What is Digg?794 Comments
- Raisedshoulder, on 05/04/2008, -14/+377"War is where the young and stupid are tricked by the old and bitter to kill each other.'' - Niko Bellic
- zippy757, on 05/04/2008, -30/+305I'm 84. I'm a WWII vet. I was slated to go to mainland Japan in 3 weeks when the A bombs were used. It was expected that 1 million GIs would have dies on the shores of Japan. There is nothing that can make this an acceptable situation on any sides part, however, what this generation needs to understand is the context and history of what lead to this action. You need to do your homework on the horrors of the Japan front before passing judgment. As terrible as these picture are, they are NOTHING COMPARED TO WHAT JAPAN WAS DOING to GIs, Chinese, and their own citizens. They ( different than todays fine Japanese ) were a horrible, brutal and inhumane people.
I grew up in western PA. In those days the entire high school school went to war together. Out of 175 men from my HS class, only 33 returned. All the others died in fighting in AP theater. Many died on Japan prison camps. Horrible deaths.
Please do your homework on real history before shooting off your mouths with naive uneducated theoretical views... the world isn't as simple and nice as you all believe it is..!
PS: It's about as low as you can go using WWII A bomb as a 2008 campaign card.... Huffingpost shame on you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&safe=off&res ...
http://www.cnd.org/njmassacre/ - tcbishop12, on 05/04/2008, -90/+334When was the last time you heard an American political figure talk about obliterating another country?
What precisely did Clinton mean when she said, "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran... We would be able to totally obliterate them"?
Obliterate: a: to remove utterly from recognition or memory. b: to remove from existence : destroy utterly all trace, indication, or significance of.
Clinton made her incendiary statement for calculated domestic electoral advantage. In Clinton's case, she was hoping that her statement might add a half a percentage point or so to her total in a single state in a primary election.
So there -- you have it.
Clinton lobbed a time bomb into the Middle East tinderbox, on the off chance that it might win her a half a percentage point or so to her total in a single state in a primary election.
This from a candidate whose mantra for months has been that she, as opposed to her opponent, is experienced in world affairs and is ready to be comander in chief on day one.
Not if we can help it. I, personally, do not want to see Hillary Rodham Clinton anywhere near the nuclear access attack codes. - Puisapres, on 05/04/2008, -17/+215I am not Hillary's biggest fan, but please let's not politicize these photos. These pictures should stand alone as a testament to the sheer horror of war.
- joshpar, on 05/04/2008, -36/+180I find it desperate that anyone is linking these photos (discovered over 10 years ago) to the current campaign. Don't get me wrong, I find Sen. Clinton's tone about Iran extremely disturbing, but using the devastation we inflicted on Japan in 1945 as a way to prove that point is uncouth, cheap propaganda.
If Sen. Clinton said 'I hope we do to Iran what these pictures show we did to Japan' you could have a field BishkekBuddy - but these photos have little to do with the kind of point you are trying to make.
By all means, see the pictures and be a responsible citizen. But don't use this horror as a cheap campaign tactic. - cnot3, on 05/04/2008, -61/+151Hiroshima and Nagasaki were terrible tragedies, but necessary acts of war. Don't forget that a conventional invasion of Japan would have cost at least 250,000 American lives (some sources say even more), not to mention countless Japanese lives. The firebombings of Tokyo and Dresden were far more terrible in terms of cost of life than the A-bombs as well. Ironically, dropping the A-bomb probably saved far more lives than it took. Conventional warfare can be horrific too.
- slightlygifted, on 05/04/2008, -4/+93you guys need to just give the elections a break for a while.
- doctorfungi, on 05/04/2008, -7/+89Why the ***** would you politicize this? "Here's a bomb that went off 60 years ago. In conclusion, don't vote for so and so".
- inactive, on 05/04/2008, -30/+97Yes war sucks, but that's war. A bomb is a bomb.
The Japanese were ruthless.
