Come to that, remind me why Nagasaki was neccessary....was it a military city? Or a flat city nestled in a bowl of hills that would produce the most catstrophic result?

Or using those hills to limit the damage by containing the spread of the fallout.A nice thought if you think about it. Besides, you'd think Hiroshima would have been enough to get a surrender out of the Japanese. Good thing we didn't waste that first bomb in a demonstration over the ocean.

Wars are impossible to fight without civilian casulties, but purposely targeting them is a different matter. Besides, have you ever heard of Nanking? Anything bad that happened to the Japanese in World War II was pretty much just Instant Karma.

Again, isn't this thread supposed to be for bashing Israel?

This was actually discussed in the Afghanistan thread (well, the other USA bashing thread).

from http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Afghanistan-....html&st=50

PeaceBlondie:

Afghanistan...imagine an army of rapists visit your town, as they did Nanking. And after six years, the invaders' country commands more rapists to rape your family.

koheesti:

Are you comparing the Japanese infamous "rape of Nanking" in the 1930's to what's happening in Afghanistan today?? Can you walk and chew gum at the same time?

PeaceBlondie: Yes. IMNSHO, warfare is sin.

The title of the thread is about Israel and I just don't see the point of the repeating the same old rhetoric about the U.S. over and over again. Yes, we all know that America isn't perfect.

Australia slaughtered the aborigines, England did everything wrong you can think of, and we don't need to get into Japan and Germany. There are no perfect nations and everyone knows it.

You forgot to mention what the Europeans did to the poor Maori people in New Zealand.

War what is it good for?

This thread is not about the U.S.

But the US condones Israel's actions when they could stop them....... Bashing Israel, bashing America, go hand in hand.

But the US condones Israel's actions when they could stop them....... Bashing Israel, bashing America, go hand in hand.

Israel & the US are joined at the hip....pocket that is

They are two seperate countries and the title of the thread says nothing about America. Is that too difficult to understand?

One anonymous phone call to the British, and that excuses Jewish terrorists destroying humans who stayed in a hotel named for King David? No. You don't love your enemy. You are a terrorist.

One anonymous phone call to the British, and that excuses Jewish terrorists destroying humans who stayed in a hotel named for King David? No. You don't love your enemy. You are a terrorist.

OK, they were terrorist bastards for blowing up the hotel. OK, now that that's out of the way, two comments;

1) I get the feeling that when you write "anonymous phone call", you do so as if it should be trusted less. Like when someone is accused of something by an anonymous person. But who calls in a bomb threat and gives their name?

2) I wonder who ignored the warning phone call to the World Trade Center on the morning of Sept 11, 2001? Or at the train station in Madrid on March 11, 2003? Or in London on July 7th, 2005. And the hotel on Mumbai in Nov 2008. Or at that volleyball match in Pakistan today. It must be a Muslim thing not to give warning. Or maybe they just aren't smart enough to call anonymously? Even the terrorist IRA started calling in bomb threats.

They blew up a military target and they warned them in advance to vacate which is better than most Armies do.

The Palestinians bomb restaurants and discos full of innocent civilians - with no warning at all – and they don’t love their enemies either.

One anonymous phone call to the British

Actually there were THREE and they identified their organization.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/li...r-whistleblower

Kinda funny when taken all together...

Israel backs Obama's push for sanctions on Iran

Israel seeks 'crippling' Iran sanctions

What America has accomplished? Let's see -

Just to start with:

1. Development of medicines, curing polio, etc.

2. The space program, America expanded the world's understanding of the universe and had practical benefits such as GPS navigation systems.

3. Removed Saddam Husein from Kuwait.

4. During the Cold war, America provided a counter balance to the Soviet Union. It was to a large degree that the foreign policy decisions of the US and the UK caused the collapse of communism in the USSR.

Plus, providing opportunities to individuals to be the best that they can be regardless of their race, heritage, religious conviction, scholastic achievement. America not only instills freedom, but exemplifies how to live free.

I would suggest that these accomplishments are somewhat superior to examples cited, such as "Mussolini made the trains run on time. Genghis Khan loved his mother. Charlie Manson had a pet he fed."

I'm not sure if you missed the point...doing good does not mitigate doing evil. Doing good does not give licence to do evil "to balance it out".

I think any honest anti-American with an ounce of education knows full well that America has done alot.

You are correct about one thing. Any "honest anti-American" has about an ounce of education - perhaps. America has made mistakes, as have all nations. But to refer to it as having done evil is simply moronic. I wouldn't refer to Germany as an evil nation even though it's history of promoting an Austrian by the name of Adolph lead to the genocide of 12,000,000 + people. Now evil to me = harboring and/or promoting the Taliban. That's evil.

So only uneducated or under-educated people are ant-American? Tut tut. Such a typically American egocentric view of the world. I think....no I'm certain, that you are wrong on that.

So the only nations that are evil are the ones harbouring and or promoting the Taliban? Tut tut....but then, I can't say that you're wrong because what is "evil" is only a matter of opinion.

