Refugees "flooding" Europe !NEW POLL!

[Westwood]

Only an American would defend atomic bombs with "but they saved lives!" 

And you're wrong. As always.

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/10/29/opinion/l-a-bombing-of-japan-was-unnecessary-393488.html?mcubz=0

A New York Times Opinion article from Gar (((Alperovitz))), the author of "America Beyond Capitalism." Nice.

Again, why such an emotional response to what is simply a bigger bomb? If you look at the Allied plans of invasion, our experiences on other Pacific islands, and the Japanese home island population the only logical conclusion is that the bombs saved lives.

I'm sorry, I forgot that cultural Marxists don't believe in linear logic. I also apologize for calling you a retard rather than respecting your Xe/Xim/Xant pronouns, I'll endeavor to be more accepting in the future, comrade.

[Xant]

A New York Times Opinion article from Gar (((Alperovitz))), the author of "America Beyond Capitalism." Nice.

Again, why such an emotional response to what is simply a bigger bomb? If you look at the Allied plans of invasion, our experiences on other Pacific islands, and the Japanese home island population the only logical conclusion is that the bombs saved lives.

I'm sorry, I forgot that cultural Marxists don't believe in linear logic. I also apologize for calling you a retard rather than respecting your Xe/Xim/Xant pronouns, I'll endeavor to be more accepting in the future, comrade.

An opinion article that cites sources, retard.

[Xant]

> ... ancestrally, if you had no coalition you were nakedly at the mercy of everyone else, so the instinct to belong to a coalition has urgency, preexisting and superseding any policy-driven basis for membership. This is why group beliefs are free to be so weird. Since coalitional programs evolved to promote the self-interest of the coalition’s membership (in dominance, status, legitimacy, resources, moral force, etc.), even coalitions whose organizing ideology originates (ostensibly) to promote human welfare often slide into the most extreme forms of oppression, in complete contradiction to the putative values of the group. Indeed, morally wrong-footing rivals is one point of ideology, and once everyone agrees on something (slavery is wrong) it ceases to be a significant moral issue because it no longer shows local rivals in a bad light. Many argue that there are more slaves in the world today than in the 19th century. Yet because one’s political rivals cannot be delegitimized by being on the wrong side of slavery, few care to be active abolitionists anymore, compared to being, say, speech police.
> Moreover, to earn membership in a group you must send signals that clearly indicate that you differentially support it, compared to rival groups. Hence, optimal weighting of beliefs and communications in the individual mind will make it feel good to think and express content conforming to and flattering to one’s group’s shared beliefs and to attack and misrepresent rival groups. The more biased away from neutral truth, the better the communication functions to affirm coalitional identity, generating polarization in excess of actual policy disagreements. Communications of practical and functional truths are generally useless as differential signals, because any honest person might say them regardless of coalitional loyalty.

[Taser]

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


And is the argument over the civil war, the use of nuclear bombs, japan or refugees in europe at this point? All of the above? Maybe a civil war in europe where berlin is bombed with a nuclear bomb and japan takes in their refugees? (lol like japan would)

[IR_Kuoin]

When's the Mad Max scenario gonna be a reality? I wanna drive around with a boss ass car and kill for water.

[Oberyn]

In a Mad Max scenario the vast majority of people end up as a pile of bones buried underneath the shifting sands, rather than as wandering hermit badasses. The obsession with those sort of post-apocalyptic loner survivalist stories are the sad reflection of a narcissistic individualism that is promoted as normal. You're not special brah, you're not going to be wandering the ruins of New-New York fighting mutants or something, you're gonna puke your guts out from radiation poisoning and die along with your entire family and everyone you know.

[Westwood]

When we first designed and created the atomic bomb, we made a specialised tool that is only effective at committing war crimes.

Alright Sammy Salvo, you got me, I just love war crimes.

You see, you're still using emotional language to describe a machine. This machine was built for war just like any other bomb, firearm, tank, or piece of artillery. It's just a weapon of war, certainly a fantastical one, but it isn't granted any otherworldly quality distinguishing it from other bombs, no matter what emotional response the word "atomic" triggers for you. If anything hippies should praise nuclear bombs, they've done more encouraging peace than any other arsenal in our history.

