Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Anchorman on August 06, 2015, 01:41:06 PM
-
Today marks the 70th anniversary of the first atomic bomb dr
http://www.cnduk.org/cnd-media/item/2203opped on Japan.
-
I understand that Rita Chakrabati introduced today's BBC News at One with the words - "Japan remembers the shock attack of 70 years ago ...". She then went on to reintoduce the story in full by saying 'At a quarter past 8 this morning in Japan, tens of thousands of people bowed their heads and stood in silence to remember one of the most shocking attacks the world has ever witnessed'.
Was this an attempt by the BBC to rewrite history? The use of the phrase '... one of the most shocking ...' is usually used to express revulsion of whatever event follows. Not sure about others here, but I have regularly been told that this attack had been on unarmed and undefended citizens, when in reality, "During World War II, the 2nd General Army and Chugoku Regional Army were headquartered in Hiroshima, and the Army Marine Headquarters was located at Ujina port. The city also had large depots of military supplies, and was a key center for shipping". (wikipedia) It sounds as if people want to lay all the blame for the atrocity (which is no doubt what it was) on the American military.
What are others' thoughts.
-
Dear Hope,
My thoughts, is God regretting the Covenant he made with Noah, now look at what his children are capable of :'(
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Hope,
My thoughts, is God regretting the Covenant he made with Noah, now look at what his children are capable of :'(
Gonnagle.
Wot Gonners said.
-
The use of the atomic bomb was shocking. I don't see how anyone could see it any other way.
-
The use of the atomic bomb was shocking. I don't see how anyone could see it any other way.
So was the bombing of Pearl Harbour.
So is all war.
-
Surely the use of a weapon way more powerful than anything seen up to that point is by definition 'shocking' at the time because of the effect?
-
Of course it was shocking, is shocking still.
Equally the treatment of POWs by the Japanese was shocking, the Holocaust was shocking. But in a different way.
-
One of the things that you notice when you visit the Peace Museum in Hiroshima is how absent is any context for the nuclear attack: "There was a war going on, and one day this American plane took off from Tinian island base and it headed for Hiroshima ...."
The museum is an accurate portrayal of the events which happened that day, and pulls no punches in presenting the awfulness of the nuclear attack. It is common to see people walking out with tears streaming down their faces. The story of Sadako, a child dying from lukaemia, folding her paper cranes and only getting to about 700 - rather short of the thousand that folk legend would guarantee her a long life, is just one of many.
The Japanese are still in denial about their role in WW2 and in China during the preceding years and about their rounding up of Korean women to be used as sex slaves. It is only fairly recently that a memorial has been erected to the thousands of Koreans who perished that day - but tellingly, it is outside the Peace Park.
The Allies knew that Hiroshima was an important military target but it was left strictly alone from bombing raids because it had already been selected as a suitable target for an atom bomb. Hiroshima is a relatively compact city set in a ring of mountains with the sea on one side. Any nuclear blast would be contained and its effects could be fully studied.
But the nuclear bombs were only dropped as an adjunct to the fire bombing of Tokyo and other cities which also caused massive civilian casualties. There is no doubt that the Allies (which by this time really meant the USA) would have defeated the Japanese in time.
It may just be that the nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki effectively reduced the total civilian population potential loss because they forced the Japanese to surrender. If this is the case, I can just about accept the Hiroshima bomb as a neccesity. I cannot, however, accept the bombing of Nagasaki. It was a war crime.
-
I understand that Rita Chakrabati introduced today's BBC News at One with the words - "Japan remembers the shock attack of 70 years ago ...". She then went on to reintoduce the story in full by saying 'At a quarter past 8 this morning in Japan, tens of thousands of people bowed their heads and stood in silence to remember one of the most shocking attacks the world has ever witnessed'.
Was this an attempt by the BBC to rewrite history? The use of the phrase '... one of the most shocking ...' is usually used to express revulsion of whatever event follows. Not sure about others here, but I have regularly been told that this attack had been on unarmed and undefended citizens, when in reality, "During World War II, the 2nd General Army and Chugoku Regional Army were headquartered in Hiroshima, and the Army Marine Headquarters was located at Ujina port. The city also had large depots of military supplies, and was a key center for shipping". (wikipedia) It sounds as if people want to lay all the blame for the atrocity (which is no doubt what it was) on the American military.
What are others' thoughts.
It was a terrible atrocity, on a par with the Holocaust, imo! >:(
-
It was a terrible atrocity, on a par with the Holocaust, imo! >:(
IIRC, the Jews, blacks and homosexuals had not done anything to the Germans; on the other hand, the Japanese had committed some horrendous atrocities - possibly on a par with the events we commemorate today - and without any appearance of giving them up or ceasing warfare. Comparing the events of August 1945 with the Holocaust is, in my view, to trivialise the Holocaust.
-
The Allies knew that Hiroshima was an important military target but it was left strictly alone from bombing raids because it had already been selected as a suitable target for an atom bomb. Hiroshima is a relatively compact city set in a ring of mountains with the sea on one side. Any nuclear blast would be contained and its effects could be fully studied.
A relative of mine who ws involved in the Far East theatre of war suggested that, rather like Oxford here in the UK for Hitler, Hiroshima had not been bombed because the Americans had designated it as the administrative capital in any post-war American reconstruction of the country.
-
It should also be noted that, had the Americans not agreed to allow the Emperor to remain in place, and to absolve him of any blame or responsibility for any actions of the Japanese military during the war, the Japanese military were prepared, as in all the battles along the island chains to reach the Japanese main islands, to fight literally to the last man, woman and child, and the vast majority of the Japanese people were prepared to die to prevent the invasion of the Japanese homeland.
