so Japs attack p.harbour? does that gives you license to kill civillian? can i kill your civillian?

Question

so to whom ever answer my late question please answer this.. some of you in my other question encourage the attack on Japan by nuke..
let see here.. Japan attack p.harbour (army harbour) is wrong? war against another army is wrong? they didn't attack other part than p.harbour.. US strike back with a nuke is right? US attack a small military department with 2 nuclear bombs that kills 1/3 civillian is right?
such an arrogant American.. when America attack Afghanistan i'm not against it because that's maybe the right thing to do.. but when they invade Iraq, i'm starting not to like them.... mass destructive weapon they say.. wmd, kmd, rmd.. its all full of crap.. no stealth weapons there too.. just a pipeline, toy tank and 1000 not fully equipped army were found..
and the war dragged to 2 years because of the rebellion and not the army.. shame on you..

the attack 9/11 caused because of US govt.... proving all resolution blocking others resources.. they have children to feed u know.

Answer 1

I do not like war but I understand it, we did ot through the first punch in the hobor or Iraq. If we did not do something about all the innicent people killed along with military people lost in the attacks that hae come yto us, to our soil first. We would be cowards. My grandfather was sent out 2 days after the Habor, he faught for us to have the right to ive in a country that is not under attack all the time like every other counrty. I am very proud to have him as my gradfather. The us is not perfect and prob will never be but you don't see poverty sticken people suffering from the hands of there gov, or some guys with guys that want power and kill innocent children and their familys, rape torture to their own people!!!!! Twice they came to us first, to our home, our soill, Once we stopped it right away with the bomb, wrong or right the war ended with one shot. US might be to blame for alot of things in this life but one is yopu can't call us cowards and let some other counrty come over here and hurt our people. Won't ever happen. The Iraq thing in my mind has gone to far now but we are still there so we might as well finish the job for a country that can seem to finish it them selves so we don't have to come back again.

Answer 2

clearly this person did not know history.

Japan used pearl harbor as a way to declare war on the united states, who had done little harm to the japanese, while japan had been brutalizing china for almost 10 years.

After pearl harbor japan and USA go to war, THE WAR IS GOING ON FOR ALMOST 4 YEARS BEFORE THE US DROPS A NUKE. The main reason for the nuclear bomb is so the united states would not have to fight in mainland japan, where not just military but civilians, MORE THAN THE NUMBER KILLED IN NAGASAKI AND HIROSHIMA, would have been fighting the army. Also the USSR, after the end of the europeon front, would have helped, just as they did in germany. The united states needed a quick way out of the war, or else the situation in japan would have probably turned out like the german debacle or even worse.

Answer 3

You did not completely read the responses.
The US was planning its strategy to win. It was either a many thousand man march across the country, or two bombs on cities. And the Japanese civilians would have gone out and fought the troops. It would have been the honorable way, not letting the invaders pass and doing everything to stop them. Elderly man, woman, young child, all would have gone to fight if it was called for. Then, they wouldn't have been civilians.
You can't ask nukes to be selective.
And sure, there weren't the weapons we said there'd be. We were wrong.
But we cannot leave.
And sanctions are to try and make governments know that they can't do what they want in a world that needs to work together. Sure, the US hasn't been doing the best job of that, but when a government is being sanctioned and deems it more important to develop WMDs and more troops than feed their own, that's their problem.
And please, stop typing 'Japs.' It's offensive.

Answer 4

The Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, the Phillipines, Guam, and many other islands in the Pacific. They killed civilians and soldiers, and tortured and and starved many others. The Japanese also invaded mainland China and killed hundreds of thousands of civilians. You can read history books on the rape of Nanking, if you don't believe that they didn't attack civilians.
I really have a hard time believing you are defending the Japanese, since you are calling them "Japs." That word is considered a slur.

As for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Afghanis are very happy living without the Taliban, and once the Iraqis have their government up and running we will be out of there.

And what does the attack on the WTC have to do with feeding children? Your last question isn't coherent enough to answer.

Finally, if you want to try to come here and kill our civilians, just bring it on, bud. All 300,000,000 of us will be here waiting for you.