You debate using absolutes - using the word 'only' twice. I did not say only nations harboring (not harbouring) and or promoting the Taliban . . . We can agree to disagree, but I will not stoop to name-calling. Your statement that you are 'certain' that I am wrong apparently evidences feelings of superiority. Let's just agree to disagree about that one too, shall we? By the way it's tut-tut, not tut tut. If you require further assistance, let me know. We Americans often provide assistance even when it is not appreciated, or understood.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/li...r-whistleblower

Kinda funny when taken all together...

Israel backs Obama's push for sanctions on Iran

Israel seeks 'crippling' Iran sanctions

Israel will not accept IAEA inspections. Iran and North Korea "prove" their malevolence by hindering IAEA inspections....but Israel is OK....because officially they do not have a nuclear program.

Everyone knows they have it.....but they do not concede it...therefore "they don't have it".

Not to mention the Palestinians downwind of Dimona that suffer diseases linked to radiation diseases. Israel can't admit to those suffering because to do so would be to admit their nuclear program and thus open themselves to IAEA inspection.

Callous.

...........You debate using absolutes - using the word 'only' twice. I did not say only nations harboring (not harbouring) and or promoting the Taliban . . . We can agree to disagree, but I will not stoop to name-calling. Your statement that you are 'certain' that I am wrong apparently evidences feelings of superiority. Let's just agree to disagree about that one too, shall we? By the way it's tut-tut, not tut tut. If you require further assistance, let me know. We Americans often provide assistance even when it is not appreciated, or understood.

Tut tut tut. Harbour is the correct spelling, except in America, which has bastardised the original English. I make allowances when Americans spell something incorrectly, and I do not pull them up on it....but typically egocentric Americans consider MY spelling incorrect when it follows true English spelling. Yet another detractor that attacks the grammar/spelling/verbiage as the only thing to attack. This time, however, the detractor has picked up on two things that were not incorrect. There's an irony there.

There's an even greater irony in the miscomprehension of simple English...American or original;

When one says, "evil to me = harboring .....", one has only one answer, because one used "equals". One could have said, "is equivalent to", or one could have said "harbouring.... amongst other things." Or one could have said "one example of evilness is...". But you didn't.

Hence, my reasonable interpretation of "only"...in both cases. BTW I note you picked up on two instances of my use of "only", yet only elaborated on only one.

Indeed I AM certain that you are wrong on that point. It is not only uneducated or under-educated people that are anti-American....I do not agree to disagree as it is a fact. Ignore it if you will.

...........You debate using absolutes - using the word 'only' twice. I did not say only nations harboring (not harbouring) and or promoting the Taliban . . . We can agree to disagree, but I will not stoop to name-calling. Your statement that you are 'certain' that I am wrong apparently evidences feelings of superiority. Let's just agree to disagree about that one too, shall we? By the way it's tut-tut, not tut tut. If you require further assistance, let me know. We Americans often provide assistance even when it is not appreciated, or understood.

Tut tut tut. Harbour is the correct spelling, except in America, which has bastardised the original English. I make allowances when Americans spell something incorrectly, and I do not pull them up on it....but typically egocentric Americans consider MY spelling incorrect when it follows true English spelling. Yet another detractor that attacks the grammar/spelling/verbiage as the only thing to attack. This time, however, the detractor has picked up on two things that were not incorrect. There's an irony there.

There's an even greater irony in the miscomprehension of simple English...American or original;

When one says, "evil to me = harboring .....", one has only one answer, because one used "equals". One could have said, "is equivalent to", or one could have said "harbouring.... amongst other things." Or one could have said "one example of evilness is...". But you didn't.

Hence, my reasonable interpretation of "only"...in both cases. BTW I note you picked up on two instances of my use of "only", yet only elaborated on only one.

Indeed I AM certain that you are wrong on that point. It is not only uneducated or under-educated people that are anti-American....I do not agree to disagree as it is a fact. Ignore it if you will.

It's almost humorous how you refer to Americans as egocentric, but then speak in terms of 'making allowances'. Using an equal sign does not translate to the exclusion of alternatives. Once again you are incorrect. Think about it, or, I could provide to you examples. I am certain that you are up to the task, however you are not one to question yourself, are you? No, that would contradict your superiority. And how you wax on about how English has been bastardized by America. Ah, but I am the egocentric, right? Funny. At least you've provided some humor. That you do quite well.

When one says, "evil to me = harboring .....", one has only one answer, because one used "equals". One could have said, "is equivalent to", or one could have said "harbouring.... amongst other things." Or one could have said "one example of evilness is...". But you didn't.

Hence, my reasonable interpretation of "only"...in both cases. BTW I note you picked up on two instances of my use of "only", yet only elaborated on only one.

Snooze time.

I guess sacrificing 5000 American soldiers (and counting) is worth finding one guy.

I guess sacrificing 5000 American soldiers (and counting) is worth finding one guy.

