QUOTE (knasser @ May 18 2010, 02:52 AM)
Some guy declares a policy of eradicating a section of society and many hundreds of thousands of people are killed by Aden in objection. That anyone would condone that is disgusting. The government of Saudi Arabia is a disgusting regime that persecutes and supresses people every day and it survives entirely through the grace of the US government. The World Trade Centre bombing was a response to that. A couple of thousand people died in that. That too was a horrible, terrible act. Yet when the exact same principle is applied to hundreds of thousands of muslims, it is considered justified?
As to Hiroshima and Nahasaki, actual real world events... There is no justification. Saying it cost the US fewer lives that way than if they'd invaded the country in a conventional manner is not a justification for such an atrocity.
I am done with this thread. I can't hold a conversation with people who think slaughter of a population on a massive scale is a justifiable response to the statements of a religious or political leader. I have always strongly disliked the desctruction of Tehran in the Shadowrun cannon because I've always felt it was the result of a double-standard where a muslim city was regarded as somehow more casually dispatched without having to consider it so much. But I figured that was perhaps paranoid. Apparently not. Deaths of millions of people - justifiable, apparently. Presumably every person in 1940's Berlin should have been slaughtered in one night because of the elimination of the Jewish population. Apparently the population of two cities in Japan were right to be killed because Japan would have put up too much resistance to being invaded (no-one can argue that Japan was actually a threat to American soil or the people there at that point). Yes, all this is justifiable.
I am done here.
You missed my point.
Japanese lives were actually saved by Hiroshima as the cabinet was willing to allow Japan to die as a people rather than have
them suffer the shame of being defeated. It was only Hiroshima and Nagasaki that caused the Emperor Showa to enter the debate and force the government to "endure the unendurable."
Considering the lies told to the civilian population in Okinawa by the Japanese government about the horrors of the American soldiers, this act probably saved countless lives of Japanese civilians. Conventional bombing in Tokyo and Hamburg killed more people but it took longer. The power of the A-bomb was the shocker-1 plane,1 bomb and BAM. The US could have invaded Japan and conquored but it would have destroyed far more of Japan than the 2 atomic bombs did. Again, my grand father was a navy staff officer at the time. This is a big part of my family history so I'm fully loaded up with lots of facts.
To work your analogy, maybe if some great energy had flattened a Nazi rally in Munich when Adolf started ranting against the Jews but before they started moving or as they started but before it spread beyond the rally stage to political power a lot of suffering would have been avoided. To bring this back to SR in the same way the Clerics came out against metahumans in Iran and that was squashed at once.
Strangely it did not happen in Japan which had the first Great Dragon and was heavily prejudiced against metas. That should tell us something about dragons.