their independence ... same way suicide action.

No the truth is that as far as Yanukovych was kicked off, the Donbass with Russian majority in population starts directly to demand independence with all the silly jabbering. For the first more or less peaceful, later armed! Still forgotten the pictures when the rebels stormed police stations, army barracks, town halls and kicked of all represents of Ukraine state and beaten them with base ball bats?
No wondering how fast they were so well armed that only military can go against them?

And finally, no wondering that it were the same police and officials under Yanukovych which were here kicked off by rebels ... if not directly confirming to support rebellion?

 

That is the question for you. I've just shown you how peaceful protesters were.

And about 'without any reason'
Here is a modern EU :

http://www.thelocal.es/20131223/spanish-cops-bash-women-video-goes-viral

Have you read paragraph 39 of Constitution of Ukraine?

 

Ok. Show me how may protesters and law enforcers were killed or wounded on Donbass? Show me how many grenades were used

If protester drops greanade into the law enforcer than it's not a 'peaceful demonstration' any more.

 

The US wanted to stay out of the war completely, yet economically sanctioned Japan. LOL

 

I guess that Barack Hussein Obama II, thought so. He tried to apologize at Hiroshima during his 'Apology Tour'. The government of Japan refused to allow it. Hmm..., I wonder why?

 

1) Donbass didn't ask independence, but wanted an autonomy with the big rights for Russians. Because the junta which came to the power issued at once the silly law - cancellation of Russian language etc.(after a week, they cancelled this law, but was already late, the people were indignant)

2) People of Donbass, also quickly armed as people in the western Ukraine earlier quickly armed and seized power in Kiev.

3) When there were protests in Kiev, in the majority the police was there from east Ukraine to which threw Molotov cocktails. Then the junta declared them criminals and pursued. Officials in the east of Ukraine and in the Crimea, the junta wanted to replace. It is why police and officials in Donbass also joined the inhabitants.

 

Apologies Not Accepted


10/11/2011

In November 2009, Barack Obama became the first U.S. president to bow to Japan's emperor.​

Leadership: Leaked cables show Japan nixed a presidential apology to Hiroshima and Nagasaki for using nukes to end the overseas contingency operation known as World War II. Will the next president apologize for the current one?

The obsessive need of this president to apologize for American exceptionalism and our defense of freedom continued recently when Barack Obama's State Department (run by Hillary Clinton) contacted the family of al-Qaida propagandist and recruiter Samir Khan to "express its condolences" to his family.

Khan, a right-hand man to Anwar al-Awlaki, was killed along with Awlaki in an airstrike in Yemen on Sept. 30. We apologized for killing a terrorist before he could help kill any more of us.

It's yet another part of the world apology tour that began with Obama taking the oath of office to protect and defend the United States and its Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, something he immediately felt sorry for.

One stop on his tour was Prague in August 2009. There he spoke of "America's commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons," ignoring that before 1945 we lived in such a world and it was neither peaceful nor secure.

Another stop on the tour was in Japan, where Obama in November 2009 bowed to the emperor, something no American president had ever done. It could have been worse if plans to visit Nagasaki and Hiroshima to apologize for winning the war with the atom bombs had come to pass.

A heretofore secret cable dated Sept. 3, 2009, was recently released by WikiLeaks. Sent to Secretary of State Clinton, it reported Japan's Vice Foreign Minister Mitoji Yabunaka telling U.S. Ambassador John Roos that "the idea of President Obama visiting Hiroshima to apologize for the atomic bombing during World War II is a 'nonstarter.'"

The Japanese feared the apology would be exploited by anti-nuclear groups and those opposed to the defensive alliance between Japan and the U.S.

mp3Subscribe to the IBD Editorials Podcast
Whatever Tokyo's motive, Obama's motive was to once again apologize for defending freedom, this time for winning with devastating finality the war Japan started.

