Pope condemns possession of nuclear weapons

  • Thread starter Thread starter TK421
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
All the USA had to do if it wanted to avoid casualties, was to turn the invasion of Japan over to our ally, the USSR.
That certainly would have reduced US causalities, but the Japanese civilian causalities would have been FAR greater.
 
The MAD protocol has been condemned by the Church as a “negative peace” because it is based on fear rather than on Christian values.
Let me get this straight – the system that has PREVENTED nuclear war for three quarters of a century is condemned? What are we going to replace it with?
 
So, if there is to be nuclear disarmament, let’s have Russia start eliminating its nuclear weapons, concurrently with the U.S.
After the U.S. and Russia are disarmed, is the world safer against nuclear weapons?
 
The old “we nuked the Japs because we felt sorry for them” routine. I have never bought that idea, and I don’t buy it now. Japan’s casualties were Japan’s problem, and all that Japan had to do to put an end to them was to surrender. Furthermore, it is my opinion that, faced with the prospect of a Russian invasion of their home islands, the Japanese would have been falling all over themselves in a rush to surrender to the USA.
 
Last edited:
I have already answered this question many times. There is only room in this world for one nuclear armed superpower. By conceding that role to Russia, we avoid the catastrophe of a global nuclear war. It really is that simple.
 
On this one: Yes, the Japanese killed thousands of Koreans during colonization era and even more elsewhere.

But is the entire Japanese population responsible for the killings? And did they have any say in killing those people? Were they aware that the army was actually doing this?

In fact, there are some Japanese people who are working to establish the peace and reconciliation with Korea at this time of turbulence. Not all people are thinking the same.

What I want for them is to renounce their mistakes, recognize that they have kidnapped women to use them as comfort women, admit that they are responsible, and apologize. One apology is enough for the Koreans. But a nuclear weapon to kill all of them? Not really…
 
Last edited:
I’m not sure if this has already been mentioned (my search of the thread wasn’t clear).

But it’s worthwhile remembering that Nagasaki had one of the largest communities of Japanese Catholics at the time of the atomic bombings. The bomb dropped only some third of a mile from the Immaculate Conception Cathedral, at a time when Mass was being celebrated and well attended.

Many of these families were Catholics for as long as the faith was preached in Japan. The Nagai family especially comes to mind: Takashi Nagai was a doctor who survived the bombing and later became a peace activist.

His wife, Midori (also a Catholic) unfortunately died. Takashi wrote very painfully about returning home (he was at his hospital when the bomb fell), and then scouring the ruins of their destroyed home to find Midori’s body. Her melted rosary is preserved in a Nagasaki museum.
 
I have already answered this question many times. There is only room in this world for one nuclear armed superpower. By conceding that role to Russia, we avoid the catastrophe of a global nuclear war. It really is that simple.
And Russia will rule the world. Do you really want to be ruled by Vladimir Putin?
 
That fact has come up a number of times, over the years.

Nagasaki was the secondary target for the 2nd bomb. Kokura, the primary, was too obscured by clouds and smoke to allow a visual drop. Nagasaki thus became the target. And it too was too obscured to permit a visual drop. Until a break in the clouds permitted a quick glimpse of a secondary aim point. The bomb detonated roughly 2 miles from the original aim point, and was largely confined, because of that, to the Urakami Valley. Which likely caused fewer overall casualties. But put the explosion nearer to the Cathedral.
 
And Russia will rule the world. Do you really want to be ruled by Vladimir Putin?
And Orthodox priests bless Russian ICBMs citing exactly the same logic: “These weapons are necessary to prevent us from being enslaved by the west.” It is all so ridiculous, and it is not by any means proven that Russia wants to rule the USA. In my opinion, the Russians want nothing more than to be free from the threat of a global nuclear war.

 
Last edited:
And Orthodox priests bless Russian ICBMs citing exactly the same logic: “These weapons are necessary to prevent us from being enslaved by the west.” It is all so ridiculous,
Anything involving nuclear weapons is not ridiculous – it’s deadly serious.

If you look at the history of Russia since 1917, you see plenty of evidence that they are expansionistic – they took the Crimean Peninsula from the Ukraine just recently, did they not?
 
i quote what i said previously:
I think that what really happened was that the CIA enabled a right-wing coup in the Ukraine that forced out its elected president who was pro-Russian. This was a gross miscalculation by the Obama administration. Did Hillary Clinton really think that Russia was going to stand idly by while Ukraine joined NATO? Was Russia then supposed to withdraw from its naval bases in the Crimea?

I don’t believe that Russia has re-occupation designs on the former satellite territories of the USSR.
But back the bear into a corner, and you will get a response.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top