br549@pobox.com wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Sep 2008 21:49:59 -0400, "RSweeney" 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Reality_Check©"  wrote in message
>>
>>> Now go cram another banana up your ass, chimpy.
>>
>> Why does this imagery excite you anti-gun people so much?
>> Where is Freud when you need him?
>>
>
> "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional
> maturity"
> -Sigmund Freud , "General Introduction to Psychoanalysis"
>
> It certainly explains a lot about these halfwits, doesn't it?

So a coward like you should have no fear when Iran or North Korea
develop their sovereign right to Nuclear Weapons, eh jackwipe?

">> "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional
>> maturity"
>> -Sigmund Freud , "General Introduction to Psychoanalysis"
>>
>> It certainly explains a lot about these halfwits, doesn't it?
>
> So a coward like you should have no fear when Iran or North Korea
> develop their sovereign right to Nuclear Weapons, eh jackwipe?
>
>
>
Nope, they have every right to develop what they want in their own borders. 
Unlike you gun grabber cowards we nutters believe in sovereignty. Now should 
they decide to try and use them on us or our allies they also incur the 
wrath that follows.

RM V2.0 wrote:
> ">> "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional
>>> maturity"
>>> -Sigmund Freud , "General Introduction to Psychoanalysis"
>>>
>>> It certainly explains a lot about these halfwits, doesn't it?
>>
>> So a coward like you should have no fear when Iran or North Korea
>> develop their sovereign right to Nuclear Weapons, eh jackwipe?
>>
>>
>>
> Nope, they have every right to develop what they want in their own
> borders.

So the U$$A shouldn't deploy their nukes outside U$ borders, eh?

>Unlike you gun grabber cowards we nutters believe in
> sovereignty.

Is that why you neo-con rightards supported the unlawful attack,
invasion and occupation of a far smaller, weaker and poorer
sovereign nation, slaughtering 100,000+ innocent civilians
in the process?


> Now should they decide to try and use them on us or our
> allies they also incur the wrath that follows.

The ONLY country immoral enough to have used NUCLEAR
WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION, killing 100,000+ innocent
civilians, women and children -- TWICE! -- is the U$$A, you
hypocritical piece of crap.

"Reality_Check©"  wrote in message 
news:6i4buiFosjrdU1@mid.individual.net...
> br549@pobox.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 1 Sep 2008 21:49:59 -0400, "RSweeney" 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Reality_Check©"  wrote in message
>>>
>>>> Now go cram another banana up your ass, chimpy.
>>>
>>> Why does this imagery excite you anti-gun people so much?
>>> Where is Freud when you need him?
>>>
>>
>> "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional
>> maturity"
>> -Sigmund Freud , "General Introduction to Psychoanalysis"
>>
>> It certainly explains a lot about these halfwits, doesn't it?
>
> So a coward like you should have no fear when Iran or North Korea
> develop their sovereign right to Nuclear Weapons, eh jackwipe?

Yet it is you with the anal fixation.

"Reality_Check©"  wrote in message

>> Now should they decide to try and use them on us or our
>> allies they also incur the wrath that follows.
>
> The ONLY country immoral enough to have used NUCLEAR
> WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION, killing 100,000+ innocent
> civilians, women and children -- TWICE! -- is the U$$A, you
> hypocritical piece of crap.

Saving millions of Japanese soldiers and civilians from a suicidal defense 
of the homeland.

Can't stand it, can you? The anger, the hate in your heart.

RSweeney wrote:
> "Reality_Check©"  wrote in message
>
>>> Now should they decide to try and use them on us or our
>>> allies they also incur the wrath that follows.
>>
>> The ONLY country immoral enough to have used NUCLEAR
>> WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION, killing 100,000+ innocent
>> civilians, women and children -- TWICE! -- is the U$$A, you
>> hypocritical piece of crap.
>
> Saving millions of Japanese soldiers and civilians from a suicidal
> defense of the homeland.

1) You're lying again.
2) Still not a defense to the War Crime of dropping Nuclear Weapons
of Mass Destruction upon Civilian Population centers, killing 100,000+
innocent men, women and children in the process, you amoral shitsucking
scumbag.

