BF2S Forums Looking for Rush, Haninty counter Radio from the Left - Any Ideas ?

Kmar wrote:

Well, to be fair.. Hiroshima/Nagaski were both strategic targets. In neither instance the militaries did not explicitly targeted civies.. like the Japanese did during the rape of nanking.

Further, Japan was by then a nation of 'small cottage industries, disbursed throughout cities ' each producing farmed out contracts. There was no' Big GM plant' left to bomb.

By comparison the A bomb didn't kill as many as previous conventional raids had. They really just needed to surrender. The Allies didn't need to waste more life to hammer home what was by then a forgone conclusion. Hind sight is 20/20 I guess.

To prove it we should go back and look at all the old threads about "Juba the Sniper" owning "U.S. Troops who are afraid to leave the Green Zone."- " Hockey Stick Graphs. " etc. I think this would be a better forum if their was more accountability. Don't you agree ?

Jaekus wrote:

How did a thread about a dude on radio turn into a thread about Islam?

Oh, wait...

For the Record I was looking for : > Radio that ran counter in opinion to " a dude on radio " <

Narrow minded conservative that I am, I always try and investigate both sides of any issue thoroughly. I even have two koran translations and a " How to understand the Teachings " Book. I'm sure the Texas Long Horn Steers that follow me around Stomping and Bellowing are as steeped in counter culture.

Last edited by Hunter/Jumper (2011-01-30 14:34:06)

AussieReaper wrote:

Kmar wrote:

Well, to be fair.. Hiroshima/Nagaski were both strategic targets. In neither instance the militaries did not explicitly targeted civies.. like the Japanese did during the rape of nanking.

Well, to be fair.. a US Naval Base was a strategic target.

The death toll on Hiroshima alone is something like 90,000–140,000. You're kidding yourself if you consider those to all be non-civilians / or even not targeted as such.

If you read the Potsdam Declaration-

"We call upon the government of Japan to proclaim now the unconditional surrender of all Japanese armed forces, and to provide proper and adequate assurances of their good faith in such action. The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction."

The two bombs were dropped on civilians to push forward that point. To instill fear. Utter destruction, as evidenced by what happened on Hiroshima and Nagaski.

Good thing to note, that those were the ONLY times weapons like those were used. They haven't been used because of the complete and utter destruction they cause.

AussieReaper wrote:

UnkleRukus wrote:

Good thing to note, that those were the ONLY times weapons like those were used. They haven't been used because of the complete and utter destruction they cause.

Hope that's sarcasm mate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXxPRHkyAvY

I should've specified, I meant used in anger.

"Tactical nuclear weapons" - an oxymoron if ever there was one

Yes, because a nuclear weapon is almost by definition a strategic weapon. They're not like your ordinary bomb, artillery shell or mine.

It'll be small, but I have serious questions over whether it would actually be seen as such by all the watching eyes in the world. A nuclear weapon is a nuclear weapon, either way.

Not least because of the radiological effects.

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

actually I was not. The Islamic golden age was offered up as proof for how great Islam is.

OK, and what have you done to counter that argument? Not a lot from what I see.

If arguing that Islam was more restrictive to progress than Christianity through that era, the points about women and gays are not relevant.

So, how do you justify the "especially Islam" point below?

Well I offered the argument that Islam's period of discovery was mainly due to conquering and by non-muslims. Sorry if that argument isn't gpod enough.

But that's simply not true. Lots of conquering did go on then (but I note you ignore the fact the Muslim invaders were often welcomed by those they were invading), but it's not even remotely accurate to claim that was just because the Muslims were running around invading people and stealing their ideas. It was to do with creating an environment where these discoveries could be made.

Religious freedom was promoted, there are a list of Muslim polymaths as long as your arm who were discovering all sorts, the Muslims came up with environmentalism back then, made huge advances in agriculture and economics - the list goes on and on.

lowing wrote:

Because I am referring to the here and now, and here and now, literally as we we speak, Islam is not doing much to prove its case with its oppression of women STILL, gays STILL, honor killings, stonings etc...

I wouldn't say Islam, backward horrible countries (and some immigrants from these countries) - many of which have Islam as their main religion.

Really? Do tell of all of these countries that welcomed invasion of Islam and force fed a new religion. Tell me more how Islam has historically welcomed new religions as equals in their Islamic society.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Please point to any religion which has historically uniformly welcomed new religions as equals in their society.

You get bent out of shape about islam, its just the same as all the other major religions.

