To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 13632
13631  |  13633
Subject: 
Re: More on Palestine
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Tue, 9 Oct 2001 07:11:12 GMT
Viewed: 
345 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tom Stangl writes:
If you mean the atomic explosions, you've got an awfully strange idea of the
definition of terrorism.

What defines terrorism? Is it the act itself or the people who do it? Or is
it situational? During the Revolutionary War, George Washington was a
terrorist to the British and obviously I disagree with that. Dropping
nuclear weapons on innocent men, women and children may not be "terrorism"
to Americans but I'm sure it was to the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Either way, both were barbaric acts that historical research proved to be
unnecessary. Japan was against the wall, perhaps a month away from surrender
and was already discussing surrender via the Soviets as an intermediary to
America (the Japanese were trying to save face). But Truman went ahead with
using the atomic bomb on Japan not to hasten their surrender, as was
previously claimed, but to show the Soviets our military might and possibly
deal us a bigger hand in the post-WWII era. And both targets we chose had no
military significance. They were "virgin targets," meaning that they had not
sustained any previous bombing. Thus, our scientists could (and did) later
study the effects of atomic weapons on buildings, vegetation and people.

So, if it was unnecessary to use atomic weapons to hasten Japan's surrender,
it is reasonable to conclude that they were meant to strike fear in the
Soviets as well as the Japanese. Isn't that terrorism?

Dan



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: More on Palestine
 
(...) Really? What? If you mean the atomic explosions, you've got an awfully strange idea of the definition of terrorism. -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home ***(URL) Bay Area DSMs (23 years ago, 9-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

117 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR