BS: One Giant Step for Mankind - or what?

Subject: RE: BS: One Giant Step for Mankind - or what?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Aug 15 - 03:52 AM

"Israel, unlike Hamas does not target civilians"
It has been calculated (by The Washington Institute) that %72 of casualties who have perished in Gaza have been civilians - all of head-colds, no doubt!
Not only, "my weapons are more peaceful than your weapons" but now they are more discriminating.
I note that one of the up-and-coming industries in Israel is the manufacture and sale of drones.
Condemning the use of weapons is not Antisemitic, but associating the use of those weapons with the Jewish people is, Bruce.
"don't forget to take into consideration who started the conflict in the first place"
"He hit me first sir", you mean?
One giant step back into the schoolyard, it would appear, Don.
"I think that if tribe A was living in its own valley and tribe"
If it was ordinary members of the tribe who started wars, you might have a point - they are the ones exclusively conscripted to go off and kill each other - often under the threat of being clubbed to death by them in charge.
We are all warriors - my arse!!
I've never felt like killing anybody in my life (not even a couple of Mudcatters I could name) and I've never been in the company anybody who has.
Mass killing on this planet is a manipulated exercise, invariably for profit and power (two sides of the same coin).
Interesting to read over the last few days that on several occasions, the Japanese leaders have been booed down at Hiroshima/Nagasaki commemoration ceremonies for having renaged on promises to disassociate Japan from militarism.   
And the beat goes on - it would seem.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: One Giant Step for Mankind - or what?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Aug 15 - 05:20 AM

Good stuff again, Jim. And you have more patience than I have with the irritating and cowardly Guest troll. One fine day the owners of this site will see the light and make everyone have a unique moniker.

Subject: RE: BS: One Giant Step for Mankind - or what?
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Aug 15 - 05:44 AM

GUEST,Derrick - 12 Aug 15 - 12:24 PM

The top estimated number of fatalities was in the region of 1 million US dead plus somewhere between 5 to 10 million Japanese dead. Those were the figures worked out at the time and given to the US Secretary of War. It was on studies and information such as this made at the time by those involved that the decision to use the atomic bombs available in August. So Guest Derrick I am not guessing, merely using the documented and well recorded information available on the matter.

Subject: RE: BS: One Giant Step for Mankind - or what?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Aug 15 - 05:52 AM

Stop shifting the goalposts. You ARE guessing when you come up with your what-if casualty numbers had the bombs not been used, or used in a threatening rather than a destructive manner. Historical fact is one thing. Unsupportable conjecture is entirely another.

Subject: RE: BS: One Giant Step for Mankind - or what?
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Aug 15 - 06:02 AM

"I've just got back from a few days of watching films in Dublin - the first of those was a remarkable documentary on a West Cork doctor, Aiden McCarthy, who became a medical officer in the British army during the war.
Having served at Dunkirk and having earned the George Cross for saving lives, he volunteered to serve in Asia, was captured by the Japanese at Singapore and was a prisoner for four years as a P.O.W.
He ended up being shipped to Nagasaki, where he and some of his fellow prisoners narrowly escaped death when the bomb was dropped.
Despite his appalling experiences at the hands of the Japanese, and in spite of the fact that their captors had decided to execute them all, McCarthy and others survived the blast - thanks largely to the mass grave they had been forced to dig for themselves.
He found himself the senior officer in the camp and the camp commandant presented him with his military sword as a gesture of gratitude for having saved the lives of the surviving troops at the camp when the newly-released Australians attempted to tear them apart.
That, to me, seems a breathtaking example of humanity that is sadly lacking in discussions of war and "our enemies".
Jim Carroll"

So Jim are you telling us that had the bomb not been dropped that Camp Commandant could very well have used that self same sword to chop the good Doctor's head off as ordered?

Subject: RE: BS: One Giant Step for Mankind - or what?
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Aug 15 - 06:19 AM

No guessing on my part Steve - "study done for Secretary of War Henry Stimson's staff by William Shockley" - Source: page 340 of the book written in 1999 by Richard B. Frank, entitled "Downfall": The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire. New York: Random House. ISBN 978-0-679-41424-7.

The report and the study carried out for Stimson by William Shockley is a historical fact Steve, whether you like it or not.

However as an exercise in logic you have two vastly different types of bomb and both are prototypes never been used in anger. Care to explain how they could have been used in a threatening non-destructive way? Once you have dropped them, if they detonate, what are you going to do then?

Subject: RE: BS: One Giant Step for Mankind - or what?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Aug 15 - 06:19 AM

"So Jim are you telling us that had the bomb not been dropped that Camp Commandant could very well have used that self same sword to chop the good Doctor's head off as ordered?"
Did I say that - don't think I did, in fact, I made a point of describing the treatment meted out by the Japanese military - keep up.
I was pointing out that despite the treatment received at the hands of the Japanese, McCarthy's humanity rose above it and he managed to remain a human being - unlike some here who have never experienced what he did.
"Wing Commander T.D. Weldon, a tutor in Moral Philosophy at Magdalen College Oxford [lecturing on "The Ethics of Bombing"]:"
Do you really draw on the opinions of militarists for your moral philosophy - unbelievable, but it does explain a lot!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: One Giant Step for Mankind - or what?
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Aug 15 - 06:26 AM

Sorry Jim but I thought you wrote that the Japanese had already decided to execute the prisoners, that the thing that saved them was the fact that they were protected from the blast of the bomb due to the fact that they were in the act of digging their own mass grave. I would therefore think it not only likely but highly probable that had the bomb not been dropped those POWs would have been executed as ordered - don't you? - or did you think that the Camp Commandant was only kidding when he ordered the prisoners to dig their own grave?

Subject: RE: BS: One Giant Step for Mankind - or what?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Aug 15 - 06:39 AM

"Sorry Jim but I thought you wrote that the Japanese had already decided to execute the prisoners,"
I did - what's your point?
Whatever the Japanese military men were McCarthy remained a compassionate human being.
Any issue I have is with militarism and bestiality in any shape or form, not with any particular race, creed or colour off such.
You appear to have a blind-spot where compassion and humanity are concerned.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: One Giant Step for Mankind - or what?
From: GUEST,4 Aug 15 - 02:56 AM
Date: 14 Aug 15 - 06:41 AM

Playing the 'I am posting under my own name' card and calling anonymous GUESTs who disagree over matters of fact 'cowardly trolls' comes over as pompus.

Subject: RE: BS: One Giant Step for Mankind - or what?
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Aug 15 - 06:45 AM

"Wing Commander T.D. Weldon, a tutor in Moral Philosophy at Magdalen College Oxford"

Oh by the way Jim I think Harry Weldon was a Lecturer at Magdalen College Oxford long before he joined up to serve in the RAF.

Born - 5th December 1896

Won a scholarship to read literae humaniores at Magdalen College, Oxford, which he postponed to become an officer in the Royal Field Artillery in 1915.

He spent World War I in France and Belgium, rising to acting captain, being wounded and winning the Military Cross and bar.

Finally went to Oxford in 1919 and graduated with a first class degree in 1921.

Elected a fellow and philosophy tutor at his college in 1923

Served as Rhodes travelling fellow in 1930.

Became a temporary civil servant in 1939.

Then joined the RAF in 1942 serving as Personal Staff Officer to Arthur Harris in RAF Bomber Command at High Wycombe from 1942 to 1945.

He died from cerebral hemorrhage in 1958.

So Jim out of his 62 years on this earth he spent a total of 6 years
serving in the armed forces in time of war and 33 years as an academic - So not much of a militarist after all then eh?

Subject: RE: BS: One Giant Step for Mankind - or what?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Aug 15 - 07:30 AM

"Oh by the way Jim I think Harry Weldon was a Lecturer at Magdalen College Oxford long before he joined up to serve in the RAF."
Obviously had military inclinations then
Doesn't make that much difference, does it - some people might be miltaristically inclined (this feller seems to prefer to be identified as such - "Wing Commander T.D. Weldon,") - most human beings aren't.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: One Giant Step for Mankind - or what?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Aug 15 - 07:36 AM

Playing the 'I am posting under my own name' card and calling anonymous GUESTs who disagree over matters of fact 'cowardly trolls' comes over as pompus.

You must be new here to have only just recognized the pomposity emanating from this poster and his fellow travellers.

Subject: RE: BS: One Giant Step for Mankind - or what?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Aug 15 - 07:45 AM

" who disagree over matters of fact "
No fact - just opinion -and many "guests", notebly yourself, scurry back under their bridge when challenged
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: One Giant Step for Mankind - or what?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Aug 15 - 08:07 AM

Why on earth must people opt for slinging accusations from the shadows rather than actually confronting things they don't agree with?
'Guest" seems to have taken the place of the tried and trusted "anon" in these non-arguments.
Jim Carroll