|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: When did World War II become a just war?
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
I've never found the, "US never gave them an ultimatum," argument convincing either. It works for Hiroshima. However, the Japanese didn't surrender immediately after Hiroshima. Why believe they would have surrendered merely because of a threat?
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
Now I like my beer, but it definitely isn't what WWII was about ...
Maybe. You raise an interesting question: Did the average soldier/sailor/marine/airman spend more time in combat than he spent drinking beer?
That's an insult to the average soldier/sailor/marine. 14 million allied servicemen died in WWII-more than enough combat was endured.
Due to English incompetency many Australian soldiers (English too) were sent to Singapore too late and never saw combat; they suffered inhumane treatment and in some cases enslavement in POW camps and if they survived they suffered ongoing health problems as a result of the deprivations. It was more than enough.
quote:
Interesting point Mere Nick . During WW1, the inactivity of trench-life meant British soldiers who came home intact weighed a good deal more than when they left.
My Grandfather fought on the western front in WWI, he was shot twice, saw his mates heads get blown off -quite literally- and waded through blood and guts. He wasn't lounging about drinking beer ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
Leave the servicemen out of your sniping people.
Agree Rolyn, the Japanese were determined not to surrender. one H bomb wasn't enough to convince them for heavens sake. They were warned to surrender of face complete annihilation on July 26 1945 and peace terms outlined. On August 6 the first bomb was dropped, the second on August 9.
Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I think some historians, esp. Hasegawa, argue that it was the Soviet invasion that really convinced the Japanese leadership to surrender. Mass civilian deaths would not convince them, since the Tokyo fire bombings had killed (acc. to some estimates), a million people, and destroyed 3 million homes. 60 Japanese cities had been substantially destroyed, but the Japanese military still did not want to surrender, but the Soviet declaration of war (9 August 1945), tipped the balance. I don't know if the amateur can really decide between such revisionist theories.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
Now I like my beer, but it definitely isn't what WWII was about ...
Maybe. You raise an interesting question: Did the average soldier/sailor/marine/airman spend more time in combat than he spent drinking beer?
That's an insult to the average soldier/sailor/marine. 14 million allied servicemen died in WWII-more than enough combat was endured.
Due to English incompetency many Australian soldiers (English too) were sent to Singapore too late and never saw combat; they suffered inhumane treatment and in some cases enslavement in POW camps and if they survived they suffered ongoing health problems as a result of the deprivations. It was more than enough.
quote:
Interesting point Mere Nick . During WW1, the inactivity of trench-life meant British soldiers who came home intact weighed a good deal more than when they left.
My Grandfather fought on the western front in WWI, he was shot twice, saw his mates heads get blown off -quite literally- and waded through blood and guts. He wasn't lounging about drinking beer
Leave the servicemen out of your sniping people.
Agree Rolyn, the Japanese were determined not to surrender. one H bomb wasn't enough to convince them for heavens sake. They were warned to surrender of face complete annihilation on July 26 1945 and peace terms outlined. On August 6 the first bomb was dropped, the second on August 9.
I have never understood why the allies felt they couldn't wait more than three days for the message to sink in before dropping another one.
More to the point, Japan had already offered to surrender - but to the Russians. The allies were not prepared to accept that so they dropped an H bomb. I think it was a war crime.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Oops, sorry, the figure cited above of a million dead in the Tokyo fire bombings is incorrect, I think I shifted a column along there. But the argument still holds, that the Japanese military and political leadership were accustomed to mass civilian deaths, and were not necessarily inclined to surrender because of them.
I think various offers of surrender had been put out by the Japanese, but the Emperor was a sticking point. Ironically, in the end, the Allies kept him, and he wrote many research papers on marine biology!
[ 25. November 2012, 10:44: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Yes,if the allies had been willing to accept a conditional surrender - it would have looked very much the same. We should have done so.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
There are of course other strands of historical thought here, which also strike me as difficult to evaluate. For example, there is the idea that the US (unconsciously) still wanted revenge for Pearl Harbour, and the two atomic bombs satisfied that; there is the idea that they wanted to demonstrate the atomic bomb to the Soviets; also, that the Allies had become used to military rather than political solutions, hence, bombing seemed preferable. Also, that peace feelers were being routed via Stalin, so the Soviet invasion put paid to that. And perhaps a reluctance by some to let the Japanese keep the Emperor, although eventually they did just that. It's a minefield of different ideas.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
My Grandfather fought on the western front in WWI, he was shot twice, saw his mates heads get blown off -quite literally- and waded through blood and guts. He wasn't lounging about drinking beer
Leave the servicemen out of your sniping people.
