CIA Tactics Endorsed in Secret Memos

[Dakota Kid]

Dropping nukes on Japan was entirely justified and appropriate. Period. End of discussion.

[Tally Whacker]

Originally Posted by SXSMITH

I'm pretty sure that's why we don't do it.

I wish that were the case. You and I have had this discussion before. Redefining torture as "Harsh interrogation" still doesn't make it right.

[636blurr]

User while the Iraqi militants go about blowing up whoever in the hell the want, by large our troops do a good job and even treat injured IRAQI's

Iraq Pictures: May 2005

[dave b]

Originally Posted by Dakota Kid

Dropping nukes on Japan was entirely justified and appropriate. Period. End of discussion.

Something about reaping the whirlwind.



db

[SBK Toy Store]

When I was in the Marine Corps, I worked at US Embassies overseas. What I learned about the spooks (our term for the CIA guys), is that anything is accepted as long as you don't get caught. Getting caught is worthy of the reprimand more so than the actual act.

[ARozanski]

The Japanese were preparing a massive defensive effort should the Americans land on the mainland. Civilians were being trained and armed with spears (yes). The Japanese defense industry was de-centralized to some extent, in that many civilian homes had a drill press or other small machine to produce items for the war effort. The Japanese people, unfortunately, were considered military targets for the purpose of the atomic bombings.

[ctandc]

Originally Posted by User Name

So in other words, the only thing that seperates a soldier from a terrorist is what side he's on? Got it, and again, I just want to see a spade called a spade.

And you didn't answer the question of *why* they hate us.

And you never answered my question about being away from the TV..

Ever been in the military?

[Parabellum]

Originally Posted by Dakota Kid

Dropping nukes on Japan was entirely justified and appropriate. Period. End of discussion.

I guess we just see this differently.

Dropping bombs on MILITARY TARGETS was clearly called for....but killing hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children, and then irradiating another hundred thousand (who got to spend their final weeks in unspeakable pain as their bodies melted, literally) was not appropriate.

The end does not justify the means, especially in Nuclear war.

[Dakota Kid]

Originally Posted by ctandc

And you never answered my question about being away from the TV..

Ever been in the military?

I hope that was a rhetorical question!! LOL

[Dakota Kid]

Originally Posted by Parabellum

I guess we just see this differently.

Dropping bombs on MILITARY TARGETS was clearly called for....but killing hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children, and then irradiating another hundred thousand (who got to spend their final weeks in unspeakable pain as their bodies melted, literally) was not appropriate.

The end does not justify the means, especially in Nuclear war.

It is tragic, no doubt. Hard to even think about. But you have to look at the totality of the situation. They would have done it a heartbeat if they had the nukes.

I just hope it never has to happen again.

[ctandc]

Originally Posted by Parabellum

Let us never forget: We dropped not one, but TWO NUCLEAR WEAPONS on Cilvilian targets in WW2.

Civilian targets.

Nuclear weapons.

There is NOTHING that justifies that action.

NOTHING.

I can understand someone's passion for that argument if their family was over there or near there when it happened....but you REALLY need to study WW2 ALOT MORE if you really believe what you just posted.

The invasion of Japan was planned to the detail. It's not like even those top Generals knew about the Manhattan Project.. (people actually kept secrets then). The invasion of Japan was actually made up of two different operations....the projected casualties for Allied Forces were over 1 million casualties with 250,000 + DEAD.

Not to mention the YEARS it would have possibly dragged on. The CONSERVATIVE estimate for Japanese casualties was 5 million.

[kirkeb]

Originally Posted by Parabellum

I guess we just see this differently.

Dropping bombs on MILITARY TARGETS was clearly called for....but killing hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children, and then irradiating another hundred thousand (who got to spend their final weeks in unspeakable pain as their bodies melted, literally) was not appropriate.

The end does not justify the means, especially in Nuclear war.

As opposed to the medical experiments, including live disection, conducted in China by the Japanese, the hundreds of thousands killed in Nanking by the Japanese, including using them for live bayonet and sword practice.

Sometimes a rabid dog has to be put down.

As others have said the bombs were dropped to save American lives. Also no doubt to send a message to the Russians. Also to perhaps forestal the Japanese from their own nuclear program.

Read an interesting book dealing with the postwar Allied mythos concerning Axis nukes i.e. they weren't close to it. Careful research has shown both Germany and Japan had a variety of programs going and that the Japanese may have indeed been able to test one; their program was centered in what is now N. Korea around the Chosin Reservoir and that that is why MacArthur was up there in the first place.

[jerome_oneil]

Originally Posted by Parabellum

I guess we just see this differently.

Dropping bombs on MILITARY TARGETS was clearly called for....but killing hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children, and then irradiating another hundred thousand (who got to spend their final weeks in unspeakable pain as their bodies melted, literally) was not appropriate.

The end does not justify the means, especially in Nuclear war.

Those nukes had nothing to do with military objectives. By that point in the war, every legitimate military target in Japan had pretty much been bombed into rubble. Those nukes had everything to do with breaking the will of the Japanese people to fight. And the only way you do that is through application of absolute overwhelming force, and a demonstration of will.

It is exactly the same strategy that Grant used when he sent Sherman across the south.

[636blurr]

^^^ correct as well as the chance to try out a new technology.

[SlowGoose]

Originally Posted by jerome_oneil

Those nukes had nothing to do with military objectives. By that point in the war, every legitimate military target in Japan had pretty much been bombed into rubble. Those nukes had everything to do with breaking the will of the Japanese people to fight. And the only way you do that is through application of absolute overwhelming force, and a demonstration of will.

It is exactly the same strategy that Grant used when he sent Sherman across the south.

Concur. The only thing about dropping the nukes on Japan in WWII that bothers me was the censorship of the results:

Censored