• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Nuclear Weapons- Who should have them and why?

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
Pearl Harbor was a military base and it was pretty much just sailors killed. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both civilian cities, and it was mostly civilians killed by those bombs.

A military base full of spouses and their children, not to mention non-military support staff-- in fact, more non-military than military.

But I see you conveniently ignored that, and my point about Japan invading many civilian targets? All throughout the South Pacific, Japan invaded and slaughtered civilians.

War is ugly. Nobody is innocent.
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
You'd be arrested and thrown into federal prison for a very long time, if not the rest of your life, in America. I'm sure the laws are much the same in the rest of the world.

You did not read what I actually wrote... did you? Not even one word....

And yet you feel it needful to make off-topic commentary?
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
The elimination of nuclear weapons is impossible. Unicorns that drop skittles are more realistic.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
"innocent"? That's a matter of opinion. Were the civilians in Pearl Harbor innocent? How about the many villages in mainland China that were raided, and slaughtered?

No. You justitying the killing of an innocent based on a killing of another innocent. You killed a few of my people so I kill hundreds of thousands of your people.

This is one of the dirtiest ways to think.

).
 
Last edited:

exchemist

Veteran Member
They derived out of the same research and inflict similar damage - radiation .
That's not true. Depleted uranium is even used a a screen against radiation. DU is used for its high density: you can make a projectile that takes a lot of stopping, you can make armour plating, counterweights for aircraft, etc. It still has some radioactivity, true enough, but this is not the purpose of it. The health problems associated with its military use come mainly from its chemical toxicity, not radioactivity.
 
Last edited:

Wandering Monk

Well-Known Member
You kill my innocent, I kill hundreds of thousands of your innocent. That was your view. Great.

On February 26, 1945, the National Resistance Program made Japanese men 15 to 60 and women 17 to 40 subject to training for a projected final defense of the homeland if it was invaded.

Innocent?

Would it have been better to kill them with conventional weapons? The major reason the bomb was to avoid invading the home islands of Japan resulting in the loss of hundreds of thousands of Allied lives.
 

JJ50

Well-Known Member
The nuclear weapons used on Japan are still causing problems for generations who weren't even born during WW2, due to the toxic affect of radiation.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
On February 26, 1945, the National Resistance Program made Japanese men 15 to 60 and women 17 to 40 subject to training for a projected final defense of the homeland if it was invaded.

Innocent?

Would it have been better to kill them with conventional weapons? The major reason the bomb was to avoid invading the home islands of Japan resulting in the loss of hundreds of thousands of Allied lives.

Hmm. Thus you justified killing innocent people. Good work.

Even actions of states have become religion these days.
 

Wandering Monk

Well-Known Member

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
You kill my innocent, I kill hundreds of thousands of your innocent. That was your view. Great.

<eyeroll>

That was my observation. If you punch a grizzly bear? Be prepared to get mauled.

The Japanese punched a grizzly bear-- in a most cowardly way. And the Japanese people? Supported the government that did that, too.

There were no innocents involved.
 

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
A military base full of spouses and their children, not to mention non-military support staff-- in fact, more non-military than military.

But I see you conveniently ignored that, and my point about Japan invading many civilian targets? All throughout the South Pacific, Japan invaded and slaughtered civilians.

War is ugly. Nobody is innocent.
It was still a legitimate military target. A base is different from a city, obviously.

I'm able to condemn both, you know. I condemn the atrocities of both the Allies and the Axis Powers.
 
Top