Point taken . The lounging around thing looked like a light-hearted mini-debate which I guess is the kind of relief most of us seek, even when debating the ghastly business of warfare , let alone experiencing it.
Respect to your Grandfather . I've looked into enough history of life on the Western Front to know it wasn't a picnic.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
So, Christendom could have, should have fought WW2 better? Nicer?
Just like Jesus would have done ... ?
![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
[ 25. November 2012, 18:39: Message edited by: Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
In fact I was surprised to learn the Japanese High Command was still holding out even after the Nagasaki attack . It wasn't until a 3rd H-bomb was destined for another city that they finally saw sense.
Not only did the High Command resist the idea of surrender, a group of officers had plans to kidnap the emperor before he could broadcast his surrender speech to the nation. They almost succeeded in carrying out this plan.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
It's 'A' bomb and there WASN'T a third one.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
It's 'A' bomb and there WASN'T a third one.
At that time there probably wasn't another bomb, but by the time the Allied invasion(s) of Japan started late in 1945 there would have been between five and ten. There were proposals to use them tactically in a bid to hasten an end of the war that could reduce casualties amongst invading soldiers and fanatical Japanese resistance.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Leslie Groves, the head of the Manhattan Project, had more bombs in production and after Nagasaki the next one was to be made available on August 19th.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
I have mixed feelings.
Dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was preferable to an invasion which would have killed even more people. However, the Allies had Japan contained. What reason did the United States have for needing to end the war so quickly that justified dropping Little Boy on Hiroshima? Why not just starve them out the way invading armies had done for thousands of years?
In any event, the Japanese bare some of the responsibility for the bombs being dropped. Japan wanted to surrender on its own terms. Surrender to the Soviets? Japan hadn't spent the past 4 years fighting the Soviet Union. The alliance between the Soviet Union and the other Allies was tenuous at best and everybody knew it. The Japanese were dreaming if they believed the United States would allow them to surrender to the Soviet Union. Usually, those arguing against dropping the bombs will say the United States needed a better understanding of Japanese culture. No, the Japanese needed a better understanding of US culture if they thought after the events of World War II the US would allow peace terms that allowed them to lick their wounds, form an alliance with the Soviet Union, and then fight again another day.
I also don't believe that Japan was so much better than Nazi Germany that they deserved better terms. The millions killed by the Japanese were every bit as dead as the millions killed by the Nazis. The horror over the concentration camps didn't trouble the Allies until after World War II was over. Using them to justify the actions of the Allies during World War II is revisionism. The UK and USA refused to take any action during World War II to prevent the holocaust from getting worse. How then can the holocaust be an excuse for demanding harsher terms from Germany than Japan?
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar
Dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was preferable to an invasion which would have killed even more people. However, the Allies had Japan contained. What reason did the United States have for needing to end the war so quickly that justified dropping Little Boy on Hiroshima? Why not just starve them out the way invading armies had done for thousands of years?
There would have been far more civilian deaths that way. The Japanese military would have kept all the food for themselves. Moreover, the atomic bombs caused terrible suffering, but mass starvation would have caused more.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
All true and more Moo. So the Christian thing to do was nuke 'em?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
I think that nuking them was more humane than starving them. Many of those who were killed by the bombs died immediately; everyone who starves to death suffers for days.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
So it's the Christian thing to do ?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
So it's the Christian thing to do ?
The war wasn't going to come to an end without massive loss of life, therefore the Christian thing to do was to minimise loss of life and suffering with what was to hand.
There are times when you have to pick up those cracked eggs and make as good an omelette as you can.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
So it's the Christian thing to do ?
This really is a simplistic and self righteous response. Getting pacifism from the Bible requires cobbling together a select group of prooftexts and then ignoring vast amounts of the rest. As you've demonstrated, most of the case for pacifism in the NT is based on arguments from silence and tut tutting about what sounds Christiany to you.