The Japanese military's insistance upon absolution for the Emperor makes it abundantly clear that they were well aware of the criminal nature of some of their actions - like the Burma Railway. Even today the Japanese have steadfastly refused to apologise for their treatment of Allied prisiners of war, hundred of whom, when the Bomb dropped, were on board ships on their way to the Japanese main islands to be used as hiuman shields in the event of an Allied invasion.
Iwo Jima, Guadalcanal, etc., proved just how many Allied servicemen would have died to win the battle for Japan. It is also a fact that, when the Bomb was dropped, Royal Air Force planes and crews, Royal Navy ships and British Army units were being prepared to join the Americans in that invasion.
-
The use of the atomic bomb was shocking. I don't see how anyone could see it any other way.
So was the bombing of Pearl Harbour.
So is all war.
Yes, all war is, but I think the use of the A-bomb was shocking in an extra special way.
-
The use of the atomic bomb was shocking. I don't see how anyone could see it any other way.
So was the bombing of Pearl Harbour.
So is all war.
Yes, all war is, but I think the use of the A-bomb was shocking in an extra special way.
The "shock" only came when the full effects of thye Bomb became apparent.
Even the people who built it were not aware of exactly what the effects of the Bomb would be. They had no idea of what "radiation sicknss" was or even that it would occur.
I am, though, not sure that, even had Truman and the American military known about these things, it would have stopped them dropping it. The US had not wanted to join WWII, and only did so when Japan attacked.
The Bomb was part of the US response to what Roosevelt called "the day that will live in infamy". Maybe today is America's "day that will live in infamy" for the Japanese.
-
The Allies knew that Hiroshima was an important military target but it was left strictly alone from bombing raids because it had already been selected as a suitable target for an atom bomb. Hiroshima is a relatively compact city set in a ring of mountains with the sea on one side. Any nuclear blast would be contained and its effects could be fully studied.
A relative of mine who ws involved in the Far East theatre of war suggested that, rather like Oxford here in the UK for Hitler, Hiroshima had not been bombed because the Americans had designated it as the administrative capital in any post-war American reconstruction of the country.
I think that your relative may have confused Hiroshima for Kyoto.
Like Hiroshima, Kyoto was spared the attention of Allied bombers. Kyoto is a city steeped in the history of Japan and was the capital before Edo was transformed into Tokyo. Kyoto, on the other hand, is in a central position close to many of the other major cities. From a communications point of view and as a political gesture, too, it would have been a good choice for centre of government.
I can think of no sensible reason why Hiroshima should have been so blessed. It is at the southern end of Honshu and at the end of WW2 was not particularly well connected with the rest of the island. Hiroshima was only founded in the 16th century and does not have the cultural importance of Kyoto.
-
I think that your relative may have confused Hiroshima for Kyoto.
I've just done a Google search and found this on wikipedia.
Residents wondered why Hiroshima had been spared destruction by firebombing. Some speculated that the city was to be saved for U.S. occupation headquarters, others thought perhaps their relatives in Hawaii and California had petitioned the U.S. government to avoid bombing Hiroshima.
http://tinyurl.com/pbhyh82
-
I think that your relative may have confused Hiroshima for Kyoto.
I've just done a Google search and found this on wikipedia.
Residents wondered why Hiroshima had been spared destruction by firebombing. Some speculated that the city was to be saved for U.S. occupation headquarters, others thought perhaps their relatives in Hawaii and California had petitioned the U.S. government to avoid bombing Hiroshima.
http://tinyurl.com/pbhyh82
Interesting.
It's some years now since I last visited the Peace Museum, but I think I recall a display about the USA's selection of a potential target. It starts out with a list of suitable cities and ends up with Hiroshima for a number of reasons such as its location in southern Honshu and on the Inland Sea, and its topography, contained in a semi-circle of hills.
Thus it was identified as a potential target a couple of years before its eventual destruction and preserved for that purpose. Of course my memory may be faulty, but then your source only reports speculation on the part of people with no firm information.
-
The blame for those deaths is at the feet of the Japanese military rulers. THEY WERE WARNED about what was going to happen. Who warned them? Harry Truman. So one bomb is dropped, Japanese military rulers refused to end the war, another was dropped and still they waited. So who were the Japanese military rulers really concerned about? Not their civilians. And yes, it is true that 80% of the casualties were non military but the city was targeted out of three cities I believe. Hiroshima was a target because of it's importance to the Japanese killing machine.
Now as I wandered around Pearl harbour, looked down on a sunken battleship from on top the water, I wondered what was racing through the minds of those young men on that day of horror, when the Japanese, without provocation, launched a brutal attack with their killing machine. An interesting thing happened as I went through a building of news articles and various items and artifact. I noticed many Japanese with me looking things over. We all came to a large display of model warships and an employee came over and proceeded to begin the story of what exactly happened on that day. I suddenly felt quite alone and looking around I found that every single Japanese person had quietly left the small building. I believe they still carry shame for their nation starting that war.
-
The use of the atomic bomb was shocking. I don't see how anyone could see it any other way.
So was the bombing of Pearl Harbour.
So is all war.
Yes, all war is, but I think the use of the A-bomb was shocking in an extra special way.
My father in law was captured in Japan and was on the railway.
He always maintained that the greatest shame was that they only dropped two A bombs!
Such was the enormity of feeling by him and his comrades, many of who died and never came back.
Its all very well for us so far removed to pontificate about its use, but I am not sure our opinions count for much.
I guess you had to be there.
-
The blame for those deaths is at the feet of the Japanese military rulers. THEY WERE WARNED about what was going to happen. Who warned them? Harry Truman. So one bomb is dropped, Japanese military rulers refused to end the war, another was dropped and still they waited. So who were the Japanese military rulers really concerned about? Not their civilians. And yes, it is true that 80% of the casualties were non military but the city was targeted out of three cities I believe. Hiroshima was a target because of it's importance to the Japanese killing machine.
