Yuusha

In my country, homosexuality is a not a crime when it occurs in private and between consenting adults. In 2003 legislation was proposed by the Justice Ministry to amend the criminal code so was to criminalize heterosexual and homosexual sodomy with up to twelve years in prison. The proposed legislation would also criminalize cohabitation, adultery and the practice of witchcraft. The government has allowed local governments to adopt Islamic law and thus certain local ordinances have been adopted that prohibit homosexuality and cross-dressing. The law also does not recognize gay marriage, civil unions or domestic partnership benefits.

I would never do a thing like that...

Of course I feel sad for the POWs and the holocaust victims. I am after all a human being. Look I know you don't like me and my views, and frankly I don't care, but please understand something: This thread is not about me, it's not about you, it's not about the US and it's not about the Japanese government either. This thread, first and foremost, is about the victims of the Atomic Bomb. Look at the pictures man. Look at them. I mean really look at them. Set aside whatever hatred you have for me and look at the pictures. Look at all the women, the children, the corpses, the destruction and the suffering that occured on that fateful day. Look at the lifeless eyes of the women who was holding her baby. It's sad isn't it. Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We must never forget.

@Everyone: I started this thread mainly to share these pictures. I have no interest in participating in another debate. I'm just sad for the world. Today is the 5th of August. Tomorrow is Hiroshima day. And on the 9th is Nagasaki. I'm just sad that's all.

On Agust 10, 1945, the day after the bombing of Nagasaki Yosuke Yamahata, began to photograph the devastation. The city was dead. He walked through the darkened ruins and the dead corpses for hours. By late afternoon, he had taken his final photographs near a first aid station north of the city. In a single day, he had completed the only extensive photographic record of the immediate aftermath of the atomic bombing of either Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

@Meshugger: 1. Boycott is civilized and proper don't you think? 2. Justifiable no. Understandable yes. 3. Unreasonable huh? Would you buy a product from someone who called you and your family terrorists? Freedom of the press is like a loaded gun, nothing will happen so long as the one who wields it is a responsible adult. But if an obnoxious kid gets a hold of it... 4. That's because unlike you 'the middle east' never went through the dark ages. 5. What is there to explain? Peace loving muslims, as in the non radical Muslims. Like me. Not all of us are terrorists y'know. Not all Muslims reacted violently to the 'cartoon.' Some of us cried. It truly hurt us. ------------------------------------------------- @Pops: Agreed. ------------------------------------------------ @:Tigranes: Well duh... I think the UN should intervene. Why? COMMON SENSE man. The UN pecekeeping troop would likely be a multinational troop, comprised of countries that are pro or neutral to Iraq. Granted, I have no way of knowing for sure what the majority of the Iraqi people want. But don't you think that a war torn Iraq would preffer to be supervised by a country/countries that DID NOT bombard Iraq on a weekly basis since the year 1991? The UN estimates that more than 500.000 iraqi children died from the US sanctions and bombardments. Lemme make this as short and as practical as humanely possible: Hello UN, bye bye US. ------------------------------------------------------ @St Jimmy: Open your eyes man. Discrimination is a fact of life. If I don't stand up for what I think is right, then I'm screwed. I didn't make the rules but I do know how to play the game. ------------------------------------------------------- @Walshingham: Let's not kid ourselves here. You and I both know that we don't see eye to eye, there's nothing wrong with that right? But even so I would never resort to calling you stupid or uncivillized coz that's just not true. Back on my US foreign policy topic, I remember you were being pressured to lock the thread by an angry mob hoding out pitchforks. "Would someone please lock this thread!!" "Oh dear... When Fionavar sees this..." "Where's a mod when you need one," and so on and so forth. You didn't back down and that was IMO one of the mark of a good leader. It's understandable to cater the needs of the majority but never on the expense of the minority. My point is: Don't patronize me man. Don't restrain/restrict yourself and your views on my account. I'm not gonna do you any favours just coz you're a mod. Ok bro. NEEEXT..... ---------------------------------------------------- @GuardDog: Ah... The good ol media. Always a reliable source. NOT!

It's been tainted by the Dark Side!

@Tigranes: It was just a figure of speech. Btw, it woud've been helpful if you stated in your personals that you're Korean living in New Zealand. I mean how am I supposed to know that? Well since I've never actually converse with you outside of this thread, I think my mistakes regarding your political views are understandable. Umm... Yeah that'd be a good start. And yes I do want to the US to stop putting its nose in where it doesn't belong, or they'll get something far worse than a nosebleed.

