If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 14:59:49 GMT, "cypher745"
wrote: Rats, In response to your eloquent rebuttal. " Umm, what the **** are you going on about? " It was you who stated the following "Sure, let's put them all on trial. Let's also include the US President responsible for dropping the atomic bombs, the US President responsible for carpet bombing, napalm and agent orange in Vietnam. US hypocrisy never ceases to amaze me." Where did the US "carpet bomb" in Vietnam? Tactical strikes in the South were always FAC control. Tactical targets in the North were strictly briefed. Did you ever read about the controversy regarding bombing of dikes? Notice that POW camps in the center of Hanoi weren't hit? I can give you a statement from a POW who was moved to a cell with a window looking out on the Hanoi power plant. Wasn't hit. More "carpet bombing" damage occurred in the North from falling AAA shrapnel and missile debris than errant bombs. What's wrong with napalm? Consider this, you're sitting in your living room and I drop a mk-82 500 pound GP bomb in your front yard, fifteen feet outside your front door. Your house is destroyed and you are dead. Now, if it were a BLU-1B napalm can, you would hear a loud swoosh, the bright flames would probably sear the house wall, and you would get up from your easy chair and evacuate out the other end of the house. Napalm any worse than a bomb? Emotionalism, that's all. Agent Orange? You ever use weed killer in your back yard? I've seen guys bathe in it. Emotionalism, that's all. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Rats wrote in message ... Umm, what the **** are you going on about? This is about cluster bombs being used indiscriminately and killing civilians. Those accountable should be punished for their actions. The original poster said that Saddam and co should be sued as well. To this I agreed and also added the US presidents he'd conveniently left out. Who said anything about indiscriminate use of cluster bombs? You liberals think the only bombing ever done is either carpet bombing or randomly dropped. -- Scott -------- The French, God bless them, are finally joining the war against Islamic extremism. Their targets, which will now confront the full force of l'état, are schoolgirls who wear Muslim head scarves in French public schools. Wall Street Journal |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
"cypher745" wrote in message
m... Your statement makes it seem like you think that the use of the atomic bombs by the US should be considered war crimes. As such, my original question is valid. Do you think that the greater loss of life on both sides, that would have resulted from a direct invasion of Japan would have a been a better alternative? I eagerly await your reply. How many soldiers did you kill with the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? I also notice that you have conveniently left the part out about carpet bombing, napalm and agent orange in Vietnam. Yes, the use of nuclear weapons is a war crime. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Where did the US "carpet bomb" in Vietnam? Tactical strikes in the
South were always FAC control. Hmm, I don't know Ed. A BUFF with a 2.5 mile long bomb train pretty much sounds like "carpet bombing" to me, particularly if you consider there were 3 or 4 of them. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Yes, the use of nuclear weapons is a war crime.
No its not. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
"BUFDRVR" wrote...
Hmm, I don't know Ed. A BUFF with a 2.5 mile long bomb train pretty much sounds like "carpet bombing" to me, particularly if you consider there were 3 or 4 of them. I've seen the term "carpet bombing" bandied about for years. I've never seen or heard a definition. Is there one? A generally accepted one? |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
I've seen the term "carpet bombing" bandied about for years. I've never seen
or heard a definition. Is there one? A generally accepted one? I generally dislike the term since it's often applied to the BUFF and seems to mean to most in the world media; "dropping 6 or more bombs at once". The definition to most of the present and former aviators I know appears to be "bombing a target *area* rather than a target itself". BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
How many soldiers did you kill with the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? I also notice that you have conveniently left the part out about carpet bombing, napalm and agent orange in Vietnam. Yes, the use of nuclear weapons is a war crime. Hmmm. When you consider that I was not born till nearly 20 years after the fact. And that at the time my family had still not immigrated to the US, I would have to say that "I" did not kill anyone in Hiroshima or Nagasaki. I just wanted to know if you opposed to the taking of human life, the use of nuclear weapons or both. It would seem that the sanctity of human life means nothing to you. That it is just the use of nuclear weapons that you object to. Or maybe.... Just maybe. You are against any weapon that would secure a victory for the US, no matter how many lives it saves. If I am out of line with that statement I apologize. But I don't think I am. Could I ask where you are from and why it is that you hate the US? |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Rats" wrote: "cypher745" wrote in message m... Your statement makes it seem like you think that the use of the atomic bombs by the US should be considered war crimes. As such, my original question is valid. Do you think that the greater loss of life on both sides, that would have resulted from a direct invasion of Japan would have a been a better alternative? I eagerly await your reply. How many soldiers did you kill with the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Does one of the last major IJ Naval bases, and an army division with headquarters count? I also notice that you have conveniently left the part out about carpet bombing, napalm and agent orange in Vietnam. Note Ed Rasimus' post elsewhere in this thread. (If you don't care to, the digest answer is, you have no argument.) Yes, the use of nuclear weapons is a war crime. It wasn't at the time, which is what counts. Ex post facto, and all that. Again, you dodged the question: Do you *really* think that the planned direct invasion of the Japanese home islands, with attendant *far* greater loss of Japanese, American, British and other Commonwealth lives, is preferable to what actually happened? Meanwhile, the Japanese Army was still active in China, with roughly 10,000 Chinese deaths daily, until the Emperor told them to stand down... One hopes you don't respond with either evasion nor knee-jerk "anything is better than nuclear", because it is an unsupportable position. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The State of the Union: Lies about a Dishonest War | RobbelothE | Military Aviation | 248 | February 2nd 04 02:45 AM |
#1 Jet of World War II | Christopher | Military Aviation | 203 | September 1st 03 03:04 AM |