Nuclear Weapon Ban?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by KenH, Jul 11, 2005.

  1. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey ya'll, with the 60th anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima coming up in a few weeks, I noticed the letter to the editor below in today's Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. My reply that I emailed in(maybe it will be published) tonight is below it. Since it concerns current U.S. nuclear policy, does anyone have any thoughts on this subject? Do you agree with Ms. West or yours truly?

    Ban nuclear weapons

    The 60th anniversary of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings is an appropriate time to discuss where the United States stands on nuclear weapons today.

    On Aug. 6 and 9, 1945, the United States obliterated over 200,000 civilian men, women and children. The U.S. is the only country that has used a nuclear weapon against a civilian population.

    Why did the United States do such an abhorrent thing? Many Americans have the belief that it was necessary to end the war. Years of books, articles, films and discussions, all based on historical documents, that say it was not only totally unnecessary, but done to impress the world with U.S. power and give the United States the top leadership role have not changed this popular belief.

    Whatever the motivations, a small group of men, in secret, made a decision that changed the world forever and then lied about and distorted the human consequences of their actions.

    Our politicians and military leaders still think of nuclear weapons as essential to American security. Threat of mass murder as a deterrent should not be on the table today. Nuclear weapons should be beyond the moral pale. We the people need to speak up and demand that nuclear weapons be illegitimate throughout the world. That includes the United States.

    Katherine West
    Little Rock


    Re: Katherine West's letter on banning nuclear weapons.

    The dropping of the two atomic bombs on Japan made an invasion of the Japanese home islands unnecessary. It is estimated that such an invasion would have cost one million U.S. casualties and many times that in Japanese casualties. Therefore, as horrible as the loss of life was in the two atomic blasts it was much less than what would have occurred in an invasion.

    As far as banning all nuclear weapons is concerned, that cannot be done as that genie cannot be put back into the bottle. For example, apparently North Korea has nuclear weapons and Iran has an ongoing nuclear program. It would be foolhardy, if not suicidal, for the United States to get rid of its nuclear weapons when nations that are, to say the least, unfriendly towards us are working to obtain them and are unlikely to have the same idealism on the subject as those who want to see all nuclear weapons banned.

    Even if nuclear weapons could somehow be banned worldwide, the technology would continue to be available to build them and it would be unwise to trust our security to the hope that a rogue nation would not develop nuclear weapons and attempt to achieve regional, if not worldwide, military hegemony.

    The United States should keep its nuclear arsenal and we should hope and pray that it never needs to be used again.

    Ken Hamilton
    El Dorado
     
  2. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,415
    Likes Received:
    72
    It would be insane to eliminate our nuclear deterrent. It is the one thing that absolutely guarantees that America will never be conquered.

    I also think the U.S. should maintain an considerable amount of low-yield nuclear weapons or tactical nuclear weapons for battlefield use.
     
  3. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,415
    Likes Received:
    72
    Also, I would live in mortal fear if someone with the opinion of Ms. West were ever president.
     
  4. prophecynut

    prophecynut
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,263
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Japanese offered unconditional surrender before they drop the two atomic bombs, resulting in millions of unnecessary deaths.

    Rev. 18:24
    "in her was found the blood .... of all who have been killed on the earth."
     
  5. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    here are the facts:

    http://www.factmonster.com/spot/hiroshima1.html
     
  6. Joseph_Botwinick

    Joseph_Botwinick
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    17,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    LE,

    There is no way that could be true. It didn't come from a source that pushes crazy conspiracy theories... [​IMG]

    Joseph Botwinick
     
  7. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Remember Pearl Harbor:

    PERSONNEL KILLED
    Navy 2001
    Marine Corps 109
    Army 231
    Civilian 54


    PERSONNEL WOUNDED
    Navy 710
    Marine Corps 69
    Army 364
    Civilian 35


    SHIPS
    Sunk or beached 12
    Damaged 9


    AIRCRAFT
    Destroyed 164
    Damaged 159


    http://my.execpc.com/~dschaaf/overview.html
     
  8. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    I never cared much for Truman but thank God he had the guts to use the atomic bomb against Japan. There is no doubt that the Japanese populace would have fought to the death against an invader.