@GuardDog: I'm sorry if you thought I was ignoring some of your posts. It's a bit difficult to keep track of things when you're bombarded by arguements from practically everyone. Sure... That proves something doesn't it. I'll stop reposting my posts until someone actually debate them properly. I'm still waiting for someone to address my arguements as to why the US is allowed to topple democratically elected governments. And please, spare me the 'because we can,' crap. I agree that hindsight is always 20/20. That is exactly why I presented the quotes that I found to all of you. To raise a point that the bombings MAY HAVE BEEN UNNECESSARY. And considering the conduct of the US government on the international stage following the incident, I don't feel like giving the US government the benefit of the doubt. The US and its allies are indeed being targeted by Muslim terrorists. And that precisely the reason why I do not condone terrorism. The victims are usually innocent people. About the Danes, their mistake was generalizing all Muslims to be terrorists. What better way to do so than to draw our Prophet Muhammad (which in itself is a deadly sin) in a violent manner. I wouldn't expect you to understand the pain and anger it inflicted on us peace loving Muslims. It may be trivial to you, but to us it's the worst kind of insult imaginable. So? What does that prove apart from reaffirming Chomsky's theory.

Ok, firstly lemme just say that I know that I'm being out of topic here. I mean what do you want me to do? My thread regarding US foreign policy was closed. I would've posted there if it were possible. Secondly, it pleases me a great deal to know that many of you 'patriotic Americans' here are reacting the way I had anticipated. No surprises there. And please don't pull any punches just coz I'm outnumbered. And last but not least, BRING IT ON!! @GreasyDogMeat: I think I've explained why I went out of topic. Now I would like to start a new thread that is more appropriate for this type of discussion, but for whatever reason I'm afraid that it won't last very long. Riiight... I'm sure the A bomb was smart enough to distinguish between military targets and civillians (women and children). And I'm sure that the bomb didn't struck terror to the hearts of the Japanese who survived the event. Now whether or not the A bomb deployment was necessary, is a matter of opinion. Therefore I arrived at the conclusion that if the deployment of the bomb was indeed unnecessary (just like Eisenhower and a few others had suggested), but the US went through with it anyway, then it can be considered an act of terror rather than an act of war. Racist Psychotic Jihadi? Religion and Race are two different things. You're right about one thing though, the Muslim terrorist that committed 9/11 and various other acts of terrorism against the USA did so out of hate. But the source of that hatred is the US Foreign Policy!! Not because of the ethnic background of the US. I mean look at Canada, they aren't being targetd by terrorist despite the similiraties of racial background to the US. I honestly don't understand why you seem incapable of handling the fact that I do not hate Americans. What I hate is the American Government and not the people. Can you differentiate between the two? Btw, are you related to Guard Dog? Inbreeding's unhealthy y'know. ----------------------------------------------- @Tigranes: What bothers me the most is smart but ignorant people like you who is highly critical and philosophical about terrorism being comitted by Muslims, but turns a blind eye to terrorism comitted by your own government. Yes, I do think that the US government practises terrorism. My original response to you regarding this was a number of quotes from Truman, Eisenhower and a number of generalas and congressman. Truman stated that the a bomb was 'the greatest thing in history.' While Eisenhower advised against it. Now you may claim to know more about the situation then better than Eisenhower in an effort to justify the deployment of the A bomb, but you'll understand if I don't buy it. Also, you asked me which was worse, the US or the Muslim terrorists? In response, I posted a list of US vetoes on UN resolutions. You can clearly see from that list that the US goverment was a supporter of, among others: Apartheid Israel's invasion of Lebanon South Africa's attempted coup of the Seychelles Nuclear testing Development of new types of WMD's. (Terrorism anyone?) Development of chemical and biological weapons and so on and so forth. And don't get me started on my list of toppled government by the US. Which is worse, the US Government or the Muslim terrorists? Why don't you decide for yourself. 1. Both. The US vetoed the UN resolution of sending multinational peacekeeping troops to Iraq. There's no way to tell who will do better. I'll just have to take the US' word for it. And besides the US had no right to invade other countries no matter what. 2. There's no guarantee. But I wouldn't want someone who I do not like in my house. Especially when that someone is arrogant, intrusive, ignorant and a goddamn bully! 3. Sure.

Jeez, do I have to spell everything out for you guys? Can't you read between the lines? Fine I'll elaborate on my last post. But it's 9 PM here in Jakarta, I gotta catch some z's. I'll continue this tomorrow. You have my word.

