SCENARIO and Question: Iran launches surprise sneak attack on US bases

[UdoKier]

Purely hypothetical, very unlikely scenario and question: Iran launches surprise sneak attack on US bases in Iraq. So then, Bush launches a massive counterattack leading to an invasion of Iran.

I don't think most of us have a problem with POS Bush's course of action up to this point.


But as the invasion progresses, it becomes clear that the resistance is fierce and progress is slow. Rummy and Wolfowitz estimate that we will lose 50K soldiers in the invasion.

So Bush drops a hydrogen bomb on Tehran. 12 million people - out like a wink.


Was Bush justified in doing so?




If you say no, what about Truman's terrorist attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Why do so many of us condone that mass murder, when we all know we would be reviled of the reptilian POS Bush were to do the exact same thing.

I'm always shocked when I find people here who defend that decision. The fact that Truman was a democrat should not excuse his actions.

[RC]

1. What does WWII have to do with bu$h's illegal war?

Hopefully enough of us have learned something since then we will know better than to use nukes. If Iran does this, you'd better believe they are being backed up by some real power.
So no, the US main land would be next with in hours. And that stupid Star Wars boondoggle will not save anyone or anything.

[Goldmund]

2. Invasion of IRAN you mean :-)

Of course Bush isn't justified in doing so. Neither was Truman.

An unlikely scenario, IMO.

[UdoKier]

8. Of course it's unlikely. Strictly hypothetical.

But The Truman defenders usually betray their double standard when it's posited this way.

[UdoKier]

13. OOps. Fixed it.

Thanks.

[lenidog]

3. You have two interesting threads going on here

One, I don't think Iran would ever launch a preemptive strike for the simple fact that the Iranian military isn't capable of doing so. Its basically still at the moment a internal security and defensive force.

The problem with you second thread is that you and many others are basing your belief that the attacks on Nagasaki and Hiroshima on hind sight. Which is a powerful tool but unfortunately only happens after the fact. Even with hindsight the claim that the bombs were not needed to end the war are on shaky ground. To ever truly decided whether a decision was right or wrong one must shed the views of their time and try looking at it through the eyes of the people who made the decision using only the info that they had behind them.

[UdoKier]

10. Hindsight? Truman was 100% aware of what the bomb would do.

He knew that the cities were primarily civilian population centers, and he was advised by almost all of the military leadership NOT to do it.

I say to you what I say to everyone who defends the terrorist attacks.

Visit Hiroshima & Nagasaki. Meet the hibakusha. Do some research.

[lenidog]

24. Truman knew exactly what the bomb would do

and no one disputes that point. What is actually germane to the subject is what was in the minds of the Japanese Government and Military which Truman did not know. Also Hiroshima was a military target while no one could have really warned Truman from bombing Nagasaki because it was not the primary target. It was a secondary target and was bombed because the primary was clouded in. Even with that said it was still the major shipping point for all troops and weapons from Asia and therefore a major military target.

[UdoKier]

28. Hiroshima was NOT a strategic military target.

If it had been, we would not have spared it from bombing, even as we leveled all the other major Japanese industrial cities with conventional bombing and reprehensible firebombing of civilian areas.


What nonsense.

[CAMANY]

4. Have you been watching too much FOX news?

WTF is wrong with americans who think everyone wants to get them?

Do you honestly believe most people wake up in Iran thinking of ways to pre-emptively attack others?

[UdoKier]

11. Read the whole post.

I think this scenario is about as likely as me getting married to Angelina Jolie.

[maveric]

5. Do you think that Iran is that stupid to attack US bases.

I'm sure that they realize the consequences of such an action.
But the bu$h administration will spin it that Iran is just an evil culture that hates us for our freedoms.
That aint gonna happen.

[Cuban_Liberal]

6. "Truman's terrorist attacks "

Yeah. Whatever.

:eyes:

[UdoKier]

12. I prefer to blame those terrorist acts of mass murder on Truman...

than on the entire US.