Now as I wandered around Pearl harbour, looked down on a sunken battleship from on top the water, I wondered what was racing through the minds of those young men on that day of horror, when the Japanese, without provocation, launched a brutal attack with their killing machine. An interesting thing happened as I went through a building of news articles and various items and artifact. I noticed many Japanese with me looking things over. We all came to a large display of model warships and an employee came over and proceeded to begin the story of what exactly happened on that day. I suddenly felt quite alone and looking around I found that every single Japanese person had quietly left the small building. I believe they still carry shame for their nation starting that war.
Carry the shame! Carry the shame!
Are you for real!
They have no shame - they STILL, after all these years, they still have no shame!
The Japanese have, for 70 years, refused point blank to acknowledge that their brutality towards and murder of British and Commonwealth POWs was in any way wrong, no Empereor since Hirohito, no politician since Hideki Tojo, has expressed one word of shame or responsibility.
They claim they acted according to the tradition of Bushido and that soldiers who surrendered were not entitled to be treated as soldiers, they should have fought to the last man as did the Japanese.
Shame, them! No way!
-
Yes I am for real Matty. You can hold hate for the Japanese people, most of whom were not around during the war. I cannot, nor do I have hate in my heart for the German people. I pity you. Those people quietly left that building as the talk began because they do feel shame for what happened that day. Shame on you.
-
I understand that Rita Chakrabati introduced today's BBC News at One with the words - "Japan remembers the shock attack of 70 years ago ...". She then went on to reintoduce the story in full by saying 'At a quarter past 8 this morning in Japan, tens of thousands of people bowed their heads and stood in silence to remember one of the most shocking attacks the world has ever witnessed'.
Was this an attempt by the BBC to rewrite history? The use of the phrase '... one of the most shocking ...' is usually used to express revulsion of whatever event follows. Not sure about others here, but I have regularly been told that this attack had been on unarmed and undefended citizens, when in reality, "During World War II, the 2nd General Army and Chugoku Regional Army were headquartered in Hiroshima, and the Army Marine Headquarters was located at Ujina port. The city also had large depots of military supplies, and was a key center for shipping". (wikipedia) It sounds as if people want to lay all the blame for the atrocity (which is no doubt what it was) on the American military.
What are others' thoughts.
It's very easy with hindsight to look back and make these kinds of judgements, but I think that the view at the time was somewhat different.
It had been a long and bloody war with plenty of civilians being killed on all sides. Although the Japanese were effectively beaten, they had no intention of surrendering and without the bombings there would have been a lot more killing.
Perhaps the Germans should reflect on how lucky they were to be beaten before the bomb was ready.
-
Dear Homo Sapiens,
War! What is it good for, absolutely nothi ...... Well actually, freeing slaves, getting rid of tyrants.
Japan wants to ban the bomb, can we do that, now that we have the technology, are we grown up enough to say, nuclear bombs were a bad idea let's scrap the lot, or is it to late, Pandora's box has been opened.
It does say something about us humans that we can sit down and actually think about making a weapon that can kill millions in an instant.
If I was God, back to the drawing board, forget I even thought about making stupid humans, stick to creating worms or Elephants, I like Elephants.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Homo Sapiens,
War! What is it good for, absolutely nothi ...... Well actually, freeing slaves, getting rid of tyrants.
Japan wants to ban the bomb, can we do that, now that we have the technology, are we grown up enough to say, nuclear bombs were a bad idea let's scrap the lot, or is it to late, Pandora's box has been opened.
It does say something about us humans that we can sit down and actually think about making a weapon that can kill millions in an instant.
If I was God, back to the drawing board, forget I even thought about making stupid humans, stick to creating worms or Elephants, I like Elephants.
Gonnagle.
-
Yep.
Too many countries posess(legally and, with the connivance of other 'civilised' countries, illegally) these abhorrant things.
Whether or not the Americans were right to drop that obscenity on Hiroshima (and, for the record, they knew EXACTLY what destruction and butchery it would wreak), they then dropped a biigger one on Nagasaki...which was not necessary, killing, in the process, nost of the Christians in Japan (though faith here isn't an issue).
When children born in the late '40-s and 50's died as a result of 'A bomb disease' - children who were born AFTE the war - then the so-called 'civillised' nations should have taken action to end the production of weapons which kill those born years, even decades, after the conflict.
There is no place for nuclear weapons in a civilised society, and it's a matter of shame for me that my so-called government allows these WMDs parked less than 40 miles from my front door.
http://k1project.org/explore-health/hiroshima-and-nagasaki-the-long-term-health-effects
-
Yes I am for real Matty. You can hold hate for the Japanese people, most of whom were not around during the war. I cannot, nor do I have hate in my heart for the German people. I pity you. Those people quietly left that building as the talk began because they do feel shame for what happened that day. Shame on you.
I fear that something strange has happened to me. I may be in need of urgent therapy.
I agree with Johnny Canoe.
It is not the ordinary, decent Japanese citizen who should "carry" any shame. He is innocent of any crime. The vast majority of Japanese citizens were born long after the conflict was over. It is the Japanese political system and philosophy of denial which is to blame.
CMG is advocating a new distribution policy for Original Sin.
-
Dear Homo Sapiens,
War! What is it good for, absolutely nothi ...... Well actually, freeing slaves, getting rid of tyrants.
Japan wants to ban the bomb, can we do that, now that we have the technology, are we grown up enough to say, nuclear bombs were a bad idea let's scrap the lot, or is it to late, Pandora's box has been opened.
It does say something about us humans that we can sit down and actually think about making a weapon that can kill millions in an instant.
If I was God, back to the drawing board, forget I even thought about making stupid humans, stick to creating worms or Elephants, I like Elephants.
Gonnagle.
-
Yep.
Too many countries posess(legally and, with the connivance of other 'civilised' countries, illegally) these abhorrant things.
Whether or not the Americans were right to drop that obscenity on Hiroshima (and, for the record, they knew EXACTLY what destruction and butchery it would wreak), they then dropped a biigger one on Nagasaki...which was not necessary, killing, in the process, nost of the Christians in Japan (though faith here isn't an issue).
When children born in the late '40-s and 50's died as a result of 'A bomb disease' - children who were born AFTE the war - then the so-called 'civillised' nations should have taken action to end the production of weapons which kill those born years, even decades, after the conflict.
There is no place for nuclear weapons in a civilised society, and it's a matter of shame for me that my so-called government allows these WMDs parked less than 40 miles from my front door.
Japan had fought a pretty brutal war by any standards so I doubt that their welfare was top of the agenda in most people minds, plus, they had pledged to fight on. Without the bomb, the end of the war would have been very slow and messy with massive military and civilian deaths on both sides.
You might like to reflect that without WMD facilities like the one built so inconveniently only 40 miles from your doorstep - the world would probably have suffered another conventional war on a comparable scale to WWII in our lifetimes.
-
Yes I am for real Matty. You can hold hate for the Japanese people, most of whom were not around during the war. I cannot, nor do I have hate in my heart for the German people. I pity you. Those people quietly left that building as the talk began because they do feel shame for what happened that day. Shame on you.
I fear that something strange has happened to me. I may be in need of urgent therapy.
I agree with Johnny Canoe.
It is not the ordinary, decent Japanese citizen who should "carry" any shame. He is innocent of any crime. The vast majority of Japanese citizens were born long after the conflict was over. It is the Japanese political system and philosophy of denial which is to blame.
CMG is advocating a new distribution policy for Original Sin.
NO, I am not!
The Germans, upon finding out what had been done in the concentration camps acknowledged the crimes that had been done there.
The Japanese government and Emperor have steadfastly failed to acknowledge that they did anythging wrong in their treatment of prisioners, civilian or military.
I do not hold the present day Japanese people responsible for the "sins" of their fathers, I do however consider that "turning a blind eye" does not make it unhappen. The Japanese concept of "face" is totally alien to the Western mind, but is as important today as it ver was.
Nothing that we, today, do or say is going to change what happened, nothing can undo what happened, but what did happen must not be forgotten in the hope of non-repetition. Unfortunately the IS has shown that man has learned little or nothing since then.
-
#26: LA.
I have reflected - long and hard.
Thes obscenities have not prevented the butchery by proxy in the cold war era, nor have they saved a single life from the terrorist bomb or bullet.
There are a few morality threads on this forum...but where is the morality in possessing such abhorrant weapons - weapons that destroy the lives of those born after the war is over?
-
#26: LA.
I have reflected - long and hard.
Thes obscenities have not prevented the butchery by proxy in the cold war era, nor have they saved a single life from the terrorist bomb or bullet.
There are a few morality threads on this forum...but where is the morality in possessing such abhorrant weapons - weapons that destroy the lives of those born after the war is over?
But if you do not have them, you will do as you are told by whoever does have them.
Are you happy to do whatever North Korea says you will do?
-
#26: LA.
I have reflected - long and hard.
Thes obscenities have not prevented the butchery by proxy in the cold war era, nor have they saved a single life from the terrorist bomb or bullet.
There are a few morality threads on this forum...but where is the morality in possessing such abhorrant weapons - weapons that destroy the lives of those born after the war is over?
But if you do not have them, you will do as you are told by whoever does have them.
Are you happy to do whatever North Korea says you will do?
-
Er.....
We've been doing pretty much what the only power ever to use thes obscenities tells us to do for the past seventy years......
-
#26: LA.
I have reflected - long and hard.
Thes obscenities have not prevented the butchery by proxy in the cold war era, nor have they saved a single life from the terrorist bomb or bullet.
There are a few morality threads on this forum...but where is the morality in possessing such abhorrant weapons - weapons that destroy the lives of those born after the war is over?
But if you do not have them, you will do as you are told by whoever does have them.
Are you happy to do whatever North Korea says you will do?
-
Er.....
We've been doing pretty much what the only power ever to use thes obscenities tells us to do for the past seventy years......
I do not think that is true, and it is not by force.
What do you say to North Korea when they make some crazy demand of you?
Remember the best Navy, Army, Air force in the world is of absolutely no use against these weapons.
You cannot win with a knife in a gun fight!
-
Anchorman,
You sound bitter that the USA has and would do it again, come to your rescue. You really think you are under the American boot? No, that boot ain't a Yankee boot, it's actually an EU boot. Canada is a mouse living beside a elephant, and we love our elephant, we share the longest unprotected border on the planet. WE get along, neither pushing the other around, sorry you feel so stepped on. Maybe have a pity parade or something.
-
Anchorman,
You sound bitter that the USA has and would do it again, come to your rescue. You really think you are under the American boot? No, that boot ain't a Yankee boot, it's actually an EU boot. Canada is a mouse living beside a elephant, and we love our elephant, we share the longest unprotected border on the planet. WE get along, neither pushing the other around, sorry you feel so stepped on. Maybe have a pity parade or something.
I for one do not feel stepped on, and I am thankful that the USA is there and has such power.
That power has saved us in two world wars.
-
Anchorman,
You sound bitter that the USA has and would do it again, come to your rescue. You really think you are under the American boot? No, that boot ain't a Yankee boot, it's actually an EU boot. Canada is a mouse living beside a elephant, and we love our elephant, we share the longest unprotected border on the planet. WE get along, neither pushing the other around, sorry you feel so stepped on. Maybe have a pity parade or something.
Honestly JC!
Why is that almost every post you make, you make a valid point and then mess the whole thing up with a stupid quip at the end?