While Obama envisions a world without nuclear weapons, and moves steadily toward unilateral disarmament of our nuclear arsenal, we envision a world without tyrants and thugs willing to use them against us. We do not fear nuclear weapons in the hands of Britain or France, countries that share our love of freedom and democracy.

It was not all that clear in August 1945 that Japan was ready to surrender. Okinawa, where 101,000 Japanese and 24,000 Americans died, was a clear indication of the fanatical resistance to come in an invasion of the Japanese home islands. That resistance ended only when Tokyo became convinced there would soon be nothing to defend.



Read More:
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/101111-587698-apologies-not-accepted.htm?ven=rss&=&p=full

 

So by your logic, the U.S. currently wants to go to war with Iran, Cuba, North Korea and Russia?

 

Who said anything about going to war with anyone? Sanctions are aggressive actions.

My point is that we ought to stop pretending that WWII was entirely unprovoked.

 

On August 12, 1945 intercepted MAGIC cables reported a "Japanese Army General Staff statement on surrender" from the vice chief of the Army General Staff to Japan's military attaches in Sweden, Switzerland, and Portugal which included two main points on surrender and neither one mentioned nuclear bombs.

The first mentioned Russia's entrance into the war which the Army characterized as a threat "for the existence of the nation", and the second made clear Japan's one critical point which would not be given up--the preservation of their Emperor.

The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb Alperovitz, Gar. 1995. pp.418-19. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.

 

What? No chapters and verses from the protocols? You're slacking...

 

The sanction came after the Japanese made their move toward US concerns.

 

You can create a new topic. And we will discuss your delusions. This theme - of the crimes the United States. You can say something on this subject?

 

Perhaps because Obama - Nobel Peace Prize. And representatives, as he himself says, "exceptional nation" .... I think that it explains a lot. The Japanese would not listen to a hypocrite and a clown.

 

This is its essence.

Obama outside the United States.









Obama inside the United States.

 

The crimes of the United States .... Perhaps the world would be better off under Nazi or Soviet rule. I hear the Gulags were fun.

 

Whatever this means? Would you care to be more specific and factual about what you actually mean "US concerns" and Japanese "moves"? Because as it stands it is meaningless but suggestive.

Meanwhile, in regard to the run up to War in the Pacific it is known that Roosevelt manoeuvred the Japanese into war. I have previously posted on this forum copies of contemporary documents and cables that prove this. Roosevelt did have a policy to force the Japanese to war.

The below extract from the US Foreign Policy website:

Source

Interestingly enough, it seems that Roosevelt also had a secret policy to force Europe into war:

The following paper is about Roosevelt's secret foreign policy and responsibility to incite war in Europe which resulted in WWII. It is a lengthy paper and I'm, therefore, only going to post a small extract and link to the whole thing for those who are inclined to read it fully. It is drawn from a batch of little known Polish government papers from the Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs that fell in Nazi hands in 1939, seeHERE

The raison d'etre for these policies of Roosvelt were the growing US desire to become the new world power following the decline of Great Britain, and it's need for access to, and control of, the world's mineral wealth.

 

The theme of this thread was the anniversary of Hiroshima. You have chosen to turn it into an excuse to change the topic. If you want to crate a new topic start one called USA Bad USA Poo.

Now before you lecture anyone else on changing topics take a good hard look at your own behaviour.

 

1. The crime is not in the United States. Crimes US.
2. The Gulag was much softer than, for example, Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib.

 

Jean Chrétien liked to point other people. But life decided otherwise

 

Can't you find any of Harper? Here's a hint. Its Harper you want to find silly pictures of. By the way you really want to show pictures of people kissing funny things...really?

 

Both sides began escalating the situation. If someone sanctioned the US, and their navy was within reach, we would probably do the exact same thing.

 

Refusing to sell to someone isn't an act of aggression.
Invading French Indochina and making move toward the Philipine, the dutch west indies and australia is.

MOD EDIT - Rule 3