Right-Wing Discussion Thread XVI: Making Things Right Again

[Salus Maior]

You know, the use of gas in warfare was probably one of humanity's lowest lows imo.

[Kowani]

You know, the use of gas in warfare was probably one of humanity's lowest lows imo.

I don’t think it’s the absolute worst, but it’s somewhere on that list.

[Salus Maior]

You know, the use of gas in warfare was probably one of humanity's lowest lows imo.

I don’t think it’s the absolute worst, but it’s somewhere on that list.

True.

I guess we did manage to top that in WWII with gas chambers for civilians, terror bombings, unrestricted sub warfare, and of course nukes. Oh, and napalm.

[Kowani]

I don’t think it’s the absolute worst, but it’s somewhere on that list.

True.

I guess we did manage to top that in WWII with gas chambers for civilians, terror bombings, unrestricted sub warfare, and of course nukes. Oh, and napalm.

I don’t know a problem with the nukes. Everything else, though...

[Salus Maior]

True.

I guess we did manage to top that in WWII with gas chambers for civilians, terror bombings, unrestricted sub warfare, and of course nukes. Oh, and napalm.

I don’t know a problem with the nukes. Everything else, though...

Obliterating a city of civilians with a single bomb isn't a moral problem?

Not to mention all the people who die of radiation poisoning and things like cancer.

[Kowani]

I don’t know a problem with the nukes. Everything else, though...

Obliterating a city of civilians with a single bomb isn't a moral problem?

Not to mention all the people who die of radiation poisoning and things like cancer.

Which is Hiroshima?

[Novus America]

I don’t know a problem with the nukes. Everything else, though...

Obliterating a city of civilians with a single bomb isn't a moral problem?

Not to mention all the people who die of radiation poisoning and things like cancer.

It was necessary to prevent even more deaths. An outright invasion or massive famine from the collapse of the Japanese economy would have killed far more.

[Salus Maior]

Obliterating a city of civilians with a single bomb isn't a moral problem?

Not to mention all the people who die of radiation poisoning and things like cancer.

Which is Hiroshima?

What's your point? That while maybe gassing civilians is bad, completely obliterating them with nuclear fire and leaving others to die slowly of poisoning and cancer is fine?

[Novus America]

Which is Hiroshima?

What's your point? That while maybe gassing civilians is bad, completely obliterating them with nuclear fire and leaving others to die slowly of poisoning and cancer is fine?

Fine no, but justified if better than the alternative.

[Salus Maior]

Fine no, but justified if better than the alternative.

I'm not really asking for whether or not its use was justified. But if you need to vocalize it to not think about what the U.S actually did by making that decision go ahead.

[Totally Not OEP]

Obliterating a city of civilians with a single bomb isn't a moral problem?

Not to mention all the people who die of radiation poisoning and things like cancer.

It was necessary to prevent even more deaths. An outright invasion or massive famine from the collapse of the Japanese economy would have killed far more.

It would've been hell on Earth for the Japanese had the 8/15 Incident resulted in a successful coup and continuation of the war.

[Totally Not OEP]

Had Nicholas Trist died in the Fall of 1847 from the disease outbreaks than spreading among the American forces in Mexico City, the United States would've annexed all of Mexico in 1848 and the world would've been a better place for it.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Like Tars said, we can't really debate whether it was justified or not, it's still wrong that hundreds of thousands of people were destroyed in an instant. Such devices shouldn't exist and should fill us with fear.

[Totally Not OEP]

Like Tars said, we can't really debate whether it was justified or not, it's still wrong that hundreds of thousands of people were destroyed in an instant. Such devices shouldn't exist and should fill us with fear.

The alternative was that Japan would not exist as a nation-state and that, eventually, you'd have Soviet tanks at the Channel. All things considered, Nuclear weapons are one of the best things ever invented and even now the research that led to them is taking us in the path of Nuclear Fusion which will change everything for Humanity.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Like Tars said, we can't really debate whether it was justified or not, it's still wrong that hundreds of thousands of people were destroyed in an instant. Such devices shouldn't exist and should fill us with fear.

