WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca to World News@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agoIsrael strikes Iran, no US involvement, US officials saywww.reuters.comexternal-linkmessage-square133linkfedilinkarrow-up1284arrow-down19
arrow-up1275arrow-down1external-linkIsrael strikes Iran, no US involvement, US officials saywww.reuters.comWizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca to World News@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square133linkfedilink
minus-squareWizardofFrobozz@lemmy.caOPlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9arrow-down21·1 year agoHiroshima and Nagasaki were not a bad call. As for your second point- in this situation is it acceptable or justified? Fuck no. Is it tactically the correct move, given what these pieces of shit are trying to accomplish? Yes.
minus-squareCruxifux@feddit.nllinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up20arrow-down2·1 year agoJapan was already ready to surrender. This is unclassified now. So how was it not a bad call exactly? Assuming we both agree on my first assertion.
minus-squareShoeThrower@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up16arrow-down3·1 year agoSo, in your view, intentionally killing civilians is OK if they’re Japanese, but not if they’re Palestinian. Fascinating.
minus-squaresupersquirrel@sopuli.xyzlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·1 year agoYes they were ESPECIALLY Nagasaki A second one was not needed, that is easy to prove and I remain unconvinced the first bomb dropped was necessary either.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not a bad call.
As for your second point- in this situation is it acceptable or justified? Fuck no. Is it tactically the correct move, given what these pieces of shit are trying to accomplish? Yes.
Japan was already ready to surrender. This is unclassified now. So how was it not a bad call exactly? Assuming we both agree on my first assertion.
So, in your view, intentionally killing civilians is OK if they’re Japanese, but not if they’re Palestinian.
Fascinating.
Yes they were ESPECIALLY Nagasaki
A second one was not needed, that is easy to prove and I remain unconvinced the first bomb dropped was necessary either.