America is the Greatest Threat to World Peace

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: randomtangentsrme

You really believe that guy wasn't the exception to the rule? Those bombs destroyed generations of lives. You can't just look at that one person and ignore everyone else, that's ignorant.

Take a look at this link to get an idea of the damage done by the bombs.

You should ask the Chinese how they felt about the bombs. The things the Japanese did to the Chinese make hitler jealous. Or does the generations they destroyed not factor in?

a reply to: Bluntone22

So the people affected by the bombs deserved what they got even though they had nothing to do with what happened to the Chinese? Makes sense.

It's usually innocent people who are punished for their countries crimes.

Ever heard of Unit 731? America looked the other way on that event all to get their test results. That's not justice.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I understand the damage done, and I understand hit pieces, and national hate. Can you respond to my question or responses?

I grant I did not respond to your whole post, but you sir/madame seem to think the USA is what is wholly wrong in the world, and my take is the world would be worse off without it.
Plus you post a photo with no link to a disfigured individual, vs a photo of an individual who survived 2 nuke attacks with no disfigurement.

I hesitate to go further unless I understand where you are coming from.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Just to start this off, I am an American, I have no bias against America other than my knowledge of the war crimes committed by America in the past. Just throwing that out there before people come in calling me a commie or whatever the case may be.

It seems as though America feels the need to be the international police force when it comes to nuclear weapons. We try to prevent other countries from making them all the while we have the biggest stockpile of nuclear weapons in the world. Seems as though we want our cake and to eat it too, for lack of a better term. I'd say we're a bunch of hypocrites for trying to regulate other people's resources while we do whatever we want with ours.

Lead the way Sgt.. What is your plan? I thought so... Anyone else see where I am going with this? Get down and push.

a reply to: randomtangentsrme

Why would the world be worse off without America?

Here's a link to an article containing one of his pictures.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Why would the world be better off without America?

Your link sights this picture as: Hiroshima A-bomb victim.
Who is that victim?

Forgive me, as I do not see Asia times regularly I do not know their track record for honesty.
I fully understand this may happen after a nuke attack, but it could be birth defects or other trauma in life including torture.

Name and location for either of the bombs could allow us some incite. Seeing as how the survivor of both was not disfigured and lived to the age of 93.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Bash the United States all you care to but the truth is that the U.S. Is nothing more than the flavor of the month. In the first century it was Rome's time to be the biggest dog in the fight. During the 13th century it was Genghis Khan. In the 18th century it was Britons time. "The sun never set on the British empire". Napoleon took his turn. The list of big dogs in the fight through the centuries are endless. It just happens to be our time now until some other bigger dog comes along.

The truth is that humanity is, actually, not very humane and wars will continue as they have since the beginning of time. May as well face that truth.

a reply to: randomtangentsrme

The points I made in my OP are a few reasons. I'm all for what America claims to represent: freedom, but I'm against its actions. I'm not so much anti-America as I am anti-war. America is the biggest war monger in the world.

So now that I answered your question, why is the world better off with America?

As for the man in my picture, I don't know who he is. But why do you think the man you pictured is a good representation of the effects of the bombs? Do you honestly think he's a good representation of the effects the bombs had?

You are taking a pretty simplistic view of a very complex issue. And it seems as though you are ignoring the countries whom have openly stated that as soon as they have nuclear weapons, X country will cease to exist. Can we afford to ignore a threat like that or do we act now before they have the weapon rather than later and hope they don't follow through on their threat?

M.A.D. works. No one wants to be the one to start it because they know the answer will be complete and total annihilation. And that will ruin your whole weekend. So the biggest kid on the block makes the rules and hopes all the other kids don't gang up on him. Its always been that way.

Thousands of years ago men fought wars by beating on each other with their fists. One day some guy with an attitude problem picked up a stick and tied a rock to it and started bashing people with that instead. It worked pretty good and he soon found himself in charge of everyone except the other guys with the sticks with big rocks tied to them. They laid into each other and before you knew it, half the people were dead. The guys with the big sticks decided that this was no way to live and if they kept it up there would be nothing left to live for. So, they decided they would each destroy their sticks with the big rocks on the ends. And just to make sure no one got sneaky and made more, one guy kept his...

wash rinse repeat...

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I think he is a representation of someone who survived 2 nuke strikes and lived.

But you give an image of a man you know nothing about, and try to couple it with nukes. And think The USA is the big bad boogy man.

I think the USA is in areas it shouldn't be. But I do not see a long term benefit for us not to be there.

a reply to: randomtangentsrme

He's the exception to the rule though. There are other pictures of victims of the bombs, I linked you to a site that has several of them. If you choose to ignore the majority in favor of one guy who got lucky, you're turning a blind eye to what actually happened.

Your reason is pretty vague.

