Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Ted Cruz

7 (6.5%)

Rick Santorum

16 (14.8%)

Michelle Bachmann

13 (12%)

Chris Christie

23 (21.3%)

Rand Paul

49 (45.4%)

Total Members Voted: 107

[Lagslayer]

When you make a soldier fight a war he's going to want all the tools in the toolbox. The reason the U.S. has been struggling in it's overseas combats since 1945 is that the U.S. public is hamstringing them every step of the way.

It sucks that the US public has prevented its army from performing acts of wholesale genocide.

You talk as if the Cold War was a snowball fight and one of the kids decides to whip out a rocket launcher and kill everyone for the lulz.

As far as anyone was concerned back then, WW3 was just around the corner, and you could be annihilated at any moment. "The enemy" was using everything at it's disposal to take everything you have and subvert your entire way of life. Faced with complete destruction, culturally and otherwise, how far would you be willing to go to prevent it? What if your defeat meant that the bad guys had free reign and could basically enslave everyone who was left?

Hindsight is not a fair way to judge.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

Nuclear genocide does not require hindsight to be seen as an act of foolishness. Especially for those claiming it was a legitimate idea to have.

Its nice to see some people learn nothing from history. I would also like to emphasize this point said earlier:

Two things to remember about that nuclear plan MacArthur had.

1) Back then there was no "Nuclear Taboo", or at least one not as strong as the current; nuclear weapons weren't necessarily crossing as severe a line, and could be used without immediately provoking WWIII.
2) If he had used them, there would likely never have been a "nuclear taboo": whenever anyone who had them wanted to use them, they simply would use them and be done with it, and no outrage or larger repercussions would occur. Decisions regarding their use would be purely tactical. How much damage this would do is impossible to predict, but it's safe to say "a lot".

Our world as we know it would be a vastly different place had Genocide MacArthur gotten his way.

[Loud Whispers]

MacArthur also let Japanese war criminals go free in exchange for access to their medical research. He didn't care that the information had been gained by performing some of the most barbaric experiments in human history on Chinese civilians (who cares though? It's not like they're white).

That's funny. You think the people who made these decisions cared about skin colour. It didn't stop MKULTRA and god knows what else, why would it stop them then, before racial prejudice was even remotely unpopular?

The Soviets were the only people who had an iota of principle and hanged those they captured.

...Unless they had actually beaten the Americans in capturing the Nazi scientists like Wernher von Braun. The end of WWII was going to level economic superpowers and construct entirely new ones, these scientists would become invaluable in reconstructing broken countries or in America's case, bringing the New World to supremacy.
If the Soviets could have, they would have tried capturing Unit 731. WWII was a world where every single country on the planet had become a lot colder.

[Owlbread]

That's funny. You think the people who made these decisions cared about skin colour. It didn't stop MKULTRA and god knows what else, why would it stop them then, before racial prejudice was even remotely unpopular?

I was actually trying to highlight the possible racism in what MacArthur was doing. I don't expect anything different of them of course.

[Loud Whispers]

I was actually trying to highlight the possible racism in what MacArthur was doing. I don't expect anything different of them of course.

It's possible he was racist. Failing that, it's possible he was prejudiced. Yet there's little reason to believe so, and it detracts from the fact that someone who didn't understand fully the effects of a nuclear weapon and its aftermath - physically and politically, almost started something that would very well could have been threatening to the entire human species. Such speculation belongs more in discussions where it is relevant, like the American concentration camps.

[Lagslayer]

Nuclear genocide does not require hindsight to be seen as an act of foolishness. Especially for those claiming it was a legitimate idea to have.

Its nice to see some people learn nothing from history. I would also like to emphasize this point said earlier:

Two things to remember about that nuclear plan MacArthur had.

1) Back then there was no "Nuclear Taboo", or at least one not as strong as the current; nuclear weapons weren't necessarily crossing as severe a line, and could be used without immediately provoking WWIII.
2) If he had used them, there would likely never have been a "nuclear taboo": whenever anyone who had them wanted to use them, they simply would use them and be done with it, and no outrage or larger repercussions would occur. Decisions regarding their use would be purely tactical. How much damage this would do is impossible to predict, but it's safe to say "a lot".

