| Author |
Message |
|
|
Posted: Nov 26, 2005 - 02:09 PM
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
Posts: 157
Location: Finland
|
|
| Stealing Society, Soldier Side and Vicinity of Obscenity has the best lyrics in my opinion. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Posted: Nov 28, 2005 - 03:23 AM
|
|
New Member
Joined: Nov 19, 2005
Posts: 18
|
|
and then the third time he says it he switches to:
"Where do you expect them to go when the bombs fall"
imho the most powerful line in the song; "them" being all the innocent civilians that the good ol' us of a has bombed into oblivion starting with oh lets just start with hiroshima and the latest being the white phosphorus (WMD's no less) it has recently been revealed we've used on iraqi civilians. soad lyrics are timeless and are very poetic. |
Last edited by nrolfes on Nov 28, 2005 - 03:27 AM; edited 1 time in total
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Nov 28, 2005 - 07:56 AM
|
|
Almost Member
Joined: Aug 01, 2005
Posts: 90
|
|
I have a question for nrolfes. How could you be so ignorant?
The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was completely neccessary in bringing an end to WW2. These two bombs being dropped saved many lives on both sides. If you know history you will know that the Japanese were very tough to fight. They thought Hirohito was a God, and they had a policy of no surrender. During the time just before the first bomb was dropped the "good ol' U.S of A" as you sarcastically referred to the country I love, was engaged in an island hopping campaign. This means they were going from island to island around Japan, fighting the Japanese troops. As you can imagine this was extremely bloody and many lives were lost on both sides.
Now, to bring a speedy end to the war, President Truman decided to use a new weapon that had just been discovered. This of course being the a-bomb. It was dropped on hiroshima killing many innocent civilians and causing a great deal of destruction. After this bomb was dropped it was thought that the Japanese would surrender. They did not. A second bomb was dropped this one hitting Nagasaki. A third one would have been on the way but the Japanese finally surrendered.
Now if it took two atomic bombs to make the Japanese surrender how much would it have taken on the ground to achieve victory. My guess would be a full on invasion of Japan. This would have cost the Americans far too many lives. The total lives lost on both sides in an invasion of Japan would have probably been greater than the lives lost from the bombs. Also, in an invasion victory is not guranteed and we just as well could have lost WW2 and be living under a Japanese emperor today.
Remember it was the Japanese who attacked us at Pearl Harbor.
Moving onto more recent matters. I'm not sure what you mean when you say (WMD's no less) in quotes. Is that supposed to mean that we are really the big, bad guys with the weapons of mass destruction because I am sure that any civilian killed in Iraq is an accident. If white phospherous was used I am sure it was directed at suspected terrorists. We would not try and knock down a city, and a group of people that we are trying to help.
Please don't return with something about how this war is for oil because that is simply untrue and is an ignorant statement to make so please don't make it.
I would like a response from you because your words have truly angered me. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Nov 28, 2005 - 10:27 AM
|
|
New Member
Joined: Sep 06, 2005
Posts: 30
|
|
| Mez/Hyp has the best SOAD lyrics. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Nov 28, 2005 - 02:59 PM
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 21, 2005
Posts: 268
Location: Finland
|
|
I love the part in solider side where it goes: "They were crying when their sons left, god is wearing black, He’s gone so far to find no hope he’s never coming back"...
and in tentative the part: "We're going down, in a spiral to the ground, no one,no one's gonna save us now"... |
_________________
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Nov 29, 2005 - 04:30 AM
|
|
New Member
Joined: Nov 19, 2005
Posts: 18
|
|
|
geoff wrote:
I have a question for nrolfes. How could you be so ignorant?
The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was completely neccessary in bringing an end to WW2. These two bombs being dropped saved many lives on both sides. If you know history you will know that the Japanese were very tough to fight. They thought Hirohito was a God, and they had a policy of no surrender. During the time just before the first bomb was dropped the "good ol' U.S of A" as you sarcastically referred to the country I love, was engaged in an island hopping campaign. This means they were going from island to island around Japan, fighting the Japanese troops. As you can imagine this was extremely bloody and many lives were lost on both sides.