Regardless of that, by your rationale the use of any "specialized tool" of war equates to war crimes. Not just gas or nukes or cluster munitions, but flintlocks, swords, machine guns. If it wasn't also intended to cut wood, it must be wur crumbs, right? Honestly I'm really unsure where your "war crimes" claim is coming from considering you're clearly not using international criminal law (I don't recall Truman standing at the Nuremberg Trials) while also denying objective morality. The question really becomes, why?

It is not 'just another bomb'

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

It can only ever be used to render an area of land (far too large to be used exclusively against military installations or personnel) unfit for human bla bla bla

Oh and you started developing it before you even joined the war so on

Nigga you asked us to and we collaborated on the bomb's development in the late war. We all did that because Germany was and we needed a deterrent if they were successful, although y'all didn't rule out any first strike on Berlin. Not that we hadn't already been wantonly bombing German civilians under British direction. When Alfred Nobel invented TNT was he "doing the war crimes" ?

It was a bomb made to do bomb things. Here's a funny bit, most bombs are "too large to be used exclusively against military installations or personnel." You should really know that considering the number of German civilians your people burned alive. Nagasaki and Hiroshima were targeted for their industrial and military significance, how about Dresden?

Either way it's disingenuous to say we used it to render an area of land unfit for human life when we didn't even know the extent to which it did that. Our planned i n v a s i o n  o f  t h e  m a i n l a n d  included plans to use several smaller fission bombs in advance of our attacks. SOP were going to stipulate that our forces wait all of 48 hours before entering bombed areas.

ay lmao but we bombed Nagasaki to salt the Earth. Right.

An opinion article that cites sources, retard.

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Sure pal, let's ignore the preparations made to defend the home islands, the deadlocked Supreme War Council (not to mention the feelings the Japanese general staff had toward surrender rather than peace terms), decades of Japanese military doctrine and centuries of philosophy, as well as our own experiences with them throughout the war. Yeah, this Marxist referencing letters and recalled conversations is definitely who I want to listen to. Surely he has no ulterior motive for demonizing America.

[IR_Kuoin]

In a Mad Max scenario the vast majority of people end up as a pile of bones buried underneath the shifting sands, rather than as wandering hermit badasses. The obsession with those sort of post-apocalyptic loner survivalist stories are the sad reflection of a narcissistic individualism that is promoted as normal. You're not special brah, you're not going to be wandering the ruins of New-New York fighting mutants or something, you're gonna puke your guts out from radiation poisoning and die along with your entire family and everyone you know.

Anime.

[Westwood]

Nope, i'm describing a tool. Different tools have different functions, not all machines are equal in function.

I imagine the rest of your post just kinda spirals out from your flawed premise there.

Sure, do the semantics thing. It's a tool of war that accomplishes its purpose well, something you've been socialized to respond to emotionally rather than rationally, leading to outbursts about war crimes and the inherent evil of payloads larger than 20 kilotons of TNT.

[Westwood]

no you are

k

[Oberyn]

Nobody ever thinks about what would happen to the original York in this situation do they? Does that become New York?

Old New York. New Old York?

[Oberyn]

Anime.

[Oberyn]

Anyways, I haven't really gotten involved into the whole "are nukes morally defensible in a Total War scenario" cause it's a dumb arguement. Firebombing Dresden and Tokyo was objectively more horrifying and caused the deaths of more "innocents" than the atomic bombs, never see any arguement about whether that was morally defensible. Was the Red Army slaughtering and raping it's way through german civilians justified, because of what the naz1s did to slavs? Was it just righteous revenge, a pragmatic and sensible action to take, a war crime on par with anything the other side did? No point discussing it, cause losers don't write the history books.

[IR_Kuoin]

I'd say the nuke is an / was an important tool for peace keeping, but some day there's gonna be a childless person and with no family with enough power to push the button and think "whatever".

[njames89]

Minutes to midnight?

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login