Japan allied themselves with Nazi Germany. Japan attacked a US military base.....
Thousands of Chinese and Korean civilians suffered horrible deaths at the hands of Japanese soldiers and through medical experiments in Japanese prison camps. Russia and the US were set to invade Japan towards the end of the war. Millions would have died.
Unconditional surrender was offered to the Japanese...they rejected it. The bombing changed the mind of the God Emperor of Japan , Hirohito. The US occupied Japan and now Japan is one of the top five largest economies in the world. - iLemon, on 05/04/2008, -26/+93You make it sound as if Senator Clinton just said she would nuke Iran as if it was on her to-do list if she is elected president. This was her response to a hypothetical question that presumed Israel looked like Hiroshima in these pictures, as a result of a nuclear attack by Iran
- Winston84, on 05/04/2008, -14/+68Israel has AT LEAST 200 nuclear devices, Iran has ZERO, NONE.
The Clintons are a bunch of power-maniacs, I hope the American People decides to retire them in November .. - stealthc, on 05/04/2008, -5/+53Compelling post.
WRONG TOPIC.
This doesn't get to be "2008 Election" related just because you hate Hillary Clinton. I wish people would stop using the descriptive paragraph of their posts to write political ads for Barack Obama, just so it gets to the front page. - AMSRay, on 05/04/2008, -9/+56I'm pleased to see there are at least a couple of people on Digg that have an understanding of world history that goes beyond "The U.S. is evil". It was the policies and financial support of our leaders that rebuilt Europe and Japan after World War II. We did everything we could to not get involved, and don't think for a minute that if the Germany or Japan had nukes they would have hesitated to use them on a far larger scale than we did.
- tehrich, on 05/04/2008, -3/+49I went to Hiroshima in March of this year to listen to a survivor who was 12 at the time of the bombing give a talk about her experience. It was really something to hear from someone who firsthand saw and felt the power of a nuclear bomb, and what her feelings are now 63 years later. Regardless of the reason they were dropped, it's hard to deny the devastation and pain they caused.
If anyone is interested in listening, I recorded the speech and put online her account of when the bomb exploded: http://vimeo.com/748115 - stinkypickles, on 05/04/2008, -25/+66Looks like someone... NUKED the server! HAHAHA!
Ok, seriously, mirror? - megabytehl, on 05/04/2008, -10/+49Man is capable of this. Let no one have a greater fear than of himself.
- doctechnical, on 05/04/2008, -8/+44And let's not forget the mercy the Japanese showed to the fallen in the Bataan Death March.
- Ockniel, on 05/04/2008, -13/+48why are we still calling them "japs"? They're Japanese.
- leonidas333, on 05/04/2008, -11/+45Ok if you think thats bad you should see the footage of the Raping of Nanking, helps put that image in perspective.
You should look into the atrocities the Japanese committed in WWII before you start viewing them as the victims of that war as their state history is being told now - mediaphile, on 05/04/2008, -2/+36This is false. Japan did not surrender until after the bombing of Nagasaki. They ignored the Potsdam Declaration, which was made on July 26th, until after Hiroshima, at which point they only began to consider surrender. They refused to surrender without special conditions. The second bomb was dropped to prove that we had more than just the one atomic bomb, and that we would continue to drop them until Japan surrendered. Germany had already surrendered in May, which ended the war in Europe, so this message was solely for Japan.
You condemn the United States for the actions it committed, but the Potsdam declaration was put forth by the allied countries of the United States, Great Britain, and the Republic of China. Japan had invaded countries, killing many more than the amount of people killed in the two atomic bombings. It's over-simplistic to point a finger at the United States as being the "bad guy" in what was a terrible, complex global conflict. - Machuse, on 05/04/2008, -5/+37I wonder how many people would like to look at the pictures of the destruction that would have been caused had the bomb NOT been dropped. Its easy to sit back 50 years later and say...'why did you do that'. But what would you think if it were your brothers, friends, and fathers that had to go over their and die to invade and occupy Japan.
