christ-on-a-stick

The government mouthpieces and talking heads like to refer to civilian deaths in OTHER countries we're at war with "collateral damage" - a term that literally makes my stomach turn.

Something to ponder... if we were fighting a war on *our* soil, would ANY civilian deaths be called "collateral damage"? I have a feeling the terms "terrorism", "brutality" and "depraved indifference" would more likely be bandied about. They bomb one of our military targets, the bomb strays off course and the local shopping mall gets hit? Somehow I don't think the local news would blithely refer to deaths of OUR civilians "sad but unavoidable in a time of war".

Hypothetical scenario: In THIS war (us attacking Iraq), the Iraqi military/intelligence has some operatives already here in the U.S. They detonate a bomb on a military target here. A few civilians are killed in the process.

Terrorism terrorism terrorism terrorism, right?

beyelzu

well, not to me, but then I actually care more for those american lives than I would for others.

We dont dance in the streets the way the Palestinians did after 911. We use smart bombs to make collateral damage more rare. Why not veiw this issue objectively?

christ-on-a-stick

Actually I recall a lot of very memorable photographs of V-Day, of Americans dancing and celebrating in the street after the war was ended by dropping nuclear bombs on 2 Japanese cities and incinerating thousands of innocent civilians.

Of course people were happy that the war was over, but it hass always struck me funny that people didn't mark the occasion with a little more solemnity considering what we did to achieve it. How do you think that the Japanese would have felt to see that V-Day celebration broadcast live on TV while Hiroshima and Nagasaki lay in ruins, people still dying agonizing deaths? Would they not have seen us as barbaric and inhuman?

But I guess those thousands of civilian Japanese men, women and children's lives were worth less than ours, right? At least you are honest about your xenophobia.

christ-on-a-stick

Arbitrarily assigning a greater value to one humans' life over another is not objective in my view.

enrious

I seem to remember that most of the people celebrating were glad that a war that was brought upon them (Pearl Harbor) by the vanquished (Japan) was finally over.

"We didn't ask for the war but we finished it. I'm glad it's over."

christ-on-a-stick

How exactly did the civilian men, women and children we nuked bring the war upon us?

If Iraq somehow got ahold of some nuclear weapons and totally decimated New York City, Washington DC and as couple other major cities, would they be justified in saying "they brought the war upon us, we finished it"?

P.S. Slightly off-topic but if anyone here is interested and hasn't read "Day of Deceit" by Robert B. Stinnett, I would highly recommend it. (re: Pearl Harbor and US foreknowledge).

Pomp

I read that. I thought the case he made for the US having knowledge that an attack was coming somewhere was pretty strong, but that his case that the US knew that such an attack would specfically hit Pearl Harbor was pretty weak.

enrious

Who said they were running saying, "Boy I'm glad we nuked the shit out of Japanese men, women, and children."

I said they were glad a war brought upon by another nation was ended. Let me repeat that...they felt they were the ones attacked and they were victorious.

I don't think I've seen many examples of hatred towards Japanese civilians - the military yes, civilians, no.

Quote:

If Iraq somehow got ahold of some nuclear weapons and totally decimated New York City, Washington DC and as couple other major cities, would they be justified in saying "they brought the war upon us, we finished it"?

I think there would be Iraqis celebrating in the streets for having won the war.

Quote:

P.S. Slightly off-topic but if anyone here is interested and hasn't read "Day of Deceit" by Robert B. Stinnett, I would highly recommend it. (re: Pearl Harbor and US foreknowledge).

Everything I've read suggests that we had some foreknowledge of some kind of action somewhere.

I've yet to see credible proof that specific knowledge of a specific attack at a specific time at a specific place were present to the White House with the notation, "This one's for real."

markstake

The civilians in Japan didn't. The government did, and brought the consequences of those actions to their civilian population. From what I've heard, there was some pretty serious calculations about the cost in lives of nuclear vs. conventional warfare, and the total numbers of dead added up to less with nuclear. I think we as a nation were pretty naive about the whole nuclear weapon thing when the Bomb was new, and I like to believe that we would never choose to do it again. I certainly wouldn't support it.

However, Iraq is at war with the U.S. (and vice-versa), and if they could deliver nukes to our land I would expect them to do so. Would I say "Hey, that's not fair - you aren't playing by the rules!" No. This is a risk that our government has taken with our population. If Iraq deliver the bomb to our doorstep, the government took that risk and brought the consequences to the civilian population.

Scary.