Presidential vapor in Hiroshima....

[untermensche]

The US followed a violent aggressive course and showed no mercy with any people that stood in it's way. That is why it is wealthy.

All nations have. We must recognize our faults, but to bitch about it in every thread doesn't help much.

Anybody can label telling the facts as "bitching".

In fact it is a tactic used by many to look away from facts.

That is all I have ever said.

The US behaves as all powerful nations have always behaved. In their self interest. Human sympathy or empathy does not enter the picture.

 

[untermensche]

Not in the least. That was entirely a Japanese pathology and crime.

But when you unleash the dogs of war it is what happens.

Unleash the dogs of war? You said it was a Japanese pathology. Make up your mind.

It is what happens when you conduct war. People behave cruelly.

But that doesn't excuse it. It merely says that there are ways to prevent it. You don't wage aggressive war. Like the US invasion of Iraq.

Look at abu ghraib. Inhumanity is what war produces.

Yes... the war crimes committed by Germany and Japan should be mentioned in the same sentence as abu Ghraib.

Crimes against humanity are crimes against humanity.

Yes some are worse than others.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Unleash the dogs of war? You said it was a Japanese pathology. Make up your mind.

It is what happens when you conduct war. People behave cruelly.

Random events, yes. Organized efforts... that requires intent and wanting to be involved.

But that doesn't excuse it. It merely says that there are ways to prevent it. You don't wage aggressive war. Like the US invasion of Iraq.

What the fuck man? The Iraq War killed very few people. The US Military was able to coordinate with the Iraqi Army to get them to stand down. It was the shit occupation that led to the power vacuum that led to the interfactional fighting and deaths of over 100,000 Iraqis and displacement of over a million. Most of the killing and displacement was between Sunni and Shia Iraqis.

Look at abu ghraib. Inhumanity is what war produces.

Yes... the war crimes committed by Germany and Japan should be mentioned in the same sentence as abu Ghraib.

Crimes against humanity are crimes against humanity.

Yes some are worse than others.

And some are so much more worse they shouldn't be used to exaggerate the smaller crimes.

 

[untermensche]

But that doesn't excuse it. It merely says that there are ways to prevent it. You don't wage aggressive war. Like the US invasion of Iraq.

What the fuck man? The Iraq War killed very few people. The US Military was able to coordinate with the Iraqi Army to get them to stand down. It was the shit occupation that led to the power vacuum that led to the interfactional fighting and deaths of over 100,000 Iraqis and displacement of over a million. Most of the killing and displacement was between Sunni and Shia Iraqis.

What the fuck man!

The US attack of the Iraqi people destroyed Iraqi society. Millions fled. It led directly to sectarian violence that hadn't existed in 200 years that is still killing people in Iraq. It was the major reason ISIS was able to become a force in the region since the military leadership of ISIS is ex-Iraqi military. It also provided ISIS with weapons.

The unwarranted and unneeded attack of a nation that was attacking no other nation has produced a major catastrophe in the region that is still playing out.

Look at abu ghraib. Inhumanity is what war produces.

And some are so much more worse they shouldn't be used to exaggerate the smaller crimes.

What the fuck man!

The crimes you are responsible for are far worse than crimes you have nothing to do with.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Nobody has brought up how the US imprisoned thousands of Japanese americans for years during the year.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

What the fuck man? The Iraq War killed very few people. The US Military was able to coordinate with the Iraqi Army to get them to stand down. It was the shit occupation that led to the power vacuum that led to the interfactional fighting and deaths of over 100,000 Iraqis and displacement of over a million. Most of the killing and displacement was between Sunni and Shia Iraqis.

What the fuck man!

*sigh*

The US attack of the Iraqi people destroyed Iraqi society.

It harmed some infrastructure, but overall, American Military actions did not destroy Iraq.

Millions fled.

Sectarian religious infighting.

It led directly to sectarian violence that hadn't existed in 200 years that is still killing people in Iraq. It was the major reason ISIS was able to become a force in the region since the military leadership of ISIS is ex-Iraqi military. It also provided ISIS with weapons.

This would all be the Occupation, not the war.

The unwarranted and unneeded attack of a nation that was attacking no other nation has produced a major catastrophe in the region that is still playing out.

No kidding.

Look at abu ghraib. Inhumanity is what war produces.

And some are so much more worse they shouldn't be used to exaggerate the smaller crimes.

What the fuck man!

The crimes you are responsible for are far worse than crimes you have nothing to do with.

Sure. *head pat*

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Nobody has brought up how the US imprisoned thousands of Japanese americans for years during the war.

No but, the US has acknowledged it and has attempted to make amends.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

All nations have. We must recognize our faults, but to bitch about it in every thread doesn't help much.

Anybody can label telling the facts as "bitching".

You never stop. The US is bad, the US is evil, etc..., etc...

In fact it is a tactic used by many to look away from facts.

Not really. Many on the left are quite aware of the nation's mistakes and crimes. Angry about them. We don't feel the need, however, to drone on about them thread after thread.

That is all I have ever said.

The US behaves as all powerful nations have always behaved. In their self interest. Human sympathy or empathy does not enter the picture.

It does in natural disasters, but when politics are involved, not so much.

 

[untermensche]

It does in natural disasters, but when politics are involved, not so much.