[Cuban_Liberal]

14. It was a WAR, ffs!

It was NOT a terrorist act, for cryin' out loud!

:wtf:

[UdoKier]

15. Being at war does not excuse the mass murder of CIVILIANS.

In case you hadn't heard, Japanese are human beings too.


It was a terrorist act because its aim was not so much to bring down the Japanese government, which was already signaling its willingness to surrender, it was intended to intimidate the Soviet Union, our new rival and a possible invasion thread to Japan.

That is by definition a terrorist act.

[Cuban_Liberal]

16. It was NOT a terrorist act.

You are not the sole arbiter of what is or is not a terrorist act!

[UdoKier]

17. From the dictionary:

Terrorism NOUN:

The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.


And you have utterly failed to demonstrate how it was not a terrorist act.


But I guess it can be surmised that in the aforementioned scenario, you would support Bush's leveling the city of Tehran with a nuclear weapon.

[Cuban_Liberal]

20. The first three words are your downfall...

"The unlawful use...."

His use was NOT illegal, but in furtherance of his duties as commander-in-chief to bring the war to a close as quickly as possible with as few American and Allied deaths as possible. Case closed.

[UdoKier]

22. I'm pretty sure that knowingly slaughtering civilians is illegal

according to the Geneva Convention, to which the US is a signatory.

[Cuban_Liberal]

23. Please find and cite the section.

I'm not so sure of that at all.

[UdoKier]

25. Familiarize yourself.

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/92.htm

[Cuban_Liberal]

26. I am familiar.

Please answer the question I asked.

[UdoKier]

27. I quote Article 3:

"1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;"

[Cuban_Liberal]

29. Truman's diary:

Harry S. Truman, Diary, July 25, 1945
President Truman told his diary on July 25, 1945, that he had ordered the bomb used.

Emphasis has been added to highlight Truman's apparent belief that he had ordered the bomb dropped on a "purely military" target, so that "military objectives and soldiers and sailors are the target and not women and children."

We have discovered the most terrible bomb in the history of the world. It may be the fire destruction prophesied in the Euphrates Valley Era, after Noah and his fabulous Ark.

Anyway we "think" we have found the way to cause a disintegration of the atom. An experiment in the New Mexico desert was startling - to put it mildly. Thirteen pounds of the explosive caused the complete disintegration of a steel tower 60 feet high, created a crater 6 feet deep and 1,200 feet in diameter, knocked over a steel tower 1/2 mile away and knocked men down 10,000 yards away. The explosion was visible for more than 200 miles and audible for 40 miles and more.

This weapon is to be used against Japan between now and August 10th. I have told the Sec. of War, Mr. Stimson, to use it so that military objectives and soldiers and sailors are the target and not women and children. Even if the Japs are savages, ruthless, merciless and fanatic, we as the leader of the world for the common welfare cannot drop that terrible bomb on the old capital or the new.

He and I are in accord. The target will be a purely military one and we will issue a warning statement asking the Japs to surrender and save lives. I'm sure they will not do that, but we will have given them the chance. It is certainly a good thing for the world that Hitler's crowd or Stalin's did not discover this atomic bomb. It seems to be the most terrible thing ever discovered, but it can be made the most useful...

Truman quoted in Robert H. Ferrell, Off the Record: The Private Papers of Harry S. Truman (New York: Harper and Row, 1980) pp. 55-56. Truman's writings are in the public domain.

[UdoKier]

30. Wow, so he lied in his diary too.

Since Hiroshima was primarily a civilian population center and NOT a military target, it can be deduced that he was trying to preserve his "legacy".

[Cuban_Liberal]

34. You *assume* he lied.

Can you prove that he had actual knowledge to the contrary? No, you can't.

[UdoKier]

38. There were extensive aerial photographs of the city.

It could easily be seen that the vast majority of the city was civilian.

