funkymofo comments

So the newer variant, which is different from older variants, is less dangerous. I don't see how that's controversial.

Oh the WHO calls this a low risk to public health like the other Omicron variants. Weren’t saying it a while ago we’re they

What does this mean? They were saying it was low risk or they weren't?

'I'm sorry for what happened'- not 'sorry for what I did'. Cop out.

How'd that Ohio ballot go?

ever since the newly woke Navy got their sailors captured by Iran under Obama, the mystique was gone as it relates to them being an Iran deterrent. nobody is scared of our Navy under Democrat "leadership".

"There's another side of this," said Schanzer. "They understood that there was a change in the rules of the risk/reward calculus, but they also seem to understand that there was less of a policy with regard to their regional activity from Yemen to Iraq to Syria."

So while Iran has dropped the very visible, US-centric naval run-ins, it's picked up on recruiting militias, deploying its armed forces to Syria, and supplying anti-US and anti-Israel militant groups.

Per your article.

So they stopped the meaningless harrassment for internal political points, but increased their actual ability to harm the US and its allies because Trump was, as usual, completely unable to understand anything beyond immediate optics. Big win.

EFD

Did NOT need that image this morning. Also, I think he has enough of his own cosmetics.

Biden! The Dems! The WH! RINOs! The DOJ! You forgot aliens and Bigfoot.

In the occupied West Bank- occupied by whom…

And this is how to romanticize the biggest war crime in history..

You've seen the movie?

10th year in a row he's promised this.

Canadians are copping a flogging here today. Why is this kid suddenly representative of an entire nation. Kind of bigoted.

The only tagline they need for this is ‘Like Twitter if it wasn’t run by Elon Musk.’

The only tagline they need for this is ‘Like Twitter if it wasn’t run by Elon Musk.’

Nothing like a racist ideology to gee up the dullards.

No fan of either, but at least Zuckerberg is competent.

Nobody trusts China.

I think it meant just him and his family.

Aussie, Aussie, Aussie, cheat, cheat, cheat.

Robinson calling Khawaja a 'f....ing ... p...k' and then defending it to all and sundry. MCC members verbally and physically abusing Australian players on the way through the long room- over a dismissal that Bairstow himself has tried on dozens of occasions, including last week. Stokes and MacCullum bleating about the spirit of the game, when there's dozens of videos of them doing the same thing and the it's literally in the rule book. In just these 2 test matches- show me the Aussies doing this. You're having a laugh.

Aussies have displayed bad behavior since the time Greg Chappell ordered his brother Trevor to bowl underarm.

You're on a hiding to nothing if you think England have the moral high ground.

Great match- deserved winners.

The second Nagasaki bomb was not necessary for its apparent purpose.

5 times lol

But might I say you have provided little to no independent synthesis of the information you have consumed....

Again, I say,

You've provided less- you made one point and repeated it 4 times.

Never mind twice when the first was more than enough

This has been explained more than enough.

The title has a certain bias to it

Do go on. Others might actually listen, or even find a short description to maybe get some idea- but you do you.

Can't you make your own mind up about it?

I gave alternative sources after you initially mentioned yours, so I guess the same criticism may be leveled at you- at least I provided a couple of sources. Regardless, I've made my position clear.

Sounds like you are feeling guilt for nuking Japanese civilians.

Really? Is that what it sounds like, or is that just your jaundiced interpretation, I'll leave it to others to decide. I'm not American, and I didn't participate in WW2. The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a tragedy, but there were a lot of tragedies going on at the time.

Indeed. And resting laurels on a 1973 war documentary.

Then I suggest you investigate Dan Carlin's Hardcore History podcast series called Supernova in the East. It deals forensically with the rise and fall of Japan through the 30's to after the war. At 10 or so hours it's a long listen, but compelling and presented without bias by an excellent historian. Of course, it's no Netflix documentary episode 10.

Elvis is here

There is an excellent BBC series about WW2 titled "World at War". The series uses interviews of those who actually made the decisions at the time, both Allies and Axis. Japanese military leaders stated that Japan was not going to surrender. There was actually a plot to kidnap the Emperor to prevent him from surrendering, essentially a continuation of the 'rule by assassination' which had created its imperialist push through Asia. The Japanese leaders themselves said that the bombs saved more lives than they took. This is all from interviews back in 1945/6, so without all the historical revisionism we see so often, including in this article. Follow the data, stick to the facts. They tell the story if the times. The times demanded of Harry Truman that he end the war with as few American casualties as possible. The bombs saved Japanese lives too.

Germany, Japan and Italy had no credible A bomb program

This does not contradict the point.

You'd do it me so I'll do it you. That is a grudge.

?

I believe that's called war.

if that is the real reason why it was dropped as it is being suggested that it was dropped to settle grudges and to avenge Chinese deaths.

No one is suggesting that.

The reasons are widely understood:

It was believed that the alternative was a full invasion of the Japanese home islands. Military planners believed that such an operation would result in up to 1 million American casualties alone, before even counting Allied casualties and those of Japanese troops and civilians.

A hastier end to the war also saved lives across Asia where fighting was ongoing. In China, Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia and elsewhere, Japanese troops were still battling advancing allied and local forces. The bombs, proponents argued, saved many lives. (Newsweek)

So no, not a war crime. What military leader would not have taken this option? Certainly the Axis forces would have, and there's evidence that they were in the early stages of development themselves.

the atomic bombings of the two Japanese cities were a genocide

atomic genocide...

What genocide? Inaccurate use of this word does nothing to advance the discussion.

hey, congratulations to a country that actually bothers to have a real corruption inquiry into CCP money that people receive.

Yeah, I bet it was one of those leftist liberal socialist communists they found, right? Oh, wait, nevermind.

The guy defending the murder of unarmed civilians in a pizza shop is talking about other people embarrassing themselves.

I'm surprised to see so many here against women having control over their own bodies.