Reality_Check© wrote:
> RSweeney wrote:
>> "Reality_Check©"  wrote in message
>>
>>>> Now should they decide to try and use them on us or our
>>>> allies they also incur the wrath that follows.
>>> The ONLY country immoral enough to have used NUCLEAR
>>> WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION, killing 100,000+ innocent
>>> civilians, women and children -- TWICE! -- is the U$$A, 

If we had had it a year or two earlier, we would have used it even more 
against Germany


>>>you
>>> hypocritical piece of crap.
>> Saving millions of Japanese soldiers and civilians from a suicidal
>> defense of the homeland.
> 
> 1) You're lying again.

Not according to "all" history, he is telling the truth. The Japanese 
had started the training of millions of women and children to fight to 
the "death" to defend against the invasion.

Man what dream world do you live in ?


> 2) Still not a defense to the War Crime of dropping Nuclear Weapons
> of Mass Destruction upon Civilian Population centers, killing 100,000+
> innocent men, women and children in the process, you amoral shitsucking
> scumbag.

How was this different than 1000 planes dropping fire bombs on Tokyo the 
week before killing over 100,000 in one night ???????????????

The difference was, the A-Bomb ended the war, the fire bombing did not.

How many innocent women and children did Japan kill in China ??????????????

How many did the Germans kill ????????

I bet you don't even know !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AND YOU DON'T EVEN CARE 
!!!!!!!!!

Your one of those nut cases that think it is "only" the method of 
killing that matters. That somehow A helpless women getting rapped and 
beaten/strangled to death, is better than a women shooting her attacker.

You are one of the sickest people I have ever read post from on the internet
> 
> 
> 


-- 
SpecTastic Wiggle Rig,
Fishing lure remote control
See lure video you won't believe
http://ezknot.com

"Reality_Check©"  wrote in message 
news:6i6a49Fp3usrU1@mid.individual.net...
> RM V2.0 wrote:
>> ">> "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional
>>>> maturity"
>>>> -Sigmund Freud , "General Introduction to Psychoanalysis"
>>>>
>>>> It certainly explains a lot about these halfwits, doesn't it?
>>>
>>> So a coward like you should have no fear when Iran or North Korea
>>> develop their sovereign right to Nuclear Weapons, eh jackwipe?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Nope, they have every right to develop what they want in their own
>> borders.
>
> So the U$$A shouldn't deploy their nukes outside U$ borders, eh?
>

In response to an unprovoked attack. Proves my point above, you poke the 
bear, you face the repercussions.

>>Unlike you gun grabber cowards we nutters believe in
>> sovereignty.
>
> Is that why you neo-con rightards supported the unlawful attack,
> invasion and occupation of a far smaller, weaker and poorer
> sovereign nation, slaughtering 100,000+ innocent civilians
> in the process?
>
>

Not a Repug, nor NeoCon, nor Rightwing. I follow no party agenda as I think 
for myself. But the attack was UN sanctioned so where was it unlawful?

>> Now should they decide to try and use them on us or our
>> allies they also incur the wrath that follows.
>
> The ONLY country immoral enough to have used NUCLEAR
> WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION, killing 100,000+ innocent
> civilians, women and children -- TWICE! -- is the U$$A, you
> hypocritical piece of crap.
>

Nope, no hypocrisy here. Japan attacked first, killing innocnet civilians 
you love so much so they faced the repercussions of their act. They were 
warned, they knew we had it but said fuck you anyway. Where is this U$$A you 
speak of? Would have been more moral to let millions die in a ground war 
instead? Illogical thought pattern noted.....
>
>

Rodney Long  wrote in
news:%nsvk.16016$3A4.14306@newsfe04.iad: 