Our world as we know it would be a vastly different place had Genocide MacArthur gotten his way.

First, you seem to be confusing "foolish" with "unethical". Holding certain things above others in value does not necessarily reflect on one's intelligence. Your end goal seems to be preventing as many deaths as possible at any cost. His was to protect his own people and way of life at any cost. Ethics are not universal.

Second, having plans to nuke people "just in case" does not mean that it's the go-to plan. And quite frankly, I feel it would be foolish not to have such plans. It is best to plan for dire situations in advance.

I was actually trying to highlight the possible racism in what MacArthur was doing. I don't expect anything different of them of course.

It's possible he was racist. Failing that, it's possible he was prejudiced. Yet there's little reason to believe so, and it detracts from the fact that someone who didn't understand fully the effects of a nuclear weapon and its aftermath - physically and politically, almost started something that would very well could have been threatening to the entire human species. Such speculation belongs more in discussions where it is relevant, like the American concentration camps.

+1
Nuclear weapons were a new thing and a massively significant milestone. Nobody really knew what to do with it or how things would play out with and around it.

[Lord Shonus]

His assumption was more that they would be "Oh no! If we object to you using those super-powerful bombs, you'll use them on us and wipe us out! YOu have many, many more than we do!"

[Frumple]

Which is an assumption that would be an incredible freaking risk to bank on -- another major likelihood is "Oh hell, they're actually using those things for shit like that. Hit them before they turn on us!"

Definitely not the sort of assumption you want a major power player to be making, ever, imo. If you're including a risk that large in your operational considerations you probably need to be replaced, yesterday.

[misko27]

American Political Thread, Christmas Edition: "Was MacArthur right to want to nuke Best Korea into fine dust?"


That, that sums up a lot.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

If we were so flippant with nukes, we just would have done Operation Dropshot and have been done with it back in the 40's.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

If Commies were really worse than nukes, then Operation Dropshot would have been the response. Make no mistake, if we were alright with the largest single act of killing in human history, the USSR and PRC both wouldn't have lasted past 1955.

[Lagslayer]

If Commies were really worse than nukes, then Operation Dropshot would have been the response. Make no mistake, if we were alright with the largest singe act of killing in human history, the USSR and PRC both wouldn't have lasted past 1955.

Don't they sort of hold the record, though?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

If Commies were really worse than nukes, then Operation Dropshot would have been the response. Make no mistake, if we were alright with the largest singe act of killing in human history, the USSR and PRC both wouldn't have lasted past 1955.

Don't they sort of hold the record, though?

That depends upon what you're talking about. If it's just killing other humans, the highest is either WWII or the Taiping Rebellion, as the latter has a very large margin of error in the death count. If it's an act of genocide, then Mao is the highest.

[Morrigi]

When you make a soldier fight a war he's going to want all the tools in the toolbox. The reason the U.S. has been struggling in it's overseas combats since 1945 is that the U.S. public is hamstringing them every step of the way.

It sucks that the US public has prevented its army from performing acts of wholesale genocide.

It sucks that the US public has forced its army into unwinnable situations

O_o

Not like they have some of the most advanced gear in the world or anything. In a few years the standard-issue light machine gun and 1,000 rounds of its ammo are likely to weigh less than the current SAW, unloaded.

[Lagslayer]

When you make a soldier fight a war he's going to want all the tools in the toolbox. The reason the U.S. has been struggling in it's overseas combats since 1945 is that the U.S. public is hamstringing them every step of the way.

It sucks that the US public has prevented its army from performing acts of wholesale genocide.

It sucks that the US public has forced its army into unwinnable situations

O_o

Not like they have some of the most advanced gear in the world or anything. In a few years the standard-issue light machine gun and 1,000 rounds of its ammo are likely to weigh less than the current SAW, unloaded.

If the military was allowed to fight without restriction, those conflicts could have been won (I'd think relatively easily). Instead, they get in there and aren't allowed to do anything except stand around, because the enemy dresses like civilians and literally uses them as human shields.