The alternative was that Japan would not exist as a nation-state and that, eventually, you'd have Soviet tanks at the Channel. All things considered, Nuclear weapons are one of the best things ever invented and even now the research that led to them is taking us in the path of Nuclear Fusion which will change everything for Humanity.

As Tolkien said, what I know is that God doesn't look favorably on Babel-builders.

[Novus America]

Like Tars said, we can't really debate whether it was justified or not, it's still wrong that hundreds of thousands of people were destroyed in an instant. Such devices shouldn't exist and should fill us with fear.

The bombing with the highest death toll, that of Tokyo was done without nuclear bombs.
We can debate that it was justified, in war you have to make such decisions.
Such as to kill 100,000 to save a million.
War is not for the faint of heart.

Nuclear weapons are not inherently worse than any other weapon.

[Totally Not OEP]

The alternative was that Japan would not exist as a nation-state and that, eventually, you'd have Soviet tanks at the Channel. All things considered, Nuclear weapons are one of the best things ever invented and even now the research that led to them is taking us in the path of Nuclear Fusion which will change everything for Humanity.

As Tolkien said, what I know is that God doesn't look favorably on Babel-builders.

That same argument could be used to justify the abandoning of the Internet, Modern Medicine and many other facts of modern day life.

[United Muscovite Nations]

As Tolkien said, what I know is that God doesn't look favorably on Babel-builders.

That same argument could be used to justify the abandoning of the Internet, Modern Medicine and many other facts of modern day life.

Yes.

[Jolthig]

Like Tars said, we can't really debate whether it was justified or not, it's still wrong that hundreds of thousands of people were destroyed in an instant. Such devices shouldn't exist and should fill us with fear.

My Khalifa repeatedly warns us about nuclear war in his speeche, warning us if the world continues down the way it's going, we could have a nuclear disaster.

If all the books of the apocalypse describing fire coming from heaven came to manifestation, it would be through nuclear war.

[Novus America]

Had Nicholas Trist died in the Fall of 1847 from the disease outbreaks than spreading among the American forces in Mexico City, the United States would've annexed all of Mexico in 1848 and the world would've been a better place for it.

It would have been better had that happened. He deliberately ignored instructions and completely botched the negotiations.

[Novus America]

[align=][/align]

As Tolkien said, what I know is that God doesn't look favorably on Babel-builders.

That same argument could be used to justify the abandoning of the Internet, Modern Medicine and many other facts of modern day life.

Yes, it is not a good argument at all. It could apply to any tool use. Anything beyond running naked through the jungle like other apes.

[Hanafuridake]

I don't think that we will ever really reach a full understanding of the role of the atomic bombings in the imperial decision to surrender, the bombings in imperial briefings were mentioned in conjunction with the Soviet declaration of war which cancelled the hopes of the militarists that some sort of white peace could be bargained for. One general commented that the bombing and declaration of war were both a blessing in disguise because they allowed the government to surrender for reasons other than popular unrest over food shortages.

But speaking about Tolkien, I was reading an article about his view of language and the relation to human expression.

Language—and more so as expression than as communication [we need to return to this proviso later]—is a natural product of our humanity. But it is therefore also a product of our individuality. We each have our own personal linguistic potential: we each have a native language. But that is not the language that we speak, our cradle-tongue, the first-learned. Linguistically we all wear ready-made clothes, and our native language comes seldom to expression, save perhaps by pulling at the ready made till it sits a little easier. But though it may be buried, it is never wholly extinguished, and contact with other languages may stir it deeply.

[Napkizemlja]

You know, the use of gas in warfare was probably one of humanity's lowest lows imo.

I don’t think it’s the absolute worst, but it’s somewhere on that list.

I don't really see how you can bemoan the use of chemical weapons but not nuclear weapons.

