Obama will be the first US President to visit Hiroshima this Friday

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by DUCKofD3ATH, May 25, 2016.

  1. DUCKofD3ATH, May 25, 2016
    Last edited: May 27, 2016

    DUCKofD3ATH Suspended

    DUCKofD3ATH

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Universe 0 Timeline
    #1
    Should he apologize?

    Mr. Obama’s predecessors had good reasons to avoid Hiroshima. None wanted to be seen by American voters as apologizing for a decision that many historians even today believe, on balance, saved lives. And there were worries about how such a visit would be viewed in China, South Korea and other countries in Asia that suffered from the brutal World War II killing machine that was Imperial Japan.
    Nope. The decision to drop the bomb saved many American lives, so for that reason alone, it was justified.

    Also, there's nothing magical about nukes, they're just big bombs. Dropping one nuke on Hiroshima is no different than fire bombing Tokyo with thousands of incendiary bombs. War is all hell, hence the Japanese reaped what they sowed.

    UPDATE

    And now we know:

    Barack Obama called for a world without nuclear weapons on Friday as he became the first sitting U.S. president to visit the site of the Hiroshima atomic bombing.
    ...
    Obama did not apologize for the U.S. actions and instead paid tribute to "all the innocents killed across the arc of that terrible war," saying that "their souls speak to us" and "mere words cannot give voice to such suffering."​
     
  2. APlotdevice macrumors 68040

    APlotdevice

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    #2
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Just big bombs? JUST BIG BOMBS?!! JUST BIG BOMBS??!!!
     
  3. DUCKofD3ATH thread starter Suspended

    DUCKofD3ATH

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Universe 0 Timeline
    #3
    Yup. Just big bombs. What, you don't think the white phosphorus in incendiaries causes horrific injuries?:

    Incandescent particles of WP cast off by a WP weapon's initial explosion can produce extensive, deep second and third degree burns. One reason why this occurs is the tendency of the element to stick to the skin. Phosphorus burns carry a greater risk of mortality than other forms of burns due to the absorption of phosphorus into the body through the burned area, resulting in liver, heart and kidney damage, and in some cases multiple organ failure.[78] These weapons are particularly dangerous to exposed people because white phosphorus continues to burn unless deprived of oxygen or until it is completely consumed. In some cases, burns are limited to areas of exposed skin because the smaller WP particles do not burn completely through personal clothing before being consumed.

    IMAGE IS TOO GRAPHIC
    So I take it you think Obama should apologize because people were burned in a unique way by nukes?
     
  4. APlotdevice macrumors 68040

    APlotdevice

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    #4
    And you know what all that has in common? It tends to kill you very quickly! You know what doesn't always kill you so quickly?
    RADIATION!

    I've seen people slowly whither away and die from cancerous tumors. That's the real hell. Anyone who thinks this is an acceptable fate to bestow on another human being is a monster.
     
  5. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #5
    By appearing in Hiroshima so close to Memorial Day, Obama's implicit apology for the U.S. winning WWII is obvious to any rational observer.
     
  6. Praxis91 macrumors regular

    Praxis91

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    #6
    He should visit his Democrat paradise of Detroilet to see what his party has done to make Detroilet look like Hiroshima after WWII.
     
  7. adroit macrumors 6502

    adroit

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2005
    Location:
    Victoria, BC
  8. thermodynamic Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #8

    I largely agree with you. The country's leaders were playing superiority and started a war against the world with Germany and Italy. Kamakazi pilots and such showed how they were not going to budge at all. Some even argued that in dropping the bombs, more lives - from ALL countries - were saved because they finally saw something massive and took a step back.

    Like Al Qaeda, et al, how does one talk to somebody so extreme so they stop being vile toward innocents and setting a spiral of war into action?

    But innocents did not deserve the agony and death. They did not sow anything, and some were manipulated - even by Japanese media.

    Maybe Japan apologized for its part in the war, or did a long time ago, yet America hadn't (?). In which case, Obama doing so is an absolutely correct thing to do.

    But in the 1940s, the world wasn't as globalized as it is now. HUGE paradigm shifts have taken place. Stepping backward may or may not work, and that is a generalization of any country on this planet. Not just America.
     