Now, to bring a speedy end to the war, President Truman decided to use a new weapon that had just been discovered. This of course being the a-bomb. It was dropped on hiroshima killing many innocent civilians and causing a great deal of destruction. After this bomb was dropped it was thought that the Japanese would surrender. They did not. A second bomb was dropped this one hitting Nagasaki. A third one would have been on the way but the Japanese finally surrendered.
Now if it took two atomic bombs to make the Japanese surrender how much would it have taken on the ground to achieve victory. My guess would be a full on invasion of Japan. This would have cost the Americans far too many lives. The total lives lost on both sides in an invasion of Japan would have probably been greater than the lives lost from the bombs. Also, in an invasion victory is not guranteed and we just as well could have lost WW2 and be living under a Japanese emperor today.
Remember it was the Japanese who attacked us at Pearl Harbor.
Moving onto more recent matters. I'm not sure what you mean when you say (WMD's no less) in quotes. Is that supposed to mean that we are really the big, bad guys with the weapons of mass destruction because I am sure that any civilian killed in Iraq is an accident. If white phospherous was used I am sure it was directed at suspected terrorists. We would not try and knock down a city, and a group of people that we are trying to help.
Please don't return with something about how this war is for oil because that is simply untrue and is an ignorant statement to make so please don't make it.
I would like a response from you because your words have truly angered me.
regardless how you justify the bombing the result is still bombing of innocent civilians which imho is what this song is about, and what the lyrics are about, which is what the topic of this thread is about.
its a debatable issue whether or not the hiroshima bomb was "necessary", maybe it was, maybe it wasn't, but to state as fact that it was and there is no debate to be had about it is ignorant. there is strong evidence that the japanese had already agreed to sign the surrender prior to the bombing, but Truman wanted to send a message to the entire world that would iterate American dominance and state our case for being the new world superpower, and that we weren't afraid to use these newly developed WMD's. It was the beginning of the era of American air bombing campaigns that destroy innocent civilians, towns, villages, at the literal press of a button.
i find it ironic that we invade a country on the premises of their posession of WMD's, and then we subsequently use them upon the country during our invasion. ironic that we depose their leader because of his infamous torture prisons, which we recreate with the help of our own CIA. ironic that we deem certain states are not allowed to have WMD's, despite the fact we are the country with the track record of using and producing the most WMD's in human history. Ironic that we sold many of these WMD's to Saddam in the 80's and now it gives us a convenient excuse to invade. Saddam was our tool, he played his part well, and now we control iraq's oil. we don't get much oil from iraq, but all of our enemies and allies do (Europe, China) and now we control the spigot they would like to drink from. i'm not making this up its all in the PNAC thinktank report authored by Dick Cheney, Wolfowitz, and other neocons before bush ever took office. they just needed the spark to initiate the plan, a "new pearl harbor" (their words, not mine), and 9/11 offered that for them in spades.
i'm not naive to believe if we didn't do all these things we would have the power, prestige, and privelige that we do as a nation today, however at least if people understood that we did not achieve all this by playing fair, we did not achieve this by being holier and more righteous than all other nations, we achieved this because we were the dirtiest, rotten scoundrel on the block and we will stop at nothing to keep ourselves in power.
Not bad if your american, but if your not american....well you can understand why everyone hates americans then. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Nov 29, 2005 - 06:40 PM
|
|
Almost Member
Joined: Aug 01, 2005
Posts: 90
|
|
How can you say that the Japanese were thinking about surrendering before the bomb was dropped? It took two to get them to surrender. And if there was a message to be sent from these bombings it was meant for the soviet union but i don't believe it was meant as a message because ww2 wouldn't have ended. If you remember certain U.S generals felt it was necessary to take on the Soviet Union at the end of WW2. Truman decided not to. These are not the actions of a man who thinks it is important to be the world's superpower.
It wasn't the bombing of Hiroshima or Nagasaki or any military action that made the U.S a legitimate power in the world. It was the supporting of Allied countries during the first part of the war with weapons and other industrial needs. Also, the Marshall plan which was the entire rebuilding of europe with american industry and money was what established the U.S as one of the superpowers. It was not only military power that made the u.s powerful it was mostly due to industry and abandoning the prior policies of isolationism.