Jesus was not an earthly king in the ancient world. Speculating on what he would do if he were the leader of a nation with a military capable of wiping out the Roman Empire in a day engaged in a war with other nations with similar capabilities is nothing but pure speculation. However, looking at the good kings of the Old Testament, the parable of Jesus, and the Book of Revelation suggests to me the answer to that question isn't pacifism.
War is always a tragedy. Sometimes the lesser of a number of evils must be chosen. It is part of living in a sinful and I would say a fallen world.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Thank you for the third rate ad hominem rhetoric Beeswax Altar. I've been THE most vociferous defendent of God the Killer on this site bar none for oooh 14 years.
IngoB has his moments. And in the shade of God the Killer I have been the most vociferous liberal interventionist here.
In the express image of the Father, Jesus was a radical pacifist. He didn't HAVE to preach it with words. His words complement his ACTIONS.
Christendom's actions make His words empty in His name.
So, what would Jesus have done mate? Starved them or nuked them?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
I think that nuking them was more humane than starving them. Many of those who were killed by the bombs died immediately; everyone who starves to death suffers for days.
Moo
I think accepting the offer of surrender would have been more humane than both. Also, possibly anything other than a nuclear explosion would mean people weren't dying half a century later: quote:
Post-attack casualties Film footage taken in Hiroshima in March 1946 showing victims with severe burns According to the US Department of Energy the immediate effects of the blast killed approximately 70,000 people in Hiroshima.[74] Estimates of total deaths by the end of 1945 from burns, radiation and related disease, the effects of which were aggravated by lack of medical resources, range from 90,000 to 166,000.[1][75] Some estimates state up to 200,000 had died by 1950, due to cancer and other long-term effects.[76] Another study states that from 1950 to 2000, 46% of leukemia deaths and 11% of solid cancer deaths among bomb survivors were due to radiation from the bombs, the statistical excess being estimated to 200 leukemia and 1700 solid cancers.[77] At least eleven known prisoners of war died from the bombing.[78]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
In the express image of the Father, Jesus was a radical pacifist. He didn't HAVE to preach it with words. His words complement his ACTIONS.
OK...keep begging the question.
quote:
originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
So, what would Jesus have done mate? Starved them or nuked them?
I've never claimed to know how Jesus would Jesus govern a 20th or 21st century democracy. I can't even begin to guess what foreign or domestic policies his government would adopt. I'm also convinced that nobody else does either and anybody who thinks they do is simply full of themselves.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
OK, keep avoiding the obvious.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
I never ignore the obvious and in this case there is nothing obvious to ignore. You've been telling us what you've believed for decades and how you don't believe it anymore. Neither the Bible nor Jesus have changed over those decades. If it was obvious the whole time, why have you only recently come to believe what you now believe? Why should you have any more faith in what you've come to believe lately than what you believed for decades?
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
You infer a false dichotomy. Typical.
I may well still have to believe in the pragmatism of God, especially if He says, "Yeah, I zotted 'em, here they are: Hi guys!".
What's that got to do with following Jesus? Rather than interpolate in to Jesus from the world - crushing Him, I'm extrapolating out from Him.
That light has gone on. I'd rather it HADN'T, life was SO much simpler in the dark.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
You still seem to believe in easy answers. Only thing you've changed is the answers. Happens quite often when people come out of fundamentalist religion. Before you can extrapolate out how Jesus would govern a nation, you first have to invent your own Jesus. Accepting the Jesus of the Gospels, formed by the OT, and reflected upon in the rest of the NT means accepting that we don't know how Jesus would govern a nation, what television shows he would watch, or any of the other stuff people confidently proclaim they know about Jesus.
[ 26. November 2012, 19:39: Message edited by: Beeswax Altar ]
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
So would He starve them or nuke them?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
OMG ! I agree with Beeswax Altar ...
*faints*
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
So do I, but that's got NOTHING to do with following Jesus has it?
NOTHING to do with His example.
And the question above therefore applies to you Doublethink. And I can't believe it either.
Oh apart from His example being easy.
[ 26. November 2012, 19:46: Message edited by: Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
I think that nuking them was more humane than starving them. Many of those who were killed by the bombs died immediately; everyone who starves to death suffers for days.
