Are there times when dropping WMD on cities with civilian populated buildings is justified

[GunnyFreedom]

I actually disagree with the calls to reject absurdity even as I agree with Cabal's Voltaire quote above, for a couple of reasons.

First, while reductio ad absurdum is a logical fallacy, it is a useful tool for locating bright lines in a philosophical system of belief. It is wholly untenable to use reductio ad absurdum to reach a conclusion in formal or informal debate, but it is perfect for discovering boundaries of applicability and practicality, two measures critical to moving a philosophy from academia to active governance. You have to learn where the landmines are and how to avoid them before stepping into the field of battle where such mistakes are less forgiving.

Second, and directly on point to the Voltaire quote above, the best defense against a society taken in by the absurd is inoculation. If we do not learn the treatment of the absurd when the question is simply academic, then we will be less equipped to discredit it when real-world life, limb, and liberty are on the line.

The key, I think, is to have the level of maturity to treat absurdity correctly. The understanding that it is a logical fallacy and cannot be used to form conclusions in a logical argument is critical. The understanding that it's sole purpose is to plumb boundaries of applicability and practicality is likewise critical. The understanding that a reductio ad absurdum is an imaginary device and not a means to fabricate real-world justification is also very important.

Most of us in here have drawn a line in the sand where we say "this far and no further!" A point where we will take on a willingness to take up deadly force in the defense of our persons and liberties. How did we arrive at that line in the sand? Most likely by reductio ad absurdum, which while useless in a debate is as I said useful for locating boundaries.

The absurd, in and of itself, is not evil or illegitimate, but it can be (and often is!) used for evil or illegitimate purposes.

 

[Occam's Banana]

And the Japanese had what leverage? After the fierce fighting that had transpired at Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima, they weren't going to get a fair deal. War is not a moral endeavor. Their own destruction was seeded when they attacked Pearl Harbor and gave fascist FDR exactly what he wanted. An entrance into the war. Prince Konoye begged his military leadership to not engage the Americans when the oil was cut off.

They didn't have any leverage. That's why they were forced to accept unconditional surrender. This has nothing to with what I said.

The war was over. Japan sought conditional surrender.
The dropping of the nuclear bombs was entirely unnecessary and unjustifiable.
All the U.S. had to do was offer or negotiate acceptable terms for conditional surrender.

 

[DamianTV]

They didn't have any leverage. That's why they were forced to accept unconditional surrender. This has nothing to with what I said.

The war was over. Japan sought conditional surrender.
The dropping of the nuclear bombs was entirely unnecessary and unjustifiable.
All the U.S. had to do was offer or negotiate acceptable terms for conditional surrender.

Maybe we shouldnt have been doing things that pissed off the Japanese in the first place, then act all shocked and suprised when they retaliated against our Sanctions. Oh noes, yeah, we're the victims. Pearl Harbor was PROVOKED by the US Govt. Not that the attack was justified either...

 

[dillo]

Yes there are, and Japan was probably one of them

 

[twomp]

Not our finest hour. Those of you warmongers who applaud this, please tell me what these people did to you.

 

[69360]

Maybe we shouldnt have been doing things that pissed off the Japanese in the first place, then act all shocked and suprised when they retaliated against our Sanctions. Oh noes, yeah, we're the victims. Pearl Harbor was PROVOKED by the US Govt. Not that the attack was justified either...

A country has a right not to trade with another country, however they don't have a right to forbid a third country from trading.

The US didn't like the way the Japanese military was behaving and cut off steel and oil. That was their right and was not a provocation for attack.

 

[69360]

Not our finest hour. Those of you warmongers who applaud this, please tell me what these people did to you.

It was very plausible that they would have fought to the last person standing including women and children or committed mass suicide. They did in their territories, why would they not defend their homeland the same or stronger.

 

[DamianTV]

A country has a right not to trade with another country, however they don't have a right to forbid a third country from trading.

The US didn't like the way the Japanese military was behaving and cut off steel and oil. That was their right and was not a provocation for attack.

And what was our reasoning to not trade with Japan? It was to piss Japan off so they'd attack us. Once they attacked us, the American People would be able to identify them as the "Enemy".