[Totally Not OEP]

I don't think that we will ever really reach a full understanding of the role of the atomic bombings in the imperial decision to surrender, the bombings in imperial briefings were mentioned in conjunction with the Soviet declaration of war which cancelled the hopes of the militarists that some sort of white peace could be bargained for. One general commented that the bombing and declaration of war were both a blessing in disguise because they allowed the government to surrender for reasons other than popular unrest over food shortages.

But speaking about Tolkien, I was reading an article about his view of language and the relation to human expression.

Language—and more so as expression than as communication [we need to return to this proviso later]—is a natural product of our humanity. But it is therefore also a product of our individuality. We each have our own personal linguistic potential: we each have a native language. But that is not the language that we speak, our cradle-tongue, the first-learned. Linguistically we all wear ready-made clothes, and our native language comes seldom to expression, save perhaps by pulling at the ready made till it sits a little easier. But though it may be buried, it is never wholly extinguished, and contact with other languages may stir it deeply.

The Atomic Bombings were very decisive, the whole "Soviet declaration of war" bit is mainly revisionism.

[ElCKuT]

Assalaamu 'Alaikum wa RaHmatullahi wa Barakaatuhu! May the peace, mercy and blessings of Allah SWT be upon you. I'm baaaaaack!
Ok, Imma make a reeeeaaaallly long post so Imma put it in the spoiler:

Germanic culture, Latin culture, Hindu culture, East Asian culture aren't worth preserving?

To me, Islamic culture means more than other cultures.

There are massive cultural differences between traditionally Muslim peoples. Islam has cultural aspects like all religions but it's not a culture itself.

True but like I said, Al-Islam has rules for just about every single aspect of our lives that it might as well be its own culture.

Which is why we need to not reply when someone tries to start such a thread jack.

Or report them.

We can just ignore those same empty comments we have heard over and over.

Though I disagree with this. Someone threadjacking doesn't make their messages empty.

This is very true. It should be noted that as much as I want to put a stop to Salafism, I (unlike the PRC) do not want to attempt to ban Islam, let alone exterminate it from people who have adopted it.
I just want to stop the spread of the aggressive strains.

Then why were you talking about how you wanted to end the "Islamic threat"?

I don't why unbelievers imagine Sufism is some sort of sect or liberal version of Islam. It's a mystical practice.

Same

Turkish accomplishments? You mean despoiling, genociding and robbing the Greeks, Armenians and Slavs for centuries?

That's an biased, ignorant view of Turkish history. A heck of a lot more things happened than just that.

Is the problem really "effeminacy", per se, or is it that we have replaced healthy masculinity with more toxic and degenerate forms of masculinity?

Probs a little bit of both. Though I'd like to be optimistic about things and say true masculinity still exists.

1: Neo-Nazis.
2: It implies that society has gotten worse, when that’s just untrue.

Well, in some cases it is true.

Ataturk shouldn't have attempted to secularize Turkey, that's where he erred. Instead trying to turn Turkey into a European nation, he should've modernized within an Islamic framework.

This

This is why I hate English.

:lol2:

He should have embraced the Tengri.

No, he should've re-embraced Al-Islam. That or be [redacted because of site rules]

Why?

Because English is dumb

Amorality is fine if motivated by sound logic. Not if done so by sociopathy.

But there's nothing to criticize from if someone does so by sociopathy.

Secularism is the worst of diseases, the greatest plague there is.

I'd say that it's ShayTaan (Satan). Secularism is just one of the symptoms of him.

We could always try that now...Heck, maybe we could even convince the Russians to get in on it.

Pls no, I don't want another war

How is that secularism?

Because kufr (disbelief) law is secularism, something that they are allowed to live by.

Yet, it's secular to the point that non muslims dont adhere to Islamic teachings

Also, not all religions have their own laws so their adherents would naturally abide by kufr law

>protest snip<

Insha-Allah the protesters win

Also, nuclear/atomic/other types of those bombs are Haraam and must be destroyed. No nation should have them.