Are there times when dropping WMD on cities with civilian populated buildings is justified

[Zippyjuan]

If that bomb is 12' long, does that make that man 10' tall?

That may have been a scale test model. From the photo caption:

Phil Hoover, an engineer at Sandia National Laboratories, shows off a flight test body for a B61-12 nuclear weapon. Sandia engineers have spent the past few years designing, building and testing the top-secret electronic and mechanical innards of the bomb.

Would make sense if it was a 50% scale test model. The article refers to him "standing" next to a 12" missile- in the photo, he is not standing but is crouched so it seems to refer to a different missile.

Here is a B61 being worked on- the missile the B62- 12 is said to be an "upgrade" of.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B61_nuclear_bomb

[idiom]

Are you defending yourself against aggression? Are the people who are for some reason labeled "civilians" responsible for the aggression? Did the "civilians" elect aggressive leaders? Do the "civilians" voluntarily act as informants in support of the aggressive leaders? Do the "civilians" provide financial support to the aggressive leaders? Do they pay taxes? If the answers are "yes", then what makes the "civilians" "innocent"? Would dropping the WMD's deter future aggression?

Sounds like you are justifying 9/11

[Danke]

It's hard to believe that little bomb can be hiroshima x 3

The Mod7 version goes up to 340 kilotons

[Ronin Truth]

"The last move in politics is always to pick up the gun." -- R. Buckminster Fuller

[A Son of Liberty]

Neither Japan nor Germany suffered anything which they were not utterly willing to inflict on others.

There's no such thing as "Japan" nor "Germany", so this ambiguous "they" to which you refer is entirely a figment of your imagination.

You've imagined that the mindless, faceless blob those names refer to actually represent some kind of anthropomorphized, unified will; which of course they do not. The people whom you casually lump together into said blobs actually were indeed individual human beings with individual hopes, dreams, ambitions, fears and sins of their very own. Many of those people were of course guilty of the same error, which is what allowed those individuals to participate in things which normal, healthy, rational human beings would on their own find utterly abhorrent... a fact which you should find troubling for your own moral framework, given - again - that you're guilty of the same error.

Until people shed such irrational views, krauts and nips will rise again to wage war on the kikes and gooks, and the beneficiaries of "American exceptionalism" will feel entitled to wage war on the rest of the planet.

There is no "we", or "them".

[Occam's Banana]

No. The attacking of civilians in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden, etc were some of the worst war crimes in all of human history.

Those 'innocent' civilians armed, supplied, encouraged their aggressive national governments and militaries.

Well, I sure am glad that American civilians would never, ever do such things!

I mean, can you imagine what horrible things might happen if they did?

Oh, wait ...



So I guess those ^^^^^^ "innocent" civilians got exactly what they had coming to them, too - amirite?

[kcchiefs6465]

Those 'innocent' civilians armed, supplied, encouraged their aggressive national governments and militaries.

Neither Japan nor Germany suffered anything which they were not utterly willing to inflict on others.

Kids sign their names on missiles (Israel). Prisoners build components of missiles (USA). Tax slaves, who morally object to the using of their funds to indiscriminately bomb, poison, shoot, maim, abort [etc. etc. etc.] anyone, pay taxes.

But even ignoring all that, how many children died? Babies? (and FWIW, Iraq is poisoned for billions of years, babies in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Colombia [etc. etc. etc.] are seeing the same thing, though perhaps not as ridiculously long as Iraq will be seeing it, i.e. eternity)

Japan would have surrendered regardless. FDR goaded them into attacking Pearl Harbor in the first place.

They talk bad about Axis inflicted fatalities but then side with the Soviet Union.

[enhanced_deficit]

Why is a MOAB not a WMD?

[osan]

Is murdering those who have done you no harm ever justified?

[osan]

Those 'innocent' civilians armed, supplied, encouraged their aggressive national governments and militaries.

All of them?

[paleocon1]

All of them?

Yes

[phill4paul]

Well, I sure am glad that American civilians would never, ever do such things!

I mean, can you imagine what horrible things might happen if they did?

Oh, wait ...



So I guess those ^^^^^^ "innocent" civilians got exactly what they had coming to them, too - amirite?

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Occam's Banana again.

[osan]

Yes

How do you reason? Your statement directly implies infants deserved to me murdered. How about retards? Are they deserving? Senile elderly? People who disagree with what an insane mob has chosen to undertake; a mob who will as soon murder YOU for so much as objecting?

Unless you have something else that's truly killer, I'd say your position is pretty well a train wreck, I am sorry to say.

[Ender]

Quote Originally Posted by paleocon1 View Post
Neither Japan nor Germany suffered anything which they were not utterly willing to inflict on others.

Hate to tell you but the US & the Brits were responsible for WWII.

[osan]

Hate to tell you but the US & the Brits were responsible for WWII.

And the Poles. They were major muck rakers.

[paleocon1]

Hate to tell you but the US & the Brits were responsible for WWII.

Which does not alter that Neither Japan nor Germany suffered anything which they were not utterly willing to inflict on others.

[wizardwatson]

..

[jllundqu]

Dropping two bombs on two civilian cities was a horrible crime against humanity.


Maybe only Hiroshima was justified..... /sarc

[UWDude]

Hate to tell you but the US & the Brits were responsible for WWII.

what B.S.
You can't stop war by re-writing history to make it appear war was avoidable.
War is a necessary function of the human race. It is ingrained in us. it will never go away. (see 2nd amendment).
As long as there are divorces, there will surely be wars.

