Muslims demand cross be removed from Swiss flag

[hmbld]

7 minutes ago, OakWood said:

That's just an inane reply. "Why don't we continue the practise?" What a stupid question. Under the circumstances it was estimated that close to a million lives would be lost if the U.S.A. launched a full invasion of Japan and that would be mainly Japanese citizens more than allied troops. So, yes, Japanese lives were taken into consideration too.

As for intercepting a cable saying that Japan wanted to end the war well Emperor Hirohito wanted to keep fighting even after the first bomb had been dropped on Hiroshima!

At the end of the day, even if the atom bombs were a mistake, they were done through honest intentions. It's not as if the U.S. dropped the bombs for the sadistic fun of it. But you make it sound as if both sides were as bad as the other. If I remember my history, Japan invaded Pearl Harbor. I don't recall the U.S.A. starting the war.

As for me not being interested in vacuous empty-headed pacifism, it doesn't mean that I can't reply to it, if only to show others just how stupid and dangerous it is!

I question the need to bomb Japan when they were running out of resources, air bombing was effective, and the Soviet Union just declared war on Japan.  Why is it a stupid question to ask why we don't continue to obliterate evil with an atom bomb when in the long run it could be justified as saving lives?  

Japan didn't invade Pearl Harbor, but did attack it.  During a discussion last month at work, I realized I had no idea why Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, I just remember what was taught in history class, so I looked it up.  Now, I question who gets to write these history books, and I can't say I know the true history, but it appears it was in response to actions taken earlier by the U.S.

 

Dwight D. Eisenhower wrote in his memoir The White House Years:

In 1945 Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives.[75]

 

[simplejeff]

16 minutes ago, hmbld said:

the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives

I saw the websites of whistleblowers a while back about who was behind encouraging the usa /12 presidents / to bomb and to war.

It wasn't, btw, to save lives.

Searching / "SEEKING"/  will bring up answers.

[hmbld]

2 minutes ago, simplejeff said:

I saw the websites of whistleblowers a while back about who was behind encouraging the usa /12 presidents / to bomb and to war.

It wasn't, btw, to save lives.

Searching / "SEEKING"/  will bring up answers.

I don't ever remember questioning the history classes I took, yet many things were entirely left out and don't line up.  Of course the victor writes the history books, yet if any other country in the world used an atom bomb and said it was only used to save lives, would that line be accepted?

[hmbld]

8 minutes ago, Davida said:

Japan attacking Pearl Harbor WAS a declaration of War.   Japan was NOT going to surrender on their own-- they were not going to stop -this was what made the decison to drop the bomb .  

Could be, I truly do not know.  Commander of U.S. pacific fleet said:

The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in the defeat of Japan.

— Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, [68]

and

The use of [the atomic bombs] at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons... The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children.

— Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Truman, 1950, [78]

The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all.

— Major General Curtis LeMay, XXI Bomber Command, September 1945, [79]

The first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment… It was a mistake to ever drop it… [the scientists] had this toy and they wanted to try it out, so they dropped it…

— Fleet Admiral William Halsey, Jr., 1964, [79]

 

[Guest Teditis]

I think that you're on to something important, Hmbld. A thing most refuse to look at... the historical

evidences that the military commanders in that "theatre" almost unanimously said that the atom bomb

was not necessary.

They were indeed blockading Japan and had very little resistance in doing that. By putting a choke-hold on

a relatively small island they were virtually insured that no invasion force would have been necessary either.

[Guest Thallasa]

On ‎29‎/‎01‎/‎2016 at 4:53 PM, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

There is nowhere to run to.

Is it really christian with all that illegal money ,and individulal liberty can lead to anarchy .

[Guest Thallasa]

45 minutes ago, hmbld said:

Could be, I truly do not know.  Commander of U.S. pacific fleet said:

The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in the defeat of Japan.

— Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, [68]

and

The use of [the atomic bombs] at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons... The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children.

— Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Truman, 1950, [78]

The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all.

— Major General Curtis LeMay, XXI Bomber Command, September 1945, [79]

The first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment… It was a mistake to ever drop it… [the scientists] had this toy and they wanted to try it out, so they dropped it…

— Fleet Admiral William Halsey, Jr., 1964, [79]

 

Thankyou for this as there is too much deceit  .in the telling of history .

[Guest Thallasa]

On ‎22‎/‎01‎/‎2016 at 3:04 AM, simplejeff said:

sorry cletus.    Yahweh says culture is not godly nor righteous. ((nor good , nor right))

Jeff you are interpreting too narrowly . Culture is simply ways of living and expressing ourselves . 

Culture covers everything fomr the food we cultivate ,th clothes we wear ,how we behave ,buildings  we build or don't .

We cannot exist without having a way of life a 'culture', so could you please explain what you really mean ? 

[hmbld]

28 minutes ago, Teditis said:

I think that you're on to something important, Hmbld. A thing most refuse to look at... the historical

evidences that the military commanders in that "theatre" almost unanimously said that the atom bomb

was not necessary.

They were indeed blockading Japan and had very little resistance in doing that. By putting a choke-hold on

a relatively small island they were virtually insured that no invasion force would have been necessary either.

I'll admit my heart really isn't in this subject that much, but in the last few years, I've come to realize there are a lot of things i've been taught, that I've taken to be the truth.  I've noticed I am not alone, another example is how the media keeps up the religion of peace, so more people pile on and repeat it, when in fact Islam is the opposite.  I suppose much I will never know the truth about, but just realizing the most repeated phrases I hear, may not be fact.  So to me, its not so much about the necessity of the atom bomb, but actually recognizing how much I thought I knew, may not be factual.  

[Guest Thallasa]

On ‎29‎/‎01‎/‎2016 at 4:15 AM, other one said:

taking up our cross and following him does not mean we lay down while they kill our loved ones....

No, but it does mean stopping believing what you were told as history in school, and finding out what is really the truth .

For that you will be held culpable if you don't .