Now onto the Iraqui invasion. We did not invade Iraq because we thought they had WMD's. If having WMD's was the litmus test for invading a country than we would be at war with almost all of the world. The reason for the invasion was the thought of wmd's in the hands of a man who had acted aggressively towards peaceful nations and seemed to have world domination on his mind. He was also a friend to terrorists and an enemy to the U.S. To give him a chance to build any kind of weapons would be dangerous. The bombings of Iraq were done with precision guided bombs directed at mostly military and terrorist targets. Any innocent civilian casualties were a mistake.
To compare the torture chambers of Saddam to the ones that we supposedly use is irresponsible. I assume you are talking about the ones of the cia and maybe abu-giraib (or however it is spelled) What was done in Abu Garaib was not torture with any stretch of the imagination and the ones the cia uses are being looked at by congress and will most likely be corrected. Even if we did have torture chambers i am sure those are used to extract evidence from terrorists and to ensure the safety of american citizens.
I also don't see how our motive is to control Iraqui oil if we plan to give the country and all of it's resources back to the people and democratic government of iraq. Please explain this to me.
Lastly, I do not understand why people hate americans. Maybe i can see how they don't always agree with the actions of our government. Maybe I can see how they do not like things like Mcdonald's and Nike being present in their country. maybe they view this as american arrogance, i don't know what they think. But i definitely do not understand why they hate the american people or want to cause them harm other than us not conforming to the beliefs of islam and living as infidels. If this last point is true than they are fascists, and are on the same level as hitler, and we as a country should strive to eliminate fascism.
Again I would like a response because i am enjoying this conversation we are having. It is shaping up to be a liberal vs. conservative type of debate thing and it is all stemming from lyrics. I actually think that is kind of cool. Please respond |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Nov 29, 2005 - 07:03 PM
|
|
SOADFans Founder
Joined: Nov 12, 2003
Posts: 7195
Location: World Wide Garbage Can
|
|
|
geoff wrote:
He was also a friend to terrorists and an enemy to the U.S.
Saddam's army and weapons including the chemical ones were all been supplied by the American government. and when he strike the kurds in the north of iraq in 1984-1989 and killed thousands of people, it was american made missiles carred on american made airplans
AND it was the American veto that stopped the UN from condemn Iraqi goverment
And it was the american airplans who have striked South of Iraq in 1992 when they tried to revolt againt Saddam, killed hundreds of them.
Now, you're telling me he wa friends of the enemies ?! what enemies ?
Bin laden? Bin Ladin is a CIA agent, American goverment have used it against the soviet invasion to Afghnstan in the 80s.
Even in Iran, the extremist islamic govement founder "El Khomni" was brought on a military american airplan from Paris ... etc
geoff wrote:
How can you say that the Japanese were thinking about surrendering before the bomb was dropped?
Its the truth in fact, you should re-read history once again and re-check your resources
Japaness forces have been already defeated in Asia and 98% of them were backed up into Japan (or at least what left) before the nuclear hit, and it was matter of time till Japan's emperor will announce the official surrender but for political reasons, the bomb was dropped, to announce the new great power rise esp. that The USSR have proved the capability of being a great power
and also for not repeating the mistake of germany, as germany been divided to 2 parts between the USA and USSR, the american wanted Japan all for them selfs and thats when the nuclear bomb decision was made, so it has nothing to do with WWW 1 as much as it has lots to do with the new born cold war back then..
Now lthis really went so far off-topic, so please lets get back on-topic |
_________________
...Don't challenge someone who has nothing to lose ..
only $10 for 3 months premium membership
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Nov 29, 2005 - 07:41 PM
|
|
Almost Member
Joined: Aug 01, 2005
Posts: 90
|
|
I will not deny that there was a relationship between Iraq and the U.S but that stopped when he invaded Kuwait (spelling might be bad). Since then he made himself an enemy to us.
We used Bin Laden because we had a common enemy, the USSR. The USSR attacked Afghanistan, Bin Laden fought them.
