8 ms·
The US has always used its military for global terrorism. Only just now, it is more in your face. There is no doubt: the US is responsible for some of the most
by michaelsshaw 5mo ago
The US has always used its military for global terrorism. Only just now, it is more in your face. There is no doubt: the US is responsible for some of the most sickening crimes against humanity the world has ever seen, including directly being the inspiration for the Holocaust, as well as US companies providing logistics for the Holocaust!
I hate the idea that it was ever the DoD. It was always a terroristic, offensive force.
- UltraSane 5mo ago"It was always a terroristic, offensive force." Even during WW2?
- lazyasciiart 5mo agoYes. Netanyahu has pretended to justify destroying civilians in Gaza by saying the US did it first in Dresden.
- ambicapter 5mo agoWell if Bibi says it then it must be true!
- UltraSane 5mo agoI don't care what Netanyahu says. Why do you?
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- lazyasciiart 5mo agoBecause in this instance he’s correct.
- UltraSane 5mo agoHe is just a scumbag trying to justify his own despicable behavior.
- dudefeliciano 5mo agoOk then, always in our lifetime, assuming you are < 81
- carlosjobim 5mo agoWWII was won by terror bombings of German cities, and terror nuclear bombing of Japanese cities. That's common knowledge. Not mentioning the Soviet terror in Germany during and after the war, since the topic is the US.
- UltraSane 5mo agoIt isn't really accurate to describe those bombings as terrorism when they happened during the largest war in human history.
- antiframe 5mo agoWhile I agree there's not a universally agreed upon definition of terrorism, I want to hear more about why you think bombing with novel munitions expressly delivered to dense urban areas which killed 250k people 90% of whom were civilian, in an attempt to scare them into surrender, is not "terrorism".
- Dylan16807 5mo agoKilling people while trying to scare them into surrender is a feature shared by both terrorism and wars. A big bombing campaign done by an army is a war, not a terrorism.
- antiframe 5mo agoEven when they specifically target civilians? What would you call a bomb exploded in times square? What if it were placed there by Iranian soldiers? Is that war, or terrorism?
- Dylan16807 5mo agoIf those soldiers are in full uniform bringing in an unconcealed bomb, and it's part of a broader campaign that's also going after military targets, I would not call that terrorism.
- michaelsshaw 5mo agoSure. The unnecessary nuclear bombing of two civilian population centers is proof enough. Do you know the ratio of civilians to military deaths in those bombings? Nagasaki is particularly bad: 0.25% military personnel, 99.75% civilian deaths, and that's the most generous count. Not to mention Tokyo, or the numerous other cities which were firebombed. The idea that nuking civilians saved lives is a statement so stupid that only an American could believe it. Let me ask you a question, directly, UltraSane. Is killing 60,000(minimum) civilians in an instant not terrorism?