[insight]

The Inverted World


By: Hussein Shariatmadari
Translated by: Abu Abdullah al-Nakhli


Paul Warfield Tibbets Jr., the American B-29 pilot who dropped the bomb on Hiroshima 62 years ago (August 6, 1945) which caused the deaths of 220 thousand residents of that city passed away this Thursday after living for 92 years. This war criminal in the last 62 years has received tens of medals of bravery and pride from top ranking American officials.
America has never expressed regret for this bomb or other similar bombs (like the one dropped on Nagasaki), rather they have pounded in the 'fact' that bombing Nagasaki and Hiroshima was the only possible road to take to end World War II. This is a ridiculous claim because the atomic bomb was used after the victory of America's allies in the war was certain. Of the three countries fighting (Germany, Italy, and Japan) two of them (Germany and Italy) unconditionally surrendered in June of 1945 - almost two months before the atomic attack on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Mussolini, Italy's leader, and Hitler were killed or committed suicide. Japan was the only resistance left. They were trying to conditionally surrender with the allies in order to bring an end to the war.
Therefore, the excuse of ending the war for America's crime against Nagasaki and Hiroshima cannot be excepted because two of the main elements - Germany and Italy - surrendered. The allies defeated them without having to use atomic weapons. Ending the war, defeating Japan in the same way - without using atomic weapons – was not only possible, but very easy.
But, according to evidence in existence and reasoning which was explained above along with various American, European, and Russian researchers - America's satanic attack on Japan was not to end the war, but rather an excuse to use the atomic weapon for two reasons: Showing their strength and testing the destructive power of the bombs. It is self-evident when reviewing the circumstances of those times there could not have been any other reason for America to bomb Nagasaki or Hiroshima.
It should be noted that America has used Neutron weapons - the weapons that Carter called ethical bombs - against Afghanistan. This is another sign of the inverted world. America is the only country that has used atomic bombs - with the only purpose of committing genocide.

http://www.insight-info.com/IslamicWorl ... e=Arrogant Powers of the World&CategoryID=7&CategoryTitle=Threats and Challenges to the Islamic World&#TopicXXX

[mr dragon]

I take it that you have deliberately ignored the obvious fact that, given the culture in Japan at the time, it was assumed that trying to defeat the Japanese militarily would have taken a very long time and probably resulted in a much higher death count. The fact that Italy and Germany had been defeated isn't actually that relevant. The issue was putting Japan out of action as soon as possible after five years of world war and millions of deaths on a worldwide scale. At the time, with the honour/death culture that Japan had in it's military and society, there were really just two options. Drop the bomb and end it straight away, or go on fighting for a long time with possibly even more deaths. You need to factor that into your argument before you start to give an accurate picture of the situation at that time.

Having said that. I don't doubt that the west, particularly the US, wanted to use this issue this to show it's strength and dominance in a post Axis world. I also think it was unnecessary to drop more than one bomb. The act was horrendous and devastating enough in itself. One bomb would have made the point. However, you need to put the whole issue into context of the time if you are going to to put up these statements in this way.

Lastly, one other thing you are also forgetting. Japan declared war on the US, and the world. Those people who were killed in those A bomb attacks were actually Japanese. They actually did have the choice to stop their government causing the destruction it did. The issue here is that their culture, at the time, prevented them from actually seeing this. They were subservient and culturally conditioned to the rule of their Emporer and governing powers. Can you see how Japan has changed since then, into a successful democracy- after the Marshall plan restored the country following this particular way that was finally used to finish the war, and the country has grown. It's awful what happened to the people in those cities when the A- bomb was dropped, but do you also understand that the people living in Japan today might not be enjoying there life in quite te same way if the second world war was bought to an end so swiftly as it was. Food for thought.

[NogginGrog]

The Inverted World


By: Hussein Shariatmadari
Translated by: Abu Abdullah al-Nakhli

It should be noted that America has used Neutron weapons - the weapons that Carter called ethical bombs - against Afghanistan. This is another sign of the inverted world. America is the only country that has used atomic bombs - with the only purpose of committing genocide.

Where and when did the US or anyone else for that matter use Enhanced Radiation Weapons (Neutron Bombs) these was an idea that certainly grew up in the 70s and were considered in the 80s but have never become an operational reality.

I endorse everything that the Dragon said above.

All rational historians would agree that the total loss of life that would have been involved in defeating Japan with conventional weapons would have been far higher than actually happened with the dropping of the two bombs. Let us not forget we are talking here about a country that had even brainwashed school children by training them to carry out suicide attacks with most basic of weapons "bamboo spears".