Bottom line: you have too look at things for what they were, not just look at the aftermath. The death toll and the destruction would have been orders of magnitude higher if we had to invade japan city by city inch by inch. Just landing on japan would have probably killed more people that dropping one of the bombs.
Extra Credit: Compare the death toll on D-Day and Pearl Harbor (either combined or not) to the death toll at Hiroshima. Then extrapolate for what all the people that would have died invading Japan; both Japanese and American. - nosyred, on 05/04/2008, -3/+35both my ww2 vet grandfathers email me regularly, dude. chill out.
- inactive, on 05/04/2008, -17/+47Same way the Japanese experimented and murdered thousands of Chinese and Korean civilians ?
- govsucks, on 05/04/2008, -18/+48Man, we are so bad, the Japanese would NEVER have done this to us. We know this because they treated the Chinese so damn well, especially their females. Matter of fact, the Chinese still love the Japanese to this day for their benevolence. Down with American imperialism...errr up with Japanese imperialism. /Sarcasm
Moronic bed wetting leftists. - mbonzo531, on 05/04/2008, -36/+64It killed civilians, women and children, instead of Soldiers. Yes it is possible that more soldiers would have died in WWII than civilians in the two bombings but IMO when you are purposely attacking civilians in anyway you're just crossing the line.
- travbrack, on 05/04/2008, -24/+50This article isn't about Hillary Clinton, jackass.
- Mier, on 05/04/2008, -2/+28What zippy said was true whether or not he's 84 is irrelevent. There was a declaration of war by the US on Japan and via the axis treaty war was declared on the US. They attacked first, they were the enemy, our use of force has held the peace for the last 60 years.
- Puisapres, on 05/04/2008, -4/+29To zippy757: Thank you for serving our country and for making sacrifices for the generations to come.
Sincerely, an American college student - earthforce1, on 05/04/2008, -5/+27Kudos to you. Unfortunately, you are getting fewer and further between, and most people today haven't had a chance to get a first hand historical perspective.
I went to school with a guy who's dad was a death camp survivor - he still has the blue numbered tattoos and has given his story to the local paper. He was the only survivor from his family and cheated death on 3x by doing things like switching queues when the guards were not looking, and personally spoke with Dr. Mengele on 2 occasions.
My wife's dad had to live in a cave for months to escape the Japanese. If you get a chance to speak with any firsthand survivors of the war, (regardless what side they fought for) take it - it is a real eye opener and you won't have that chance much longer. - itsameericle, on 05/04/2008, -15/+36By stooping to an evil person's level, we become no better than that person.
- mediaphile, on 05/04/2008, -7/+27Wow, that is in incredibly bad taste.
- kawaiirobo, on 05/04/2008, -8/+27I don't understand what some of you are thinking. Yes, war is a terrifying and horrible ordeal, but sometimes it is a necessary evil, I don't like what we did in WWII, the A-bombs were a terrible tragedy, but they could have been worse, the decision to drop the bombs on targets other than Tokyo and Kyoto was specifically due to the smaller populations of Hiroshima and Kokuran (damn I'm impressed someone else knew about that). The fact is that no one liked dropping those bombs. Many of the people on here act as if America was essentially just waiting for a chance to slap their dick in another countries face, but that couldn't be further from the truth.
and @ Stealthc, do you know ANYTHING about WWI and it's role in causing WWII, sure, if American hadn't gotten involved, Germany would have won the war, and there wouldn't have been the financial hardships to cause Hitler to et elected, but Germany was already an imperialist nation by that time, Europe would have been virtually absorbed into one large germanic state, remember that though Hitler brought out the worst in Germans, what he exposed already existed in their cultural mindset. - mediaphile, on 05/04/2008, -6/+25I think you should read up more on the war between the Japanese and the Americans. The Japanese were losing the war, but they were never going to stop. Their generals were aware that they would lose, but were willing to sacrifice their entire population in the name of national honor. We dropped the bombs to end a war that would have wiped out the entire nation of Japan. This is well documented, and even made it into the incredible book Cryptonomicon, a novel by Neal Stephenson (author of Snow Crash, The Diamond Age, and the Quicksilver trilogy) about WWII and the Philippines.