@Tigranes: I partially agree with you. I do tend to not be as 'passionate' discussing Muslim terrorists as I am discussing the US foreign policy. But that still doesn't change the fact that most Muslims here in Indonesia (myself included) CONDEMN terrorism. Why? Because terrorism directly violates key principle teachings of Islam. Now I may understand the reason for terrorism commited by Muslim terrorist but I do not justify it. Understanding terrorism and justifying it are two different things. And I'd like to think I'm smart enough to know the difference. Because he never seemed to get the idea that I do not support terrorism. The A bomb was, or is, a controversy. Some may agree and some may not. However, I am troubled by the fact that the deployment of the bomb may have not been necessary. As the following passage will suggest. US responses to dropping the A bomb on Japan. "...the greatest thing in history." - Harry S. Truman President of the United States during the Atomic Bombing "It always appeared to us that, atomic bomb or no atomic bomb, the Japanese were already on the verge of collapse." - General Henry H. "Hap" Arnold Commanding General of the U.S. Army Air Forces Under President Truman "I had been conscious of depression and so I voiced to (Sec. Of War Stimson) my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at this very moment, seeking a way to surrender with a minimum loss of 'face.' " - General Dwight D. Eisenhower "Japan was at the moment seeking some way to surrender with minimum loss of 'face'. It wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing." - General Dwight D. Eisenhower "It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was taught not to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying woman and children." - Admiral William D. Leahy Former Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff "I am absolutely convinced that had we said they could keep the emperor, together with the threat of an atomic bomb, they would have accepted, and we would never have had to drop the bomb." - John McCloy "P.M. [Churchill} & I ate alone. Discussed Manhattan (it is a success). Decided to tell Stalin about it. Stalin had told P.M. of telegram from Jap Emperor asking for peace." - President Harry S. Truman Diary Entry, July 18, 1945 "Some of my conclusions may invoke scorn and even ridicule. "For example, I offer my belief that the existence of the first atomic bombs may have prolonged -- rather than shortened - World War II by influencing Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson and President Harry S. Truman to ignore an opportunity to negotiate a surrender that would have ended the killing in the Pacific in May or June of 1945. "And I have come to view the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings that August as an American tragedy that should be viewed as a moral atrocity." - Stewart L. Udall US Congressman and Author of "Myths of August" "Certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated." - U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey's 1946 Study "Careful scholarly treatment of the records and manuscripts opened over the past few years has greatly enhanced our understanding of why Truman administration used atomic weapons against Japan. Experts continue to disagree on some issues, but critical questions have been answered. The consensus among scholars is the that the bomb was not needed to avoid an invasion of Japan. It is clear that alternatives to the bomb existed and that Truman and his advisers knew it. - J. Samuel Walker Chief Historian U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Well I was actually on my way to post this: USA Vetoes on UN resolutions: 1972, Condemning Israel for killing hundreds of people in Syria and Lebanon in air raids. 1973, Condemning Israel for attacking Lebanese civillians. 1976, Condemning South Africa's attempt to impose APARTHEID on Namibia. 1976, Calling for the admission of Vietnam to the UN. 1977, Condemning the apartheid situationin South Africa. 1978, Condemning the Israeli human rights record. 1978, Critical of the living conditions of the Palestine. 1978, Urging the permanent members of the security council (USA, USSR, UK, China, France) to ensure the UN decision on peace and security. 1978, Calling for developed countries to quality and quantity of development assistance to underdeveloped countries. 1979, Concerning negotiations on disarmament and cessation of the nuclear arms race. 1979, Demanding that Israel desist from human rights violation. 1979, Requesting a report on the living conditions of Palestinians in occupied Arab countries. 1979, Offering assistance to the Palestinian people. 1979, For a United Nations Conference on woman. 1979. To include Palestinian women on the UN conference of women. 1980, Condemning Israeli policy regarding the living conditions of the Palestinians. 1980, Condemning Israeli human rights practises in occupied territories. 1980, Emphasizing that development of nations and individuals is a human right. 1980, Calling for an end to nuclear tests. 1981, Affirming the right of every nation to choose its economic and social system in accordance to the will of its people, without outside interference whatever form it may take. 1981, Urging negotiations on prohibitions of chemical and biological weapons. 1981, Declaring that education, work, healthcare, proper nourishment and national development are human rights. 1981, Condemning an attempted coup by South Africa on the Seychelles. 1981, Establishing rights of the Palestinian people. 1981, Concerning Israelis human rights violation in occupied territories. 1982, Condemning the Israelis invasion of Lebanon. 1982, Condemning the shooting of 11 Muslims at a shrine in Jerussalem by an Israeli soldier. 1982, To promote international actions against Apartheid. 1982, Calls for establishing a world charter on the protection of the ecology. 1982, For the nuclear test bans and negitiations and nuclear free outerspace. 1982, Prohibiting chemical and bacterilogical weapons. 1982, Against product harmful to the environment and health. 1983, Prevention of arms race in outerspace. No wonder the Death Star was built. 1983, Prohibiting the manufacturing of new weapons of mass destruction. 1983, Reversing the arms race. 1984, On elimination of discrimination. 1984, Affirming the rights of the Palestinian people. 1984, Prohibiting new types of WMD's. 1984, Condemning assasination attempts against Palestinian mayor. 1984, Proposing economic assistance for Palestine. 1985, Condemning Israel for the use of excessive force in occupied territories. 1986, Calling all governments (USA included) to observe international laws. 1986, Condemning Israel for its actions against the Lebanese. 1986, Calling for Israel to respect Muslim holy places. 1987, Calling for Israel to abide by the geneva convention in treating its prisoners. 1987, Opposing build up of weapons in outerspace. 1987, Opposing the development of new WMD's. 1987, Opposing nuclear testing. 1989, Opposing the acquisition of territory by force. 2001, Condemning Israel for acts of terror in occupied territories. If you look closely, the US 'seem' to favor the Israelis. So you'll understand if I want the US out of Iraq ASAP. 1. The US vetoed the UN resolution of sending multinational peacekeeping troops to Iraq. There's no way to tell who will do better. I'll just have to take the US' word for it. 2. Oh yes! 3. Sure.