The above would have been fine except for the "Maybe have a pity parade or something" tacked on the end.
-
Do ya want to start it all up again Matty? Keep your distance.
-
Anchorman,
You sound bitter that the USA has and would do it again, come to your rescue. You really think you are under the American boot? No, that boot ain't a Yankee boot, it's actually an EU boot. Canada is a mouse living beside a elephant, and we love our elephant, we share the longest unprotected border on the planet. WE get along, neither pushing the other around, sorry you feel so stepped on. Maybe have a pity parade or something.
-
I don't like my country being used as America's poodle -or dumping ground for American made Trident nuclear warheads.
I'm proud to say my Church - the Church of Scotland - has been totally opposed to these abhorrant weapons for more than three decades.
(As have the STUC, COSLA, SNP, SSP, Scottish greens, and a few Labour members who still have principles.)
-
Anchorman,
You sound bitter that the USA has and would do it again, come to your rescue. You really think you are under the American boot? No, that boot ain't a Yankee boot, it's actually an EU boot. Canada is a mouse living beside a elephant, and we love our elephant, we share the longest unprotected border on the planet. WE get along, neither pushing the other around, sorry you feel so stepped on. Maybe have a pity parade or something.
-
I don't like my country being used as America's poodle -or dumping ground for American made Trident nuclear warheads.
I'm proud to say my Church - the Church of Scotland - has been totally opposed to these abhorrant weapons for more than three decades.
(As have the STUC, COSLA, SNP, SSP, Scottish greens, and a few Labour members who still have principles.)
Presumably, you'd have been happier if Scotland had been allied to Comrade Stalin - then you would have had some proper Socialism!
-
Stalin was niether socialist nor, in the strictest sense of the word, Communist.
On principle, I protest weapons of mass destruction on my country's soil, especially since my country's parliament voted against them - twice - once when what passes for Labour were in coalition with the Lib Dems, and once when Snp were in minority government.
I'm proud to be a citizen of a nation whose democratically elected government has voted against these obscenities - even though an undemocratic pseudodemocracy refuses to acknowledge the will of a democratically elected government.
-
I think that I would argue that Stalin and his like are the inevitable product of Socialism.
Any attempt to implement the principle:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"
results in:
A/ A section of the population who claim disproportionate needs.
B/ A section of the population who feel aggrieved because they are doing all the work for little reward.
In order to keep those workers in line and prevent the regime falling apart it becomes necessary to have a strong security system run by a 'trusted' elite and in order to keep these people in line it becomes necessary to have a strong and ruthless leader.
-
I think that I would argue that Stalin and his like are the inevitable product of Socialism.
Any attempt to implement the principle:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"
results in:
A/ A section of the population who claim disproportionate needs.
B/ A section of the population who feel aggrieved because they are doing all the work for little reward.
In order to keep those workers in line and prevent the regime falling apart it becomes necessary to have a strong security system run by a 'trusted' elite and in order to keep these people in line it becomes necessary to have a strong and ruthless leader.
I'm not going to debate what is and is not socialism or communism, LA, mainly because
A) I am niether,
and
B) it's off topic!
-
I think that I would argue that Stalin and his like are the inevitable product of Socialism.
Any attempt to implement the principle:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"
results in:
A/ A section of the population who claim disproportionate needs.
B/ A section of the population who feel aggrieved because they are doing all the work for little reward.
In order to keep those workers in line and prevent the regime falling apart it becomes necessary to have a strong security system run by a 'trusted' elite and in order to keep these people in line it becomes necessary to have a strong and ruthless leader.
I'm not going to debate what is and is not socialism or communism, LA, mainly because
A) I am niether,
and
B) it's off topic!
I think it's on topic in as much as it is part of the reason that we need to keep these weapons.
-
What reason?
-
Dear World,
Our Lapsed, the man who got me thinking, is ego just part of the baggage we all carry around or can we truly rid ourselves of it, but Lapsed is still living in Victorian times.
Gonnagle.
-
What reason?
North Korea, who have already, no, sorry, whose leader has already, stated that he is prepared to start a nuclear war against the U S and South Korea;
Pakistan, who have refused to state that they would never launch a pre-emptive strike against India.
What would happen in the Middle East if Iran reached nuclear weapon capability?
It used to be known as the "nuclear deterrant" and it was the certainty of total global nuclear destruction that kept the USSR and the U S from launching a nuclear war, though it came far too close over Cuba.
I, unfortunately, am not so sure that there is anything that would stop the three countries mentioned above from launching without any thought of the consequences. THEIR perceived enemy would be wiped out and that, unfortunately, would probably justify their action.
The fact that they might just be destroyed by the U S, Russia, the UK or France just might prevent the total destruction of mankind - the Biblical Armageddon!
-
Dear World,
Our Lapsed, the man who got me thinking, is ego just part of the baggage we all carry around or can we truly rid ourselves of it, but Lapsed is still living in Victorian times.
Gonnagle.
Hi Gonnagle.
unfortunately we have to live in the world as it exists with all it's cruel imperfections. Sure, it would be great if we could just proclaim peace and harmony for all - but I fear that is not going to happen any time soon.
-
I suspect that the groups that really want nuclear war won't be 'deterred' by anything - they see it as their passport to eternal bliss in the next life.
-
I suspect that the groups that really want nuclear war won't be 'deterred' by anything - they see it as their passport to eternal bliss in the next life.
I think today we face two distinct problems.
There are groups of extremists who are prepared to launch terrorist attacks against us or indeed any country that doesn't comply to their ideology. I fully accept that nuclear weapons are no use against these people.
Then there are nation states that possess or are capable of developing or acquiring, nuclear weapons. As time goes by, there will be a lot more. We have to assume that at least some of these states could potentially be a threat to us.