Conventional bombing could have easily taken out any military installations.

Now you're being intellectually dishonest, too.

Anything to preserve your little rose-colored view of history, I guess.

[Cuban_Liberal]

40. Do you know that he actually KNEW that?

You are the one who says that Truman lied. Prove it.

[UdoKier]

43. He was the president.

His advisers were against the bombings. They must have mentioned that these were civilian population centers. Or are you accusing them of committing a massive fraud of omission against the President?

[Cuban_Liberal]

46. They weren't the commander-in-chief.

Yes, I do suggest that they didn't tell him all the facts The record is CLEAR that Truman thought Hiroshima was a military target.

[Darranar]

35. How can you NOT target women and children...

when you drop an atomic bomb on a large population center?

Did he think the bomb was sentient, and could decide whether a person was a soldier or a civilian?

[Cuban_Liberal]

37. He did not *deliberately* target civilians.

It's an entirely different question. Furthermore, the Japanese were warned, had made war on the WORLD for a decade, etc. . It would be nice to see some condemnation of THEIR actions, for a change.

[Darranar]

How was it not deliberate?

He KNEW it would slaughter thousands of innocent people.

The Japanese regime is not equivalent to the Japanese people. They did commit a vast number of horrible atrocities, but that does not at all excuse atrocities committed against them.

[Cuban_Liberal]

42. No, he didn't 'know that'.

Harry S. Truman, Diary, July 25, 1945
President Truman told his diary on July 25, 1945, that he had ordered the bomb used.

Emphasis has been added to highlight Truman's apparent belief that he had ordered the bomb dropped on a "purely military" target, so that "military objectives and soldiers and sailors are the target and not women and children."

We have discovered the most terrible bomb in the history of the world. It may be the fire destruction prophesied in the Euphrates Valley Era, after Noah and his fabulous Ark.

Anyway we "think" we have found the way to cause a disintegration of the atom. An experiment in the New Mexico desert was startling - to put it mildly. Thirteen pounds of the explosive caused the complete disintegration of a steel tower 60 feet high, created a crater 6 feet deep and 1,200 feet in diameter, knocked over a steel tower 1/2 mile away and knocked men down 10,000 yards away. The explosion was visible for more than 200 miles and audible for 40 miles and more.

This weapon is to be used against Japan between now and August 10th. I have told the Sec. of War, Mr. Stimson, to use it so that military objectives and soldiers and sailors are the target and not women and children. Even if the Japs are savages, ruthless, merciless and fanatic, we as the leader of the world for the common welfare cannot drop that terrible bomb on the old capital or the new.

He and I are in accord. The target will be a purely military one and we will issue a warning statement asking the Japs to surrender and save lives. I'm sure they will not do that, but we will have given them the chance. It is certainly a good thing for the world that Hitler's crowd or Stalin's did not discover this atomic bomb. It seems to be the most terrible thing ever discovered, but it can be made the most useful...

Truman quoted in Robert H. Ferrell, Off the Record: The Private Papers of Harry S. Truman (New York: Harper and Row, 1980) pp. 55-56. Truman's writings are in the public domain.

[UdoKier]

47. Their actions were roundly condemned.

We continue to make a big stink about the few hundred SOLDIERS who were killed every Pearl Harbor Day.

Japan has since embraced a pacifist constitution, and up until Bush stooge Koizumi, ahd been working mostly as a force for peace in the world.

The US stopped being a force for peace decades ago.

[Cuban_Liberal]

48. I haven't seen your posts condemning them.

Please show me those.

[UdoKier]

51. Here's a recent post.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3488838#3489142

I lived in Japan. Half my family is Japanese. This is not just chitchat to me.

The fact that Japanese soldiers did evil things in the war doesn't excuse us from evil we commit. The Japanese were brainwashed to think they were liberating Asia from western imperialism, just as many Americans are brainwashed to believe we are liberating the middle east today.