  9. DUCKofD3ATH thread starter Suspended

    DUCKofD3ATH

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Universe 0 Timeline
    #9
    Have you seen people starve to death in concentration camps? In just the Japanese-run Santo Tomas Internment Camp:

    In January 1945, a doctor reported that the average loss of weight among male internees had been 53 pounds during the three years at Santo Tomas, 32.5 percent of average body weight. (Forty percent loss of normal body weight will usually result in death.)[31] That month, eight deaths among internees were attributed to malnutrition, but Japanese officials demanded that the death certificates be altered to eliminate malnutrition and starvation as causes of death. On January 30 four additional deaths occurred. That same day the Japanese confiscated much of the food left in the camp for their soldiers and the "cold fear of death" gripped the weakened internees.
    Death by starvation is excruciating. The cancer deaths you mentioned mostly occurred years after the bomb was dropped.

    Still not seeing anything that makes nukes particularly evil or hideous when compared to war as the Japanese fought it.
     
  10. thermodynamic Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #10
    And we know compassionate conservatives like Romney would have let it die. We know.

    Oh, you might want to look up reaganomics, CEOs calling the shots like poorer quality materials, greed, and other issues other than just "union greed" as a blanket statement because it's not just one-sided.

    Oh, since you started playing partisan pattycake, let's show another perspective:
    http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-li...s-not-black-population-or-unions-2465676.html

    I also read only the headline. You should be lucky, I read your entire post. Your entire blindly hate-filled post.

    I'm sure the Democrat in New Jersey whose policies let water costs skyrocket-- oh, wait, he's a republican as well. Man, this is fun playing partisan pattycake. Time to stop before I become an addict, however.
     
  11. DUCKofD3ATH thread starter Suspended

    DUCKofD3ATH

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Universe 0 Timeline
    #11
    So you think he'll apologize? I wouldn't call that appalling, just disappointing.
     
  12. APlotdevice, May 25, 2016
    Last edited: May 25, 2016

    APlotdevice macrumors 68040

    APlotdevice

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    #12
    Were the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki directly responsible for those acts? Perhaps a few of them where, but it's unlikely that most of them had anything to do with it. Certainly that little girl had nothing to do with it. Or do you think that all Germans needed to be punished for the holocaust? All Americans of the first few centuries of this nations history should have been punished for what was done to the natives?

    No, I'm not trying to excuse what Imperial Japan did. Imperial Japan did a lot of ****** things, and the people in charge were rightfully punished for those things. But don't pretend that war is some glorious struggle between good and evil. It's human beings doing horrible things to one another until one side gives up. In WW2 it was the Axis powers that gave up. In Vietnam we were the ones to give up.

    The fact that those deaths occurred years later PROVES MY POINT! With conventional weapontry, if you survive intact then you're generally fine. This isn't the case with nukes. They continue to kill years after the last one is dropped.
     
  13. DUCKofD3ATH, May 25, 2016
    Last edited: May 25, 2016

    DUCKofD3ATH thread starter Suspended

    DUCKofD3ATH

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Universe 0 Timeline
    #13
    You're not being logical. Why are you singling out the A-bombed civilians when more were killed in the firebombing of Tokyo?

    The Operation Meetinghouse firebombing of Tokyo on the night of 9 March 1945 was the single deadliest air raid of World War II,[2] greater than Dresden,[25] Hiroshima, or Nagasaki as single events.
    I think you've been brainwashed to dread nukes, but any weapon of mass destruction can be as bad or worse. Obama's not going to Tokyo to apologize (nor should he), so there's no reason to apologize for the nukes that have made the current time the most peaceful humanity has ever known.

    As for dying years after the bomb was dropped: better that than dying when the bomb was dropped.
    --- Post Merged, May 25, 2016 ---
    Innocents die in wars, that's what "total war" is all about. Nations have to destroy the ability of their enemies to wage war, and that means crushing the civilian population or at least not worrying too much about collateral damage when attacking military targets located in civilian areas (Tokyo, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki, for example).

    Oh, Japan has been on a tear when it comes to apologizing for what they did in WWII. You'd think they were Democrats! But they should apologize, they started the war and they committed awful atrocities.

    We did nothing we should have to apologize for.
    --- Post Merged, May 25, 2016 ---
    Probably picked the Memorial Day weekend so he wouldn't have to feign caring about our military and the sacrifices they've made for this country his wife isn't proud of.
     
  14. APlotdevice macrumors 68040

    APlotdevice

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    #14
    I have already ******** told you why singling out the atomic bomb. Repeatedly in fact!