Answer 5

i'll stick to the historical connection. The war in the pacific cost more lives than just pearl harbor. from there to okinowa. Compounded by the European front, after 56 million deaths A lot of people just wanted to be done with it. Hell 3 million more and we can all go home. f -it. They also had a new toy all ready for Berlin, Berlin fell to the russians and they knew they had the nail in the coffin for japan. It ain't pretty but hey, you ask could you do it to us. Sure, if you had a hell of a lot of shat.

firestorming, and carpet bombing were used by all sides to destroy cities in a more time consuming manner at the time.

Answer 6

The attack of Pearl Harbor, included attacks on Midway Island, and on the island of Oahu in Hawaii, such as Schofield Barracks, Hickam Air Force Base, Diamond Head Military Installation, and other strategic sites. They did not kill military personnel ONLY, but, also civilians, so what part of the world are you from. Also, war is not meant to be polite or has its own military etiquette. It is kill or be killed, and unfortunately collateral damages occur in every war.

Answer 7

Especially bad when we go to war based on a concept of "preemptive invasion." It was a bad idea. Cost us a lot of money. Lost us a lot of soldiers and we also killed a lot of people. The wars were badly started and then it is a challenge to extract ourselves from them even now. We fought the WW wars in less time but then the military industrial complex is doing well by our adventures. War profiteering is back with pallets of money being sent to the Middle East. This is a reason to get the money out of elections. The power brokers too often call the shots that are not in the best interest of the average person.

Answer 8

Your information is not correct! You need to check your history on what Japan did during WWII, and what their objectives were. Iraq most definately DID have WMD (chemical weapons), and were most definately trying to acquire Nuke information and equipment. I was there during the first Gulf War, and although many were unwilling to fight, they DID have a fairly well equipped army. And for you to justify the attack on 9/11 because "they have children to feed" is completely ridiculous.

Answer 9

I will try to answer you question politely, even though your tone is not really deserving of polite response.

If you want to discuss this topic honestly, you have to be willing to put the context of the discussion in the time of the action, e.g. 1940's. The short answer is YES, dropping two atom bombs to end WWII was justified. The reason is the strategy and tactics of the time. Bombing entire cities to destroy infrastructure and break the will of nations was standard tactics used by Axis and Allied forces.

More importantly, the U.S. didn't drop the atom bombs on Japan solely as retaliation for Pearl Harbor, although I'm sure that factored into President Truman's decision. Remember, Pearl Harbor happened in 1941. The U.S. decided to support the European Allies first to defeat Hitler and the Nazis. It wasn't until 1945, after a long and costly island hopping campaign, and many carpet bombing runs (just as in Europe) of Japan's mainland using conventional ordinance, that the U.S. decided to drop the first atom bomb…

At his point, I feel some more context needs to be added to this discussion. Your rationalization that Japan's attack of Pearl Harbor was military on military and thus dropping the atom bombs on Japan was unwarranted completely glosses over Japan's actions throughout the Indochina region. Japanese occupation of China, Korea, the Philippines, and many island nations throughout the region was brutal. Although the Japanese methods were not as efficient in killing mass amounts of people like the Nazi's and their gas chambers, their methods were no less effective and cruel. To suggest that Japan had claim to some noble warrior code during WWII is just ignorant and insulting to those who suffered and died at their hand.

…So the U.S. dropped one bomb and Japan still didn't surrender. Why? Because they hand convinced every citizen that U.S. troops were "white devils" that would eat their children, which is why so many Japanese civilians jumped off of cliffs with their children as U.S. forces came ashore at Guam and other Japanese controlled territories. The Japanese had prepared their civilians to fight to the death if U.S. troops landed on mainland Japan, and by all accounts that was a real threat President Truman was not willing to chance. Finally, the Japanese gambled that the U.S. only had one atom bomb and chose not to surrender in order to force the U.S to attempt a landing on mainland Japan. Their gamble failed and the U.S. dropped the second atom bomb and brought Japan to its knees.

So you see, if your concept of history is Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and the big, bad U.S. nuked them in return, please go read a book and learn more n00b.

Answer 10

Remind me again of what the honorable Japanese did to the innocent civilians of Nanking?
A nation that initiates a war against another has no right to complain about the nature of the response they receive, including atomic bombs dropped on two major military-industrial supply hubs.