The problem is after wwII the US military became so big and after they thought for maintaining order (in the world) and safety the military must be as strong and even stronger since wwII but the result is it sought problems and solving it with force which never makes this place a safer and a nicer place. Also the US is in control of many or at least for a big part of world institutions, they basically as you have seen with the war against Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Syria etc their ''allies'' gladly help out even though it makes no sense at all and the whole war was based on what??? why? for what reason(s) that was necessary and see the result right now. These wars are here longer then 10 years already and the whole region is in chaos, with countless of deaths, wounded, displaced- a fire which is still only growing bigger with not end in sight still!.... a big crime against humanity just because someone got big toys to play with..

It's like you are my neigbour and buying lots of guns to feel safer against me and my reaction would be I also must gear myself up for defending myself.... instead of solving the problems we have no we just go on and on until at some point 1 feels stronger and goes all in...

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

My view is of not just the USA but also other countries and their misguided attempts of its elected and non-elected to achieve absolute authority over all of known reality.

The nuclear arms race of past times had atrocities committed across the world.

Denying nuclear weapons to other countries is the manifested guilt of the USA Government. It is a psychological fear of having their mistakes repeated. And their paranoia is evident when they approve laws and action that lead to high security and surveillance over all of us.

originally posted by: soulpowertothendegree
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Give me a break, you want to know who is the single greatest threat? Starts with a Q and ends with a N, ...I will give you a clue....single greatest fake land owner on the planet....and she is a disgusting reptilian shape shifter evil witch.

The truth of it is that the Queen is just as human as you or I and though I don't favor the British Royal Family or any other royal families of other countries I just pay no heed them. They are not really that interesting in the whole universal scope of things.

originally posted by: Cyborg11

Lead the way Sgt.. What is your plan? I thought so... Anyone else see where I am going with this? Get down and push.

Why do you post the entire OP's post just for a one liner over and over?


LOL

The biggest threat to world peace is humans...period. There are those who can, like the US and another 130 countries that wish they could. Humans will be humans no matter what country, just look around the world today and look at history BEFORE America, I don't see too many points in our human history when we were nice...to say the least...

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme

Why would the world be better off without America?

It would be different... Could you imagine what the world would be like with imperialist Japan running all of Asia, and Germany Nazi rule in all of Europe, Middle East and Africa? The Japaneses were some harsh people, you want to talk heinous acts just look at what they were like before they were broken as a nation.

Might as well add in China and Russia. I'm sure their great purges were acts of kindness, or America created...lol

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

He's the exception to the rule though. There are other pictures of victims of the bombs, I linked you to a site that has several of them. If you choose to ignore the majority in favor of one guy who got lucky, you're turning a blind eye to what actually happened.

Your reason is pretty vague.

So what?

Why do you rate these suffering greater than the billions of other sufferings? Why is it when people say nuke that somehow that is worst than what people all over the planet, all though history experienced. Would a ground war in Japan have been better to end the war?

Japan killed thousands of Americans by attacking us first. We would have lost thousands of more lives if we didn't drop the bombs. The A bombs worked as intended they brought the war to an end. I don't wish what happened on anyone but they brought it on themselves.

Iran has been using terrorist groups as a proxy to attack America and her allies for years. It's no secret Hezbola was responsible for attacking the US barracks in Beirut killing 300 Americans. Iran has been chanting death to American and Israel for years. Iran's actions speak for themselves.

like a junkie, america needs war to preserve itself - economically and politically.
without the war complex the US economy would crumble and the other super powers would finish them off.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Pretty ignorant "take" on why the bombs were dropped, imho.

As for keeping nukes out of the hands of countries like Iran: America has had nukes for quite a while now and only used them twice, other than testing them. America doesn't issue a weekly press release calling for wiping another country off the map and out of existence.

Yea, America has done and continues to do some questionable and downright wrong stuff. But please don't sit there and act as if 2015 America is somehow more likely to use a nuke next Tuesday than Iran is.

which country calls for wiping others off the map?
i really hope you don't mean the wrong translation of ahmadinejad!
iran did't do anything.

but speaking of threats:
look up "axis of evil" and see how many countries america destroyed therefrom!

Worst atrocities ever? never. What the USA did in ww2 was tame compared to the axis powers and the USSR. The holocaust happened during this time for goodness sake.

The US did what it did in order to create a bridgehead in asia because they seen the foe that was coming, the USSR and communism. If the Japanese emperor would have unconditionally surrended earlier the nukes would not have even been dropped, he waited months because he was afraid he would lose his status. You can blame that guy directly. Other bombings raids were comparable to the nukes as conventional bombing and firestorm bombing spread the damage out better than a single nuke wasting a lot of energy in the epicenter.

To top it off Japan didn't surrender because of the nukes, even if us history books say so. months of bombings over 60 cities leveled, this was just another day for japanese officials. The japanese surrendered to the US because the USSR was weeks away from invading the main islands. The japanese understood surrendering to the USSR would be truly terrible.

the real atrocity during that time was the allies not backstabbing the USSR once Berlin was captured. Giving the USSR half of europe was a crime against humanity. Only like 50 million died unnattural deaths under Stalin.

Another atrocity at the same time is not really helping nationalist china over communist china. Mao, winning the war, killed even more than stalin in the great leap forward.