great post Poseidon. ENjoyed it and nicely argued.

I am not a pacifist, but war is sometimes necessary. I argue that men are not lottery ticket numbers that can be used. They are not robotic instruments that can be lost to gain.

Just because some men will die, does not mean they should be sentenced to death on a one way mission. Let 100 men die in a struggle to bomb and sink a ship. Never let 1 man do the job in a suicide mission. There is no honour, there is nothing right in such a move, whatever the motive. I somehow do admire the bravery and self-sacrifice on the part of these men, despite abhoring what they did or what they were sent to/brainwashed into. They were not terrorist suicide bombers as we know it today, but ordinary men fighting for freedom (as they believed).

I so much agree with Posidon. War is a political game played by governments at the expense of innocent people who are totally uninvolved. There is no winner. Each side loses precious lives and if only men had their heads screwed on straight they could have agreed something at the negotiating table and saved all the blood.

Sometimes war is right, but when it is wrong it is terrible in every sense of the word and a disgrace to a nation beyond proportion.

Quote:



That sounds nice and all.  And I'm sure just about everyone agrees we should just sit down and discuss our differences and solve everything that way.  But in this real world, how do you hope to accomplish such a thing?

Quote:

Sorry Ben but it's not possible to discuss history seriously without the politics. I agree with dcunning & prefer sticking to history, leaving current events out of it.

Quote:

Unfortunately this doesn't always work. Economic sanctions by America & Britain led directly to the bitter war against Japan in 1941.

Plus sanctions mean I can't bring cool Syrian bongos into the US. Those would've been nice.

Quote:

Nothing personal against you, but this is just a quote continously ripped from Patton.  I cannot help but think how foolish this quote is.

Quote:

Exactly.  Everyone on Earth isn't the same.  War is unfortunately inevitable.  The only half solution I could possibly come up with is just ignoring it.  Diplomacy often fails, and war should be a last resort, so why can't two countries be allies (for lack of a better word) whilst ignoring the parts they don't like about each other?  It goes without saying this won't always work, even if it were to be used more often.  People always try to make a universal solution; war doesn't always work just as peace and diplomacy don't always work.  Seeing how quickly people like to blow things up (no pun intended) and make issues out of everything, I'm surprised there aren't more wars.

Ben. Despite our pleas you seem determined to turn this into a discussion on current affairs. You know very well that is not allowed on this forum. You were one of those responsible for that rule being applied so strictly in the first place. I'm afraid you can't have it both ways & put your point of view without allowing others to reply.

Not sure what you mean there Scorp.  ???

Edit: Duh you deleted it.

So you are saying Japan was not agressive or land grabbing/world denomination - just wanting resources and trying to halt communism?

I'm sorry I disagree if that is so.

Anyway it's bedtime! Nite nite!

Quote:


  A foolish statement....perhaps.  But the truth is that the sacrifice of what may have been Japan's bravest young men did not stem the Allied onslought or rescue their nation from defeat.  Even if Japan fought a conventional war, and not turned to suicide attacks, chances are those men would have died by the guns of roving Hellcats and Corsairs.  Its said that a Fast Attack Carrier Task Force could put up as many as 100 aircraft at a time.  How many could the Japanese muster?  Outnumbered, under trained, lacking experance and flying infreior aircraft what were thier chances of survival?  Either way their deaths can be traced to a goverment that misread U.S. resolve to defend herself.