Moo
This seems to me to dubious thinking. The reasoning would be usable to justify execution of prisoners of war, or refugee civilian populations, along the lines of they'll starve anyway because there is either no food or not bothering to feed them. This sort of justification leads down all sorts of dangerous paths. We don't know that civilians would have died in the numbers that they did, and belligerents (soldiers) who would have died did not.
Unless you are considering American lives would have been saved versus Japanese. I suspect American soldiers lived who would have died and Japanese civilians died in the city bombings who would not have had the war continued conventionally. In time of war, lives on your side are of course worth lots more than the lives of the enemy. If you want to say it was preferable to kill Japanese civilians than American soldiers, then I think it is at least honest. If you think that choosing that civilians would be vapourised in nuclear bomb blasts is a better way than possibly starving them, then I think it is justifying an objectively evil act, a war crime. It is not hard to understand that shooting civilians is a war crime, can bombing them en masse be considered differently?
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
It would appear so no prophet. I did. Others here still do. It's all right. If I can be changed, they can.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
So would He starve them or nuke them?
Reading Genesis and Revelation, God prefers fire. So, I'd go with nuke over starvation though a famine caused by drought wouldn't be out of the question. Given the location of Japan, I wouldn't rule out a tsunami either. Our Lord used water for smiting on two well known occasions. God destroyed the Egyptian army with just the Red Sea. Imagine what God could do with the Pacific Ocean.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
So what about reading the good news of the man Jesus Christ? What He did? What He said?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
I didn't think about that. Based on Matthew, Jesus likes fire as well. So, nuke it is.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
You sod. That got a SOL.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
It is a universal truth about religion. The first thing that must go out with the trash are the principles of the founder. Jesus has always hated who I hate. He wants them dead.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
You sod. That got a SOL.
Hostly Tudor Bonnet on
Personal insults are not acceptable in Purgatory and are a violation of commandment 3. If you want argue in that way use Hell.
Hostly Tudor Bonnet off
Doublethink
Purgatory Host
[ 26. November 2012, 21:25: Message edited by: Doublethink ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
It is a universal truth about religion. The first thing that must go out with the trash are the principles of the founder. Jesus has always hated who I hate. He wants them dead.
Especially all those nasty conservatives, right no prophet? ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
It is a universal truth about religion. The first thing that must go out with the trash are the principles of the founder. Jesus has always hated who I hate. He wants them dead.
Especially all those nasty conservatives, right no prophet?
The only way is the in the middle. Pox to the right. Pox to the left. Jesus was a moderate. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
the giant cheeseburger
Shipmate
# 10942
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
It is a universal truth about religion. The first thing that must go out with the trash are the principles of the founder. Jesus has always hated who I hate. He wants them dead.
Especially all those nasty conservatives, right no prophet?
The only way is the in the middle. Pox to the right. Pox to the left. Jesus was a moderate.
Here lies part of the problem with trying the WWJD approach to WWII or other such ethical questions - Jesus doesn't really fit on a simple one-dimensional axis like left-right, or pacificist-hawk.
When faced with the question of how to finish off the war against Japan, my guess is that neither option available to the secular democratic republic of the USA would be the perfect WWJD answer. The perfect WWJD approach for the USA probably would not have gotten them to the point where they faced that invasion/A-bombs choice, it could well have led to the Pacific theatre of the war being avoided completely through better foreign policy decisions in the 1920's and 30's which might have helped Japan avoid getting to the point of making a pre-emptive strike on a US military base and starting a war.
--------------------
If I give a homeopathy advocate a really huge punch in the face, can the injury be cured by giving them another really small punch in the face?
Posts: 4834 | From: Adelaide, South Australia. | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink
I think accepting the offer of surrender would have been more humane than both. Also, possibly anything other than a nuclear explosion would mean people weren't dying half a century later:
AIUI the Japanese surrender offer stipulated that the Japanese would disarm themselves and no outsiders would be allowed in to make sure that it was done. It also stipulated that Japan would continue to occupy the former European colonies in Asia and would be the government that would grant them independence. This latter stipulation fit in with the idea that Japan's only motive in invading these countries was to liberate them from the Europeans.
