CIA Tactics Endorsed in Secret Memos

[jerome_oneil]

Originally Posted by SlowGoose

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

Censored

Yeah. Grant had to talk Sherman out of hanging a couple of reporters in his day, too.

[636blurr]

Originally Posted by SlowGoose

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

Censored

Alot of things on WW2 are still classified that were supposed to be made public.

[SlowGoose]

Originally Posted by 636blurr

Alot of things on WW2 are still classified that were supposed to be made public.

And your point is..... that makes it okay? Or that there was a lot of stuff that was wrongly covered up?

[shah269]

Originally Posted by 636blurr

Alot of things on WW2 are still classified that were supposed to be made public.

You have no idea!

[636blurr]

Originally Posted by SlowGoose

And your point is..... that makes it okay? Or that there was a lot of stuff that was wrongly covered up?

lol why do you always assume with me.

I never said it was ok, I wanted them to be put public as they were supposed during the klinton riegn.

I think we keep way to much quiet in this country.

[User Name]

Originally Posted by 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

That's great, as we should, but that doesn't negate the fact that we also kill and maim them by the thousands as collateral damage.



I'm only suggesting we be honest with ourselves when it comes to how our actions appear to those who later become our enemies. We seem to have this idea that since we convince ourselves that our intentions are good, and we'll help those we can, people won't be upset when we kill by the thousands.

Honestly, how is our actions in Iraq any different than BinLadin's attacking the US. At the end of the day, thousands of innocent people are dead because one group decided it was justified in forcing it's will on another. And in reality, the islamists just want us the fuck out of their countries. We're the aggressors in this fight.

Again, I just want a spade called a spade. Shit happens in war, I can accept that, but we should at least be man enough to be honest with ourselves and not be self-apologists.

Originally Posted by ctandc

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

Ever been in the military?

First, I don't watch TV, haven't had it in years.

Second, no, I've never been in the military, and of course that means any photos of clear torture and human rights violations never actually happen. That means the US military DIDN'T kill millions in Vietnam, DIDN'T kill thousands, if not hundreds of thousands in Iraq, DIDN'T support terrorists and dictators when it served our purposes. Only those who served have the right to comment on such issues

Stop trying to deflect.

[Parabellum]

I am simply amazed that most of you who voiced an opinion on the matter, supported dropping a nuclear weapon on civilian targets AFTER we had already dismantled the majority of the Japanese war machine.

And by amazed, I mean shocked and disappointed.

Worse yet, I am FUCKING BLOWN AWAY that some of you tried to suggest that because our enemy has committed egregious violations of human rights, that you believe that somehow gives us a pass to do the same.

Right and wrong are not predicated on the behavior of the enemy. If its wrong in principal to torture someone, or to drop bombs on a civilian target, then its wrong REGARDLESS OF THEIR ACTIONS.

[jerome_oneil]

Originally Posted by Parabellum

I am simply amazed that most of you who voiced an opinion on the matter, supported dropping a nuclear weapon on civilian targets AFTER we had already dismantled the majority of the Japanese war machine.

And by amazed, I mean shocked and disappointed.

Dismantling their means of production did not disarm the nation. And like I said, the intent of those bombs was to break the will of the People.

You had Japanese soldiers holing up for decades on remote islands after the war. Fanatics have to be treated differently.

[Parabellum]

Originally Posted by jerome_oneil

Fanatics have to be treated differently.

Funny, that is the same reasoning that Bush used to justify torture, detention without habeus corpus, and the patriot act.

[jerome_oneil]

Originally Posted by Parabellum

Funny, that is the same reasoning that Bush used to justify torture, detention without habeus corpus, and the patriot act.

The difference is that Bush applied it to people that weren't fanatics (The Iraqis) and Truman did.

The results are also quite different. Truman quit when his tactics worked (The Japanese surrendered) while Bush simply changed his reasonings when is expected result (where's those WMDs, anyway) ended up being wrong.

[SlowGoose]

Originally Posted by 636blurr

lol why do you always assume with me.

I never said it was ok, I wanted them to be put public as they were supposed during the klinton riegn.

I think we keep way to much quiet in this country.

Actually, if you reread my post I asked a question rather than making an assumption. And thank you for answering that question. We're actually in agreement for once except for your strange side-step into Klintonia.

[dave b]

I am simply amazed that most of you who voiced an opinion on the matter, supported dropping a nuclear weapon on civilian targets AFTER we had already dismantled the majority of the Japanese war machine.

The army estimated that an invasion of the Japanese home islands would result in more than 1M Japanese casualties, and many, many allied casualties. That number has been disputed but I believe that it's clear that the bombs hastened the surrender.

Read Thank God for the Atom Bomb and Other Essays (1988) by Paul Fussell. It may at least allow you to understand the 'other' side.

db

[636blurr]

Originally Posted by SlowGoose

Actually, if you reread my post I asked a question rather than making an assumption. And thank you for answering that question. We're actually in agreement for once except for your strange side-step into Klintonia.

Becouse during the klinton riegn (I do not remember the year) was when the files were supposed to be made public. Im not blaming him for keeping them under, Im sure there were alot of factors whatever those may be for not releasing them.

[jiffy]

Just ask the prisoners nicely I'm sure they will gladly reveal whether they are terrorists or not. Go to a prison and ask who actually committed a crime, most deny any crime. Motivating someone to divulge information is the only way you will get any information at all. Put them all on trial, because we have the money, time, judges, and enough court backup as it is.

[ARozanski]

Originally Posted by jerome_oneil

Dismantling their means of production did not disarm the nation. And like I said, the intent of those bombs was to break the will of the People.

You had Japanese soldiers holing up for decades on remote islands after the war. Fanatics have to be treated differently.

Wasn't it during the Potsdam meeting when Churchill declared that only unconditional surrender would be acceptable to end the war? Roosevelt had been thinking of a conditional surrender package for the Japanese, but when Churchill said unconditional, Roosevelt had to back him up.

Unconditional surrender to the Japanese militants that were in charge of the war effort was unacceptable, they vowed rather to fight to total annihilation as a people. One of the large hang-ups was the status of the Emperor, unconditional surrender was seen by the Japanese as meaning that the Emperor had to go, again unacceptable.