Im still of the conclusion the whole scharade was done in order to draw the US into WWII. The Govt got Japan to commit the False Flag for us.

 

[Cabal]

It was very plausible that they would have fought to the last person standing including women and children or committed mass suicide.

I'll grant you that for the sake of argument, and only for the sake of argument. However, it's also very plausible you are completely wrong. Moral of the story: When in doubt? Don't murder hundreds of thousands of people.

 

[Contumacious]

A country has a right not to trade with another country, however they don't have a right to forbid a third country from trading.

The US didn't like the way the Japanese military was behaving and cut off steel and oil. That was their right and was not a provocation for attack.

Bullshit:

A new book entitled The Pearl Harbor Myth: Rethinking the Unthinkable by George Victor and published by Potomac Books Inc. of Washington, D.C. is well researched and gives a very clear picture of how and why the Pearl Harbor myth was created. This "patriotic political myth" states that the attack by the Japanese was unprovoked and was a surprise to the Roosevelt administration, as well as, the key military personnel in Washington; but the commanders of Pearl Harbor were at fault for not being ready. Based on a good summary of the up-to-date research the author, who is an approving admirer of Roosevelt, concludes that Roosevelt deliberately provoked the attack and that he and his key military and administrative advisers clearly knew, well in advance, that the Japanese were going to attack both Pearl Harbor and the Philippines. Roosevelt wanted to get into the European War but he had been unsuccessful in provoking Germany; therefore, he considered the sacrifice of Pearl Harbor and the Philippines as the best way to get into the European War through the back door of Japan.

.

 

[eduardo89]

It was very plausible that they would have fought to the last person standing including women and children or committed mass suicide. They did in their territories, why would they not defend their homeland the same or stronger.

The US never needed to fight the Japanese to the last man standing. By August 1945 Japan was no longer a threat to the US. Their entire navy and Air Force had been decimated. They threat had been neutralized.

 

[69360]

And what was our reasoning to not trade with Japan? It was to piss Japan off so they'd attack us. Once they attacked us, the American People would be able to identify them as the "Enemy".

Im still of the conclusion the whole scharade was done in order to draw the US into WWII. The Govt got Japan to commit the False Flag for us.

A reason is not needed to stop trade. A country is not obligated to trade with another. Do you want a world government enforcing mandatory trade?

But the US government did not like the way the Japanese military was behaving in China and the pacific and did not want to supply them with materials to wage war any longer.

Bullshit:

A new book entitled The Pearl Harbor Myth: Rethinking the Unthinkable by George Victor and published by Potomac Books Inc. of Washington, D.C. is well researched and gives a very clear picture of how and why the Pearl Harbor myth was created. This "patriotic political myth" states that the attack by the Japanese was unprovoked and was a surprise to the Roosevelt administration, as well as, the key military personnel in Washington; but the commanders of Pearl Harbor were at fault for not being ready. Based on a good summary of the up-to-date research the author, who is an approving admirer of Roosevelt, concludes that Roosevelt deliberately provoked the attack and that he and his key military and administrative advisers clearly knew, well in advance, that the Japanese were going to attack both Pearl Harbor and the Philippines. Roosevelt wanted to get into the European War but he had been unsuccessful in provoking Germany; therefore, he considered the sacrifice of Pearl Harbor and the Philippines as the best way to get into the European War through the back door of Japan.

.

Stoppage of material trade is justification for attack? This wasn't food or goods needed for survival of civilians, it was war material.

 

[69360]

The US never needed to fight the Japanese to the last man standing. By August 1945 Japan was no longer a threat to the US. Their entire navy and Air Force had been decimated. They threat had been neutralized.

So the Japanese government and military should have been left, unpunished and in power? What would have stopped them from doing it again in the future?

We learned that lesson in WW1 with the Germans.

