Israel (now broader Mid East discussion)

Consigliere said

I suppose that is how history is taught in the Land of the Mushroom People. I was talking about the Real World.

Dude, read your own link, Truman et al thought hard about it, and dropping two bombs was the only realistic option to end the war quickly, decisively, and with less loss of life (less than invading the islands would have caused). Imperial Japan posed a threat to the world, and they were systematically doing thousands of horrible things and needed to be shut down completely; I will not waste ink on it here but you can google it if interested.

Click to expand...

Okay, and you're blatantly operating under a false dichotomy which you asserted earlier. You remember that, don't you?

Here - I'll quote your statement earlier - talking about Japan:

"They did horrible and shocking things for years as part of an offensive war. We had to do something horrible and shocking to stop them in our defensive war."

All I mentioned was that there were other options. When you act as if 'horrible and shocking' (which I guess equates to atomic bombs) is the only way to counteract, then you're just oversimplifying the situation to reduce a complex situations to two options - kill 100,000+ or risk having that done to us.

Just because we didn't exercise other options at the time doesn't mean they didn't exist, or that they weren't valid. Hell, man. There are 4 options listed in bold which constitute most of the article. Did you skip over that yourself, comrade?

Your statement also completely ignores what I'd shared with Dave earlier regarding the state of Japan at that time. The point isn't "well but they could have done something". It's that they weren't in the capacity to do so, thus the act of obliterating hundreds of thousands of people was
in the very, very least...like the most gracious I'll be to your narrative..HIGHLY questionable, ethically speaking.