OT: Free speech?

[sachmo]

Originally posted by JayBdey:
America committed atrocities too.

America dropped incendiary bombs on the German town of Dresden. Dresden was a town of mostly old wooden buildings and the fire created a surge of air that sucked people into it. The death toll of the Dresden bombing exceeded the atomic bLasts on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These people were burned to death by the firestorm that sucked them into the core of the fire. It would have been a slow, horribly painful death for many of them.

Yet no kids in America learn about this in school, and you won’t see it on the history channel.

Many of the casualties from the firebombing attacks in Germany and Japan were from asphyxiation and smoke inhalation. It was indeed a horrible, horrible way to die. The problem is in what position you take on the subject. If you believe that it was necessary to save more lives, then it becomes acceptable. I have a feeling that if there were chemical bombs and/or nuclear weapons going off in America, there would have been far less outcry about the prisoner abuse.

And I learned about the firebombing of Germany and Japan in high school in the late 80's. I have also seen it documented on the History Channel. Maybe they don't talk about this in school anymore, because it might offend someone. I'll ask my kids when they get there.

[Grauzone]

Originally posted by sachmo:
The problem is in what position you take on the subject. If you believe that it was necessary to save more lives, then it becomes acceptable. I have a feeling that if there were chemical bombs and/or nuclear weapons going off in America, there would have been far less outcry about the prisoner abuse.

It is never acceptable to fall back to such kind of barbarism. Not for people who say they defend "freedom", "peace" and "human rights". Acceptance for such practics for enemies leads in most cases to use same practics on own population few years later.

[CNCRaymond]

DELURKING


*I had considered toning this down a bit, but I really wanted to convey my anger over this ageless argument about WWII. So bare in mind that I mean no one here any disrespect at all. This is not a personal attack against any one and if you find it offensive or insulting, remember you chose to read it after I warned you.*

Read at own risk, stongly worded comment to follow. If you offend easily, do not read. If you do read and are offended, remember you chose to read it.

I always love to read how people of today judge what happened in WWII by today’s standards. I almost laugh at their logic.

Any argument based on the beliefs of today, judging that era, is flawed to the point of being useless.

So you can use your examples about what occurred in that era and try and say they were atrocities by today’s standards all you want. Unless you were alive then and lived through that time you have no right to pass judgment.

Germany firebombed England too you know.

Japan treated its POW's so horribly that many who are alive today STILL hate the Japanese people and are grateful that we dropped the H-bomb on the island not once but twice. Given the alternative, them or us, we chose them. That is the nature of war.

It how you treat your enemies AFTER you have beaten that shows the world if you’re a monster or not. The US was very generous with its enemies following the war and that record has never been questioned.

War is hell and if another world war were to come, we would all find this out first hand, and I promise you, the gloves will come off and no matter how many liberal, save you from your rights, left wing lets just surrender, flag burning, protesting, anti American Americans there are, we will do what we must to survive.

You can fire off your counter points, I won't be reading them.

RE-LURKING

[sachmo]

Originally posted by orm:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sachmo:
The problem is in what position you take on the subject. If you believe that it was necessary to save more lives, then it becomes acceptable. I have a feeling that if there were chemical bombs and/or nuclear weapons going off in America, there would have been far less outcry about the prisoner abuse.

It is never acceptable to fall back to such kind of barbarism. Not for people who say they defend "freedom", "peace" and "human rights". Acceptance for such practics for enemies leads in most cases to use same practics on own population few years later.

---

You and I may believe that, but if you had lived through those time, or you were a soldier waiting to invade Japan, you might have a different story. I guess when you come down to it, what is the price you are willing to make others PAY for your rights? Would you firebomb a city to kill your greatest enemy, or would you avoid it because it is not in your character? When I think about losing my family, lots of moral questions get answered pretty quickly.


Clarification: I am not attempting to justify any of the current issues in Iraq nor draw a comparision between the Iraqi threat and the Nazi threat. My purpose is to try and spark conversation on how "atrocities" can be viewed in a different light by some.

[ May 19, 2004, 14:55: Message edited by: sachmo ]

[Grauzone]

I agree your opinion about human nature. To survive should be always the highest priority. But in the actual politics USA fights not for survival.

Atrocities done in the past are good lessons to learn better ways to live together. They shows us many possibilities to solve actual problems, and ways wouldn't work. My point is that i see too much decisions done by potitians today, they could do better if they take a little time to see in our past.

Germany was one of few coutries where "bombing to democracy" ever functions. The couse wos not the total destruction of this country, it was the "Marchall Plan" helps the germans to build up their state.

Reduction of poverty reduces terror, not bombs. I now no "smart-anti-terrorist-bomb". Bombs hit almost the false peole in such asymetric combat.

All that money wasted in Iraq could be effectively used on other spots.

[dogscoff]

To the german guy who says that many germans are loaded with guilt over the actions of their predecessors:

You are right, the current generation should not feel guilty of the "sins of the father", and very few people in the world now judge modern germany by it's actions 60 years ago. Most people recognise modern Germany as a peace-loving nation.
The younger generation shouldn't feel guity. Each individual should be judged on their own actions.

However it's interesting that while nobody dreams of judging modern Germany by their actions in the war, many people want us to judge modern USA by *their" actions in the war. How many times have I heard "If it wasn't for us you'd all be speaking german by now"?

To whoever pointed out that neither Hitler nor Stalin came from their own countires: Keep your eye on Schwarzenegger.

And to all those people trying to justify the lowering of human rights: You can't. As soon as you put anything at all- even your own survival (and I we can argue later about just how threatened the survival of the USA is/ was) then you can no longer proclaim yourself to be any better than hitler/ stalin/ saddam hussein/ Darth Vadrer/ insert your bad guy of choice here. Remember that Al-Qaeda also think that they are fighting to protect the survival of their way of life. Hitler used similar propaganda to justify the kind of atrocities we have all been condemning here.

[Grauzone]

Originally posted by dogscoff:
However it's interesting that while nobody dreams of judging modern Germany by their actions in the war, many people want us to judge modern USA by *their" actions in the war. How many times have I heard "If it wasn't for us you'd all be speaking german by now"?

If you mean me: I do not try to judge USA for their wars of the past. I'm not agree with the actual politic of USA goverment. They make avoidable failures now.