But you've made it clear. You think that Bush would be justified in nuking Tehran, and that Iraqis would be justified in nuking US cities. Thanks.

[Cuban_Liberal]

53. No, I haven't made that clear.

All I've done is make it clear that your allegations that Harry Truman was some sort of terrorist are complete and unmitigated horseshit.

[Baclava]

31. You act like the Japanese were innocent...

http://members.iinet.net.au/~gduncan/massacres_pacific.html

NANKING MASSACRE (December, 1937)

Known historically as the 'Rape of Nanking'
...(snip) "In the following six weeks, the Nanking Red Cross units alone, buried around 43,000 bodies. About 20,000 women and girls had been raped, most were then murdered. Department stores, shops, churches and houses were set on fire while drunken soldiers indulged in wholesale looting and bayoneting of Chinese civilians for sport. It is estimated that up to 150,000 Chinese civilians and soldiers were killed in this, the most infamous atrocity committed by the Japanese army...."

THE CHEKIANG MASSACRES

...(Snip) "When the Japanese troops moved out of the Chekiang and Kiangsu areas in mid-August, they left behind a scene of devastation and death that is beyond comprehension. Chinese estimates put the death toll at a staggering 250,000. Lt. Col. James Doolittle was later awarded the US Medal Of Honor. (The Chinese Department of Defense claims that 1,319,659 Chinese soldiers were killed between 1937 and 1945. It estimates the number of Chinese civilians killed during this period at over 30,000,000)

THE PORT BLAIR MASSACRES (March 23, 1942)

... (Snip) "Japanese forces occupied the British controlled Andaman Islands. They met no resistance from the local population but within hours the 'Sons of Heaven' started an orgy of looting, raping and murder. Unbelievable orgies were perpetrated in the towns and villages with women and young girls forcibly raped and young boys sodomized. In Port Blair, eight high-ranking Indian officials were tortured then buried up to their chests in pits they were forced to dig. Their chests, heads and eyes were then prodded with bayonets after which the pit was sprayed with bullets until the helpless victims were all dead. During the three and a half years of Japanese occupation, out of the 40,000 population of Port Blair around 30,000 were brutally murdered."


...it goes on and on and on.....

[UdoKier]

36. The Japanese civilians WERE innocent, and blissfully unaware

of those atrocities, just as many Americans are blissfully unaware that we slaughtered upwards of 100K Iraqi civilians in our illegal and unprovoked invasion of Iraq.

Would some angry Iraqis be justified in nuking one of OUR cities, just because Bush murdered a bunch of THEM?

What a crock of crap. Where do you people come up with this shit?

Of course the Japanese were horribly brutal in dealing with the people they occupied. And they've got a long way to go in owning up to what they have done.

But we haven't owned up to what we did AT ALL.

[Cuban_Liberal]

39. We have nothing to own up TO.

We did not start WW2, but by God, we DID end it!

[UdoKier]

41. Yes, with an unconscionable act of mass murder.

"He started it" doesn't work as an excuse, either.

[Cuban_Liberal]

44. It was not "an unconscionable act of mass murder"

As has already been shown, Truman's order was to avoid civilian deaths, if at all possible. I love arguing with the 'blame America' crowd, because they seldomn care to recognize facts which don't fit neatly into their agenda.

[UdoKier]

49. "Blame America crowd"? Wow, a Hannity talking point, too!

Good to know who I'm talking to!


BTW, blaming Truman is not blaming America.

[Cuban_Liberal]

50. If the shoe fits, wear it.

You're calling Truman a murdering savage.

[UdoKier]

52. The shoe of mass murderer certainly fits Truman.

He also started the unnecessary Cold War, in case you'd forgotten.

[Cuban_Liberal]

54. Nice mischaracterization.

The Cold War was not unneccessary, in case YOU'D forgotten.

[mikehiggins]

7. First of all, the opening of your scenario would be a lie

from the outset. There would be NO Iranian attack AND Bush wouldn't give a rat's ass how many "brave 'muricans" got wasted in the war. They all are, after all, volunteers.