 

[Cabal]

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

Did the bankers approve the bombings? I'm sure they had mutual stock interest in profiteering from all these wars. It's the people that pay to rebuild, not Washington DC or their Elite masters

One thing that many here should recognize, bombing civilians is not just immoral, it's war crimes, and it doesn't matter what type of government is in control. Whether it be communist, fascist, parliamentary, constitutional, democratic, oligarchy, monarchy, etc... The PEOPLE can ALWAYS being brought to their knees praying to the bidding of the regime in power. Purposely created ideologies and well crafted propaganda to fool the masses. Gun Ho 2003 and Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Tenet LIES, propagated by propaganda media and very powerful special interests, lead to death, destruction, war crimes, and massive debt on the people.

The "Information Isolated" German people didn't realize how bad the war situation was until 1945... then after the war, they realized, they were all conned by psychopaths and lies that were running the country for years, by cheap political words and very expense propaganda with force. Yesterday wars were done with brute force and controlled environments. Today, the propaganda and manipulations are very well crafted and polished for the clueless public over a long stretch of time to 'condition' the public. Just keep repeating those lies, after lies, after lies. Goebbels confiscated radios... when the public is uninformed, with the exception of one source, government propaganda, it's that tyranny, which fools the people into supporting the regime. The last thing governments want, is a society that is independent, well informed, capable of critical-deductive thinking. Every single professional study conducted around the world, resulted that, ~90% of the people are "followers"... at night, you can call it the "Blue Light Bug Zapper". Government takes those studies and uses every means possible in selling/getting those 'followers' to fall into their control/trap. Telling you what to believe and what to think... they pound it into you 24/7 through their direct propaganda programs or their accomplices in news, media, mind control entertainment. They've got you by the balls... and be very careful, because it's those smart 10% that realize the charades and know the con games... those are ones targeted by government. .Gov; Denounces, discredits, smears, 'anti-everything', non-conformists, everything to silence and/or eliminate the truth. You name it, government will come up with a label to either suppress/eliminate/divide and outcasts. It's always devisive policies with the 2 parties of the exact same Power Hungry Borg.

When you have megalomaniacs and psychopaths running countries and controlling the people... they go beyond FAILSAFE(no return situation), and will take everyone down with them or at the very least, the people suffer and always go down first.

War is immoral, bombing civilian populations are war crimes, period!

PS: Japan, well before the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki offered a conditional surrender, there was dialog numerous times, US demanded UNCONDITIONAL surrender, and nuked two cities to enforce that condition. 100,000s civilians died and many long agonizing suffering.

 

[Danan]

I don't want to be offensive, but I am trying to raise every angle to your question, for the sake of interesting discussion. For the sake of extreme example, what if you're facing a super-villain who is literally seconds away from launching a global nuclear attack that will extinguish all life on the planet, and the villain has fashioned himself armor made out of living children; is the only justifiable option to stand back and watch him launch the attack?

The German Supreme Court has ruled that a law allowing the German military to shoot down a hijacked plane is unconstitutional. They argued that even if we can be almost certain (but never absolutely sure) that the passengers are going to die anyways, nobody has the right to kill innocent people, even if doing so would likely result in fewer deaths.

That was the right decision, imo. Killing innocent people is never justifiable or right.

 

[Ranger29860]

We learned that lesson in WW1 with the Germans.

Go read a book please I beg you. Any book on WW1 or WW2 would work.

 

[Contumacious]

Stoppage of material trade is justification for attack? This wasn't food or goods needed for survival of civilians, it was war material.

1- In 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt seizes all Japanese assets in the United States in retaliation for the Japanese occupation of French Indo-China.

2- Roosevelt embargoed the export of such grades of oil as still were in commercial flow to Japan

Further, FDR had no Constitutional authority to order PRIVATE INDUSTRY no to sell to whomever they chose.

 

[Cabal]

So the Japanese government and military should have been left, unpunished and in power? What would have stopped them from doing it again in the future?

We learned that lesson in WW1 with the Germans.

Lolwut? Your grasp of history reads like a public school indoctrination camp's propaganda curriculum.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

So the Japanese government and military should have been left, unpunished and in power? What would have stopped them from doing it again in the future?

We learned that lesson in WW1 with the Germans.

Actually, Hitler happened because the world was a bit overzealous in punishing Germany after WW1. Hitler rose up on the angst and outrage from the German people who were getting shat on by all of Europe.