> Reality_Check© wrote:
>> RSweeney wrote:
>>> "Reality_Check©"  wrote in message
>>>
>>>>> Now should they decide to try and use them on us or our
>>>>> allies they also incur the wrath that follows.
>>>> The ONLY country immoral enough to have used NUCLEAR
>>>> WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION, killing 100,000+ innocent
>>>> civilians, women and children -- TWICE! -- is the U$$A, 
> 
> If we had had it a year or two earlier, we would have used it even more 
> against Germany
> 
> 
>>>>you
>>>> hypocritical piece of crap.
>>> Saving millions of Japanese soldiers and civilians from a suicidal
>>> defense of the homeland. 
>> 
>> 1) You're lying again.
> 
> Not according to "all" history, he is telling the truth. The Japanese 
> had started the training of millions of women and children to fight to 
> the "death" to defend against the invasion.
> 
> Man what dream world do you live in ?
> 
> 
>> 2) Still not a defense to the War Crime of dropping Nuclear Weapons
>> of Mass Destruction upon Civilian Population centers, killing 100,000+
>> innocent men, women and children in the process, you amoral shitsucking
>> scumbag. 
> 
> How was this different than 1000 planes dropping fire bombs on Tokyo the 
> week before killing over 100,000 in one night ???????????????
> 
> The difference was, the A-Bomb ended the war, the fire bombing did not.
> 
> How many innocent women and children did Japan kill in China
> ?????????????? 
> 
> How many did the Germans kill ????????
> 
> I bet you don't even know !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AND YOU DON'T EVEN CARE 
> !!!!!!!!!
> 
> Your one of those nut cases that think it is "only" the method of 
> killing that matters. That somehow A helpless women getting rapped and 
> beaten/strangled to death, is better than a women shooting her attacker.
> 
> You are one of the sickest people I have ever read post from on the
> internet 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

Rodney, this is pointless. This knob just hates America. He or they is taking 
a single incident in a 15 year period of closely related actions, takes the 
incident completely out of context with no intelligent consideration for 
concurrent facts and making a moral judgement with as if the US had simply 
decided to atomic bomb a city full of civilians for no reason.

There is no reason, no rationale. Nothing any intelligent, knowlegeable 
person would consider significant or important is allowed as explantion. He 
is no better than a Klansman haring a black man because he is black.

At best he is an immature child saying hateful things to provoke a response. 
No amount of factual evidence regarding the situation and time will have any 
impact. It is not about an intelligent debate over whether it was right or 
not. Hell he won't even say why it was immoral, he just says if you don't why 
it's immoral than it's just proof of your immorality. This is just about he 
thinking he is morally superior and cursing America without presenting any 
factual evidence, nor even desiring to.

Plonk him and move on.

-- 
Always remember:

Bull Connor was a Democrat!

parris_k@yahoo.com wrote in news:bfffdca7-6453-4a25-8214-24b8c5012f43
@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:

> On 3 Sep, 07:02, "Reality_Check©"  wrote:
>> RSweeney wrote:
>> > "Reality_Check©"  wrote in message
>>
>> >>> Now should they decide to try and use them on us or our
>> >>> allies they also incur the wrath that follows.
>>
>> >> The ONLY country immoral enough to have used NUCLEAR
>> >> WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION, killing 100,000+ innocent
>> >> civilians, women and children -- TWICE! -- is the U$$A, you
>> >> hypocritical piece of crap.
>>
>> > Saving millions of Japanese soldiers and civilians from a suicidal
>> > defense of the homeland. 
>>
>> 1) You're lying again.
> 
> Please indicate where he has lied. He expressed an opinion, based on
> available facts (e.g. Japanese defence of Iwo Jima, attitudes amongst
> Japanese high command)

Don't bother. He will never actually produce one iota of evidence to support 
what he says. He's a stupid, bigoted America hating fool. Several people, 
including myself has provided quite a bit of facts regarding the Japanese 
intention of fighting to the bitter end and the possible extinction of the 
Japanese people and culture by Spring 1946. Apparently the fate of the 
Japanese people doen't matter. He will not defend a single one of statments, 
vague as they are and continue to insult and demean you. If you're an 
intelligent man, move on.