We could of course take the easy option; get rid of nuclear weapons and rely on good old Uncle Sam to protect us - That is certainly an possibility if you have total faith that the the USA will always have our best interests at heart.
-
I suspect that the groups that really want nuclear war won't be 'deterred' by anything - they see it as their passport to eternal bliss in the next life.
Yes, I know this, but the last time I quoted that on here, in one of the posts that disappeared during the most recent cull, I got well and truly roasted for being a stupidly over the top anti-Muslim.
Muslims, I am lead to believe, or at least those who follow similar agenda's to IS and Al Quaeda, believe that by killing an infidel (any non-muslim) they are guaranteed entry into paradise, so completely destroying the total population of the world, including themselves, in a nuclear holocaust holds no downside for them.
-
I suspect that the groups that really want nuclear war won't be 'deterred' by anything - they see it as their passport to eternal bliss in the next life.
Yes, I know this, but the last time I quoted that on here, in one of the posts that disappeared during the most recent cull, I got well and truly roasted for being a stupidly over the top anti-Muslim.
Muslims, I am lead to believe, or at least those who follow similar agenda's to IS and Al Quaeda, believe that by killing an infidel (any non-muslim) they are guaranteed entry into paradise, so completely destroying the total population of the world, including themselves, in a nuclear holocaust holds no downside for them.
I don't think some Christians are that bothered either and think it will usher in Jesus.
Armageddon and the Second Coming?
In that case humanity is really in the shit!
-
Do find me those you claim are Christian and are calling for or will not be bothered by a nuclear holocaust. Do that and I will show you with scripture why they are not Christian. But I need names or congregations.
-
Today we remember the second bomb which was delivered to Nagasaki - centre of Christianity in Japan.
-
Today we remember the second bomb which was delivered to Nagasaki - centre of Christianity in Japan.
The following link is to an article about the likely reason that Kyoto was omitted from the list of targets for nuclear attack.
In passing it refers to Nagasaki and the somewhat casual, incidental, almost desperate way it became a nuclear bomb target. Although the bomb used for this raid was considerably more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb, the topography of Nagasaki greatly restricted its effect.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-33755182
Nagasaki had for 200 years been just about the only place in Japan open to Europeans. It became the centre for christianity. It was the setting fro Madama Butterfly and the birthplace of Kazuo Ishiguro.
-
Dear Lapsed,
My opinion, The United Kingdom/Great Britain is a very rich nation, more than enough to go around, the banking crisis we all went through, at its core, greed!!
On the subject of Trident, this country is in a position to discuss how to rid this world of all nuclear weapons, it should be discussed, it has to be a goal if we are serious about world peace.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Hope,
My thoughts, is God regretting the Covenant he made with Noah, now look at what his children are capable of :'(
Gonnagle.
God tells the end from the beginning....
King James Bible
Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:
In all things God works for the greater good.
He knew these things before they happened. Look at Hitler and 7 million Jews and disabled people.
Do you not think these things serve as a warning and prevent even greater evils when nipped in the bud/
God knew that if Adam ate from the tree he would live forever in a fallen state. He removed the sin for those whom choose to live.
But God loves us and sometimes we need to understand that if Christ dying would have only saved one person he loves us enough to have let him die for the one.
Men commit a lot of evil crimes against humanity. But only God has the power over the body and soul after death. Sometimes the few die for the many. My uncle Wilfred was a prisoner of war held by the Japs. He was a mere shadow of a man when he returned. He suffered much but could never speak about the trauma he suffered. He was a skeleton when he came home and has seen much horror. One of our curates actually got him to talk to him many years later.
But God would regret NOTHING for he has told us he works for our good and told the end from the beginning. Even when Noah was here on earth, God knew the history of man from the beginning and our choices... The book of life from the foundation of the world.
-
Praise be unto the holy bomb.
-
Today we remember the second bomb which was delivered to Nagasaki - centre of Christianity in Japan.
The following link is to an article about the likely reason that Kyoto was omitted from the list of targets for nuclear attack.
In passing it refers to Nagasaki and the somewhat casual, incidental, almost desperate way it became a nuclear bomb target. Although the bomb used for this raid was considerably more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb, the topography of Nagasaki greatly restricted its effect.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-33755182
Nagasaki had for 200 years been just about the only place in Japan open to Europeans. It became the centre for christianity. It was the setting fro Madama Butterfly and the birthplace of Kazuo Ishiguro.
There was an interesting piece in the Times yesterday. Even on the day it was only a secondary target, selected when Kokura, that had large ammunition works, was obscured by smoke and cloud.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/asia/article4520538.ece
-
Dear Hope,
My thoughts, is God regretting the Covenant he made with Noah, now look at what his children are capable of :'(
Gonnagle.
God tells the end from the beginning....
King James Bible
Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:
In all things God works for the greater good.
He knew these things before they happened. Look at Hitler and 7 million Jews and disabled people.
Do you not think these things serve as a warning and prevent even greater evils when nipped in the bud/
God knew that if Adam ate from the tree he would live forever in a fallen state. He removed the sin for those whom choose to live.
But God loves us and sometimes we need to understand that if Christ dying would have only saved one person he loves us enough to have let him die for the one.
.......
But God would regret NOTHING for he has told us he works for our good and told the end from the beginning. Even when Noah was here on earth, God knew the history of man from the beginning and our choices... The book of life from the foundation of the world.
Do you write this stuff yourself or do you pay someone to do it for you?
-
Dear Hope,
My thoughts, is God regretting the Covenant he made with Noah, now look at what his children are capable of :'(
Gonnagle.
God tells the end from the beginning....
King James Bible
Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:
In all things God works for the greater good.
He knew these things before they happened. Look at Hitler and 7 million Jews and disabled people.