There is another very important point that needs to be made. All the war-related decisions had to be approved by the War Minister, who had to be an army officer on active duty. If the top army generals did not like something the War Minister did, they could put him on inactive duty and appoint someone else. In effect, the country was ruled by a handful of army officers who believed that the strength and glory of Japan rested entirely on its military prowess. There were no signs that these men knew anything about literature, art, or music.
As I have said in an earlier post, the military rulers were willing to starve the entire civilian population if that was the only way they could get enough food to feed the military. Since all the glory of Japan rested in the military, this made perfect sense to them.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
BA can speak for himself, but He probly agrees we're not doing the WWJD thing. We're mocking it. Any attempt to get Jesus into our framework is confining God into a vision we have have of him, and suffers from the limits of our perception.
Jesus surprised a lot of people when he decided to recruit fishermen as disciples, used a major persecutor as an evangelist, made friends with prostitutes, tax collectors and other undesirables. If he had been around during any of our wars, well, I don't think he'd confine himself to what we think he is.
'He's not a tame lion you know.' (CS Lewis)
'There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.' (Galatians 3:28)
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink
I think accepting the offer of surrender would have been more humane than both. Also, possibly anything other than a nuclear explosion would mean people weren't dying half a century later:
AIUI the Japanese surrender offer stipulated that the Japanese would disarm themselves and no outsiders would be allowed in to make sure that it was done. It also stipulated that Japan would continue to occupy the former European colonies in Asia and would be the government that would grant them independence. This latter stipulation fit in with the idea that Japan's only motive in invading these countries was to liberate them from the Europeans.
There is another very important point that needs to be made. All the war-related decisions had to be approved by the War Minister, who had to be an army officer on active duty. If the top army generals did not like something the War Minister did, they could put him on inactive duty and appoint someone else. In effect, the country was ruled by a handful of army officers who believed that the strength and glory of Japan rested entirely on its military prowess. There were no signs that these men knew anything about literature, art, or music.
As I have said in an earlier post, the military rulers were willing to starve the entire civilian population if that was the only way they could get enough food to feed the military. Since all the glory of Japan rested in the military, this made perfect sense to them.
Moo
You may be mistaken.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Oh dear, Think, you got caught in the headlights of an IHR article.
The Institute for Historical Review is a known Holocaust-denial organization and outlet for radical right-wing revisionism.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
As in the Styx, I apologise for any offense caused Beeswax Altar. None was intended, on the contrary. Hopefully other Brits may confirm that 'You sod.' is the sort of thing one says when one is made to laugh against one's will.
no prophet, I AM doing the WWJD thing.
Again, which way would He have suffered the little children of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - that most Christian of Japanese cities ?
When shall we start His mission ? 1941 ?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
no prophet, I AM doing the WWJD thing.
Again, which way would He have suffered the little children of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - that most Christian of Japanese cities ?
When shall we start His mission ? 1941 ?
But we cannot possibly know the WWJD thing. The disciples who actually knew the guy in person, physically, didn't get it. Were they magnificently stupider than me? No, I think there probably just as thick or smart as we all are. The disciples knew that Jesus was supposed to show up again, and his reappearance startled and surprised them. WWJD? Surprising things apparently. Like get killed. Like getting unkilled. Like inspiring people to do right and wrong ways. Like requiring us to use our judgement. Like allowing us to think we're doing WWJD while we're killing other people. Superbus**. All of us. [[can't help noticing you put "I AM" in capitals, OMG!]]
The question about when to start Jesus' mission is akin to asking where a flame is before the match is lit. It's the wrong question. The question WWJD and when he'd do it is a way of avoiding the responsibility to do what is right ourselves. Jesus' mission starts on all occasions and at all times, if only we want to sign on.
**Superbus (Latin): haughtily over-confident, know it all, arrogant. (describes me anyway)
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
But we cannot possibly know the WWJD thing.
But we can confidently pretend that we know with telegraphic and repetitive hyperbolic posts on the internet.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
As in the Styx, I apologise for any offense caused Beeswax Altar. None was intended, on the contrary. Hopefully other Brits may confirm that 'You sod.' is the sort of thing one says when one is made to laugh against one's will.
FWIW, I can confirm this. I took SOL to be "snort out loud". I haven't seen the Styx thread. Maybe I don't want to...
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chesterbelloc
Tremendous trifler
# 3128
|
Posted
... but I just did. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."
Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
