No Apology but Good Thinking

[irosie91]

One thing that is absurd and impossible is equating a military attack on a military target that killed about 3000 with a military attack on a primarily civilian target that primarily killed tens of thousands of women, children and the elderly. A bomb intended to terrorize a virtually helpless population into somehow forcing their tyrannical government into surrender is not in the same 'ball game' as Pearl Harbor. Go ahead and say it is if one will, but it isn't.
The Japanese government and military were just as criminal as the Nazis. Being equally criminal to both of them is not a morally superior position.

The point is there would not have been a Hiroshima except for there was a Pearl Harbor. The Japanese were given multiple opportunities to surrender and to stop the war. They made the choice not to.

wrong again willow tree-------murder of persons who happen to be military people in a TIME OF PEACE------is ****MURDER**** ---

 

[there4eyeM]

One thing that is absurd and impossible is equating a military attack on a military target that killed about 3000 with a military attack on a primarily civilian target that primarily killed tens of thousands of women, children and the elderly. A bomb intended to terrorize a virtually helpless population into somehow forcing their tyrannical government into surrender is not in the same 'ball game' as Pearl Harbor. Go ahead and say it is if one will, but it isn't.
The Japanese government and military were just as criminal as the Nazis. Being equally criminal to both of them is not a morally superior position.

The point is there would not have been a Hiroshima except for there was a Pearl Harbor. The Japanese were given multiple opportunities to surrender and to stop the war. They made the choice not to.

The people in Japan did not make the choice. The people in Hiroshima had no choice about government policy or about being a target. They were not military. The people on the ships in Pearl Harbor were military and made a choice. There is a difference.

 

[WillowTree]

One thing that is absurd and impossible is equating a military attack on a military target that killed about 3000 with a military attack on a primarily civilian target that primarily killed tens of thousands of women, children and the elderly. A bomb intended to terrorize a virtually helpless population into somehow forcing their tyrannical government into surrender is not in the same 'ball game' as Pearl Harbor. Go ahead and say it is if one will, but it isn't.
The Japanese government and military were just as criminal as the Nazis. Being equally criminal to both of them is not a morally superior position.

The point is there would not have been a Hiroshima except for there was a Pearl Harbor. The Japanese were given multiple opportunities to surrender and to stop the war. They made the choice not to.

wrong again willow tree-------murder of persons who happen to be military people in a TIME OF PEACE------is ****MURDER**** ---

Why was I wrong? I am the one who called it murder. Pearl Harbor was murder.

 

[WillowTree]

One thing that is absurd and impossible is equating a military attack on a military target that killed about 3000 with a military attack on a primarily civilian target that primarily killed tens of thousands of women, children and the elderly. A bomb intended to terrorize a virtually helpless population into somehow forcing their tyrannical government into surrender is not in the same 'ball game' as Pearl Harbor. Go ahead and say it is if one will, but it isn't.
The Japanese government and military were just as criminal as the Nazis. Being equally criminal to both of them is not a morally superior position.

The point is there would not have been a Hiroshima except for there was a Pearl Harbor. The Japanese were given multiple opportunities to surrender and to stop the war. They made the choice not to.

The people in Japan did not make the choice. The people in Hiroshima had no choice about government policy or about being a target. They were not military. The people on the ships in Pearl Harbor were military and made a choice. There is a difference.

They were military on a ship not at war with Japan when Japan snuck up on them and murdered them.

 

[there4eyeM]

Those who wish to call war murder are welcome to do so. Those who call bombing civilians murder are correct in doing so.

 

[WillowTree]

Those who wish to call war murder are welcome to do so. Those who call bombing civilians murder are correct in doing so.

We were not at war with Japan asshole. Do you got that now?

 

[OldLady]

Did he mention the dead Americans that the Japanese murdered at Pearl Harbor? I am betting he did not. How about the Bataan death march? Probably not.

How 'bout you listen to his remarks? He is not stuck on blaming and he did not defend either side of the conflict.

That's the point. He should have defended America.

No. I agree with him that it is time to move on. Blame and defend no one in particular. Move on and try to create a world without nuclear war.

 

[irosie91]

One thing that is absurd and impossible is equating a military attack on a military target that killed about 3000 with a military attack on a primarily civilian target that primarily killed tens of thousands of women, children and the elderly. A bomb intended to terrorize a virtually helpless population into somehow forcing their tyrannical government into surrender is not in the same 'ball game' as Pearl Harbor. Go ahead and say it is if one will, but it isn't.
The Japanese government and military were just as criminal as the Nazis. Being equally criminal to both of them is not a morally superior position.

The point is there would not have been a Hiroshima except for there was a Pearl Harbor. The Japanese were given multiple opportunities to surrender and to stop the war. They made the choice not to.

wrong again willow tree-------murder of persons who happen to be military people in a TIME OF PEACE------is ****MURDER**** ---

Why was I wrong? I am the one who called it murder. Pearl Harbor was murder.

yes it was-----by the murdering japs who did not 'apologize'

 

[OldLady]

I'm going to pass. Mostly because I can't stand the asshole and secondly I can't stand hangwringing ceremonies, especially when they completely obscure the reasons why it happened and imply the US was the villain. I've heard that in their memorial museum there is no mention of why.

