Commando

here again and again IRAQ IRAQ IRAQ. who cares about the weapons of mass destruction that werent there. That is such ********. Any of you people still whining about no weapons of mass destruction have no heart and no idea about what the Iraqi's want. We got rid of Saddam, stopped executions, rape and fraud and liberated a country. Iraq was and will continue to be a success.

With Iran 25 years of a nuclear programme. Ballguy what do u think they were doing for 25 years sitting down around a table and going this is gonna be cool man. Progress must have been made. And the fact that the programme has been unknown to the world is worrying.

IRAQ=we liberated a country from a tyrant leader successfully

Ballguy=sounds like one of those peace activists that wanted no war and Saddam to still be executing his innocent civillians.

Officer of Engineers

No

Strongly recommend you read the rest of the articles to relieve your bowels of stress.

__________________
Chimo

Bulgaroctonus

No.

I don't regret the fact that America dropped atomic bombs over Japan.

Harry Truman is on the record as saying he did not lose sleep over the decision to bomb Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Japan was offered terms of surrender, but their generals remained defiant. It was necessary to intimidate or exterminate Japan into defeat.

After the Hiroshima atomic attack, President Truman issued the following statement:

And other generals like Curtis LeMay certainly didn't shed a tear over Japan's defeat.

Japan was the enemy of the United States in World War II. The goal of the United States was in essence a simple one: defeat Japan. Dropping atomic bombs on Japan was an effective way of ending the war. It also spared many American soldiers that would have had to participate in a lengthy and costly land invasion of Japan.

I think you overestimate the amount of regret that exists in the United States over the atomic bombings. Why do you regret the use of atomic weapons?

What is your point?

Ballguy

Ballguy=sounds like one of those peace activists that wanted no war and Saddam to still be executing his innocent civillians.[/quote]


I supported the war on the grounds that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, which we now know to be false. I feel for the Iraqi people, but I am pissed that my government lied to me.

__________________
The Ball Mall, LLC: Your Central Ohio Source for Used and Recovered Golf Balls.

Bulgaroctonus

Ballguy,

Your implied argument is very weak. I believe you are implying that we should not go to war in Iran. Your logic is that because Iraq was purported to have a weapons program, and did not, we should also not invade Iran. However, the evidence is clear that Iran has a nuclear program, and has had one for some time.

There are many arguments against going to war in Iran, but fears of duplicating the intelligence fiasco of the Iraq war is not one of them.

Bulgaroctonus

Are you aware that this happened in the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War?

Rusky

Guys, guys, guys, you are overreacting, Iran is already discussing the compromise with Russia under which Russia will enrich Uranium for Iran so they don't have to do enrich it themselves and still be able to have nuclear power.

Officer of Engineers

Yes, you are. You want to burn babies.

I can forgive that because of your age but the regret is not military. It's humanitarian. We've burned babies and that is extremely regretful.

It was the correct decision but it also was an inhumane decision.

He wasn't the one who had to comfort burning babies.

It was the correct military decision and in the long run, the correct humanitarian decision but that decision to burn babies wasn't as clear cut as you've made it out to be. There was alot of soul searching that went into that decision.

Everyday I stared across the Iron Curtain, we regretted the things were ever made. No matter what we do. No matter how good we are. We cannot imagine another outcome other than our babies and their babies were going to burn.

Doi you know how many times we nearly started WWIII?

Do you want to be on standby to burn babies at a moment's notice?

Bulgaroctonus

Sir,

This last post seems curiously out of keeping with your usual diction. Are you mocking my post? Do you want me to actually reply to your arguments?

Officer of Engineers

Take it for what it is. You did not have to face the reality of nukes.

Bulgaroctonus

I have to face the reality of nuclear weapons just as much as you do.

Your preoccupation with the death of infants is not important militarily. Besides, I am immune to guilt trips about the death of the enemy. The point of a bombing campaign to kill civilians, women, children, and infants included. The point of war is to kill the enemy until one's needs are met.

You have military experience and you also wrote that the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima were the the right decision militarily. You also wrote that it was in the long run the right humanitarian decision.

So, are you arguing against me or not?

Even if the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the incorrect humanitarian decision, those concerns must be subordinate to the business of war.

Rusky

What he is saying is, nuking people is not nice. All you need to do to appreciate that is go somethere there you can see war for what it really is, death, blood, and orphans, and all that other stuff, which is not nice, then one sees all of that with his own eyes there is a different angle that opens up. Oh i have some stories for you my friend....

I hope this explains it a bit.

Officer of Engineers

You weren't on the line with me and you certainly never scared crapless on an unannounced drills. You did not imagined your family dying within minutes of that drill. You certainly never served along guys who were ready to drop these things, some on danger close near me. So, no, you did not have the face the reality of nuclear weapons as much as I did.

And you've got the expertise to judge this how?

It was the lesser of two evils but do not forget for one second, it was an evil.

There's nothing to argue. You're too young and too innocent to imagine the effects of nukes.

We're not butchers. As I stated, there was a hell of alot of soul searching in those decisions. Truman, to his credit, made the decision but do not think for one second that he did not think long and hard about not dropping that bomb.

Bulgaroctonus

I know that using nuclear weapons is not 'nice.' I am also aware that battle is gory and physically disgusting.

However, I do not confuse my humanitarian or emotional responses with military concerns. The business of war is to defeat the enemy in such a way that is in accordance with one's interests. This may include the large-scale slaughter of innocent people. So be it.

Emotional sensations of guilt are valuable in a philosophical sense or perhaps as the content of a memoir afterwards, but not when the war is actually taking place.

The military fact remains that nuclear weapons are a powerful way of achieving ends.

Rusky

Have you ever been in a war? Also what ends? Destruction of human kind as a species? Because of US or anyone today uses nukes for whatever reason they will be annihilated along with the rest of the world.