    I hope we would do the same if we were ever invaded.
     
  9. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Katherine West is just regurgitating the liberal/left line that has been around for the last half century.
     
  10. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Besides all of that, my parents who lived during WW2 and my dad, who was in the Army in WW2, said pamphlets were dropped to civilians warning them of the attacks to come and for them to leave. No one ever discusses that fact, though - it doesn't fit in with revisionist history.
     
  11. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    I note that SIXTY YEARS after the victory
    over Japan, the USofA still has it's
    military people in Japan. This is the
    sure and true sign of victory.

    Victory in Iraq!
    Victory in Afganastan!
     
  12. JamesBell

    JamesBell
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2005
    Messages:
    226
    Likes Received:
    0
    Perhaps the author of the original letter has somehow managed to miss the films of those civilians training to repel the attacking US forces should America attack the Japanese homeland; but I assume she knows full well that most citizens in Japan would have been fighting just as any military unit would have. That is beside the point. Let’s think about whether the nuclear bombs, killing 200,000 as she claimed, were better or worse for the people of Japan.

    The closest thing to an invasion of the Japanese homeland would be the assault on Okinawa. While this island doesn’t hold the same significance to Japanese people as the actual islands of Japan do, it was still well defended. Much more so than the other islands in the “island hopping” campaign through the Pacific. The attack on Okinawa had a huge cost. There were 12,281 American deaths and about 110,000 Japanese deaths. Think about that, the bloody conventional warfare of Okinawa killed more than half as many as were killed in two nuclear blasts. Let’s forget about the 500,000 minimum American casualties we would have seen with an invasion of Japan—how many Japanese deaths would there have been? It could have been well into the millions. Clearly there would have been many more than the 200,000 that were killed through the use of nuclear weapons.

    It is hard for the left to admit, but using the bomb saved lives on both sides. It is the thing they see as the biggest disgrace to the Democrats, yet it was one of the best decisions a Democratic president ever made.
     
  13. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Good post James!
     
  14. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    You're spreading lies, exaggerations, and distortions again, prophecynut. These kinds of things discredit America to its core.

    The two atomic bombs, while terrible as are all weapons of war, were probably far less destructive to Japan than a prolonged conventional war would have been. They certainly brought about a quick surrender and saved our nation extensive causalities that would have been very likely from a large scale D-Day style invasion. The burden for Japan's suffering rests upon its citizens who supported their leaders in their aggression upon neighboring nations and, ultimately, even America. We need to put that responsibility squarely where it belongs and stop "blaming" ourselves for the consequences our enemies received.

    The verse should not be taken out of context and used to imply guilt unto America for defeating its enemies in World War II and liberating those whom they oppressed.

    Read the entire chapter 18 of Revelations with an understanding that "Babylon" probably refers to the whole "so-called Christian civilization in its social and commercial aspects", as explained in King James Bible Commentary, as a "city" contrary to "New Jerusalem".

    In God's eyes, by His perfect standards, I'm certain America is full of sinful people and, thereby, a sinful nation by God's judgment. Thus we, as people, may well be part of "Babylon".

    On the other hand, God has richly blessed our nation for several hundred years and America, among nations of men, has stood tall as one that has, generally, honored, respected, and obeyed God from its very foundation. The American flag will not fly in Heaven but here on earth it represents liberty and justice for all. We would do well to stay to the path God has laid out for us and to accept the duty to uphold and encourage among others that with which we've been blessed. Among men that may often mean taking up the sword in defense of that which we've fought to attain. The use of that sword is a duty ordained by God for civil government and there is no sin in it.
     
  15. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Excellent and very credible comments in every aspect, JamesBell! We need to put all things into proper persepctive.
     

Share This Page

Loading...