Do you not think these things serve as a warning and prevent even greater evils when nipped in the bud/
God knew that if Adam ate from the tree he would live forever in a fallen state. He removed the sin for those whom choose to live.
But God loves us and sometimes we need to understand that if Christ dying would have only saved one person he loves us enough to have let him die for the one.
.......
But God would regret NOTHING for he has told us he works for our good and told the end from the beginning. Even when Noah was here on earth, God knew the history of man from the beginning and our choices... The book of life from the foundation of the world.
Do you write this stuff yourself or do you pay someone to do it for you?
If you feel you actually have a point the spit it out. Otherwise refrain from making comments which have absolutely no bearing on anything said... that is other than you showing your ignorance...
-
Dear Hope,
My thoughts, is God regretting the Covenant he made with Noah, now look at what his children are capable of :'(
Gonnagle.
God tells the end from the beginning....
King James Bible
Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:
In all things God works for the greater good.
He knew these things before they happened. Look at Hitler and 7 million Jews and disabled people.
Do you not think these things serve as a warning and prevent even greater evils when nipped in the bud/
God knew that if Adam ate from the tree he would live forever in a fallen state. He removed the sin for those whom choose to live.
But God loves us and sometimes we need to understand that if Christ dying would have only saved one person he loves us enough to have let him die for the one.
.......
But God would regret NOTHING for he has told us he works for our good and told the end from the beginning. Even when Noah was here on earth, God knew the history of man from the beginning and our choices... The book of life from the foundation of the world.
Do you write this stuff yourself or do you pay someone to do it for you?
If you feel you actually have a point the spit it out. Otherwise refrain from making comments which have absolutely no bearing on anything said... that is other than you showing your ignorance...
Sassy
NOT ignorance - Disbelief!
Please learn the difference.
-
Dear Hope,
My thoughts, is God regretting the Covenant he made with Noah, now look at what his children are capable of :'(
Gonnagle.
God tells the end from the beginning....
King James Bible
Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:
In all things God works for the greater good.
He knew these things before they happened. Look at Hitler and 7 million Jews and disabled people.
Do you not think these things serve as a warning and prevent even greater evils when nipped in the bud/
God knew that if Adam ate from the tree he would live forever in a fallen state. He removed the sin for those whom choose to live.
But God loves us and sometimes we need to understand that if Christ dying would have only saved one person he loves us enough to have let him die for the one.
.......
But God would regret NOTHING for he has told us he works for our good and told the end from the beginning. Even when Noah was here on earth, God knew the history of man from the beginning and our choices... The book of life from the foundation of the world.
Do you write this stuff yourself or do you pay someone to do it for you?
If you feel you actually have a point the spit it out. Otherwise refrain from making comments which have absolutely no bearing on anything said... that is other than you showing your ignorance...
Sassy
From the little I know of you, you appear to be a caring person. you make occasional reference to your circumstances which make great demands on you. You appear to be a model of a person who has adopted the culture of christianity. I like to think that I, too, organise my relationships with my fellow humans according to the principles outlined in the parable of the Good Samaritan and the Sermon on the Mount.
But it is at this point that our outlooks part: I recognise that most of the bible is fiction, little more than a collection of myths, legends and fairy tales fabricated around camp fires and plagiarised from other cultures. You accept the lot with total credulity.
God never spoke to Adam - because neither of them ever existed. Noah was never "here on earth" because there never was a Noah or a flood. The great deluge is a myth stolen from a similar, Babylonian, fairy tale: The Epic of Gilgamesh.
Nobody want you to stop holding your particular beliefs. That's your privilege and your right, but you should not be surprised if they are questioned when they are aired in a public place. To accuse someone who does not share them of ignorance, however, is not particularly wise.
-
Dear Hope,
My thoughts, is God regretting the Covenant he made with Noah, now look at what his children are capable of :'(
Gonnagle.
God tells the end from the beginning....
King James Bible
Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:
In all things God works for the greater good.
He knew these things before they happened. Look at Hitler and 7 million Jews and disabled people.
Do you not think these things serve as a warning and prevent even greater evils when nipped in the bud/
God knew that if Adam ate from the tree he would live forever in a fallen state. He removed the sin for those whom choose to live.
But God loves us and sometimes we need to understand that if Christ dying would have only saved one person he loves us enough to have let him die for the one.
.......
But God would regret NOTHING for he has told us he works for our good and told the end from the beginning. Even when Noah was here on earth, God knew the history of man from the beginning and our choices... The book of life from the foundation of the world.
Do you write this stuff yourself or do you pay someone to do it for you?
If you feel you actually have a point the spit it out. Otherwise refrain from making comments which have absolutely no bearing on anything said... that is other than you showing your ignorance...
Sassy
NOT ignorance - Disbelief!
Please learn the difference.
CORRECTION;
Gonnagle, professes to be a believer...
Whereas HH,
Dismissed what I said as if not biblical.
Had he not been ignorant to the teachings of the bible he would NOT have made the statement he did.
Had nothing to to with disbelief it was ignorance. Had it just been disbelief, he would have said he did not believe what the bible said about God, not made a personal remark about the contents coming from myself or some other person.
I understood what I was replying to... how come you didn't.
-
Dear Hope,
My thoughts, is God regretting the Covenant he made with Noah, now look at what his children are capable of :'(
Gonnagle.
God tells the end from the beginning....
King James Bible
Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:
In all things God works for the greater good.
He knew these things before they happened. Look at Hitler and 7 million Jews and disabled people.
Do you not think these things serve as a warning and prevent even greater evils when nipped in the bud/
God knew that if Adam ate from the tree he would live forever in a fallen state. He removed the sin for those whom choose to live.
But God loves us and sometimes we need to understand that if Christ dying would have only saved one person he loves us enough to have let him die for the one.
.......
