OT - WMDs... The UN says he had them

Page 3 of 4  
wrote:

No, we were damn well not terrorists. You need to get your terms right.
What you describe is _guerilla_warfare_, not terrorism. Terrorism targets _civilians_.
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No, it's not "all about perspective." It's about being able to distinguish between legitimate rebellion and terrorism.
You missed the point on a grand scale.
The Contras fought against the Nicaraguan _military_ and police. The Afghans fought against the Soviet _military_. The French Underground fought against the German _military_.
The Palestinian terrorists target and murder Israeli _civilians_.
Do you see the difference?
If not, re-read as needed, until you understand the difference between a rebel and a terrorist.
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:

So, the roadside bombs, suicide cars and walk-up bombers who target our military folks aren't the efforts of terrorists, you say? Maybe you should tell Washington they're rebels - seems I hear often about how our military is over in Iraq fighting terrorists not rebels.
I agree that Hamas and the other misdirected Palastinian groups are terrorists and have their heads on backwards (at least temporarily) and it's abhorent that they target civilians (or anyone for that matter) but *my* point was that I'd guess they believe themselves to be freedom fighters and totally justified in taking the course of action they've chosen.
You made a great distinction between military targets and civilian targets... does that mean that when we a-bombed Hiroshima (targeting the civilian population) we were terrorists?
--
Owen Lowe and his Fly-by-Night Copper Company
Offering a shim for the Porter-Cable 557 type 2 fence design.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
(Doug Miller) wrote:

distinguish
You don't get to be taken off the terrorist list just because you throw in a few attacks on military targets along with the killing of unarmed civilians.

I don't give a crap what they believe themselves to be. Radical Islam believes that it would be best if you and I didn't exist. Is that a valid position just because they believe it?

I think you could make that argument.
todd
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I don't.
Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were home to several military installations and to industries that were actively engaged in producing war materiel. Nagasaki, for instance, had naval shipyards, and Hiroshima IIRC had among other things an enormous ball-bearing factory. Kyoto was on the list of proposed targets, and stricken from that list by Truman's Secretary of War because it was a cultural center and *not* a military target.
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

the
and to

for
an
and
cultural
Well, I'm pretty right-wing, but 90,000-140,000 civilian dead (some right away and the rest within five years) is a little too much collateral damage for my taste.
todd
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I don't like it either; on the other hand, when a nation locates its military facilities in population centers, and then starts a war, the responsibility for the inevitable civilian deaths when those military facilities are attacked rests in at least as great a measure upon the leaders of that nation as upon its adversary IMO.
In a similar vein, if we were at war with, say, China, and they nuked the huge Navy base at San Diego, it seems to me that we wouldn't have much right to complain about civilian deaths. San Diego *is* a legitimate military target.
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

damage
military
responsibility
attacked
upon
huge
target.
If you accept that nuclear weapons are moral weapons to use near a civilian population in the first place, then I guess you're right. IMHO, I don't believe they are, because of the very fact that their destuction is so wide-scale, that the number of civilian casualties greatly exceeds the military.
todd
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Doug Miller wrote:

It's a bit ambiguous to say that Japan started the war. It is no secret that the then US government wanted a war with Japan and was prepared to do almost anything to provoke Japan into making the first strike.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob Martin responds:

It is no secret that Japan claimed that was the case, forming their co-prosperity sphere and bombing Pearl Harbor. What cites can you give, other than revisionist theorists?
Charlie Self "If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave it to." Dorothy Parker
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Charlie Self wrote:

Recent BBC documentary showed government correspondence to that effect. There's no doubt about it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob Martin responds:

Really? I think it's at least likely to be anything from bullshit of the purest ray supreme to misapprehension. And why does the BBC have papers stating U.S. purposes? Letters from FDR to Winnie, perhaps? Or not.
I've got a lot of doubt without reading the correspondence and knowing its provenance.
Charlie Self "If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave it to." Dorothy Parker
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.comnotforme says...

Charlie, I don't know anything about the BBC claims, but I know that right after the war, and maybe even during it, there was a lot of talk that Roosevelt wanted an excuse to join the war and even some suggestion that he ignored intelligence about Pearl Harbor.
I can't document that either pro or con, but can testify that it's not a new "revisionist" idea :-).
--
Where ARE those Iraqi WMDs?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Larry Blanchard wrote:

The real truth of Pearl Harbor may never be known. I think the key to the Pearl Harbor question of responsibility are contained in the messages from Washington to Pearl Harbor concerning those 3 carriers' deployment just prior to December 7, 1941. I have never read anything about such messages. IMO, there were such messages which have never surfaced. Remember that FDR had been the Secretary of the Navy, or something like that, before he was elected president. I got no comfort from Toland's book in that matter.
Hoyt W.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Larry Blanchard responds:

Sure enough. It's been around as long as I can recall. But that's not the point: the poster was saying there was no doubt at all about it, which, IMO, is nonsense. If there were no doubt about it, there'd be more than a Beeb program on it.
FDR drew a lot of flak for a lot of things, from Social Security to Pearl Harbor and the Manhattan Project. That doesn't mean the people attacking him and his ideas were right.
Charlie Self "If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave it to." Dorothy Parker
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ah yes, the BBC. Paragon of objective journailsm, that lot.
I'm more tempted to believe it's basolutely false *bacaue* a BBC documentary claimed it was true.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Oh great. Now the U.S. is the evil empire that picked on poor Japan. It never ends. I suppose we picked on England, too. Opps, i forgot. That Revolutionary War theory is out there too.

other
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@NOcomcastSPAM.net says...

If so, all of the participants were terrorists, as all bombed civilian populations - Dresden and London spring to mind.
--
Where ARE those Iraqi WMDs?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
says...

the
I think that could be argued as well.
todd
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The acts themselves, when directed against our military personnel, I would classify as guerilla warfare. Those committing them may be terrorists, or not, depending on whether they do, or do not, *also* commit similar acts against the civilian population.

Half-way there. Do you also agree that the Contras, the Afghan mujaheddin, and the French Resistance in WW2 were *not* ?
[small snip]

Your argument here is based upon a false premise. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both *military* targets.
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.