> 
>> 2) Still not a defense to the War Crime of dropping Nuclear Weapons
>> of Mass Destruction upon Civilian Population centers, killing 100,000+
>> innocent men, women and children in the process, you amoral shitsucking
>> scumbag. 
> 
> The hypothetical sacrifice of 100,000 to save several million most
> certainly is justified.
> 
> It should be noted that the Axis powers initiated the odious practice
> of bombing purely civilian targets (and neither Hiroshima nor Nagasaki
> fitted that description) Odd how you can ignore their immorality in
> your rush to condemn the (far from perfect) US...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



-- 
Always remember:

Bull Connor was a Democrat!

parris_k@yahoo.com wrote:
> On 3 Sep, 07:02, "Reality_Check©"  wrote:
>> RSweeney wrote:
>>> "Reality_Check©"  wrote in message
>>
>>>>> Now should they decide to try and use them on us or our
>>>>> allies they also incur the wrath that follows.
>>
>>>> The ONLY country immoral enough to have used NUCLEAR
>>>> WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION, killing 100,000+ innocent
>>>> civilians, women and children -- TWICE! -- is the U$$A, you
>>>> hypocritical piece of crap.
>>
>>> Saving millions of Japanese soldiers and civilians from a suicidal
>>> defense of the homeland.
>>
>> 1) You're lying again.
>
> Please indicate where he has lied. He expressed an opinion, based on
> available facts (e.g. Japanese defence of Iwo Jima, attitudes amongst
> Japanese high command)
>
>> 2) Still not a defense to the War Crime of dropping Nuclear Weapons
>> of Mass Destruction upon Civilian Population centers, killing
>> 100,000+ innocent men, women and children in the process, you amoral
>> shitsucking scumbag.
>
> The hypothetical sacrifice of 100,000 to save several million most
> certainly is justified.

The 100,000 weren't "hypothetical" you ignorant asswipe, they were actually
murdered by the U$$A.

_ Prof. Jonez _ wrote:
> parris_k@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On 3 Sep, 07:02, "Reality_Check©"  wrote:
>>> RSweeney wrote:
>>>> "Reality_Check©"  wrote in message
>>>>>> Now should they decide to try and use them on us or our
>>>>>> allies they also incur the wrath that follows.
>>>>> The ONLY country immoral enough to have used NUCLEAR
>>>>> WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION, killing 100,000+ innocent
>>>>> civilians, women and children -- TWICE! -- is the U$$A, you
>>>>> hypocritical piece of crap.
>>>> Saving millions of Japanese soldiers and civilians from a suicidal
>>>> defense of the homeland.
>>> 1) You're lying again.
>> Please indicate where he has lied. He expressed an opinion, based on
>> available facts (e.g. Japanese defence of Iwo Jima, attitudes amongst
>> Japanese high command)
>>
>>> 2) Still not a defense to the War Crime of dropping Nuclear Weapons
>>> of Mass Destruction upon Civilian Population centers, killing
>>> 100,000+ innocent men, women and children in the process, you amoral
>>> shitsucking scumbag.
>> The hypothetical sacrifice of 100,000 to save several million most
>> certainly is justified.
> 
> The 100,000 weren't "hypothetical" you ignorant asswipe, they were actually
> murdered by the U$$A. 

So were the 300.000+ "innocent" Chinese, the Japanese "murdered", one at 
a time, face to face, at Nan King.

Now in the case of Nan King it was INDEED murder as these people had 
already surrendered. Now if the US had dropped the A-Bomb after the 
Japanese had surrendered , then they would have committed murder
> 
> 


-- 
SpecTastic Wiggle Rig,
Fishing lure remote control
See lure video you won't believe
http://ezknot.com

Rodney Long  wrote in
news:M0Gvk.27915$Fr1.25526@newsfe03.iad: 

> _ Prof. Jonez _ wrote:
>> parris_k@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> On 3 Sep, 07:02, "Reality_Check©"  wrote:
>>>> RSweeney wrote:
>>>>> "Reality_Check©"  wrote in message
>>>>>>> Now should they decide to try and use them on us or our
>>>>>>> allies they also incur the wrath that follows.
>>>>>> The ONLY country immoral enough to have used NUCLEAR
>>>>>> WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION, killing 100,000+ innocent
>>>>>> civilians, women and children -- TWICE! -- is the U$$A, you
>>>>>> hypocritical piece of crap.
>>>>> Saving millions of Japanese soldiers and civilians from a suicidal
>>>>> defense of the homeland.
>>>> 1) You're lying again.
>>> Please indicate where he has lied. He expressed an opinion, based on
>>> available facts (e.g. Japanese defence of Iwo Jima, attitudes
>>> amongst Japanese high command)
>>>
>>>> 2) Still not a defense to the War Crime of dropping Nuclear Weapons
>>>> of Mass Destruction upon Civilian Population centers,
 
Which were also legitimate military targets,being manufacturing centers.

