83 soldiers dead in 12 days

[Brain]

in ww3 everybody dies

YES!  It's like in America's Army when I am using the RPG....and somebody sneaks up on me so I fire it into a wall, killing both the enemy and myself.  If EVERYBODY dies in WWIII....then that means not only will I die, but people like voodoo, Typhy, BFG, and Bill Gates will die, too!

I like it!

Bring on the Global Thermal Nuclear Weapons!

w00t!

gs, there are far more important things in life than  just killing a few people who piss you off online.  think of it this way. you nuke  the world, not only do you an i die, but then your wife dies and your family as well.  if they aren't lucky enough to die in the initial salvo, they will suffer and die a slow and horrible death during the ensuing nuclear winter. everything that is good in the world, everything that is beautiful, will wither, rot and die.  are you ready to condemn 6 billion people for the sake of just those 4?  if you are, i should start calling you antichrist in stead of gs

[BFG]

Terrorism is a good way of achieving objectives, but no wars have been won purely through terrorism, although in Iraq it's beginning to look that way...

I wonder somtimes whether we have been blurring the difference between terrorism (we can't even agree on what that is) and Gurrilla (shocking spelling) warfare... A lot of soldiers have been killed in iraq - not from terrorist attacks, but from boobytraps, bombs and ambush's.

[Brutha]

Oh, and whoever said that the atomic bomb only killed a few thousand people....

The two atomic bombs dropped on Japan killed over 250,000 people.  Now then, military estimates show that an invasion of the Japanese Islands would have resulted in over 1,000,000 Japanese deaths, not to mention the hundred thousand or more U.S. deaths.

Peace.

-GhostSniper Out.

It might just be me, but would you not think that the military "estimated" the death toll to be that high just to get to test the atomic bomb in a war? Well...as I said, might just be me, because the military never has lied about anything. We all know that the military never tested the effects on ppl after the war, so why during a war?

[Cutter]

We all know that the military never tested the effects on ppl after the war, so why during a war?

they did test on humans. here's a good site. take a look at all the test movies.

http://www.nv.doe.gov/news&pubs/photos&films/testfilms.htm

[abe 2.0]

***Looks at subject heading...Looks at thread......Looks confused***

The israelis have become pretty concious about avoiding killing civilian bystanders when they send rockets after the leaders of the "palestinian resistance". And these people know they are marked targets, so they deliberatly surround themselves with civlians in order to getting blown up, as alaric mentioned. And since we are talking about civilian casualties, lets also not forget that about half of the victims on the israeli side are women and children, while over 90% of the palestinian victims are adult males. For all the criticism you can make of Israels heavy handed approach towards security, you cant deny that it has been effective in curbing the flow of suicide attacks; they catch would be bombers all the time, but there have been few succesful attacks recently.

Under the Oslo accords, The PLO (OLP is the french acronym btw) has the responsibility to reign in on militants and terrorist in the areas under their authority, which NEVER happened. Hamas people and other terrorists get arrested sometimes, but they are released within days. And this was both before and after israel destroyed much of the PLO/PAs capabilities. With all the money the PLO gets from Europe, the arab world and the US, they have had the means to reform themselves into a responsible government, but that never happened either. Just like Israel acts against israeli terrorists and extremists who try to use violence, the PLO needs to do somthing about palestinian terrorists. Instead, they have actually encouraged violence and many of its members directly fund, support and organize suicide bombings. If theyre not going to do it, the IDF will......and, as you all know, they wont be 'delicate' about it.

To brotha and losemoney: You guys should really read up on what happened in 48/49, 67 and again in 73, instead of getting all your background from CNN. The whole story is a little more nuanced. THe palestinians could have had a state for a while if the people leading them hadent consitently acted like assholes.

[BFG]

 lets also not forget that about half of the victims on the israeli side are women and children, while over 90% of the palestinian victims are adult male

love to see where you got those figures from.... Would that be counting the acts of genoside in some of the refugee camps or not? since when were those figures tallied?

[abe 2.0]

http://www.ict.org.il/articles/articledet.cfm?articleid=440

a study that compares non-combatant deaths and deaths by gender for both groups. and yes, it only includes victims of the most recent outbreak of violence (since 2000) aka. the al aqsa intifada. It does show that while most of the palestinians killed were male combatants, 80% of the israelis killed have been non combatants, of which 40% were women and girls. That was the point i was trying to make.

As for the "acts of genoside" that you are speaking of (i assume youre referring to the sabra and shatilla massacres), they occured in the late 80s and were carried out by lebanese maronite phalangist militias, not israelis, although Sharon (Min of Def at the time) was judged to be 'indirectly responsible' (or something like that) for the atrocities because the IDF was in control of the areas where they took place and did nothing to stop the lebanese. The lebanese christians had their own reasons for hating the palestinians.

[Cossack]

There has been a recent incident in Jininn.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

It might just be me, but would you not think that the military "estimated" the death toll to be that high just to get to test the atomic bomb in a war?

Look, I did numerous research papers on this subject on the way to getting my FIRST degree in History.  The number I put up there, 1,000,000 dead was the LOWEST that ANYBODY said would have died on the Japanese side if we had invaded the country.  What, do you think I just pull these numbers out of my ass?  If I say something on this forum, it is because I personally have some understanding of the topic, whether through my own research, my own life, or from direct first person accounts.  You guys keep forgetting I'm not some 14 year old looking all this shit up on the internet or believing everything I see on T.V.

Some of you really need to leave the house every now and then and find out a little about history on your own.  Go take a trip to Hiroshima (as I have done), talk to Brig Gen Paul Tibbets (as I have done), read through the official documents at the National Archives (as I have done), or at the very least go talk to some of the other MILLIONS of people who fought in that war.

Peace.

-GhostSniper Out.

[abe 2.0]

Cossack,
There was a lot of investigation into what happened in Jenin and there was no evidence of any atrocities, crimes against humanity or  'acts of genocide'. The palestinian fighters used civilian buildings as cover for ambushes against IDF troops entering the camp and the soldiers responded by pretty much levelling a block of houses within the next couple of days. Some 50 palestinian militants were killed in the process. There is no evidence that suggests the IDF deliberatly targeted civilians or did anything like that. Also, keep in mind that we are talking about very densly populated areas that the fighters use as cover and that these places are extremely hostile environments for the IDF (think of Falluja for the US Army and multiply by 30). Bottom line is, there was no massacre in Jenin, despite what arab and palestinian propaganda will have you think.

Btw. In that report i posted the link to, they also point out that other palestinians were responsible for the death of253 of the palestinians killed (about 1/8 of the total). Thought that was kindof interesting.

[cO.gabe]

Abe you should register for these forums and post more often!

[Ssickboy]

Go take a trip to Hiroshima (as I have done), talk to Brig Gen Paul Tibbets (as I have done), read through the official documents at the National Archives (as I have done), or at the very least go talk to some of the other MILLIONS of people who fought in that war.

But all the important info comes from your conversations with God, right?  He's mentioned you to me.  He says you're not a very good listener.    

Abe you should register for these forums and post more often!

he's right. you should.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

Go take a trip to Hiroshima (as I have done), talk to Brig Gen Paul Tibbets (as I have done), read through the official documents at the National Archives (as I have done), or at the very least go talk to some of the other MILLIONS of people who fought in that war.

But all the important info comes from your conversations with God, right?  He's mentioned you to me.  He says you're not a very good listener.    

Sure, God told me to "nuke 'em til they glow."  As I have yet to get my hands on any nuclear weapons, I would say that God simply hasn't given me the means to do what he wants me to do.

 

["Sixhits"]

It might just be me, but would you not think that the military "estimated" the death toll to be that high just to get to test the atomic bomb in a war?

Look, I did numerous research papers on this subject on the way to getting my FIRST degree in History.  The number I put up there, 1,000,000 dead was the LOWEST that ANYBODY said would have died on the Japanese side if we had invaded the country.  What, do you think I just pull these numbers out of my ass?  If I say something on this forum, it is because I personally have some understanding of the topic, whether through my own research, my own life, or from direct first person accounts.  You guys keep forgetting I'm not some 14 year old looking all this shit up on the internet or believing everything I see on T.V.

Some of you really need to leave the house every now and then and find out a little about history on your own.  Go take a trip to Hiroshima (as I have done), talk to Brig Gen Paul Tibbets (as I have done), read through the official documents at the National Archives (as I have done), or at the very least go talk to some of the other MILLIONS of people who fought in that war.

Peace.

-GhostSniper Out.

In sum, Ghost is right on this one.

["Sixhits"]

Go take a trip to Hiroshima (as I have done), talk to Brig Gen Paul Tibbets (as I have done), read through the official documents at the National Archives (as I have done), or at the very least go talk to some of the other MILLIONS of people who fought in that war.

But all the important info comes from your conversations with God, right?  He's mentioned you to me.  He says you're not a very good listener.    

Sure, God told me to "nuke 'em til they glow."  As I have yet to get my hands on any nuclear weapons, I would say that God simply hasn't given me the means to do what he wants me to do.

 

In sum, I am afraid of Ghost.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

In sum, Ghost is right on this one.

In sum, I am afraid of Ghost.

In sum, Sixhits agrees that I am sometimes right, but he hopes he never runs into me in a dark alley somewhere.  

["Sixhits"]

In sum, Ghost is right on this one.

In sum, I am afraid of Ghost.

In sum, Sixhits agrees that I am sometimes right, but he hopes he never runs into me in a dark alley somewhere.  

That about sums it up.

[cO.Kuza]

It might just be me, but would you not think that the military "estimated" the death toll to be that high just to get to test the atomic bomb in a war?

Look, I did numerous research papers on this subject on the way to getting my FIRST degree in History.  The number I put up there, 1,000,000 dead was the LOWEST that ANYBODY said would have died on the Japanese side if we had invaded the country.  What, do you think I just pull these numbers out of my ass?  If I say something on this forum, it is because I personally have some understanding of the topic, whether through my own research, my own life, or from direct first person accounts.  You guys keep forgetting I'm not some 14 year old looking all this shit up on the internet or believing everything I see on T.V.

Some of you really need to leave the house every now and then and find out a little about history on your own.  Go take a trip to Hiroshima (as I have done), talk to Brig Gen Paul Tibbets (as I have done), read through the official documents at the National Archives (as I have done), or at the very least go talk to some of the other MILLIONS of people who fought in that war.

Peace.

-GhostSniper Out.

GS i cannot belive you are saying that 250,00 deaths + radiation to people is justified. 1,000,000 deaths by invasion is just rediculous by the time our ships would be offshore japan they would have surrendered. I too have been to Hiroshima and they are quite positive toward Americans and they forgive us for what we had done. which is not the case for us, most people still dont like the japanese for what they did at pearl harbor and that was a MILITARY target not an overpopulated city such as hiroshima.

And personaly i cant belive your saying this after visiting the museum there of the monstrosities that the Atomic bomb did. ( this is if you went there )

GS im not trying to attack you here it just seems like theres is some weird logic that i cant get at of how you view these events.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

GS im not trying to attack you here it just seems like theres is some weird logic that i cant get at of how you view these events.

It's okay....you would have to have a 180 IQ like me to get my logic.  

["Sixhits"]

GS i cannot belive you are saying that 250,00 deaths + radiation to people is justified. 1,000,000 deaths by invasion is just rediculous by the time our ships would be offshore japan they would have surrendered.

I think you're flat out wrong.

There was no assurance that Japan would cave, either due to fire bombing, economic woe, or nuclear weapons. Japan was well known as a fanatical nation, bent on national extinction or victory. By '45 there was no middle ground, at least not for the military leaders. The emperor was not being informed of the force disposition - all his military leaders were telling him that an invasion was a good thing. It would give them the chance to kill Americans is such numbers that they might sue for peace, allowing the Empire to survive. The incredible amount of men and material gathered in the two invasion beaches - one on the plain just east of Tokyo, the other on the nearest southern island - were brimming with troops, suicide boats, suicide frogmen, suicide jet-powered-bombs, suicide planes, and well thought out and positioned death fields. The entire able bodied populace was being trained for enmass bambo lance charges. Children were being trained to strack bombs to there backs and crawl under tanks. I think you fail to grasp the extremes to which events were leading. It was going to be a slaughter on both sides.

Frankly, thank goodness we nuked them. The nukes caused fewer civilian deaths than any signal fire bombing. In fact it was actually less damaging to use a nuke over a fleet of B-29s dropping incindiary bombs. That, and we showed our hand to Russia.

In anyevent: we are aruging revisionist history - would the Japanese have surrendered without the nukes? Conditionally, yes, they had already made peace overs. But unconditionally? No. They would never have surrendered unless a meaningless death was assured. The nukes assured a pointless, meaningless death for all Japanese.