Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ArrogantBustard
Well, in large part, I agree with you. I'm an "eye-for-an-eye" type of guy myself. If WMD attacks are against military targets, such should be the retaliation.

However, a large-scale WMD attack against one of our civilian population centers should be met with an identical counter-strike. Otherwise, the enemy can park his military inside population centers and blast away at ours without retaliation.

Genocide, my *#&$& ... fire-bombing Dresden and Tokyo was not genocide. The two nukes at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the best investments that we made in wartime, saving the lives of tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of our own troops (and Japanese defenders, civilian and military .. although that doesn't really enter into MY equation).

17 posted on 03/20/2003 12:04:56 PM PST by BlueLancer (Der Elite Møøsenspåånkængruppen ØberKømmååndø (EMØØK))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: BlueLancer
I am aware of no justification for the firebombing of Dresden. And I think equally little of the BBC nighttime area bombing campaign. Even worse was the Luftwaffe "blitz" against London, which also serves as a prime example of the military stupidity of bombing civilians. They actually quit a very effective bombing campaign against RAF bases and lookout stations in order to bomb London. As a result, the RAF was able to rest, regroup, and kick the Luftwaffe butts. Hitler was a moron.

The bombing campaign against Japanese cities was somewhat better justified in that their war industry was spread throughout the cities. The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki caused "medium sized" damage, compared to other air raids at the time, and certainly destroyed the war industries and port facilities of those cities. A nuke is as much a WMD as a fleet of bombers full of napalm.

If our opponent (Saddam Hussein, for example) decides to surround his legitimate military targets with civilians, their deaths are on his hands, not ours. There's a big difference between attacking your opponents' army (and accidentally killing civilians) and deliberately targeting civilians for the sole purpose of killing civilians. If one is engaged in the latter, one is engaged in mass murder. SH did precisely that to the Kurds in the early 1990s; it's one of his many crimes for which I'd like to see his head on a pike.

21 posted on 03/20/2003 12:31:50 PM PST by ArrogantBustard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson