Bigboldworld wrote: » No it wouldn’t be, by doing so he’s declaring war on the people of Iran and on their history, if his goal is to start a conflict that will ignite a war on many fronts including in the us homeland and that will last for years after trump is long gone then yes very astute, really great outcome there. They’ve been bogged down in so many conflicts in the middle east which they have not won despite their military might, they simply cannot win with brute force on this one, there are no winners here on either side if it escalates to that.
BonnieSituation wrote: » Having been to Hiroshima you're on the money right there. It was one of the most sickening and callous decisions ever made. To then do it again 3 days later in Nagasaki shows that the USA really doesn't care about anyone once they seem to get what they want.
listermint wrote: » The absolute state of some posters on here expressing glee about the thoughts of nuclear war and about he US being the big lad in the room . Where other counties messing with the bully in the room will soon find out. Will you take a look at yourselves.
fash wrote: » Once the decision was made to drop a nuclear bomb, it made a lot of sense to drop a second. Japanese scientists had guessed that there was a slight possibility that the US could build 1 bomb- but believed it would be impossible to build 2 or more. A 2nd bomb was "needed" to show them the Japanese that their assumptions were wrong . Whether nuclear bombing was needed at all is a separate question/debate.
drunkmonkey wrote: » It's comical reading this thread I've never seen so many people so bitter against one man for winning, not one dem can let it go, seriously your Queen Hillary would have cut the defence budget. What planet are you on. The Don is trying to avoid making the same mistake as Hillary I thought that much was blindingly obvious to even the biggest orangeman haters. The Trump derangement syndrome in this thread is off the charts.
duploelabs wrote: » So assassinating a foreign leader with the justification that a strike was imminent, where the evidence underpinning that imminent strike is sketchy to say the lease is now seen as 'avoiding mistakes'? That kool aid must be super refreshing this morninghttps://twitter.com/rcallimachi/status/1213421769777909761
woohoo!!! wrote: » From a military tactic view point, dropping those bombs on Japan made sense. Morally disgusting. And they had already fire bombed cities, with 100,000 killed in Tokyo on one occasion. They also hated the Japenese, with a passion. The Japanese pattern was fight to the last man, and never surrender. The US estimated to take Japan would result in half a million US troops killed, and up to 6 million Japanese deaths. So they picked the bombs. And they would do the same today. Morals have never got in the way of any US president to use their military for dubious reasons.
woohoo!!! wrote: » The US estimated to take Japan would result in half a million US troops killed, and up to 6 million Japanese deaths. So they picked the bombs. And they would do the same today. Morals have never got in the way of any US president to use their military for dubious reasons.
rossie1977 wrote: » Probably from same people that would be claiming Hillary Clinton would be bad choice for President because she is a supposed war monger couple years ago. Clinton would have cut money to defense budget most likely.
Letwin_Larry wrote: » i dont believe there are ANY WINNERS when it comes to war. everyone loses. who won WW1? WW2? you could debate these issues all week.
rossie1977 wrote: » Yes, Clinton's military policies would likely have resulted in budget cuts not increases https://www.militarytimes.com/news/2016/10/02/from-troops-to-nukes-this-is-how-trump-and-clinton-would-manage-the-military/ Trump complained that Obama and the Dems had left the US military vastly under-funded., Clinton and Obama are very similar politically. Again you ignore my main point that Trump fans claimed Clinton was a war monger hence why she shouldn't be elected. Now those same people are praising Trump for possibly starting a war even advocating dropping nuclear bombs on sovereign nations. I am pissed the most powerful nation on Earth elected an unstable man-child with no political experience over a highly qualified candidate. I can imagine the world in the depths of nuclear winter and some Trump supporter shouting out 'Its Hillary' s fault'
StringerBell wrote: » The Japanese were ready to surrender, they had disagreement in that they wanted to keep their emperor and the US would not agree. The emperor being what he is for the Japanese that was prolonging the war. Rather than give way the Americans were eager to show off their new weapon, to show Stalin what they had as much as anything else. It was reprehensible and repugnant and still is. Stains have been on the American empire for a long time at this stage.
Jimmy Garlic wrote: » That the excuse. Japan wasn't far off surrender in any case. Japanese diplomats were in the process of arranging a surrender and the US knew that. The US wanted live targets to test their new weapons on, they wanted to study the effects on real cities full of real people. War crimes.
Iraq votes to expel foreign troops At an emergency parliamentary session, Iraqi politicians have voted in favour of a resolution telling the government to end the presence of foreign troops in Iraq, and ensure they not use its land, air, and waters for any reason. "The government commits to revoke its request for assistance from the international coalition fighting Islamic State due to the end of military operations in Iraq and the achievement of victory," the resolution read. "The Iraqi government must work to end the presence of any foreign troops on Iraqi soil and prohibit them from using its land, airspace or water for any reason." Parliament resolutions, unlike laws, are non-binding to the government, but Iraqi prime minister Adel Abdul Mahdi had earlier called on parliament to end foreign troop presence.
Nody wrote: » Remember those 3k new troops to Iraq? Well they can turn around, thumbs up Trump well done! Which of course will also help ISIS to rebuild further; so great work by Trump. Not only does he get the troops kicked out but he helps ISIS to rebuild further while burning further bridges in ME and ensuring a new generation will continue to hate the USA. Best negotiator eva!
Letwin_Larry wrote: » for posters who think that the Japanese were some highly-cultured peace-loving reclusive nation, they really need to educate themselves. they were a highly belligerent menace long before WW2 started, and like the Nazis considered many of their neighbours to be racially inferior, and therefore worthy of extermination. i have little sympathy for the Japan of the 1930s & 1940s. sadly it took 2 atomic weapons to halt their aggression. the Americans made a calculated decision, to end the war quickly. it was hardly a flippant or easy decision, as some people like to portray it. but it was the correct decision imo.
antiskeptic wrote: » Trump is a clown. But that doesn't make him worse than his death-wielding predecessors.
Letwin_Larry wrote: » i would suggest hitting cultural targets would be militarily very astute, a bit like kicking the local yobbo in the goolies. this tactic of war has been employed throughout the ages.
Gbear wrote: » It absolutley does. His direct predecssor orchestrated a deal precisely to avoid this kind of situation and Trump blew it up because 1) He had to destroy anything with Obama's name on it due to a childish need to outdo him, 2) to fulfill the bloodlust of the kind of hideous, racist and sociopathic American Imperialism Cultists like John Bolton, and 3) Not having the strength or inclination to ignore Israel's demands on the issue. Obama would've gone down as a middling president all told, with a tenure marred by a rise in cultish partisanship by the Republicans disrupting much of the serious and unambiguous domestic policy wins, but the Iran deal would very much have been one of the most important pieces of foreign policy anywhere in the world in the last 30 years.
hotmail.com wrote: » You've ignored the rest of the post. The bit about the general problem of US foreign policy. Those in the Middle East don't care whether the president is Rep or Dem, all they know is that American foreign policy has had a negative influence on their lives.
Letwin_Larry wrote: » make no mistake Trump has played a blinder here. The Iranians do not possess the capability to strike America. all that will happen is a strongly worded letter to the UN. They cant even emerge from their bunkers it seems. it was laughable on Sky earlier, the Iranian 2nd in command was geeing up the mourners from his bunker, as he is too frightened to appear in person. if they do somehow through their proxy terrorists manage to strike American interests, the blowback will land directly on Iran.
