Former US hostages allege Iran's new president was captor

Your right, it's 100% better than it was just 10 years ago. It's a 1000 times better than it was 50 years ago.

 

Sourdough,

True but the public has changed.
What is aceptable has changed. When Truman ordered the bomb on Japanese civilians, public sentiment was that the war needed to end at whatever cost, as long as it wasn't at OUR cost. After all we had just witnessed the Holocaust and the atrocities of Pearl harbor and the civilian bombing of the British people.
Dropping a nuclear bomb on two enemy civilian cities made sense. Sure much collateral damage would occur but the trade off was worth it.

Some did Criticize Truman but not many.

Fast forward to today. First of all, we aren't loosing men like we did in WWII. Not nearly as many. The US wasn't as populated then as it is today, so many more familys were effected. People wanted the enemy DEAD.

today public outcry would be the opposite. Too many want to coddle the enemy and ask them if we've wronged them to make them mad at us. People would be outraged at the mere suggestion of using even mass carpet bombings to convince the enemy to quit. No one has their back up agaisnt the wall yet. There are some that are sacrificing but by and large it's just on the news. Or it was young Billy Johnson who got killed, we didn't know him that well. How awful. No one is giving up buying supplies like Nylon for instance, as was the case in WWII. Women aren't having to work in munitions factories because all able bodied fighting men are called up.

They haven't converted any car manufacturing plants into fighter plane factories so far. There hasn't been a year model of car make skipped because the car manufacturer was too busy building tanks for the US Government yet.
there isn't a Military funeral in EVERY town just about EVERY day as there was in WWII, no things aren't THAT bad.


If you ever have someone break into your house in the middle of the night and possibly kill someone in your family, would you coddle them and ask them if you 've wronged them to make them mad at you.
Or would you just do the right thing and take them out? Hopefully this will never happen to any of us but you see my point?

War isn't pretty and it isnt always about "doing the right thing"
It's about survival and preserving a way of life.
It's hard to say what the "right thing" is. It's not always cut and dried. Truman had no way of knowing japan would turn out like it did. He did realize he and the U.S citizens wanted the war over though.

Who's to say it wasn't right to bomb Hiroshima. Well if you had a relative die there it probably wasn't your favorite part of history. But someone has to preserve THEIR way of life, I am glad it was us. AND did Japan do better?
Is Japan friendly with us now? the US built that nation and the people who died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the heroes that modern Japanense people should thank. Although they did not volunteer and the out come wasn't what they desired, it most likely had a better effect on their nation's future than say if Japan and the Axis had won the war.

Strength commands respect.
We've often heard throughout history that to show Mercy, shows weakness.

There is a time to be merciful and a time to be strong.

When your back is up against the wall and you feel the steel tip as the enemy is whispering in your ear, this is not the time to be merciful, it is the time to play your ACE card. or close your eyes and sleep.

Dont get me wrong, I'm not advocating blanket punishment for all Iraqis, all I am saying is at the very least, the US military should be allowed to take off the gloves and do what they do best. Secure your liberties.

:911: :usaflagwa

 

When I talk about our military aint what it use to be I mean by numbers only.
Its true that our military is better than it use to be but by technology only but
we don't have a mighty army like we once did.

I get your point but the problem with this war in Iraq and the way the total war on
terrorism is run is that we aren't doing a thing to fix the problem, such as Pakistan
and Iran, places were Al Quada and other groups have their roots and is taught.
Then there are our borders, we do all this extra security stuff and totally ignore the most important part.

Yes, the terrorists are coming to Iraq and I understand what King George is trying to
accomplish in Iraq but the problem I see is that it is like killing flies one by one.
When you kill flies, mesquitos and ants do you kill them one by one or do you spray
to try and take out as many as you can.
This is my point, we would be far better off spraying the terrorists and their training
facilities, schools were this hate is taught and breed then ignoring thier breeding
grounds and taking them out one by one.

The way I see it, its the world versus the terrorists and there is a price to pay for
either direction you take.
I think the price may be higher then when Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor, the
reason being is that its impossible to identify all of our enemies this time around.
Our way of life as well as existance is threatened by this new enemy because you
have to have a safe, free environment for a Democracy to flurish.
This is an unconventional war because the other side has no uniform or country to
identify them.

If you are real serious about the war on terror do you not have to take out their
schools and training facilities of hate?
I do not trust nor believe the countries of Pakistan, Iran and Syria are doing everything
they can to help us in this war, these are the roots of terrorism.
This is what happens when you don't fix the problem in the first place, this kind of thing started with Arafat in the 70's and because we didn't fix the problem the first
time around the stakes are now higher than ever.

 

Sadly, it looks like I won't get my wings for at least two more years, then add at least 6 months for the RAG. I guess we'll see! Meanwhile, several 03 buddies of mine will be there in the fall. Lucky bastards.

But you're right. Flying those Cobras would be badass, especially the new AH-1Z's. :grin:

 

Could not agree more. One of the best posts I've ever seen here...and I can't believe the source. Nice JSRacing. :thumb:

 

I NEVER suggested Nuclear weapons, I do have a Truman like scenario but I believe
the result could be reached by conventional bombing.
Its not like Iran, Pakistan and other middle east countries have great defenses and
shelters.
You might be partially right about Iran as far as letting them stew in their own problems but I disagree about Iran not being in this fight.
Some of the terrorists fighting us in Iraq are from there and I strongly believe that
you cannot prove that Iran isn't part of the problem or they have no terrorists.
If you want a one on one war then people better quit complaining about casualties
because there will be plenty with the unconventional method and the unfair
methods, a war with no rules meaning the enemy will disguise women and children
and attack you when you least expect it.
There is no Geneva Convention with this war.

You have to kill the root of the problem and not just a few fighters here and there.

 

Red, please stop applying reason to my fantasies of nuclear bomb-inducing parking lot development. If you have a fantasy about Pamela Anderson (or similar), I don't ruin your fun by reminding you that they probably wouldn't be into an old professor. Please afford us the same courtesy in our WWIII dreams.

 

Red, doing nothing is sometimes the same as doing something, just takes longer. We should do everything we can to Help more forward thinking youth or would be Rebels in Iran. At one time we were considered Rebels commiting treason to the english crown.
The only problem with helping fund or encourage covert coups or groups in other countries is. 1. it looks bad and 2. it could really be worse. out of the frying pan and into the fire so to speak. which looks worse.

Sometimes we settle for the lesser of two evils. Sell arms to a U.S. friendly dictator to keep a radical Holy man out of office for example.

you never know when that group of "young" Iranians that you supported, may decide the winds of change and a new democratic government aren't what they wanted after all. They just up and decide to follow jamir akmar homad salad man holy man. then what do you do? OPPS?
LOL

but I think you are right, let Iran implode in on itself.
if Bush by some miracle turns out to be right and Iraq becomes a democracy but more important a center for Western culture and free trade.... look for IRAN to want a taste of that.

I am doubting things will change fast over there though, the Muslim religion is extremely radical in and of itself. It amazes me how well it seems to resist modernization.