All Things Microsoft > Microsoft as a Company
Virus targets
H_TeXMeX_H:
Why bother with history ... I mean there's no way you can prove that anything you say is right. Which way did it really happen ... both seem plausible ... but you'll never know for sure, so forget that shit. Unless history is accurate it is useless, and history is not accurate ... thus history is useless.
worker201:
--- Quote from: H_TeXMeX_H ---Why bother with history ... I mean there's no way you can prove that anything you say is right. Which way did it really happen ... both seem plausible ... but you'll never know for sure, so forget that shit. Unless history is accurate it is useless, and history is not accurate ... thus history is useless.
--- End quote ---
Agreed.
However, for a country that has nuclear weapons, it is pretty damn important to know when to use them and when not to use them. Since it has only happened once before, it would be kinda nice to know whether that was the right choice or not. Numerous members of the current administration have said publicly that they would never rule out the use of nuclear weapons in any military campaign. Which means that now more than ever it is important to have some sort of rubric that defines when it is okay to use the damn things. And some sort of history is a big part of that. So even if history is useless, we have a use for it.
piratePenguin:
Killing innocent people is bad. Killing guilty people is good.
So, drop an atomic bomb when it's the best solution to (a) killing the least amount of innocent people while (b) killing the most amount of guilty people.
Or that's close enough to what way I'd go about sorting it out.
Every man responsible for those two atomic bombs simply was not thinking about the innocent people.
When you get 100 million Nazis in a few consecutive counties, call me.
H_TeXMeX_H:
Use logic and reason instead ... those little things everyone has forgotten about or twisted into something far from what they should be. It's never ok to use nuclear weapons for many many many reasons ... radiaton, mass death and destruction, mutations, contamination of food and water sources, tons of money wasted cleaning up the shit. War is never ok either, but hey can you stop it ? Can you convince everyone to put down their weapons and stop the madness ? Do you care to ? I don't, they made their own bed, now they will sleep in it.
P.S. One of my theories (one of the wierder ones) on this is as follows:
All people on this planet are guilty of the acts anyone commits ... collective guilt. If your neighbor commits a crime you and everyone else on this planet is as guilty of it as the neighbor himself. Why ? Because you allow it to happen ... you don't stop it ... you don't prevent it ... you live with it
Also note that at times I seem to contradict myself ... well, you're right I do, because I don't always express my personal point of view in what I say ... just making an argument, seeing if it holds water, if it does, keep it ... if not, discard it
GenuineAdvantage:
But like I said, conjecture of intent aside, no kind of historical record outside of a tinfoil hat club will deny that Japan was not surrendering. And with that said, if you think that an invasion by US forces into Japan would have not caused several times the deaths of civilians than the two bombs, I think you'd be wrong, because the regular people just did as they were told for the most part. And appearently that's what the people who decided to deploy them took into account also. And I seriously doubt it was purely a logical decision either. In war things often aren't.
And warm fuzzies never saved anyone from a determined onslaught. Yeah, it's your right to choose that philosophy as your only reaction to an attack. Maybe it's a humane way to accept your maiming or your destruction. But if you ask me, it's wrong to impose that philosophy on others.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version