@GreasyDogMeat: Tell you what. When you start talking about the US foreign policy and its implications objectively and unbiasedly, I'll give you my insight on Muslim terrorists. How bout it? To one as limited as you perhaps. I mean how many times do I have to say it? I DO NOT SUPPORT TERRORISM.

"Why not emphasize with the KKK? Surely those blacks did SOMETHING to deserve those lynchings. It wasn't after all, spontaneous human action without credence. Come on... the KKK can't be all bad... it must have SOME valid reasons, just like the Islamofascists... right guys??" @GreasyDogMeat: Terrorism is not something that CAN or SHOULD be justified. I never said that I supported terrorism. And I sure as hell don't support the KKK/Black Panther or racism in general. If you're trying to discredit me, try harder. ------- Regarding the A bomb, any of you guys think it's worth a topic of its own?

I never said I was offended. I was just saying that from a Muslim's point of view, you're understanding of Jihad is only half true. But believe whatever rethoric you wish. It does not matter in the end. :sad: It's not like I can defend myself here.

Stop talking politics. Lest you wanna get this thread locked by the 'great' FIONAVAR! Man I hate tyrants!

That's a nice shirt.

Woulda been cool if KOTOR 2 played like Fable. A Jedi has 'needs' to y'know.

USA Vetoes of UN Resolutions. The USA has the power to veto UN resolutions. What follows is an incomplete list of some of the resolutions the USA has vetoed. 1972, Condemning Israel for killing hundreds of people in Syria and Lebanon in air raids. 1973, Condemning Israel for attacking Lebanese civillians. 1976, Condemning South Africa's attempt to impose APARTHEID on Namibia. 1976, Calling for the admission of Vietnam to the UN. 1977, Condemning the apartheid situationin South Africa. 1978, Condemning the Israeli human rights record. 1978, Critical of the living conditions of the Palestine. 1978, Urging the permanent members of the security council (USA, USSR, UK, China, France) to ensure the UN decision on peace and security. 1978, Calling for developed countries to quality and quantity of development assistance to underdeveloped countries. 1979, Concerning negotiations on disarmament and cessation of the nuclear arms race. 1979, Demanding that Israel desist from human rights violation. 1979, Requesting a report on the living conditions of Palestinians in occupies Arab countries. 1979, Offering assistance to the Palestinian people. 1979, For a United Nations Conference on woman. 1979. To include Palestinian women on the UN conference of women. 1980, Condemning Israeli policy regarding the living conditions of the Palestinians. 1980, Condemning Israeli human rights practises in occupied territories. 1980, Emphasizing that development of nations and individuals is a human right. 1980, Calling for an end to nuclear tests. 1981, Affirming the right of every nation to choose its economic and social system in accordance to the will of its people, without outside interference whatever form it may take. 1981, Urging negotiations on prohibitions of chemical and biological weapons. 1981, Declaring that education, work, healthcare, proper nourishment and national development are human rights. 1981, Condemning an attempted coup by South Africa on the Seychelles. 1981, Establishing rights of the Palestinian people. 1981, Concerning Israelis human rights violation in occupied territories. 1982, Condemning the Israelis invasion of Lebanon. 1982, Condemning the shooting of 11 Muslims at a shrine in Jerussalem by an Israeli soldier. 1982, To promote international actions against Apartheid. 1982, Calls for establishing a world charter on the protection of the ecology. 1982, For the nuclear test bans and negitiations and nuclear free outerspace. 1982, Prohibiting chemical and bacterilogical weapons. 1982, Against product harmful to the environment and health. 1983, Prevention of arms race in outerspace. No wonder the Death Star was built. 1983, Prohibiting the manufacturing of new weapons of mass destruction. 1983, Reversing the arms race. 1984, On elimination of discrimination. 1984, Affirming the rights of the Palestinian people. 