There’s a difference between having balls and being bugfuck crazy.
If you think this, then you’re not paying attention to the actual discussion.
This is nothing but another one of your vicious anti-American fantasies. No doubt there was some abuse and even some murder; but by and large Japanese prisoners of war were treated fairly decently, certainly far better than Allied prisoners of war–and, for that matter, many civilians in occupied territories–were treated by the Japanese. At least we didn’t eat them or conduct biological warfare experiments on them. Japanese prisoners were often easy to debrief. Their commanders had told them they would inevitably be tortured and murdered by American troops and did not bother to give them any training about what to do when captured–no “name, rank and serial number” for them. Interrogators could usually get them to talk quite freely just by speaking to them respectfully and offering them tea and cigarettes.
There simply was no wholesale slaughter of Japanese prisoners during the Second World War.
This was limited to Okinawa and was in no way official policy. The article you cite states that military authorities made serious efforts to control it. Certainly there was nothing that even came close to the Japanese practice of “comfort women,” in which women were deceived or abducted and basically were serially raped night and day.
How could you possibly have developed such blind, venomous hatred for your own people?
I see there are still people “making their own reality.” Unfortunately for them, that plan, like Generalisimo Franco, remains dead:
Much more at source. Of course, in order for reality to sink in you’d have to put your red, white & blue pom-poms down for a few minutes…
As for the OP, I think it has potential as Hollywood blockbuster if nothing else.
And again, none of that is this thread. If you want to discuss or argue that, please start a different thread.
Well, you took care of the OP’s musings in your very first post. Not much left to argue after that. Of course, you also ruined the Hollywood script…
Bolding mine. Although I could bold this entire post by the OP.
You sure this isn’t the right thread, Chimera?
You may not think it is (and we don’t know what your unique and fascinating definition of “a rational subject” is), but it’s a scenario that I can assure you is being seriously considered by the leaders of the US, Israel, Russia, etc. They’re building a nuclear weapon. Do you think they intend to do nothing with it other than polish it and put pictures of it on Facebook?
Trihs is a foaming-at-the-mouth anti-American. The reason that he needs to shout is that…his inner demons compel him to. The actual subject matter at hand is irrelevant, as long as it gives him some kind of flimsy pretext to bash the US (note that to him, facts are for other people).
Rather than Iran, some far more interesting questions to consider might be
a) What is the American response if Israel decides to nuke an Iranian base without “approval” / good cause / because they’re being overly paranoid*
b) What is the proper reaction if China uses a nuke in a war against Taiwan
c) What if Pakistan and / or India use a tactical nuke against the other?
I would think that any of the above is far more likely to come about than Iran nuking America or Israel - I don’t think anybody is that clusterfuck insane.
- not sure how to phrase this, but they use it in a way that justification can’t be found for, and a way that the US govt publicly and privately (via high level diplomatic channels) is against
A> We play Sgt. Schultz. We see nothing, we know nothing. The scary part is that the rabid Christian Right will crow with delight. Of course, these are the same fuckers who DESIRE Armaggedon because it means Jesus is coming back. The thing is, that’s one scenario where I have to doubt that the Europeans will play their usual game of No Balls.
B> I believe we have a treaty with Taiwan that says we’re involved. How that actually plays out depends on how quickly the Chinese conquer Taiwan, and I’m betting if they risked dropping a nuke, they’d be sending over loads of troops in everything from Junks to Container ships, fuck the casualties, just to get as much in as fast as they can.
C> If Pakistan and India nuke each other, we all pretty much sit back and go :eek:
This, in general, is the biggest self-delusional activity American public is engaged in by their “glorious leaders’ and willing (read, paid) media.
Just because you pretend or really do not to know about involvement, covert or not, of your Government, it does not make the other side – the one that experiences injustice, murder, loss of livelihood and destruction of society as they knew it – less forgetful.
And just like you did not care about them they have every right not to care about you. It does not matter if you think it’s not fair that you have to pay, the causality of events is force you cannot control. Eventually, it will catch up with you.
Asking some frightened dude somewhere in Middle East to raise his voice against “terrorist” and those who want “misinterpret religion” and what-not while at the same time advocating and/or justifying ignorance of that same dude being killed for no reason whatsoever must be the highest peak of hypocrisy and hubris.
For all of the reasons stated here, Iran is not going to attack the US, or even Israel, directly.
However, given that Iran has a long history of aiding and abetting international terror, namely Hamas, it is not at all far-fetched to imagine them supplying a terrorist network with suitcase nukes to use anywhere.
If and when this happens (God forbid), it will be challenging to retaliate without incontrovertible evidence leading back to Tehran.
Well, if you read Tom Clancy novels, every radioactive isotope has its own “signature” and the fallout from a nuclear explosion can be tested, like determining a wine’s vintage (“The Sum of All Fears”). I have no idea if this is true, but I suspect it isn’t.
If Hamas blew up Tel Aviv, though, where would they have gotten the bomb? EBay? Though the evidence would be circumstantial, it would nonetheless be pretty compelling. We could probably eventually uncover its origin one way or another, Clancy novels aside.
Clancy used to be pretty good on his research, so I suspect it’s correct.
I think they intend to use it to keep America from attacking them. Deterrence is the standard modern use for nuclear weapons.
No, it’s wildly implausible. Governments don’t hand weapons like that to loose cannons like terrorist groups. Nor as I said earlier would there be any point; if Iran had nukes, and Hamas got nukes from anywhere, we’d assume Iran did it and use the excuse the destroy them.
I daresay there might be a huge disconnect between what “governments” don’t as a general rule do and what the Iranian government might do. I don’t think the “no sane government would…” argument applies to them.
Iran wouldn’t deter much of anything with its weapon(s) unless it had a delivery system that would survive an initial attack. “If you obliterate Tehran, we’ll FedEx you a nuke of our own” doesn’t hold much water.
The above doesn’t mean they couldn’t deliver a weapon to target in peacetime. If we launched a nuclear strike against Iran, though, I imagined we’d also ensure that nothing got out of the country.
As opposed to that epitome of sanity Stalin? The “insanity” of the Iranian government is grossly exaggerated by the warhawks and Islamophobes.
They don’t need much of a delivery system to deter an invasion; we’ll come to them. They can even just bury the things and set them off under the American forces as they pass.
No, as exemplified by Stalin. Stalin did many things that were just batshit crazy, including executing most of his army’s officer corps just prior to WWII. he was, if not technically insane, at the very least paranoid-delusional.
If Iran is truly developing a nuclear “deterrent” with the idea of deterring an invasion by detonating nukes on its own soil, now that would be batshit insane. That’s one of the many reasons I think that Iran is building a nuclear weapon with the intent of actually using it in an offensive capacity. That has nothing to do with “Islamophobia”–it’s more to do with “Insanenutjobophobia.”
And yet he didn’t hand over nukes to terrorists. Governments don’t do that.
No, that’s about demonizing them to justify conquest and/or mass murder. And it’s hardly “insane” to own some nukes to deter aggression by a nation you can’t otherwise hold off.
You seem to be using Iraq as a cautionary tale in this connection.
Why?
Are you assuming that those who are calling for U.S. military action against Iran don’t want it to end up in shambles?