1st Month in 7 Years- No Military Casualties in March
 

Good sign. We'll see how well Afghanistan does this weekend in their elections and how well their able to secure the state, as the US pulls out. No Americans should die in the middle east. Lets hope this is something that will continue

I had a friend that died there cause of 'friendly fire' he was the only one in his unit that died, it was horrible.

His mother was a wreck and to this day you can see she is still affected by it, ppl not personally affected by this just see statistics but ppl who have a suffered a loss because of this see more than that.

i would like to add your statement of "No american should die in the middle east' that no one should die in this bullsh*t war, i don't see americans crying for the innocent civilians they killed, comes with the job however if one of their boys fall uncle sam sheds a tear.

Now im not defending them terrorist, that's not the issue, the issue is i think beyond which side you fight for each human life should be equally valuable.

I know im a dreamer but im not the only one. :)

(seriously though, im on your side america.. plz don't waterboard me.)

In theory yeah, but I've got a buddy who last time I heard was in the Coast Guard in Iraq. If you exchange "Coast Guard" with "Army" and "Iraq" with "Afghanistan", and ask me if I'm willing to allow drone strikes into Pakistan to keep him alive and with all limbs intact then yeah I am.

How will they talk the deaths in the post we leave time frame. We will be exposed for many years

What is friendly fire?

That's when the military fires on its own people or other friendly forces by mistake.

This post confuses me?

Thanks for that, it doesn't sound good at all. You'd think with the technology that exists these days you would be able to figure out who you're firing at?

Me too. I don't understand.

America.

You dropped hiroshima but still cry over 9/11.

A bullly and a victim all in one, gotta luv ya <3

How is retaliating for Pearl Harbor being considered as a bully? you must be trolling dude.

People are still human and when you are in the middle of action accidents happen. It's easy to say what you are saying while you are sitting comfortably at home but it's different when there are bullets flying by you.

im not trolling at all, and i don't hate america i want to make that very clear.

but it's a matter of perspective, it's your team always the good guy and the enemy the bad guy?

There is a sense that they can dish it out but they can't take it back.

How is retaliating for Pearl Harbor a bully act?

i'll explain it through play ground politics,
it would be like me going on over and destroying your sand fort and you retaliating by killing me and my whole family and as bonus leaving my home full of radiation to **** up our future generation.

But see to point this would be anti-patriotic from an american standpoint, but really my point is you have to dehumanize one party to justify the atrocites of war and im very much against that.

but my beef with america is the hypocrisy. somehow they are the exception every rule. they can bomb but not bombed.

Im not saying im against this btw but from a logical standpoint it's very hypocritical.

The bomb was dropped on Hiroshima because the Japanese islands were defended by 2 million strong in preparation of an inevitable pending invasion by America and its allies.

Japan was not even close to the capacity of invading the US, at that time.

Jesus.

is this a joke? "destroying your sand fort" does not account for the 2,400 innocent American soldiers the Japanese killed that day. If you wanna surprise bomb us, we're gonna surprise bomb you. That's not hypocritical in any way. Now if you wanna talk about Iraq or other things, you would have a point.

Oh absolutely, I have no idea what it's like. But you didn't get any action n Afghanistan did you?

Isn't about being a victim for me. My concern for my friends and my own just trumps my concern for people I've never met and will likely never meet. Simple as that.

No, but I have heard stories from friends that were stationed overseas.

You do realize we stayed out of WWI and WWII till we had a reason to enter it right?

The word bully is a little misplaced here.

This ^.
Also, Japan may have looked impressive from a technological standpoint, but they were still living in the ****ing dark ages where their leader was perceived to be a god. I'm sure everybody knows about the suicidal tactics employed by Japanese soldiers; they would ram their own planes into U.S. battleships if they had no other options.
The bloodshed would have been HORRENDOUS! It would have taken months to secure the island.


You don't have to be there to know what it's like. PTSD is post-traumatic stress disorder. You can look it up if you want. The U.S. has a Government Website specifically for people to go to learn about PTSD, if that doesn't tell you how bad it is. It's run by the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs.

I'm of the belief that Hiroshima was unwarranted. The whole saving more lives than it cost reeks of bull**** to me.

I think in reality it's about not wanting to sacrifice so many, many American lives. You gotta think of it in context of the times. After four years of friends and family coming back in body bags by the thousands I'd probably be willing to drop the bomb rather than risk them coming back in the millions. Especially after hearing about things like the Bataan Death March and Nanjing.

It could have been avoided if the US wasn't vying for an unconditional surrender. I understand the intent, but I think it could have been carried out in a more humane way.

I have to agree. The massive deaths that occurred were way more than any Japan assault on the US could have done. I have to say, I think in the long run, it was best for the world that it happened. It's only happened once and the world saw the horror of it. That will always play a role in perceptions that a nuke war is winnable

I don't know about that. It did have a hand in inciting the Cold War. Without the Cold War the military industrial complex probably (assumption) would not be as prevalent in the US, not to mention the series of internal conflicts that the Cold War brought about (Vietnam, Korea, etc.)

Hmm, well I believe it was the right choice. The Japanese rarely surendered, if ever. I think the U.S. would have had to take every single Japanese base with overwhelming force before the Japanese even considered surrendering.

Allegedly, the Japanese was willing to surrender by the terms of the Potsdam Declaration with conditions, but the allies were bent on an unconditional surrender. I think the media also incorrectly portrayed the Japanese as being in "the dark ages" as you put it. Take into consideration the overwhelming dissent for the Japanese that many Americans held at the time and it's pretty plausible that they'd eat up any negative facts about them.

The United States and Japan have been the first and second largest economies since the early 70's, but this year, there was a change with China taking over the position occupied so long by Japan. With that said, the modern Japan of today only uses military forces for self defense purposes only. Maybe if we had invaded instead of dropping the bomb while wasting countless American and allied lives in the process, Japan might rank as the number one largest economy in the world today. Isn't all out World War hell when you're on the losing side. :rolleyes:

Obviously there were American self-interest and vengeance reasons for this, but still, they had just invaded about half of Asia and were pretty douchey about it too. I might have wanted them crushed into dust at the time too.