Atrocities Argument Carried From Another Thread...

[BTs_GhostSniper]

GS, distance and perspective can be very helpful in history, you should know that. My distance having not lived through the red scare lets me analyze the cold war without the emotional fear that Americans were indocrinated with. My distance allows me to see that the objective history shows that the Soviets really showed very little aggressive threat to the US as the US drummed it up to be. The US was the aggressor in the Cold War, that is historically inarguable. The Soviets sent money and aid to countries in support of politics they liked...so did the Americans. The Soviets did not send troops outside their immediate vicinity to fight any real action. The Americans were all over the place. The Soviets were from day one within range of American nuclear weaponry...we had nukes in Europe, in Turkey, etc. Yet they only got nukes near us in what led to the Cuban Missle Crisis. We were creating a threat to them and they were reacting, it wasn't us reacting to a threat. This isn't historical revisionism, it is just historical objectivism.

It is not revision to say Japan would have folded from the embargo...it is unknown. You cannot say they would have or that they wouldn't have. We can't know what would have happened had we not dropped the bombs. However, to say what we did is the only way is highly unlikely. We could have dropped the bomb on a non-populated region as a show of force...or a less-populated region, the choice of target was unnecessarily immoral.

Um, where do I begin...

First and foremost, you are talking to someone who served in the military during part of the Cold War.  Yes, I realize you were just a young boy then, but I was in uniform the day the Soviet Union collapsed.  So I know a little about what I speak.  Next, how can you possibly say the United States was the agressor during the Cold War?  Do you not know that the Soviet Union sent weapons, troops, pilots, and airplanes for the North Koreans to use to invade South Korea, as well as for North Vietnam to invade South Vietnam.  Yes, they even had their pilots and ground troops there in those two wars.  Then there is the invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviet Union.  And we were the agressors?  Give me a break.

Now, as for the two atomic bombs being dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki being immoral...

They started it, we finished it.  Ever hear of Pearl Harbor?  How about something more recent...September 11, 2001...when this nation is attacked, we take the fight to their soil.  That's how it has always been, and that is how it will always be.  Lest this nation cease to exist.

Peace.

-GhostSniper Out.[/size]

[*DAMN Bondo]

Pearl Harbor is a military target. An attack on it is absolutely no justification for a mass attack on civilians. In fact, when you are the alleged "good" guys, no intentional attack on civilians is justifiable.

You did not contradict me about the USSR...I said they did said aid to countries to support communist movements and the like...just like the US did for anti-communist movements. The reason we were in Vietnam was French colonial interests, not communism. Ultimately we got more involoved by using the communist threat...Vietnam went communist yet it didn't end up being a domino theory situation and Vietnam is starting to do pretty well after recovering from the devestation of the war.

USSR aggression would have meant them fighting in a large-scale war somewhere in the Americas.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

Pearl Harbor is a military target. An attack on it is absolutely no justification for a mass attack on civilians. In fact, when you are the alleged "good" guys, no intentional attack on civilians is justifiable.

Oh, Pearl Harbor was a military target.  Now I get it, it is okay for another country to attack us and start a war with us just because they attacked a military target.  That is laughable.  Dude, you might not realize this, but we weren't in the middle of a war when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.

You did not contradict me about the USSR...I said they did said aid to countries to support communist movements and the like...just like the US did for anti-communist movements. The reason we were in Vietnam was French colonial interests, not communism. Ultimately we got more involoved by using the communist threat...Vietnam went communist yet it didn't end up being a domino theory situation and Vietnam is starting to do pretty well after recovering from the devestation of the war.

We did not go into Vietnam for French colonial interests.  We went in to aid the South Vietnamese from a Communist oppressor (North Vietnam).  And tell me how it wasn't a Domino Theory when most of the countries on that peninsula were overthrown by Communists.

USSR aggression would have meant them fighting in a large-scale war somewhere in the Americas.

Oh, so no Agression by the Soviet Union because it doesn't fit your nifty little definition of Agression.  Nice.  Revisionists often change definitions to suite their argument.

[BTs_Mysterio]

You know this thread is rather sick actually. I don't see how you guys can argue that one atrocity is more of a atrocity than another. Each are terrible.

GS, to what you said "September 11, 2001...when this nation is attacked, we take the fight to their soil." can't you show any respect beyond that of an eye for and eye. Same with Pearl harbor. There's more to every atrocity than the death toll. If we rank them based on our justifications, we aren't showing the respect the dead and damaged forever deserve.

