Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Bart, are you really
defending the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
didn't know those bombings needed to be defended.
You seem to be saying the world is united in their condemnation of
I don't think that's true.
Is mass civilian murder acceptable
means for winning wars?
me ask you a question: How many of YOUR sons
would you be willing to sacrifice to save those civilians?
Would you personally sacrifice YOUR life to save some civilians who
had the bad luck to live in a country that sneak-attacked a sleeping
to Wikipedia, 250,000 people died
that August from our bombs.
Let's say another 250,000 died from radiation afterwards.
should America sacrifice one million soldiers (they say) to save
generally don't have strong feelings about events that happened before
I was born.
In those cases, I have to depend 100% on someone else's account of what
When a subject like this comes
up, I get letters from every color in the spectrum saying,
"Everybody knows the
real truth about
this" but who am I supposed to believe?
don't know idea what happened on 9-11
how sure can you be about
your 1945 facts?
murder is never a good thing, but bad things happen in World Wars.
Americans like to pretend they had no other option to end the war,
but that is a BS notion in an attempt to clear the collective
You say that as if every
reasonable person in the world agrees with you.
What are those other options?
Choke Japan off from the rest
of the world and let them starve to death?
Their leaders wanted to try the bomb the entire world had been racing
to develop, and anyone thinking in such cynical terms are sociopaths.
I might call them "survivors."
You're saying racing to develope the bomb was a bad thing?
That'd mean you're OK with Hitler getting it first.
Are you sure you want to own
I see you have gotten a lot of e-mails
claiming you are blood thirsty lately.
You dealt with those ok, but it's hard to really prove them wrong when
you defend this historical atrocity.
You have yet to
define "this historical atrocity."
These bombs ended a world war - are you saying that's a bad thing
ending the war?
I think it's pretty easy to sit in comfort at home in 2011 and say, "Why didn't they do
Whoever you're getting your
WWII facts from, why do you think you
can trust them?
On the other hand, if you're
90-years old and you know for a fact, personally, that Truman
had other options at the time that only a sociopath would ignore, then
you may be onto something.
I think I already know the
answer, but I'll ask anyway:
Should America allow itself to be taken over (or wiped out) to avoid
I never said war was pretty.
I never said war was fun.
I'm guessing YOU have never had your life threatened by another nation.
So many Liberals have this "violence is always
wrong" attitude and that floors me.
If your choices were "death" or "violence" would you choose to
live? I would.
I own guns but I don't own them for the fun of killing innocents.
If a masked buglar breaks into
home at night,
are you going to turn the lights on and try to reason with him?
If you ask 100 liberals that question, 99 will say, "Well, how often
does that happen?"
Well gee, how often does Japan bomb Pearl Harbor?
If a masked man breaks into my home, I'm going to go all "blood
thirsty" on his ass
and live to see another sunrise. That might make me a
sociopath but I'll still have
my life and my wife - and a clear conscience.
I guess, in your view, that
might make me a "cowboy" just like Cheney.
I guess I'll just have to "live" with that.
But seriously, when it comes to defending your family or country,
do you fight or do you surrender?
Thanks for keeping it civil.
e-mail to Bart
Back to Bartcop.com