While a cute sound bite that would fit nicely on a bumper sticker or written on a toilet wall, saying that their only mission is to "hunt for one man" isn't close to being accurate.

We Americans often provide assistance even when it is not appreciated, or understood.

.......Or paid for.

The US military has got the World surrounded.......and the World foots the bill. Now that's an achievement.

Regards.

It is not egocentric to point out that humour and harbour are the correct spelling in English english. It is somewhat egocentric, when a country has changed that spelling, to consider the original spelling as incorrect, especially when written by a non-American, outside of America.

Pointing out the bastardisation of the english language by America is neither egocentric nor condescending, it is plain fact. Perhaps you have misinterpreted the word "bastardised" and have lent it a more negative connotation.

It is particularly not egocentric for me to make the point when I am defending my spelling from the American way.

You keep saying I am superior.....Well, if you feel that way, I can understand, but I would rather you didn't look up to me. It's tiresome having fawning people around.

When one says, "evil to me = harboring .....", one has only one answer, because one used "equals". One could have said, "is equivalent to", or one could have said "harbouring.... amongst other things." Or one could have said "one example of evilness is...". But you didn't.

Hence, my reasonable interpretation of "only"...in both cases. BTW I note you picked up on two instances of my use of "only", yet only elaborated on only one.

Snooze time.

Nighty night, don't let the bed bugs bite.

You keep saying I am superior.....Well, if you feel that way, I can understand, but I would rather you didn't look up to me. It's tiresome having fawning people around.

more evidence that simpletons have big problems to understand irony

Sarcasm actually.

It is not egocentric to point out that humour and harbour are the correct spelling in English english. It is somewhat egocentric, when a country has changed that spelling, to consider the original spelling as incorrect, especially when written by a non-American, outside of America.

Pointing out the bastardisation of the english language by America is neither egocentric nor condescending, it is plain fact. Perhaps you have misinterpreted the word "bastardised" and have lent it a more negative connotation.

It is particularly not egocentric for me to make the point when I am defending my spelling from the American way.

You keep saying I am superior.....Well, if you feel that way, I can understand, but I would rather you didn't look up to me. It's tiresome having fawning people around.

You really have a sense of humor; looking up to you? You are growing tired of people fawning over you? That's great! You are so very impressed with yourself. Anyone reading what I have posted knows, except you apparently, that the reference to superiority is regarding how you see yourself; certainly not how you are perceived by others. The expression 'Get over yourself' wouldn't come close to addressing the severity of your affliction. Now, I too have grown tired of you. If you wish to continue the diatribe regarding how some words in English are spelled differently in our respective countries, then continue - impress yourself. I doubt that anyone will be paying attention, except you of course.

If you wish to continue the diatribe regarding how some words in English are spelled differently in our respective countries, then continue - impress yourself. I doubt that anyone will be paying attention, except you of course.

Snooze time.

You keep saying I am superior.....Well, if you feel that way, I can understand, but I would rather you didn't look up to me. It's tiresome having fawning people around.

more evidence that simpletons have big problems to understand irony

Sarcasm actually.

Now THERE'S irony. Do you need me to explain?

It is not egocentric to point out that humour and harbour are the correct spelling in English english. It is somewhat egocentric, when a country has changed that spelling, to consider the original spelling as incorrect, especially when written by a non-American, outside of America.

Pointing out the bastardisation of the english language by America is neither egocentric nor condescending, it is plain fact. Perhaps you have misinterpreted the word "bastardised" and have lent it a more negative connotation.

It is particularly not egocentric for me to make the point when I am defending my spelling from the American way.

You keep saying I am superior.....Well, if you feel that way, I can understand, but I would rather you didn't look up to me. It's tiresome having fawning people around.

You really have a sense of humor; looking up to you? You are growing tired of people fawning over you? That's great! You are so very impressed with yourself. Anyone reading what I have posted knows, except you apparently, that the reference to superiority is regarding how you see yourself; certainly not how you are perceived by others. The expression 'Get over yourself' wouldn't come close to addressing the severity of your affliction. Now, I too have grown tired of you. If you wish to continue the diatribe regarding how some words in English are spelled differently in our respective countries, then continue - impress yourself. I doubt that anyone will be paying attention, except you of course.

Hey, when I am attacked for spelling, I will defend it if I am not wrong. It was not me that started the spelling critique.

Lets get back to the subject at hand instead of trying to find fault with my spelling.

If you wish to continue the diatribe regarding how some words in English are spelled differently in our respective countries, then continue - impress yourself. I doubt that anyone will be paying attention, except you of course.

Snooze time.

Nighty night, don't let the bed bugs bite.

Actually, I find that unnecessarily haughty British pedants insist that the only correct way is the English-English-Shittish way. There is more than one way to spell properly. Webster's spellings usually are better, but yours is OK, as we say in Oklahoma, which is OK.

Never forget that many Brits are not complete dipshits.