There was no implication that US was the villain. He took a giant step back from all that. It's not as offensive as you are imagining. But I would find it hard to sit through a Hillary speech, so I hear ya.

you "hear" nothing

What's up your ass this fine morning, Rosie?

nothing------as far as I know----what is up your KUNT----old whore?

why so crabby? We're all on the same side here.

 

[there4eyeM]

Those who wish to call war murder are welcome to do so. Those who call bombing civilians murder are correct in doing so.

We were not at war with Japan asshole. Do you got that now?

It is not clear what or who "Japan asshole" is, but it is clear that communication with you is over.

 

[WillowTree]

Did he mention the dead Americans that the Japanese murdered at Pearl Harbor? I am betting he did not. How about the Bataan death march? Probably not.

How 'bout you listen to his remarks? He is not stuck on blaming and he did not defend either side of the conflict.

That's the point. He should have defended America.

No. I agree with him that it is time to move on. Blame and defend no one in particular. Move on and try to create a world without nuclear war.

Yeah, that's just like him not to stand for America and why I will never recognize him as president. He does not deserve the title. Wonder why out of all the presidents he's the only one to do this?

Those who wish to call war murder are welcome to do so. Those who call bombing civilians murder are correct in doing so.

We were not at war with Japan asshole. Do you got that now?

It is not clear what or who "Japan asshole" is, but it is clear that communication with you is over.

good deal asshole.

 

[irosie91]

I'm going to pass. Mostly because I can't stand the asshole and secondly I can't stand hangwringing ceremonies, especially when they completely obscure the reasons why it happened and imply the US was the villain. I've heard that in their memorial museum there is no mention of why.

There was no implication that US was the villain. He took a giant step back from all that. It's not as offensive as you are imagining. But I would find it hard to sit through a Hillary speech, so I hear ya.

you "hear" nothing

What's up your ass this fine morning, Rosie?

nothing------as far as I know----what is up your KUNT----old whore?

why so crabby? We're all on the same side here.

who is "ALL"

 

[there4eyeM]

[/QUOTE]why so crabby? We're all on the same side here.[/QUOTE]
Perhaps incinerating helpless civilians and then trying to defend it has interfered with internal peace.

 

[OldLady]

There was no implication that US was the villain. He took a giant step back from all that. It's not as offensive as you are imagining. But I would find it hard to sit through a Hillary speech, so I hear ya.

you "hear" nothing

What's up your ass this fine morning, Rosie?

nothing------as far as I know----what is up your KUNT----old whore?

why so crabby? We're all on the same side here.

who is "ALL"

Americans? Humans? USMB cranky contributors? We are all on the side of the U.S., I know that much. It IS surprising that so many are apparently still fighting WWII, but hey. Why does anything surprise me here anymore?

 

[Iceweasel]

you "hear" nothing

What's up your ass this fine morning, Rosie?

nothing------as far as I know----what is up your KUNT----old whore?

why so crabby? We're all on the same side here.

who is "ALL"

Americans? Humans? USMB cranky contributors? We are all on the side of the U.S., I know that much. It IS surprising that so many are apparently still fighting WWII, but hey. Why does anything surprise me here anymore?

We're just trying to make America great again.

 

[OldLady]

why so crabby? We're all on the same side here.[/QUOTE]
Perhaps incinerating helpless civilians and then trying to defend it has interfered with internal peace.[/QUOTE]
In times of war, leaders do a lot of things; that was part of the president's point. Can you let it go and work to do better in the future? That's all we can do--pissing off Rosie isn't helping anything.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

One thing that is absurd and impossible is equating a military attack on a military target that killed about 3000 with a military attack on a primarily civilian target that primarily killed tens of thousands of women, children and the elderly. A bomb intended to terrorize a virtually helpless population into somehow forcing their tyrannical government into surrender is not in the same 'ball game' as Pearl Harbor. Go ahead and say it is if one will, but it isn't.
The Japanese government and military were just as criminal as the Nazis. Being equally criminal to both of them is not a morally superior position.

The point is there would not have been a Hiroshima except for there was a Pearl Harbor. The Japanese were given multiple opportunities to surrender and to stop the war. They made the choice not to.

The people in Japan did not make the choice. The people in Hiroshima had no choice about government policy or about being a target. They were not military. The people on the ships in Pearl Harbor were military and made a choice. There is a difference.

Civilians died at Pearl Harbor.

 

[WillowTree]

why so crabby? We're all on the same side here.

Perhaps incinerating helpless civilians and then trying to defend it has interfered with internal peace.[/QUOTE]
In times of war, leaders do a lot of things; that was part of the president's point. Can you let it go and work to do better in the future? That's all we can do--pissing off Rosie isn't helping anything.[/QUOTE]
Yeah! I remember nine eleven do you?

 

[there4eyeM]

why so crabby? We're all on the same side here.

Perhaps incinerating helpless civilians and then trying to defend it has interfered with internal peace.[/QUOTE]
In times of war, leaders do a lot of things; that was part of the president's point. Can you let it go and work to do better in the future? That's all we can do--pissing off Rosie isn't helping anything.[/QUOTE]
Being 'pissed off' is a choice, especially when nothing personal has been said. Making gratuitous personal comments in lieu of intelligent defense of a position, even if it is an indefensible position, might help someone make that choice, but we can't make a person make a choice.

 

[WillowTree]

Since nine eleven libtards have been defending Muslim terrorist. I can't imagine why......oh wait. Let's dig up Tim McVeigh.