"First point: regarding human rights... hm - aren't we forgetting the Indians you wiped out and the blacks you enslaved? No other nation in the world has ever done this on that large a scale.

You forgetting the Jews and Roma "you" wiped out and enslaved during W.W. II...? Of course you wouldn't include Rwanda or China or Saudi Arabia or Iran or Spain in your argument...

"Second point: blatantly UNTRUE: dropping the atomic bomb was absolutely unnecessary: Japan had offered THREE TIMES to capitulate before the bomb, with only one demand: keep the Emperor. What does America do? They drop the bomb, Japan capitulates and gets to keep the emperor anyway."

Really? I don't remember them capitulating before the FIRST bomb.

"The bomb was dropped to test the bomb (and the scare the USSR) and for no other reason."

Clearly your own personal speculation. But actually the widely accepted reason was to quickly end the war and spare even MORE American and Japanese casualties.

"As for the subject of nuclear profileration - of course the US should try to stop this. But it's already too late - India, Pakistan, N Korea, Israel and possibly S Africa already have the bomb. You can't change the past, or is George W planning to invade all those countries too?"

- Israel hasen't signed the NPT, and therefore is exempt from any kind of critizism.

- India is semi-responsable and with Pakistan also possessing the bomb they keep each other in check. Of course they shouldn't have the bomb but they do, so might as well make the best of a bad situation.

- South Africa is breaking international treaties, and shouldn't be allowed to possess such weapons. Why do they need it anyways? To protect themselves from Botswana?

- North Korea is offically screwed up. There won't be any successful negotiations with a pychotic person.

Darken

__________________
Walk down the right back alley in Sin City and you can find anything...

Show your kids you love them by buying them the No. 7 brand.

The bomb was still in it's testing stages at the time it was used on Japan. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were still tests.
It was also a show of force by the US against the USSR.
I'm not saying either of these was the reason, but they did factor in to the final decision.

How so?
Israel still officially denies it has a nuclear program. Dimona is still a "textile plant".

South Africa had developed nukes under the apartheid regime in the 80's (not exactly sure of the date?), but they were dismantled when the regime fell. And yes, those evil Botswanans.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble, it's not my speculation, it is fact, and moreover, it is the way history is taught at universities in Europe... Wake up and smell the coffee.

Some facts:

Japan tried to capitulate for the first time in June 1945 - with as only demand to keep the monarchy. The US rejected this. As is wellknown, the atomic bombs were thrown in August 1945. Why? By this time, the USSR had entered the conflict (they were still neutral in June 1945 towards Japan) - and they were gaining ground in Japanese-controlled parts of China, more notably Mansouria (not really sure the English spelling is correct this way) - and the US was now seeing the USSR as a future enemy, hence the threat gesture and many innocent lives lost.

Thank you to the Finnish friend for the support Love your country, have been to Tampere, Jyvaskyla and Helsinki a couple of years ago, and will without a doubt return;

__________________
“If you're out to speak the truth leave elegance to the tailor” (Albert Einstein)

i am opposed to any war in iran(or any new war at all) simply because the only military left to fight it will be draftees. And i will end up a draftee. Its quite simple, really.

A few of things that might interest you.
http://www.hrw.org/worldreport99/usa/index.html
http://www.globalissues.org/HumanRights/Abuses/USA.asp
http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/united_s.htm

In addition to those articles, there are the well known historical ones:

1776-1863: America is one of the largest parts of the international slave trade.
1776-1920's: Women do not have civil rights, or suffrage.
1776-1960's: African Americans do not have civil rights, or equal protection under the law. The effects in the African American community are still being felt today.
1830's-1900: the U.S.A. removes thousands of Native Americans from land they have inhabited for thousands of years, proceeded to break numerous treaties and place many Native Americans on reservations in the middle of the desert.
1913-1921: Woodrow Wilson sends American troops into foreign countries a total of 12 times, with almost no justification.
1941-1945: Japanese Americans are placed in internment camps; two Atomic bombs are dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing between 150-200,000 innocent civilians, as well as 12 Americans in prison there.
1960's-70's: American soldiers kill and rape innocent Vietnamese civillians.
2003 - American soldiers in Abu Ghraib prison force Iraqi prisoners, most being held without trial, to humiliate themselves, interrogate them with methods often equated with torture, and allow one man to be attacked by a dog as an "example".

“... I told him I was against it on two counts. First, the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing. Second, I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon.” - Dwight D. Eisenhower

I'm pretty sure everyone knows America has more nuclear missiles, although we have turned down requests to have them inspected.

Partially. I'm saying the U.S. doesn't have the right to pick and choose which countries are allowed to have nuclear weapons programs, and if George Bush really doesn't want Iran to have nuclear weapons, maybe he should lower our threat to them by destroying some of our weapons. Leading by example, not force, is the way to get things done. [/url]

__________________
"Violence isn't always evil. What's evil is the infatuation with violence."
Jim Morrison

The concept of a nuclear standoff between 'responsible' nation states has proved to be successful in the past. No matter the alarm felt by those looking over the ever near cliff edge of total annihilation through the Cold War period, the concept of mutually assured destruction was sufficiently grim to ensure against total strikes by both sides although regional conflicts fought by proxy were a collateral effect. This does not however negate the fact that the homelands of both sides were enjoyed 'peace' for fifty years.