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

Once there is a clear declaration of war, any and all tactics should be on the table. Clucking about morality in warfare is only done by unserious people who aren't prepared to do what it takes to win.

[wizardwatson]

Once there is a clear declaration of war, any and all tactics should be on the table. Clucking about morality in warfare is only done by unserious people who aren't prepared to do what it takes to win.

If you act like an evil $#@! in war, who will follow you? Just other evil $#@!s.

[AZJoe]

Once there is a clear declaration of war, any and all tactics should be on the table. Clucking about morality in warfare is only done by unserious people who aren't prepared to do what it takes to win.

This validates every terrorist act ever committed. YeeHaw Jihad! 9/11 justified. The next nuke detonated on an American city has just been validated by TPL. Throw all morality, ethics, law, virtue, "American" values out the window. Rape, genocide, torture, beheadings, nuclear annihilation, irradiate a population, burning people alive, poison gas, killing the children - the "beautiful babies," - Its all simply validated tactics of "serious people prepared to do what it takes to win." Its all valid tactics so long as you make a clear declaration of war. Be the terrorist. Suicide bombers - sure. "Any and all tactics" justified. ISIS wants to nuke Tel Aviv - ThePaleoLibertarian says its validated tactics, just make your declaration of war clear. Al Qaeda/ISIS simply declares war on Washington - Ok to blow up the innocents; dirty bombs in the city; poison the water supply; steal children; burn the schools and hospitals with the people inside - its all good so long as you make a clear declaration. Who knew pure evil was so easily justified.

[AZJoe]

Well, I sure am glad that American civilians would never, ever do such things!

I mean, can you imagine what horrible things might happen if they did?

Oh, wait ...



So I guess those ^^^^^^ "innocent" civilians got exactly what they had coming to them, too - amirite?

Obviously 9/11 was simply valid tactics of "serious people doing what it takes to win". If only they had some nukes, then they could really implement some valid tactics on civilians, right?

[jllundqu]

Once there is a clear declaration of war, any and all tactics should be on the table. Clucking about morality in warfare is only done by unserious people who aren't prepared to do what it takes to win.

Have you been in combat?

It absolutely matters HOW you win, not just IF you win. Neocons like Cheney are famous for quoting things (paraphrasing) like "principles only matter if you win" and he's right, to an extent. For WW2, we can jabber on about what WE would have done, but we weren't there. There were things done to 'win' other than the shock and awe of the A-bomb that were unconscionable (Fire bombing of Tokyo, Dresden Raids, etc). Targeting civilian populations as a means to an end is criminal of the highest order. Legitimate targets and war tactics, as you say, ARE on the table. Women and children are not. Only tyrants and murderous kings have brought down the sword on the innocent.

[Occam's Banana]

Obviously 9/11 was simply valid tactics of "serious people doing what it takes to win". If only they had some nukes, then they could really implement some valid tactics on civilians, right?

Well, they would have to issue a clear declaration or war fatwa calling for jihad first. Otherwise, they'd just be criminals.

I mean, there's gotta be some kinda rules, after all. (We just don't want to get carried away and be unserious cluckers about it ...)

[r3volution 3.0]

Once there is a clear declaration of war, any and all tactics should be on the table.

Ethics should not be discarded with the outbreak of war, but they almost inevitably will be.

[Ender]

Which does not alter that Neither Japan nor Germany suffered anything which they were not utterly willing to inflict on others.

And the US is different? Don't remember Japan or Germany dropping nukes on cities.

[Ender]

what B.S.
You can't stop war by re-writing history to make it appear war was avoidable.
War is a necessary function of the human race. It is ingrained in us. it will never go away. (see 2nd amendment).
As long as there are divorces, there will surely be wars.

Maybe you ought to learn a little real history instead of believing your public edumacation $#@!e.

[UWDude]

Maybe you ought to learn a little real history instead of believing your public edumacation $#@!e.

I know both sides just fine, and I know a hell of a lot more than you, I assure you. I was quite educated in history before I decided to make it my major. In fact I only chose history because I knew I could sleepwalk through it, and I did.

[enhanced_deficit]

It's that historic day's anniversary again when 'fire and fury' was unleashed on a city populated with many civilian buildings:


On this day in 1945: The US detonated an atomic bomb over the Japanese city of Nagasaki


The bombs detonated over Nagasaki (right) and Hiroshima (left) Credit: Wikimedia Commons

• Dominic Selwood

9 August 2017 • 10:11am
At 11.02 a.m. on 9 August 1945, the US detonated a mustard yellow atomic weapon over the Japanese port city of Nagasaki.

The five-ton bomb, named “Fat Man”, was dropped from Bockscar, a Boeing B-29 Superfortress. US ground crews had scrawled personal messages to Emperor Hirohito on the bomb casing, and there was one word stencilled on its nose. “JANCFU”. It was a reference to a bodge job in the final stages of assembling the bomb: Joint Army-Navy-Civilian $#@! Up.
When Bockscar had taken off that morning from Tinian in the North Pacific, its crew had intended to drop the atomic weapon on the military arsenal at Kokura, which was a city built on a wide plain, and therefore ideal for maximising the destructive impact of the bomb’s extensive blast waves.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...city-nagasaki/





Related

North Korea says considering strike on Guam after Trump warns of 'fire and fury'
Metro US Aug 8, 2017