Sure *head pat*

Nobody profits when the US responds to disasters.

It is not a transfer of wealth from the US Treasury into private pockets.

You never stop. The US is bad, the US is evil, etc..., etc...

Well thought out positions based on facts are consistent.

Not really.

Yes really. It is a rhetorical devise of those who want to place some facts into a special place and think of them differently than they think of everything else.

 

[untermensche]

The crimes you are responsible for are far worse than crimes you have nothing to do with.

Sure. *head pat*

A head pat for a simple moral truism?

One can't demonstrate they stand for nothing more clearly.

 

[Bronzeage]

Sure. *head pat*

A head pat for a simple moral truism?

One can't demonstrate they stand for nothing more clearly.

Truism have to make sense, in a grammatical way, if nothing else.

 

[untermensche]

A head pat for a simple moral truism?

One can't demonstrate they stand for nothing more clearly.

Truism have to make sense, in a grammatical way, if nothing else.

The crimes you are responsible for are far worse than crimes you have nothing to do with.

Are you not able to make sense of this?

What do you not understand? I don't care about your learned aesthetics.

 

[Bronzeage]

Truism have to make sense, in a grammatical way, if nothing else.

The crimes you are responsible for are far worse than crimes you have nothing to do with.

Are you not able to make sense of this?

What do you not understand? I don't care about your learned aesthetics.

Okay, I'll play. You murder my father, so I murder you. Which murder is worse?

 

[untermensche]

The crimes you are responsible for are far worse than crimes you have nothing to do with.

Are you not able to make sense of this?

What do you not understand? I don't care about your learned aesthetics.

Okay, I'll play. You murder my father, so I murder you. Which murder is worse?

The worse crime for me is the crime I commit.

And the worse crime for you is the one you commit.

 

[Bronzeage]

The crimes you are responsible for are far worse than crimes you have nothing to do with.

Are you not able to make sense of this?

What do you not understand? I don't care about your learned aesthetics.

Okay, I'll play. You murder my father, so I murder you. Which murder is worse?

The worse crime for me is the crime I commit.

And the worse crime for you is the one you commit.

No, I am quite upset that you murdered my father. That is a much worse crime for me. Besides that, you are now dead, which has made my life a little nicer. I can't see any downside to your murder.


This makes your truism a falsism.

 

[untermensche]

The crimes you are responsible for are far worse than crimes you have nothing to do with.

Are you not able to make sense of this?

What do you not understand? I don't care about your learned aesthetics.

Okay, I'll play. You murder my father, so I murder you. Which murder is worse?

The worse crime for me is the crime I commit.

And the worse crime for you is the one you commit.

No, I am quite upset that you murdered my father. That is a much worse crime for me. Besides that, you are now dead, which has made my life a little nicer. I can't see any downside to your murder.

This makes your truism a falsism.

No. It is a worse crime TO you, but not a worse crime for you. There is no mark against you, nothing to be said about you at all for my crimes.

You just don't understand simple truisms and the idea of moral responsibility.

A moral truism.

I am responsible for the crimes I have something to do with.

I have no responsibility for crimes committed by others.

The worst crimes for me are the crimes I have responsibility for. Those are the crimes I can do something about and therefore morality comes into play.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I have no responsibility for crimes committed by others.

Really? I can brainwash somebody to commit a crime and order them to do it, am I still not responsible?

 

[untermensche]

I have no responsibility for crimes committed by others.

Really? I can brainwash somebody to commit a crime and order them to do it, am I still not responsible?

That is not a crime committed by others.

That is a crime committed by you and others. You have direct responsibility.

 

[Bronzeage]

The crimes you are responsible for are far worse than crimes you have nothing to do with.

Are you not able to make sense of this?

What do you not understand? I don't care about your learned aesthetics.

Okay, I'll play. You murder my father, so I murder you. Which murder is worse?

The worse crime for me is the crime I commit.

And the worse crime for you is the one you commit.

No, I am quite upset that you murdered my father. That is a much worse crime for me. Besides that, you are now dead, which has made my life a little nicer. I can't see any downside to your murder.

This makes your truism a falsism.

No. It is a worse crime TO you, but not a worse crime for you. There is no mark against you, nothing to be said about you at all for my crimes.

You just don't understand simple truisms and the idea of moral responsibility.

A moral truism.

I am responsible for the crimes I have something to do with.

I have no responsibility for crimes committed by others.

The worst crimes for me are the crimes I have responsibility for. Those are the crimes I can do something about and therefore morality comes into play.

Why should killing you be a problem for me? I have full moral justification for causing your death. I take full responsibility, but it doesn't bother me a bit. If someone asks me about you, I tell them it was like a Tom Waits song.

Your truism is meaningless, unless everyone in the world agrees with your moral code. Since that is not realistic, your truism fails.

 

[untermensche]

Why should killing you be a problem for me? I have full moral justification for causing your death. I take full responsibility, but it doesn't bother me a bit. If someone asks me about you, I tell them it was like a Tom Waits song.

Your truism is meaningless, unless everyone in the world agrees with your moral code. Since that is not realistic, your truism fails.

All murderers try to justify their murder. Two wrongs do not make a right, another truism.

But they have guilt whether they recognize it or not.

And your argument is absurd.

To say you have the right to harm another means you must demonstrate that right.