If the Japanese were going to surrender they would have before a second one hit. There were 2 a-bombs. If we wanted to decimate Japan why not 3? why not one at Tokyo? Why? because they surrendered that's why
This is not off topic this is within the context of lyrics and the discussing of lyrics, but to keep it on topic My favorite lyrics are contained in "Vicinity of Obscenity"
p.s. germany was divided into many parts as many countries helped with the invasion of germany. I think there were 4, not sure though I know there was more than just us and ussr pieces. And we were the only nation fighting japan hence there wouldn't be multiple pieces, so I'm not sure what your argument is about the segmented germany having anything to do with the bomb. Next you will say Hitler was our fault because of the Treaty of Versailles. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Nov 29, 2005 - 08:19 PM
|
|
SOADFans Founder
Joined: Nov 12, 2003
Posts: 7195
Location: World Wide Garbage Can
|
|
|
geoff wrote:
germany was divided into many parts as many countries
Man! you really need to re-check your history !!
Berlin Wall was between west germany and east germany, have you ever heared of 3rd or 4th germany ?!?
geoff wrote:
Since then he made himself an enemy to us.
you still cant explain how, and re-read my post again, the usa used the veto severl times even after the Kuwait war, and not only this, but they stricked south of iraq when they tried to resist Saddam and thats was 1992-1993. you really need to re-check your resources
geoff wrote:
If the Japanese were going to surrender they would have before a second one hit. There were 2 a-bombs.
Coz once again Japan Emperor didnt have any war declarness from the USa and allies before that date.
The bombs were dropped on Aug. 6th and 9th, only 2days in between and "Potsdam Declaration" which asks Japan to unconditional surrender, was only announced After the bomb in the Aug. 13 and the Japan Emperor have immediately accpet it on the next day the 14th.
AND ...
geoff wrote:
If we wanted to decimate Japan why not 3? why not one at Tokyo?
well, you're just proving my point and I already said that in my above post..
the USA did NOT used the A-bomb to make Japan surrender, it was mainly for political reasons toward the new great power the USSR or if they really wanted Japan to surrender then they would hit Tokyo directly and kill the emperor and so on. it was political message to USSR that we can strike any place once .. and twice with massive weapon no one has, later one the American documents assured that there was no 3rd nuclear bomb, they only had these 2 and they drop them, and according to the americans themselfs they didnt expect that massive destruction, even the bomb dropper went insance after what he saw ..
I highly recommend google for more researching |
_________________
...Don't challenge someone who has nothing to lose ..
only $10 for 3 months premium membership
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Nov 29, 2005 - 08:44 PM
|
|
Almost Member
Joined: Aug 01, 2005
Posts: 90
|
|
When Germany was originally conquered there were many armies invading it including the United States, France, and USSR. after Germany fell we gave the pieces back to Germany wanting to avoid another Versailles situation. The USSR would not give their piece back. That is why it was originally divided between many people but was eventually wittled down to two. One side being the democratic west the other being the communists and the east. again im not sure how many pieces it was originally divided into, i know that france was going to have a piece. Still what does this have to do with Japan?
About the Japanese surrender. It is debatable when the war even ended. On August 14 the emperor Hirohito announced that they would surrender. The formal surrender wan on September 2nd on some boat but many japanese troops fought on. 500,000 Japanese troops surrendered to a group of marines on October 15 and many Japanese soldiers kept fighting. So the bombs were needed to make Japan surrender.
We did not strike southern Iraq when people tried to resist Saddam. That is untrue. I think what you are talking about is us not helping them. We tried to stage this event and when it happened we didn't help them. I know for a fact we never bombed people against Saddam, I think this is the situation you are confused about.
I don't know what you're talking about when you say if they wanted to end the war they would have just hit Tokyo or kill the emperor. First of all the emperor thing: why didn't they just kill hitler or why not just kill mussolini? the answer is because they don't know where he is and he really doesn't matter. If you kill him does the war end?
And about Tokyo, it was in the 40's im not even sure if tokyo was their biggest city then. |
Last edited by geoff on Nov 29, 2005 - 08:55 PM; edited 1 time in total
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Where I really want to be, It's already where I am,
Cause I'm already there
-- Sugar Lyrics
|
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