>>>>killing
>>>> 100,000+ innocent 

"innocent"? 
many were involved in the manufacture of military weaponry and support 
items.
Using civilians to "shield" military targets is not allowed under Geneva,I 
believe.

>>>>men, women and children in the process, you
>>>> amoral shitsucking scumbag.
>>> The hypothetical sacrifice of 100,000 to save several million most
>>> certainly is justified.
>> 
>> The 100,000 weren't "hypothetical" you ignorant asswipe, they were
>> actually murdered by the U$$A. 
> 
> So were the 300.000+ "innocent" Chinese, the Japanese "murdered", one
> at a time, face to face, at Nan King.
> 
> Now in the case of Nan King it was INDEED murder as these people had 
> already surrendered. Now if the US had dropped the A-Bomb after the 
> Japanese had surrendered , then they would have committed murder
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

First,"murder" is the WRONGFUL killing of human beings. 
(Liberals/socialists always seem to 'overlook' that...)

Killing in wartime combat is not "murder",nor is it wrong.

-- 
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

>>
>> The hypothetical sacrifice of 100,000 to save several million most
>> certainly is justified.
>
> The 100,000 weren't "hypothetical" you ignorant asswipe, they were 
> actually
> murdered by the U$$A.
>

Jesus learn to fucking read. The "sacrifice" was the hypothetical part, not 
the 100k.

parris_k@yahoo.com wrote:
> On 3 Sep, 23:55, "_ Prof. Jonez _"  wrote:
>> parri...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> On 3 Sep, 07:02, "Reality_Check©"  wrote:
>>>> RSweeney wrote:
>>>>> "Reality_Check©"  wrote in message
>>
>>>>>>> Now should they decide to try and use them on us or our
>>>>>>> allies they also incur the wrath that follows.
>>
>>>>>> The ONLY country immoral enough to have used NUCLEAR
>>>>>> WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION, killing 100,000+ innocent
>>>>>> civilians, women and children -- TWICE! -- is the U$$A, you
>>>>>> hypocritical piece of crap.
>>
>>>>> Saving millions of Japanese soldiers and civilians from a suicidal
>>>>> defense of the homeland.
>>
>>>> 1) You're lying again.
>>
>>> Please indicate where he has lied. He expressed an opinion, based on
>>> available facts (e.g. Japanese defence of Iwo Jima, attitudes
>>> amongst Japanese high command)
>>
>>>> 2) Still not a defense to the War Crime of dropping Nuclear Weapons
>>>> of Mass Destruction upon Civilian Population centers, killing
>>>> 100,000+ innocent men, women and children in the process, you
>>>> amoral shitsucking scumbag.
>>
>>> The hypothetical sacrifice of 100,000 to save several million most
>>> certainly is justified.
>>
>> The 100,000 weren't "hypothetical" you ignorant asswipe,
>
>
> Neither were the millions of Japanese who didn't die, in that case.

Prove it.

RM V2.0 wrote:
>>> The hypothetical sacrifice of 100,000 to save several million most
>>> certainly is justified.
>>
>> The 100,000 weren't "hypothetical" you ignorant asswipe, they were
>> actually
>> murdered by the U$$A.
>>
>
> Jesus learn to fucking read. The "sacrifice" was the hypothetical
> part, not the 100k.

You really are dumber than a bucket of dirt, aren't you boy?

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 19:53:06 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
 wrote:

>RM V2.0 wrote:
>>>> The hypothetical sacrifice of 100,000 to save several million most
>>>> certainly is justified.
>>>
>>> The 100,000 weren't "hypothetical" you ignorant asswipe, they were
>>> actually
>>> murdered by the U$$A.
>>>
>>
>> Jesus learn to fucking read. The "sacrifice" was the hypothetical
>> part, not the 100k.
>
>You really are dumber than a bucket of dirt, aren't you boy?
>
>

That's funny, coming from an ignorant limey serf. He's so stupid that
he doesn't realise that he's a subject and not a free citizen.