No doubt the US wanted to test the bomb on a live target but by refusing the opportunity to surrender unconditionally just a few weeks before the bombs were dropped the japanses sealed their own fate. On the other side of the coin the world may be grateful that the bombs were dropped. Had Japan surrendered before the bombs were used, then the world would have moved on through the 1950s and 60s etc with no Real-Life example of the effects of nuclear weapons. Nukes would have remained exotic devices unproven in war and therefore would not carry with them among public opinion all the horrors that we now know about the prospect of nuclear war. There would be no pictures of radiation burns victims and the cancer risk associated with nuclear weapons in the popular imagination. Consequently most people would just see them as another weapon (just a more powerful one) not something special in their own right. It is quite likely therefore that had the bombs not been dropped on Japan that therefore politicians might have been less willing to hold back on their use at various other times in history - such at Korea - Cuba - Viet nam and on a number of other occasions.

[mr dragon]

It's kind of ironic that this subject is called 'the inverted' world. This is pretty much what these Arab extremists, that publish this bull, are attempting to do. Invert history. Ie: turn very well known, and obviously proven, historical truth on it's head- in a vain attempt to radicalise certain people's minds who are ignorant of the west, and isolate them from the truth.

It's quite a good title for the topic, in an ironic way. Though, probably not intentional in that manner. I just wonder though, do they really think people will be fooled by this in the West. I'm sure it goes down a storm in certain areas of Arabic countries, but for how long. Are they really that naive in thinking that in publishing this naive bollocks that it's going to make any difference over time- in the long term.

[NogginGrog]

It's kind of ironic that this subject is called 'the inverted' world. This is pretty much what these Arab extremists, that publish this bull, are attempting to do. Invert history. Ie: turn very well known, and obviously proven, historical truth on it's head- in a vain attempt to radicalise certain people's minds who are ignorant of the west, and isolate them from the truth.

Hence that is why I raised the question of TRUTH in one of COBERST's threads. I pointed out that it has become far to fashionable today among Liberal Arts thinkers to claim there is no absolute Truth. That somehow all truths are valid to different people. All of which is blatant nonsense but of course it makes for good TV dabate. Douglas Adams had it well and truly pegged when he wrote:

"We represent the Amalgamated Union of philosophers, sages, luminaries and other professional thinking persons and we want this machine off and we want if off NOW."

"Why"

"Whats the point in us staying up all night arguing whether there Might; or might Not be a God, if this machine comes along in the morning and gives you his bleedin phone number."

For such people it is important to keep the debate going and not find answers. Therefore they have created a whole host of dangerous precendents by attibuting validity to things which are clearly not true, by claiming that if a large number of people believe something that somehow gives it credence.

As Isaac Asimov wrote: "The facts Gentlemen and nothing but the facts".

I once heard a Muslim scholar complain that he did not like trying to express himself in English because the English Language itself is to mechanistic and did did not allow him to convey hidden meanings through poetic expressions. This of course does beg the interesting question that I am sure some of these professional thinkers might care to debate - Does a culture's language have a part to play in how that culture eveloves into an industrial technological society?

[Caer Ibormeith]

It's kind of ironic that this subject is called 'the inverted' world. This is pretty much what these Arab extremists, that publish this bull, are attempting to do. Invert history. Ie: turn very well known, and obviously proven, historical truth on it's head- in a vain attempt to radicalise certain people's minds who are ignorant of the west, and isolate them from the truth.

Hence that is why I raised the question of TRUTH in one of COBERST's threads. I pointed out that it has become far to fashionable today among Liberal Arts thinkers to claim there is no absolute Truth.

I'm an arts person, and most definitely a liberal in the truest sense of the word. Moral relativism and historical revisionism appall me. Whatever happened to critical thinking? This was omething you were expected to learn when I got my Liberal Arts degree.

And I agree with you both.

[Caer Ibormeith]

It's kind of ironic that this subject is called 'the inverted' world. This is pretty much what these Arab extremists, that publish this bull, are attempting to do. Invert history. Ie: turn very well known, and obviously proven, historical truth on it's head- in a vain attempt to radicalise certain people's minds who are ignorant of the west, and isolate them from the truth.

Hence that is why I raised the question of TRUTH in one of COBERST's threads. I pointed out that it has become far to fashionable today among Liberal Arts thinkers to claim there is no absolute Truth.

I'm an arts person, and most definitely a liberal in the truest sense of the word. Moral relativism and historical revisionism appall me. Whatever happened to critical thinking? This was something you were expected to learn when I got my Liberal Arts degree.

And I agree with you both.