So, what is the other question? Oh, yeah. A major power attacks and destroys US interests in the Pacific AND invades Asia AND Australia in alliance with a genocidal maddog regime in Europe, costs the world millions of innocent lives, destroys entire populations and looks to cost the US hundreds of thousands of additional American lives BECAUSE the militarists running their show refuse to accept any sort of defeat or surrender acceptable to their enemies.

So Truman nukes 'em, the Emporer finds his cojones and the war ends.

And you have a problem with that?

You compare George Bush to HST? The neocon imperialism to WWII?

In my opinion, that is just lame, lame, lame.

I'm sorry so many Japanese were killed in the A-bombings but there is no doubt in my mind that if they had those weapons they would have used them against us, just as the Nazis would have. It was a war, after all, not a tea-party.

[signmike]

9. By Iran attacking - maybe you mean "Iran" -- (MIHOP)

[Media_Lies_Daily]

18. The war against Japan was believed to be justified at the time....

...and even knowing today that Pearl Harbor was a setup to cause Japan to launch their attack, I still believe going to war against Japan was the right thing to do. By the time we entered the war against Japan, Japan was allied with Germany and Italy, and at war with a number of countries that later became our allies during WWII.

I also believe that had we invaded Japan instead of dropping the nukes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, many more Americans and Japanese would have died during and following the invasion than the number of Japanese that died as a result of the two nuclear weapons.

Conversely, a war against Iran would be very difficult to justify for any reason, following as closely as it does the unjustified invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Iran has never attacked the US, or US interests. Iran is not currently at war with any of her neighbors...the last war fought by Iran was against Iraq almost twenty years ago. A nuking of Tehran would not be looked upon with favor by a majority of Americans, not to mention the rest of the world. Most Americans are slow, but not stupid. Besides, Al Qaeda was supposedly our primary enemy along with Osama....what happened to the operation designed to eradicate them?

[UdoKier]

19. I never said that the war was unjustified.

It was completely justified as FDR had pursued it.


And most would feel a war against Iran precipitated by sneak attacks on our bases in Iraq would be justification for a war there. The point is some democrats' willingness to excuse an act of mass murder against civilians simply because it was committed by a democrat, and because it happened at the end of a war that is generally viewed through nostalgic rose-colored glasses by most Americans today.

[UdoKier]

21. We should level Baghdad with nukes.

After all, we've lost 1500 soldiers, and are bound to lose many hundreds more in this occupation, therefore it's justified.

Yours truly, Truman Apologist


:sarcasm:

[MisterP]

32. I think you'd like Rhodes's "The Making of the Atomic Bomb"

it's also very damning towards Curtis LeMay; his policy was basically to slaughter civilians, ostensibly to "bring this horrible war to an end," never minding that it was mostly so horrible because of those very bombings...

[Darranar]

33. No...

That would be a vicious and disgusting atrocity.

[leveymg]

45. A much more likely scenario is Iran being tricked into launching first.

Remember the aircraft drop tanks that fell with a big bang 11 miles from the nuclear plant being constructed at Bushehr, Iran (say that aloud)?

That seemed to have set off a lot of alarm bells and the beginning of a retaliatory strike. What would the result be if a single, unmarked fighter bomber dropped a bomb right on the plant? Or, if a major Iranian figure were assassinated?

That would present a real dilemma for the Iranian military command: use 'em or lose them. Not a very long fuse, and easy to light. Too much of a temptation for some, I think.

I hope that the Europeans and Russians have run the Iranian Generals through some scenario planning of this sort. The world doesn't need another Sarajevo, 1914.



:bounce: :freak: :nuke: :bounce:

[Moderator]

55. Locking.

The thread has become a slugfest. Everyone seems to have made their points and we're calling time out.

Thanks for your consideration,
DU Mod