    Have you never witnessed someone die from cancer or other degenerative disease? Seeing them slowly rot away from the inside? Muscles decaying? Bowls failing? Constant pain? Loved ones crying at their side because there is nothing they can do to help?! The people who died immediately after had a merciful end compared to that.
     
  15. impulse462 Suspended

    impulse462

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    #15
    I think you're in the wrong here duck. Nuclear weapons are /worse/ than other bombing due to reasons eloquenly explained by @APlotdevice. You don't even have to take my word for it. Albert Einstein (a hero of mine) was visibly distraught for weeks after the bomb was dropped because he knew its destructive power.

    I think think the science behind all of it is pretty "cool", however.
     
  16. DUCKofD3ATH thread starter Suspended

    DUCKofD3ATH

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Universe 0 Timeline
    #16
    Because nuclear weapons cause cancer that kills people years after they're dropped?

    And that's worse than being burned from the outside in?

    I just can't take your point as seriously as you want me to. Rather die years later than when the bomb drops.

    There are few good ways to die. Rather die of cancer than Alzheimer's or a stroke.
     
  17. impulse462 Suspended

    impulse462

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    #17
    lol uh...whatever ****ed up fantasy that is...its still just your opinion. and you don't really have a right to subject other people to ways you feel are "better" at dying
     
  18. DUCKofD3ATH thread starter Suspended

    DUCKofD3ATH

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Universe 0 Timeline
    #18
    Someday it will happen. But not this day.

    No. He or she is citing emotional reasons that don't hold up to scrutiny. An A-bomb killed Hiroshima's civilians in droves? So did the firebombing of Dresden with incendiaries. The A-bomb killed people years after it was dropped? Better than at the moment the bombs fall.

    As for Einstein, Robert A. Heinlein describes my feelings exactly about the pacifism of this otherwise estimable man:

    Albert Einstein was a pacifist but not an honest one. When his own ox was gored, he forgot all about his pacifist principles and used his political influence to start the project that produced the first city-killer bomb.​
    --- Post Merged, May 25, 2016 ---
    Why not? She's the one making the emotional case that dying of cancer is so terrible. I happen to think she's wrong.

    Given that both opinions are emotional and not fact-based, they both have equal validity. Sorry to burst your bubble. (But not really.)
     
  19. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #19
    Yeah, like England apologizing for Dresden. Oh, the groveling that commenced that day...

    "SORRY FOR THAT MESS, OLD CHAPS! WE JUST COULDN'T HELP OURSELVES, TUT TUT! WE JUST FEEL SO TERRIBLY AWFUL ABOUT THAT WHOLE RIGMAROLE! NOW EXCUSE US WHILE WE OVERCOOK A STEAK, AND DRIVE ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE ROAD!"
     
  20. APlotdevice macrumors 68040

    APlotdevice

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    #20
    No, I am making the case that dying of cancer is FACTUALLY horrible. And honestly for you to say that you would rather spend the last few months of your existence in agonizing pain is just ******* hilarious!
     
  21. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #21
    I think this quote, moreso than anything, proves Duck is here just to get our goat. No one could actually say what he just said without having some gross disconnect with objective reality.

    ...though, granted, he could be the type of person who goes into children's oncology wards, screaming "OH, QUIT YOUR BITCHIN', YOU LITTLE WHINY BRATS! QUIT DYING ON MY DOLLAR". I mean that would be a pretty Republican thing to do..
     
  22. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #22
    Well, empathy anyway.
     
  23. DUCKofD3ATH thread starter Suspended

    DUCKofD3ATH

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Universe 0 Timeline
    #23
    Glad you're amused. Otherwise, your emotional arguments don't sway me. I'd rather die of cancer, dosed up with morphine, than have a stroke or some other impairment.
     
  24. lobeyonekenobi macrumors regular

    lobeyonekenobi

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #24
    I think any human emotion is a sign of weakness for this bloke.
     
  25. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #25
    I just ran into a guy earlier today that was diagnosed with cancer of the esophagus about 6 months ago. Hasn't been able to eat solid foods in practically all that time. He couldn't get surgery, since the tumor was attached to one of his major arteries in his chest.

    Fortunately for him, after the rounds of chemo and radiation therapy, his prognosis is looking excellent. Though while riding the trip to Wellsville, he's lost 80 pounds, most of his hair, and can barely stand up without assistance, which, you know, looks SO ****ing FUN!
     

Share This Page