Replies

If you will look at post #109, you will see a distinction between collateral deaths (which may be morally tolerated) and indiscriminate killing (which is forbidden.)

An awful lot of collateral deaths could have been justified in WWII, especially considering the phenomenal murderousness of the Axis Powers. I don't deny that.

The objection is, that the civilians killed at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not collateral deaths. These deaths were intended, inasmuch as (1) the US chose to use indiscriminate weapons of mass destruction and (2) the US intended that the psychological effect of a butchery of such magnitude would shock the Japanese High Command.

Who can deny that the atomic bombing of Hiroshima would have been considered a dud, if (by some fluke) only the military targets had been destroyed, and the civilians remained pretty much unscathed?

We must make a distinction between killing, and murder. Killing --- and, realistically speaking, quite a lot of it --- may be justified if, at he same time, we are honestly trying to shield the civilian population as much as possible. As, in fact, we are doing in Iraq, where our military has clearly tried to minimize harm to noncombatants (even under horribly difficult circumstance.)

I salute the US military for this. This is courageous, and honorable, soldiering.

That's my point. Honorable soldiers don't target civilians. George Washington didn't target civilians. Robert E. Lee didn't target civilians.

The indiscriminate killing of civilians is, in fact, prohibited by the U.S. Uniform Code of Military Justice. It's against God's law, international law, and the law of the USA.

I don't need anyone to explain collateral damage to me.

I have spent quiet hours listening to the wind and water beat against the white hull of the U.S.S. Arizona memorial at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.

I have stood at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial on an anniversary of the bomb, in US Navy uniform, and written "Remember Pearl Harbor!" in the visitor book.

I have stood in the Broken Stone Arch of the Catholic church upon the hill of Nagasaki, where the air burst was centered, and where it displaced the stone arch exactly the width of the stone.

I don't need anyone to explain the difference between MURDER and WAR.

Apparently you do.

That you, and those of your ilk, would dare to question the HONOR and MORALITY of our ancestors who fought to the death, and defeated, BY FORCE OF ARMS, a nation run by murdering animals who would have gladly killed off the entire population of Japan to defend their "way of life". Shows the failure of you, and such folks as you, to have any frikkin clue of the realities of TOTAL WAR.

There is one morality in WAR, that is Victory.

Please spare me your Pollyannish "morality" blather.

Without the use of Atomic bombs, MILLIONS of lives more would have been lost. MILLIONS. If you doubt that, your ignorance is indeed, invincible.

You dishonor the memory of those who gave all, that you could live, to be free, to be so proud, of your "moral" "superiority".

Tell me would you have dropped the Bomb on Berlin to end the the Holocaust ? The Japanese went on a rampage in WWII and did things that we would have hanged the Germans over a dozen times for

I have some sympathy for the individual citizens,but countries that embark on wars of conquest and genocide should be ready for the consequences

Honorable soldiers don't target civilians. George Washington didn't target civilians. Robert E. Lee didn't target civilians.

back then wars were fought by professional armies,and they weren't fighting against Hitler and Co either