just curious to see how many stupid people are here.
2006-10-13 05:05:54 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
capn edib, at least you're an honest one.
2006-10-13 05:30:08 · update #1
too bad you don't have a email address, I would be happy to teach you the error of your ways.
2006-10-13 05:31:09 · update #2
The bombing of Japan was not an act of terrorism it was an act during war. The American Government warned Japan over a period of time, leaflets were dropped stating that a bomb was coming if Japan did not surrender and explaining the devastation, also trying to get the people of Japan to evacuate before the bomb was dropped. The Japan Government was given ample time to surrender, but they did not. Even after the first bomb was dropped, they did not surrender. The second bomb also came after a warning period, and period of education, a period asking that they evacuate. It wasn't until after the second bomb that Japan surrendered. It wasn't an act of terrorism and Japan could have stopped it at any time. The bombing of Pearl Harbor was an act of terrorism and thus started our fight with Japan.
2006-10-13 05:12:04 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
Bombing Japan served US in 2 ways .
It ended the war.
It sent a TERROR message to the nations that follow its policy or else be eliminated.
Dont you think its a kind of terrorism ? You follow us or be prepared like Iraq onslought.
What do you think that if Japan was not bombed the war would not have ended ?
What would have happened to the super power image if the bombs were not dropped ?
Yes ... Iam one stupid person to answer your question....
God bless you...
2006-10-13 12:27:05 · answer #2 · answered by ♪¢αpη' ε∂ïß♪ ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Lets be honest - the bombs on Japan - whichever side you were on in the war was dramatic and an awful thing to have happened. To be fair in the context of war they deserved it after the way the Japanease tortured British & American soldiers.
The reason that those bombs were in no way terrorism is because they were in the context of War. Remember that we are not at war with "Muslims" - we are at war with "Muslim Extremists". Although the lines seem to be very blurred between the two. The Muslim Extremists are attacking without warning and are going for the soul intention of blowing up civilians because they "believe" something to be right. At the end of they day when America was at war with Japan they dropped the bombs to STOP a war. And War is something that needs to be stopped, period. We wasn't blowing them up for not believing what we beleived we were blowing them up because we were at war. These extremists are just bell ends - don't talk to them.
2006-10-13 12:14:44 · answer #3 · answered by Paul 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The bombing of Japan was during a declared war. Not terrorism.
Many argue that the using nukes on Japan ended the war faster and saved lives on both sides. Had they not capitulated, the US would have invaded Japan with millions of deaths on both sides. Some argue though, that Japan was really done and it wasn't necessary.
The terrorists are not part of a state really. They predominantly attack civilians and do not play by the rules of war.
2006-10-13 12:15:33 · answer #4 · answered by dapixelator 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It was terrorism. All war is terrorism, Hiroshima and Nagasaki in particular because the whole thought process was to show such an overwhelming destructive capability, that the Japanese lost the will to fight. i.e. Hit them so hard that they would be scared to face us. And that's exactly how it worked.
But that has no relation to any current activities. There is a major moral difference between terrorism during a declared war, and terrorism as a political tool.
2006-10-13 12:16:00 · answer #5 · answered by juicy_wishun 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I would take this approach in the argument and throw this person off balance:
agree that the bombings were terrorist acts. they were by definition taken to upset the people and government into taking certain actions - ending the war on the pacific front.
then pose the question - what actions should have we taken following December 7th, 1941 at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii? Was this a terrorist act? Or an act of war? How does their act of war differ from our act of war? Should we accuse Japan of terrorism?
2006-10-13 12:15:58 · answer #6 · answered by Johnny Rockstar 1 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I would tell them to crack open a history book and read the history of World War 2 and the atomic bomb.
2006-10-13 12:10:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Tell him two words: Pearl Harbor.
2006-10-13 12:08:20 · answer #8 · answered by chrstnwrtr 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Nothing.
It's better to be thought of as a fool than be caught arguing with one.
2006-10-13 12:08:04 · answer #9 · answered by JaMoke 4 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Stop wasting your points!
2006-10-13 12:16:43 · answer #10 · answered by K9 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