OT: Maybe the left wing doesn't like to be spoonfed the same tripe over and over? Perhaps thats why they don't have a need for inane mouthpieces.

Ask Berster he is the one that brings it up. Don't ask me.

Because Islam is the problem child in the here and now, not CHristianity 1000 years ago. Already explained that to you.

Well for the left not wanting a mouthpiece they sure seem to try and fail at getting one an awful lot. Truth is, it is really is because they can not hold an argument for their twisted opinions on how the world is supposed to work.

Last edited by lowing (2011-01-31 02:04:49)

Dilbert_X wrote:

I'd say Christianity and Judaism are the problem now since they've provoked the Islamic world in recent times.

Messed with Iran -> Islamic fundamentalism was the reaction

Messed with Afghanistan -> Islamic fundamentalism was the reaction

Messed with Palestine -> Islamic fundamentalism was the reaction

Messed with Lebanon -> Islamic fundamentalism was the reaction

Messed with Iraq -> Islamic fundamentalism is the reaction

Messed with Pakistan -> Islamic fundamentalism is the reaction

Messed with Egypt -> Islamic fundamentalism is the reaction

See where thats headed?.

I believe you have it wrong again. " Christianity and Judaism " didn't " provoke the Islamic world in recent times. " It also takes a bit of licence to use the word " provoke ". We know you mean The U.S.A. and Israel. Everyone is aware of your loyalty.

Leaders, Factions and Radicals use Islamic fundamentalism to provide dissidents, terrorists and any opposers with a command structure. Also Arms Training and Money. I'm sure there are people who use the cause and do not believe. Just as I am sure most of Radical Islams leaders do not have real faith. They use Religion to steer the masses. There were many Vietcong who were not Communist, just Nationalist. On that note I hope you are aware of the Vietcong's fate once The North Vietnamese were in power. Maybe the Rank and File islamist wants to stay in the Stone-age But the Leaders don't. Given a better Rallying point, islam would not be needed, used and subverted.

Dilbert_X wrote:

lowing wrote:

Truth is, it is really is because they can not hold an argument for their twisted opinions on how the world is supposed to work.

You're getting funnier.

Lets just take their treatment of women alone.
Do you not agree that it is viewed as twisted by most of the modern world ? 90 percent of posters here think Religion in itself is twisted. I thought you did too.  Do you not recall the uproar and hatred that was espoused for a Non Accredited  Christan college that discouraged flirting. What happens if a muslim woman flirts ? Twisted View from my prospective.

Last edited by Hunter/Jumper (2011-01-31 04:46:39)

lowing wrote:

I believe you have it wrong again. " Christianity and Judaism " didn't " provoke the Islamic world in recent times. " It also takes a bit of licence to use the word " provoke ". We know you mean The U.S.A. and Israel.

Well its funny, up until the west started provoking them they hadn't really bothered anyone for hundreds of years/

lowing wrote:

Lets just take their treatment of woman alone.

This was wholly unrelated to islam, it was about democrats and their lack of moronic cheerleaders, see your original comment.

Well for the left not wanting a mouthpiece they sure seem to try and fail at getting one an awful lot. Truth is, it is really is because they can not hold an argument for their twisted opinions on how the world is supposed to work.

I believe the Roman Religion Welcomed other Gods. Not sure if it is true. I was taught by evil Christians that although we use different names in different cultures the God is the same for all. So if we didn't welcome other religions we didn't even reject them. They didn't teach us to rip a woman's finger nails out if she painted them.

Hunter/Jumper wrote:

I believe the Roman Religion Welcomed other Gods.

Not exactly, they had followers of other religions ripped to pieces for sport.

Anyway, you're reaching a bit going back to Roman times.

Dilbert_X wrote:

lowing wrote:

I believe you have it wrong again. " Christianity and Judaism " didn't " provoke the Islamic world in recent times. " It also takes a bit of licence to use the word " provoke ". We know you mean The U.S.A. and Israel.

Well its funny, up until the west started provoking them they hadn't really bothered anyone for hundreds of years.

lol  So you backed off Christianity, OK I give you "provoke". Just when did they become provoked ? I know Feeding the Starving Somalians pissed them off, But why ?

Dilbert_X wrote:

This was wholly unrelated to islam, it was about democrats and their lack of moronic cheerleaders, see your original comment.

Lowing wrote:

Well for the left not wanting a mouthpiece they sure seem to try and fail at getting one an awful lot. Truth is, it is really is because they can not hold an argument for their twisted opinions on how the world is supposed to work.

OK -I see Sorry about that. Sorry Lowing also !