Quote:
Originally Posted by skeptic-f";p="
I realize that your comment was deeply tongue in cheek, but unfortunately it is still very stupid in spite of that fact. The commander is referring to the fact that when a fire fight breaks out, you don't have any choice but to return fire. If you are a civilian, and you don't head for cover ASAP; or if you are an attacker using a mosque as cover, you get what you deserve.
The U.S. dropped the atomic bombs on Japan after Truman was shown an estimate of 1.25 million american casualties in a convential invasion and conquest of Japan. If the Iraqis were by some stretch of fate capable of inflicting such casualties, I would nuke away, but of course the United States is in no danger of suffering more than a few thousand casualties in Iraq.
This may be a war of liberation, but it's still a war and people should remember that fact. I guess the learning curve is steeper for some people than it is for others
|
Yes, it was tongue in cheek, obviously, and nothing in your post lends support to the judgement that it was nonetheless stupid. In fact, the sarcasm was to make exactly the same point you did, essentially. So one wonders who is stupid here.
Truman as lied to. But irregardless of that, it doesn't explain Nagasaki. People treat that historical sequence as if it was one act. It wasn't. And all the justifications (false as they may be) only focus on Hiroshima.
You can never understand your country and, indeed, you can never truly love your country as long as you insist on wearing blinders and living in fantasies about good guys and bad guys. Time for some to grow up.