But God would regret NOTHING for he has told us he works for our good and told the end from the beginning. Even when Noah was here on earth, God knew the history of man from the beginning and our choices... The book of life from the foundation of the world.
Do you write this stuff yourself or do you pay someone to do it for you?
If you feel you actually have a point the spit it out. Otherwise refrain from making comments which have absolutely no bearing on anything said... that is other than you showing your ignorance...
Sassy
From the little I know of you, you appear to be a caring person. you make occasional reference to your circumstances which make great demands on you. You appear to be a model of a person who has adopted the culture of christianity. I like to think that I, too, organise my relationships with my fellow humans according to the principles outlined in the parable of the Good Samaritan and the Sermon on the Mount.
But it is at this point that our outlooks part: I recognise that most of the bible is fiction, little more than a collection of myths, legends and fairy tales fabricated around camp fires and plagiarised from other cultures. You accept the lot with total credulity.
God never spoke to Adam - because neither of them ever existed. Noah was never "here on earth" because there never was a Noah or a flood. The great deluge is a myth stolen from a similar, Babylonian, fairy tale: The Epic of Gilgamesh.
Nobody want you to stop holding your particular beliefs. That's your privilege and your right, but you should not be surprised if they are questioned when they are aired in a public place. To accuse someone who does not share them of ignorance, however, is not particularly wise.
Both Abraham and Noah were ancestors of Jesus Christ.
Both Christ and the Jews knew Abraham existed because the circumcision and covenant made handed down from Abraham.
Maybe you need to understand that the bible is true for many reasons and one reason is that Christ and Abraham both existed and without Noah then none of them could have existed.
My belief in the word of God is based on God himself and him being part of my life. I probably have a closer relationship with God because I don't trust mankind full-stop.
But the bible in the OT is the word of God. But the bible is clear that the word is a pathway to God and that all men know God through the presence of his Holy Spirit.
God isn't a liar... as humans we can all be liars and we can all sin.
But God never does any of those things. The bible is not myth or fiction and if you followed the pathways too... you would know and learn that for yourself. No need for anyone else to teach or tell you.
We may get things wrong and do wrong...but the truth about God is a solid and firm foundation which seeks to show us our wrong and return us to our rightful place with God.
-
Dear Sass,
It is quite clear that you are a Bible believing Christian, God gave you a wonderful gift, do not waste it.
Oh and that Einstein quote, lot of truth in that quote.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Hope,
My thoughts, is God regretting the Covenant he made with Noah, now look at what his children are capable of :'(
Gonnagle.
God tells the end from the beginning....
King James Bible
Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:
In all things God works for the greater good.
He knew these things before they happened. Look at Hitler and 7 million Jews and disabled people.
Do you not think these things serve as a warning and prevent even greater evils when nipped in the bud/
God knew that if Adam ate from the tree he would live forever in a fallen state. He removed the sin for those whom choose to live.
But God loves us and sometimes we need to understand that if Christ dying would have only saved one person he loves us enough to have let him die for the one.
.......
But God would regret NOTHING for he has told us he works for our good and told the end from the beginning. Even when Noah was here on earth, God knew the history of man from the beginning and our choices... The book of life from the foundation of the world.
Do you write this stuff yourself or do you pay someone to do it for you?
If you feel you actually have a point the spit it out. Otherwise refrain from making comments which have absolutely no bearing on anything said... that is other than you showing your ignorance...
Sassy
NOT ignorance - Disbelief!
Please learn the difference.
CORRECTION;
Gonnagle, professes to be a believer...
Whereas HH,
Dismissed what I said as if not biblical.
Had he not been ignorant to the teachings of the bible he would NOT have made the statement he did.
Had nothing to to with disbelief it was ignorance. Had it just been disbelief, he would have said he did not believe what the bible said about God, not made a personal remark about the contents coming from myself or some other person.
I understood what I was replying to... how come you didn't.
When it comes to criticism of tyhe basis of your beliefs you understand NOTHING! That is your problem!
-
Hi Sassy
This biblical scholarship is fascinating.
Both Abraham and Noah were ancestors of Jesus Christ.
For the time being, we'll forget about Noah, and just look at the ancestry of Jesus. The Bible gives the genealogy of Jesus and, just as you say, he was descended from Abraham in a direct line of descent through 42 generations.
According to Archbishop Ussher, Abraham lived about 1900 years before Jesus. This means that the average age of each of the ancestors in the line of descent was about 45 at the time of the relevent conception. Seems a bit old, to me but we'll accept it. And because they were so relatively old it is also likely that several older siblings had already been produced - it was before the days of Marie Stopes, after all.
Anyway, let's assume that each of these patriarchs had just two children, and that each child had just two children. And of course, we know that Abraham only had one because the Bible says so - so that means wear looking at the progeny of 41 generations.
So 2 raised to the 41st power is:
1,199,020,000,000
Abraham's potential issue over 41 generations would be 1.19 trillion. That's more than a hundred times the present population of the planet.
No wonder Jesus could clain descent from Abraham. So could everyone else, including all the apostles, Judas Iscariot (ok so he was one of the apostles anyway) Herod Antipas and Pontius Pilate as well.
Both Christ and the Jews knew Abraham existed because the circumcision and covenant made handed down from Abraham.
I suspect that ritualised male genital mutilation had alrady been around for a long time.
Maybe you need to understand that the bible is true for many reasons and one reason is that Christ and Abraham both existed and without Noah then none of them could have existed.
There is no evidence that any of them existed. There are stories about them contained in the Bible. Using this argument I can say that Dumbledore and Ron Weasley both existed.
Now, I fear that we have derailed a topic about a very serious and meaningful subject. Let's get back to Hiroshima.
-
Using this argument I can say that Dumbledore and Ron Weasley both existed.
ARRGGGHH!! You mean that they didn't? I am totally and terminally devastated. My world is now falling apart.