[BTs-FahQ2]

Well, I would say to you mysterio, think of it the other way around.  You wouldn't argue the greatness of one man feeding another to one man feeding a family.  Why can't we set a level to atrocites to find out who was the best scumbag when we can justify the level of merit to another.

just a thought

[BTs_Mysterio]

Glorifying hitler and other terrible people is now a good thing to do?

[BTs_GhostSniper]

Glorifying hitler and other terrible people is now a good thing to do?

No, never glorify these monsters.  Study them, research them, gain knowledge about the true evils in this world...but never glorify them.  I just like people to see what evil really is...it isn't the United States of America like everyone wants to believe.[/size]

[BTs_Mysterio]

The USA doesn't compare to the evil of say Nazi Germany. I wouldn't call the US evil even. I would say that the US Government is only looking at it's own interests and using influencing its own interests in questionable ways. There's a difference between Evil and Bad.

[bronto]

i wouldn't consider the usa evil at all, even though i despise lots to do with it. i think i can safely say that after world war 2 the US has really overstepped their boundries playing world police. i mean, maybe intentions were good, at least some of the times, but it really hasn't helped, one thing must be realised is that as soon as you change something, something else will fall out of place. this country has such a huge trade market that we have to send troops out to protect our economy. too bad isolation isn't an option anymore.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

i wouldn't consider the usa evil at all, even though i despise lots to do with it. i think i can safely say that after world war 2 the US has really overstepped their boundries playing world police. i mean, maybe intentions were good, at least some of the times, but it really hasn't helped, one thing must be realised is that as soon as you change something, something else will fall out of place. this country has such a huge trade market that we have to send troops out to protect our economy. too bad isolation isn't an option anymore.

Everybody wants to complain about the United States being the World's Police.  But guess who they call when somebody needs a cop?

That's not an exact quote, but Colin Powell said something close to that.[/size]

[bronto]

i wasn't complaining, but the united states gets called to help because they have the military resources not because they are american. it's like the snobby rich kid with all the toys...you can befriend him just to use his things. i know i'm not making much of a point here, basically any country that decides to spend such a huge part of their government budget funding their military is a candidate for world police (although most countries don't have this money, which is why it's america of course). i just wonder what the world would be like if another country had assumed the role, maybe one that wasn't so deeply outsourced for economic concern, that didn't allow just any old hick to rig an election and exploit a war for personal gain...(here comes the backlash lol)


as far as that last part is concerned, i don't care what anyone else will have me believe because this much is true: 9/11 was ALLOWED to happen, so we could go to war on a FALSE pretense. the only reason Bush was re-elected was because he suckered you in with that political tool called Religion...faith based politics my fucking ass, if any supposed decent christian thinks that george w. bush holds the same values so deeply, you got fucking scammed, plain and simple.

as far as the world police part, correct me if i'm wrong GS.

(PS any country being world police besides the US is strictly theoretical, it was pretty well solidified after the ww2 and the cold war)

[BTs_GhostSniper]

as far as the world police part, correct me if i'm wrong GS.

Well, we get called on not just because we have the resources, but also because we are WILLING to help.  Big difference there.  We are the most generous nation on earth.  Just look at the Balkins.  The Europeans had a problem right in their own back yard, but the United States had to come in to take care of the situation.

[lexdemon]

as far as the world police part, correct me if i'm wrong GS.

Well, we get called on not just because we have the resources, but also because we are WILLING to help. Big difference there. We are the most generous nation on earth. Just look at the Balkins. The Europeans had a problem right in their own back yard, but the United States had to come in to take care of the situation.

well, GS i think that the partial look of the world is that USA is helping a lot (i recognize that), but unfortunately they have screwed off some stuff sometimes and then USA gov. trying to take it underground so nobody sees the mistakes helping others, i repeat: USA has helped a lot, but is those mistakes that make it part terrorist sometimes (by mistake or maybe sometimes no). I guess USA would make better when not trying to cover that.

plus another comment to:

Glorifying hitler and other terrible people is now a good thing to do?


No, never glorify these monsters.  Study them, research them, gain knowledge about the true evils in this world...but never glorify them.  I just like people to see what evil really is...it isn't the United States of America like everyone wants to believe..

I guess is not glorify them but its also recognizible that they made amazing things (unfortunately bad things but amazing) such a tremendous power on their heads that was missused, study their plans and the way they acted, is amazing the power they had not to glorify the atrocities but glorify the mind of those bastards