Their deaths were tragedies, but in the long run it worked out better for their nation. - stam66, on 05/04/2008, -4/+221. Mirror?
2. WWII was abominable in more ways than just the A-Bomb, which became a major political/propaganda tool. No mention for example on the incendiary bombing of Tokyo and other Japanese cities, which were all made of *wood*.
3. Stop politicising! This is history, and much as i personally dislike Clinton, i fail to see how WWII can be pinned to her. - Risingashes, on 05/04/2008, -9/+27How do you possibly justify a nuclear attack as a reasonable response to the leaders of a country attacking another country?
How do you possibly justify slaughtering an entire country of innocent people?
America's well deserved nuke will be arriving any day now if anyone else in the world followed that logic. - sumothumbs, on 05/04/2008, -1/+19translation: "Your arguments are too strong for me to counter, so I will declare you a fraud"
- LeeSoong, on 05/04/2008, -4/+21Here is a thought - let Israel and Iran work out their issues by themselves.
The USA has enough trouble of its own, maybe if America stops paying the bills of all these foreign governments, and stop stealing the money from citizens to give to foreigners and churches - the economy could be fixed up?
Focus money on converting the USA to 80% renewable power - solar, hydro, wave, wind, and nuclear.
Forget spending every American's earnings in the middle east while they kill our people.
Let them all keep the hot sand they love so very much, and stop wasting our money on them.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/iraq/ - mediaphile, on 05/04/2008, -1/+18Funny that you say that very few could do it, since that means there are those who could. Yet you find it so difficult to believe he could be one of those. If you read up on his other posts, he's either sticking very closely to the character of an 84 year old WWII vet, or he really is. His posts are eloquent enough that I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
- johndajap56, on 05/04/2008, -13/+30i hope that's sarcasm
- Jimbob200, on 05/04/2008, -13/+30I thought the point was "does the world need to see an American wannabe-President threatening *this* horror all over again?" Being a responsible citizen means, among other things, being aware of history and its implications. Take these photos for what they are: what Hillary Clinton threatened to do to Iran if they nuked Israel.
- mediaphile, on 05/04/2008, -2/+18Uh, no, I don't really wonder. They were attacked because they were invading other countries, and had allied themselves with Nazi germany. The allied countries were attempting to stop those invasions. Keep in mind, the US stayed out of WWII for a relatively long time.
- mediaphile, on 05/04/2008, -5/+21Do some reading yourself. The Japanese did not surrender until after Nagasaki. They began considering surrender after the bombing of Hiroshima, but they ignored the Potsdam declaration. It wasn't until the emperor stepped down after Nagasaki that Japan surrendered.
- TomTruelle, on 05/04/2008, -5/+21"And HRC wants to "obliterate Iran." Nice."
In description... Blame the submitter. - johndajap56, on 05/04/2008, -2/+17i guess some people still don't realize the history of the term
- mediaphile, on 05/04/2008, -3/+18The bombing targets were chosen for military significance. The World Trade Center had no military significance.
- norman619, on 05/04/2008, -11/+26You really believe that the president's office is the seat of power in the US. Too funny. The peopel with real power are not elected.
- Andyschism, on 05/04/2008, -6/+21This is the same thought pattern that justifies us torturing suspected terrorists today.
- Kyan, on 05/04/2008, -2/+16Read his comments.
- tehrich, on 05/04/2008, -8/+22Actually, Hiroshima was a fairly large military depot. I don't agree with killing the civilians, but there were valid military targets.
- jimmy17, on 05/04/2008, -4/+17Many people didnt think so back in the day:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_over_the_atomi ... -
Show 51 - 100 of 793 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is