usa is mass-killing people and nobody cares

Post Reply New Topic

/\
It was either use the bomb (actually 2) to force a surrender or do it the old fashioned way with a land invasion of Japan and suffer/inflict many more casualties. The A-bomb was coming, anyway; we were just the first to build one that works and use it.

PEOPLE mass-kill PEOPLE. The only people who care, most of the time, are the ones with a stake in the killing, one way or the other.

H. sapiens and H. neanderthalensis did WHAT to each other again?? Hint: "exclusion" is not necessarily synonymous with "avoidance."

They've been killing each other in the Middle East for HOW LONG?? What did that start over?? Whose camel went first at the well?? Whether it's pronounced "Al" or "El"?? Who gets that choice bit of ground east of the Mediterranean that looks like a paradise flowing with milk and honey if you happen to be standing in the Arabian Desert and trying not to die?? If you believe the mythology, it started with two women, one of whom wanted to give her husband an heir come what may (and then didn't want to deal with the consequences of that when she gave birth to a child herself).

What exactly happened to the people indigenous to the North American continent?? It happened to the indigenous Australians too. And a bunch of other indigenous people. Basically over the same thing-- "How are we going to use this land, and who is going to decide??"

There's genocide in Africa. If we get involved, we'll get slammed for militarizing it on a massive scale and causing thousands of civilian casualties. If we don't get involved, we're allowing mass murder. Either way, a bunch of people are going to be dead.

It's not a question of stopping the killing. People are going to die by violence. It's a question of how many, which ones, and for what.

IIRC, there was a similar logic behind Fat Man and Little Boy. We were in the war and believed it was essential to our survival as a nation to win it. Our options were the bombs or an amphibious invasion of Japan. The bombs had a lower projected body count. On both sides.

There's another mass killing we can talk about. A few million people (are they people?) every year who haven't had the opportunity to do anything to offend anyone other than being inconvenient (even if possibly life-threateningly so).

Mass killing isn't an American thing. Mass killing is a HUMAN thing. It's based on binaries (good/bad, us/them, win/lose) and the perception (real or not) of scarcity of resources.

When we recognize THAT, and figure out how to do something about it, there will be less mass killing, and more people will care.

It should be said that my opinions on the causes, the perpetrators, and the ubiquity of mass killing should in no way be taken to imply that I'm condoning it, or that it doesn't bother me.

It bothers me quite a lot, from Homo whosgonnawin on up to the unplanned fetus aborted five minutes ago.

But pointing to primitive H. sapiens and saying "Barbarian" isn't gonna stop it. Pointing to Americans/British/Germans/Japanese/Chinese and saying "Imperialist dog" isn't gonna stop it. Pointing to Hutus and Tutsis or Boko Haram or Al Quaeda or ISI-Where-ever and saying "Terrorist thugs" isn't gonna stop it. Pointing to the woman walking into or out of an abortion clinic and saying "Baby-killer" isn't gonna stop it.

Doing that is, in effect, PART OF THE PROBLEM. At best it accomplishes nothing other than stroking the self-righteous pride of the person pointing the finger. At worst, it perpetuates the "us/them" binary that is a necessary condition in order for it to happen.

To stop it, you have to address the beliefs, the perceptions, the goals, and the fears that drive it.

I still don't know how to do that. Yet. The best I've figured out to do is live below my means, help out the people I encounter, and pass out copies of The More-With-Less Cookbook. That's something, but it's not enough. Obviously.

So if you've got any better ideas... Preferably ones that DON'T involve putting the power of life and death in the hands of some centralized authority that you just happen to think might be friendly to your particular worldview... I'm ALL EARS.

Y'know whenever I see a anti-American circle-jerk stirring about I have to ask you. What would you prefer the world power to be?

Would you prefer it to be the USSR where you can be sent to gulags for not supporting communism?

Would you prefer it to still be the British empire and watch them exploit the world for there own benefit?

Would you prefer it to be the Japanese and watch them treat other Asian minorities terribly?

Would you prefer it be the Mongolians and watch the world get sacked, raped and pillaged?

Would you prefer it to be German national socialist party and watch them mass kill Jews and eastern Euros?

the USA isn't perfect but its been most ethical dominating world power that we have seen of late and I would rather they be the world power than someone else

USA funded the Al-Qaeda for its proxy war against the Soviet Union and then made the same mistake with ISIS. I hope they finally learned there lesson and not sponsor Ukraine.

News Flash! World War Two ended 70 years ago!

Anyone who fought in that war is likely in his or her eighties, if they're still alive at all.

So blaming America for dropping the first atomic bomb is like blaming Germany for the Shoah (Holocaust) - pointless, since if a trial were to be held for those who gave the orders, there wouldn't be anyone to arrest and try!

You are blaming dead people for something that occurred long before you were even born!

One popular theory about the US using their atomic weapons in 1945 is that it was done to intimidate the USSR out of their planned invasion of Japan. It's possible to make a case that Japan would have suffered more casualties from a long period of Soviet rule than they did from the nuclear bombs.