@WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca to World News@lemmy.worldEnglish • 3 days agoIsrael strikes Iran, no US involvement, US officials saywww.reuters.commessage-square133arrow-up1283
arrow-up1283external-linkIsrael strikes Iran, no US involvement, US officials saywww.reuters.com@WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca to World News@lemmy.worldEnglish • 3 days agomessage-square133
minus-square@WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.caOPlinkfedilinkEnglish9•edit-23 days 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-square@supersquirrel@sopuli.xyzlinkfedilinkEnglish2•2 days 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.
minus-squareCruxifuxlinkfedilinkEnglish19•3 days 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-square@ShoeThrower@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkEnglish15•3 days agoSo, in your view, intentionally killing civilians is OK if they’re Japanese, but not if they’re Palestinian. Fascinating.
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.
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.
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.