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 19:52:32 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
 wrote:

>parris_k@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On 3 Sep, 23:55, "_ Prof. Jonez _"  wrote:
>>> parri...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>> On 3 Sep, 07:02, "Reality_Check©"  wrote:
>>>>> RSweeney wrote:
>>>>>> "Reality_Check©"  wrote in message
>>>
>>>>>>>> Now should they decide to try and use them on us or our
>>>>>>>> allies they also incur the wrath that follows.
>>>
>>>>>>> The ONLY country immoral enough to have used NUCLEAR
>>>>>>> WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION, killing 100,000+ innocent
>>>>>>> civilians, women and children -- TWICE! -- is the U$$A, you
>>>>>>> hypocritical piece of crap.
>>>
>>>>>> Saving millions of Japanese soldiers and civilians from a suicidal
>>>>>> defense of the homeland.
>>>
>>>>> 1) You're lying again.
>>>
>>>> Please indicate where he has lied. He expressed an opinion, based on
>>>> available facts (e.g. Japanese defence of Iwo Jima, attitudes
>>>> amongst Japanese high command)
>>>
>>>>> 2) Still not a defense to the War Crime of dropping Nuclear Weapons
>>>>> of Mass Destruction upon Civilian Population centers, killing
>>>>> 100,000+ innocent men, women and children in the process, you
>>>>> amoral shitsucking scumbag.
>>>
>>>> The hypothetical sacrifice of 100,000 to save several million most
>>>> certainly is justified.
>>>
>>> The 100,000 weren't "hypothetical" you ignorant asswipe,
>>
>>
>> Neither were the millions of Japanese who didn't die, in that case.
>
>Prove it. 
>

Sorry, limey maggot. YOU made the assertion. YOU prove it.

Otherwise STFU!

br549@pobox.com wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 19:52:32 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
>  wrote:
>
>> parris_k@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> On 3 Sep, 23:55, "_ Prof. Jonez _"  wrote:
>>>> parri...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>> On 3 Sep, 07:02, "Reality_Check©"  wrote:
>>>>>> RSweeney wrote:
>>>>>>> "Reality_Check©"  wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Now should they decide to try and use them on us or our
>>>>>>>>> allies they also incur the wrath that follows.
>>>>
>>>>>>>> The ONLY country immoral enough to have used NUCLEAR
>>>>>>>> WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION, killing 100,000+ innocent
>>>>>>>> civilians, women and children -- TWICE! -- is the U$$A, you
>>>>>>>> hypocritical piece of crap.
>>>>
>>>>>>> Saving millions of Japanese soldiers and civilians from a
>>>>>>> suicidal defense of the homeland.
>>>>
>>>>>> 1) You're lying again.
>>>>
>>>>> Please indicate where he has lied. He expressed an opinion, based
>>>>> on available facts (e.g. Japanese defence of Iwo Jima, attitudes
>>>>> amongst Japanese high command)
>>>>
>>>>>> 2) Still not a defense to the War Crime of dropping Nuclear
>>>>>> Weapons of Mass Destruction upon Civilian Population centers,
>>>>>> killing 100,000+ innocent men, women and children in the
>>>>>> process, you amoral shitsucking scumbag.
>>>>
>>>>> The hypothetical sacrifice of 100,000 to save several million most
>>>>> certainly is justified.
>>>>
>>>> The 100,000 weren't "hypothetical" you ignorant asswipe,
>>>
>>>
>>> Neither were the millions of Japanese who didn't die, in that case.
>>
>> Prove it.
>>
>
> Sorry,

We knew you couldn't you lying cowardly piece of repugnikkkan shit.

br549@pobox.com wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 19:53:06 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
>  wrote:
>
>> RM V2.0 wrote:
>>>>> The hypothetical sacrifice of 100,000 to save several million most
>>>>> certainly is justified.
>>>>
>>>> The 100,000 weren't "hypothetical" you ignorant asswipe, they were
>>>> actually
>>>> murdered by the U$$A.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Jesus learn to fucking read. The "sacrifice" was the hypothetical
>>> part, not the 100k.
>>
>> You really are dumber than a bucket of dirt, aren't you boy?
>>
>>
>
> That's funny,

Only an inbred pig-ignorant retard like you would find your own stupidity to 
be funny.