Developing Story: Obama Is Still A *****

[Type Username Here]

Maybe in the US and Soviet union where the war was cold. Not so much for much of the world where proxy wars resulted in the deaths of millions.

Those proxy wars would have probably occurred anyway, since most of them involved internal conflicts. There would have been a massive war in Europe, and unlike WWII, the Soviet had the means to attack the US Mainland.

The casualities worldwide would have been exponentially larger.

 

[Type Username Here]

you are ex-military right? Makes sense.

What does that mean?

You keep taking these shots at Vets around here.

 

[Robbie3000]

Those proxy wars would have probably occurred anyway, since most of them involved internal conflicts. There would have been a massive war in Europe, and unlike WWII, the Soviet had the means to attack the US Mainland.

The casualities worldwide would have been exponentially larger.

eh, Your still making the assumption that a conventional war between the US and the Soviets was inevitable. I don't think Russians were looking to get into more wars after the devastating losses they had taken in WW1 and WW2.

The country lost more than 24 million people in WW2 alone. I don't think the appetite for war was there and it might have been the right time to broker a deal if we had more reasonable leadership.

But I don't entirely discount your point. Maybe Nukes have prevented an all out WW3. But i still argue that a conventional war with Russia at that time was not inevitable.

 

[Robbie3000]

What does that mean?

You keep taking these shots at Vets around here.

Not all vets. Just the narrow minded ones who think the US can do no wrong.

:favre:

 

[CASHAPP]

so what I'm reading here is Nuclear bombs=ok but drone strikes= wrong

Yep.....and its going to keep going on. Were gonna hear more about how its different than drone strikes because drone strikes never give any warnings and how these nuclear strikes decades ago were "for the greater good".

Little Katsumi Mouri skipping along playing with her brother on the front steps before they get ready for breakfast in the morning, turning into carbon in a split second from a fireball, is somehow different because she was "warned".

You notice what also went unmentioned also right? How there was far more loss of life in those two instances of nukes being used than drone strikes put together over the years?

The bottom line is neither of these uses should be defended in any way.
fukk out of here.

 

[Type Username Here]

One thing to add, Americans gave plenty of warning about dropping the nukes. Not saying it makes it better, I'm personally against the decision, but we need to be accurate.

so what I'm reading here is Nuclear bombs=ok but drone strikes= wrong

Yep.....and its going to keep going on. Were gonna hear more about how its different than drone strikes because drone strikes never give any warnings and how these nuclear strikes decades ago were "for the greater good".

Little Katsumi Mouri skipping along playing with her brother on the front steps before they get ready for breakfast in the morning, turning into carbon in a split second from a fireball, is somehow different because she was "warned".

You notice what also went unmentioned also right? How there was far more loss of life in those two instances of nukes being used than drone strikes put together over the years?

The bottom line is neither of these uses should be defended in any way.
fukk out of here.

Please read the bold. No one in here is justifying it.

I have nothing against drones being used properly. We are using them illegally, in sovereign countries we have not declared war with. We are using them, and lying about the deaths, especially civilian deaths. We are using them, and killing Americans without due process. We are targeting males between certain ages without real evidence they might actually be the "bad guys".

 

[CASHAPP]

Please read the bold. No one in here is justifying it.

I have nothing against drones being used properly. We are using them illegally, in sovereign countries we have not declared war with. We are using them, and lying about the deaths, especially civilian deaths. We are using them, and killing Americans without due process. We are targeting males between certain ages without real evidence they might actually be the "bad guys".

Your talking about when we murked Bin Laden's son in Abottobad? Yeah i still don't know the hell why we did that.

About drone strikes is there a reason why we cannot just use our advanced technology to make snipings when we locate someone like say Zawahiri? I hate how we have to risk civilians dying just to get a terrorist. What the hell is wrong with us? It pissed me off even more when Obama actually had these in the crowd at his inauguration as a demonstration like it was a magic show or something. Straight disgusting.

Side Note:

The funny thing is we would probably have better Presidents more often if we were able to stay out of war without the need for them to constantly compromise and try to find reasons all the time for doing unconstitutional things.

 

[No1]

Those proxy wars would have probably occurred anyway, since most of them involved internal conflicts. There would have been a massive war in Europe, and unlike WWII, the Soviet had the means to attack the US Mainland.

The casualities worldwide would have been exponentially larger.

In lots of the world the conflict still would have happened you're right. He was also wrong to say it was Truman's fault that the world became to be viewed as it was. First off, Truman did not even know about FDR's agreements, he thought we were practicing what we preached. The stain on Truman is that nuclear bomb, but I find it odd that a guy is being criticized on here for actually believing in all that stuff the US espoused (to some degree) when being pragmatic is routinely criticized on here on principled grounds. Truman is being criticized by liberals in here because he was for free elections instead of stacking the deck so that Poland would have a USSR favored regime win....

But overall the nuclear weapons very well may have spared more lives in the long run.

 

[Type Username Here]

In lots of the world the conflict still would have happened you're right. He was also wrong to say it was Truman's fault that the world became to be viewed as it was. First off, Truman did not even know about FDR's agreements, he thought we were practicing what we preached. The stain on Truman is that nuclear bomb, but I find it odd that a guy is being criticized on here for actually believing in all that stuff the US espoused (to some degree) when being pragmatic is routinely criticized on here on principled grounds. Truman is being criticized by liberals in here because he was for free elections instead of stacking the deck so that Poland would have a USSR favored regime win....

But overall the nuclear weapons very well may have spared more lives in the long run.

We also got to be reminded that Truman essentially saved a war against China because General MacArthur basically went off the grid and Truman had to fire his ass, to Truman's own political detriment. MacArthur was extremely popular.

MacArthur basically said "fukk off, I'm doing what I want". While he was initially successful, he basically advocated invading the Chinese mainland and dropping nuclear weapons if need be.

 

[No1]

We also got to be reminded that Truman essentially saved a war against China because General MacArthur basically went off the grid and Truman had to fire his ass, to Truman's own political detriment. MacArthur was extremely popular.

MacArthur basically said "fukk off, I'm doing what I want". While he was initially successful, he basically advocated invading the Chinese mainland and dropping nuclear weapons if need be.

And he gave a struggling China a rallying point and pushed them closer to the USSR.