A stand off with Iran along the same lines then is not out of the question. Nuclear strikes enjoy the advantage that they need not discriminate between leaders and their peoples. A sufficiently large nuclear strike will be in most situations take out the very same ruling elite that took what course of action got them into that situation in the first place, either that or after the strike what is left to govern is insufficiently small to contain their future aspirations for power. In fact it might be the case that nuclear standoffs foster a degree of maturity in a leadership. Its not just about losing a couple of assets at the periphery of your control, the leadership are just as vulnerable. The India Pakistan situation is perhaps a point in fact.

As well we should. Non-democracies have no right to exist, and that monarchy was the main reason Japan was a threat to us in the first place.

Our justification for using nukes was easy; they tried to invade us. We dont go around invading nations and making them into slavestates.

Uh...why?

Despotic nations should not even exist, nevermind being allowed to have WMDs. I do not see them as equals.

I dont get this idea from liberals...in America they are supposedly against oppression in any form, but oppression in other cultures is somehow excusable. It is hypocritical.

That only works with people that care. Despots do not give a crap. They will never follow our example willingly.

How many times in history can you recall a despot giving up it's power willing?

Why take chances? If we can deny them nukes, then the possibility of a nuclear strike from them is reduced to zero.

Irans leadership may or may not be responsible in their regard to acquire a nuclear deterrent. In fact Iran ethical standards vis a vis our own is immaterial, it really just gets in the way.

We as yet are Im afraid, unable to deny any agent a nuclear capability there is just too much material out there unaccounted for. Added to this is the overall WMD threat and future scenarios whereby massive destructive capabilities could be produced in ever smaller programmes. To premptively and unilaterally deal with every single threat will eventually become impossible.

Irans attempt to establish a primary nuclear capability of their own could be seen as a niave move given the fact they would perhaps be much more able to acquire material on the open market. If Iran did have a capability this would mean that assured retaliation would prevail. It would be far more advantageous to have Iran as a nuclear power in the event of a premptive nuclear attack on Western territory than otherwise.

Simply put, if a shot is fired then we are within our rights to strongly suspect those holding a gun. If the gun is secreted about their person or worse they have let a friend hold that gun for them then we would have big problem to know how to begin retaliation, unless we exterminate millions of Iranians on a flimsy basis? If they are a licensed gun owner then this is a big problem for them.

True but irrelevent. It doesnt mean we shouldnt try.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

I agree. However, we dont have to deal with all of them to reduce our risk. We deal with the most dangerous (volitile) first.

Once they already have nukes, our takes becomes exponentially more difficult. It is probably already too late with North Korea, thanks to Clinton.

"How so? Israel still officially denies it has a nuclear program. Dimona is still a "textile plant". "

Please catch up on who has signed the NPT...Israel has NOT therefore they don't have to tell jack to the nuclear watchdog.

If they signed it then left, like North Korea, it would be different, but it didn't happen that way.

"1776-1863: America is one of the largest parts of the international slave trade."

So Europe and the Caribbean doesn't factor in this equation? Besides America may of had slaves galore, but we also ended slavery.

"1776-1920's: Women do not have civil rights, or suffrage."

And? We were one of the first nations to implement women's right to vote.

"1776-1960's: African Americans do not have civil rights, or equal protection under the law. The effects in the African American community are still being felt today."

What effects are you talking about?

"1913-1921: Woodrow Wilson sends American troops into foreign countries a total of 12 times, with almost no justification."

Evidence please.

"1941-1945: Japanese Americans are placed in internment camps; two Atomic bombs are dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing between 150-200,000 innocent civilians, as well as 12 Americans in prison there."

I guess you would rather have the US invade Japan with military and potentially cost more lives?


"1960's-70's: American soldiers kill and rape innocent Vietnamese civillians."

Please! I don't condone this at all, but it has occurred in almost every major conflict in history.

"2003 - American soldiers in Abu Ghraib prison force Iraqi prisoners, most being held without trial, to humiliate themselves, interrogate them with methods often equated with torture, and allow one man to be attacked by a dog as an "example"."

Yeah, they are idiots for letting that leak out. I can mention or post a few of China's "tricks" of interrogation, but you might not have the stomach for it.

I'm surprised thats all you have. Name me any country on Earth and I will give you a list double that size just off the top of my head.

DaRkeN

P.S.

"I'm pretty sure everyone knows America has more nuclear missiles, although we have turned down requests to have them inspected."

Actually, Russia still has more; why should we have them "inspected" if they already know they are there?

__________________
Walk down the right back alley in Sin City and you can find anything...

Show your kids you love them by buying them the No. 7 brand.