| Welcome to Mahora Academy. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Collateral Damage | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 27 2008, 10:32 PM (464 Views) | |
| book of life | Apr 27 2008, 10:32 PM Post #1 |
![]()
'3'
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
By collateral damage, I mean a person's life. Is collateral damage acceptable in certain cases? For example, if you pursuing someone, like a killer, who is could be a possible threat to many people's lives, and you pushed someone to their death, unintentionally, on your way, is that person's death an acceptable loss to get the killer? I guess the atomic bomb dropped on Japan during WWII could also be an example. But still, is it acceptable by your standards? |
![]() |
|
| UnNegi-relatedname | Apr 28 2008, 05:14 AM Post #2 |
|
Not enough ponies
![]()
|
I don't really think there was going to be any other choice (atom bomb). Japan won't back down. US won't back down. So in the end, it leads to The US could of send an invasion force. Dragging out the war even longer and killing MORE people. or The bomb. This was necessary. Yes people died. But not as many people died. |
![]() |
|
| Zaroff | Apr 28 2008, 10:59 AM Post #3 |
|
┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘
![]()
|
Collateral damage and its causes should be avoided at all cost. While it goes hand in hand with war and violence, I think it is unacceptable but at the same time I undertand and completely admit its sometimes an unavoidable thing. It just has to happen sometimes. |
![]() |
|
| Sir Meh | Apr 30 2008, 02:49 PM Post #4 |
![]()
Middle Schooler
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
What? Japan was already surrendering at that point, if year 9 History lessons serve me correctly. Besides, even if the use of a nuclear weapon was necessary to "make the Japanese back down", the second bomb was most definitely NOT needed. The major reasons for using nuclear weapons were to show the US's power, ya know? As for collateral damage... as Zaroff said, sometimes shit happens. You can do all you can to prevent that, but no one is 100% safe. Sometimes, these things are unavoidable. |
![]() |
|
| UnNegi-relatedname | Apr 30 2008, 05:20 PM Post #5 |
|
Not enough ponies
![]()
|
I believe you were taught a different story. The Japanese were not ready at all to back down before the first bomb. They were fighting to the very end. The first bomb shook them up a little, but they were still resisting a surrender. Which is why the second bomb was dropped. And really, I'm debating over an average person's beliefs. My answer to this topic is The End Justifies The Means |
![]() |
|
| Jollepoker | Apr 30 2008, 06:08 PM Post #6 |
|
Yue <3
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If you can prevent collateral damage you should, although you shouldn't try to hard to prevent it, since that can backfire. Also, about the bomb, it's exactly as UnNegi says, they wouldn't back down... But really, I still think it was unnecessary. After the first bomb, they could've just charged Japan with their army instead, I think Japan eventually would've given up with this tactic and it could possibly have saved some lifes. I know how the president at that time thought though when he sent the bombs out, I guess I kinda would think of something like that too. I mean, it's common sense to want to protect your own people before other nations people. I think his motivation was "If these Japanese people will die anyway, we should just kill them directly, instead of waisting our own lives to take them down". Of course, peace is always an option, but since that was highly unlikely (especially because Japan attacked USA first) I guess the only "right" thing to do is to try to save your own population first. |
![]() |
|
| UnNegi-relatedname | Apr 30 2008, 06:17 PM Post #7 |
|
Not enough ponies
![]()
|
Oh yea, the US are total paranoid jerks. The ENTIRE cold war could have been avoided had the US been more open and less paranoid and less of a snobby asshole. |
![]() |
|
| Sir Meh | Apr 30 2008, 06:35 PM Post #8 |
![]()
Middle Schooler
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
History is the story of the winner. And UnNegi, the following video should give a humorous summary of American's entry into World War 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svnolXdD7q0&feature=related But anyway, the main point I was trying to make about the atomic bombings is that there was a lot of political motivation, not just militaristic. And now I'll drop this bomb subject as it is bound to get heated and boring. |
![]() |
|
| UnNegi-relatedname | Apr 30 2008, 08:00 PM Post #9 |
|
Not enough ponies
![]()
|
How OxyMoronic, Heated and Boring. Lololol We can at least all agree the US is stupid? yes ? |
![]() |
|
| Sir Meh | Apr 30 2008, 08:08 PM Post #10 |
![]()
Middle Schooler
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I dunno, they seem kinda clever to be able to take care of their enemy and show off their power at the same time. |
![]() |
|
| UnNegi-relatedname | Apr 30 2008, 08:16 PM Post #11 |
|
Not enough ponies
![]()
|
That's more like them being overly powerful. Like some stupid kid with hacks. |
![]() |
|
| Sir Meh | Apr 30 2008, 08:30 PM Post #12 |
![]()
Middle Schooler
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So much for being objective. The US and a couple other countries were working on the Manhattan Project for a while. Using it to end the war with a strategic strike seems sensible, though I don't like the fact that they were planning to use more. Curse those moral dilemmas eh? But, it was a brand new weapon with incredible destructive power. Nowadays, it's used as a deterrent - same case as in the Cold War. We don't want countries with nukes to start firing them now, do we? But, I pose this question: Some people are caught in the cross fire between two opposing forces (collateral), but it turns out they're unrelated terrorists that just got unlucky. Before you heard that last part, did you feel sorry for them? What about after you learned that they are terrorists? |
![]() |
|
| UnNegi-relatedname | Apr 30 2008, 08:34 PM Post #13 |
|
Not enough ponies
![]()
|
I suppose I'd blame the US first. Then after learning they were terrorists, I'd blame them for getting in the way, and the US still. |
![]() |
|
| Sir Meh | Apr 30 2008, 08:44 PM Post #14 |
![]()
Middle Schooler
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well, I was wrong on the heated part. This is as boring as fuck. Please at least type something interesting. |
![]() |
|
| UnNegi-relatedname | Apr 30 2008, 09:31 PM Post #15 |
|
Not enough ponies
![]()
|
Not really feeling the heat to say anything interesting. Like in the pro-life pro-choice thing. That was interesting, because I have these religious hoi polloi trying to force pro-life on other people. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() Our users say it best: "Zetaboards is the best forum service I have ever used." Learn More · Register Now |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Yue's Corner · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2






![]](http://z1.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)







3:48 AM Jul 11