1984, Prohibiting new types of WMD's. 1984, Condemning assasination attempts against Palestinian mayor. 1984, Proposing economic assistance for Palestine. 1985, Condemning Israel for the use of excessive force in occupied territories. 1986, Calling all governments (USA included) to observe international laws. 1986, Condemning Israel for its actions against the Lebanese. 1986, Calling for Israel to respect Muslim holy places. 1987, Calling for Israel to abide by the geneva convention in treating its prisoners. 1987, Opposing build up of weapons in outerspace. 1987, Opposing the development of new WMD's. 1987, Opposing nuclear testing. 1989, Opposing the acquisition of territory by force. 2001, Condemning Israel for acts of terror in occupied territories. This is some of the reason why more and more people hate the USA everyday. People worldwide hate the US because they have been given a good reason to do so. Given these facts, the US Government continues to display acts of arrogance, ignorance and intrusion into other nations. I hope this brief explanation has helped you understand why more and more people continue to hate the USA. People from the countries of the world are forming massive alliances that includes a greater population than the American population 5 times over. It could be said that KARMA is beginning to pay America a visit.

@Meshugger: US responses to dropping the A bomb on Japan. "...the greatest thing in history." - Harry S. Truman President of the United States during the Atomic Bombing "It always appeared to us that, atomic bomb or no atomic bomb, the Japanese were already on the verge of collapse." - General Henry H. "Hap" Arnold Commanding General of the U.S. Army Air Forces Under President Truman "I had been conscious of depression and so I voiced to (Sec. Of War Stimson) my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at this very moment, seeking a way to surrender with a minimum loss of 'face.' " - General Dwight D. Eisenhower "Japan was at the moment seeking some way to surrender with minimum loss of 'face'. It wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing." - General Dwight D. Eisenhower "It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was taught not to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying woman and children." - Admiral William D. Leahy Former Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff "I am absolutely convinced that had we said they could keep the emperor, together with the threat of an atomic bomb, they would have accepted, and we would never have had to drop the bomb." - John McCloy "P.M. [Churchill} & I ate alone. Discussed Manhattan (it is a success). Decided to tell Stalin about it. Stalin had told P.M. of telegram from Jap Emperor asking for peace." - President Harry S. Truman Diary Entry, July 18, 1945 "Some of my conclusions may invoke scorn and even ridicule. "For example, I offer my belief that the existence of the first atomic bombs may have prolonged -- rather than shortened - World War II by influencing Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson and President Harry S. Truman to ignore an opportunity to negotiate a surrender that would have ended the killing in the Pacific in May or June of 1945. "And I have come to view the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings that August as an American tragedy that should be viewed as a moral atrocity." - Stewart L. Udall US Congressman and Author of "Myths of August" "Certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated." - U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey's 1946 Study "Careful scholarly treatment of the records and manuscripts opened over the past few years has greatly enhanced our understanding of why Truman administration used atomic weapons against Japan. Experts continue to disagree on some issues, but critical questions have been answered. The consensus among scholars is the that the bomb was not needed to avoid an invasion of Japan. It is clear that alternatives to the bomb existed and that Truman and his advisers knew it. - J. Samuel Walker Chief Historian U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission