Opinion Question
Argument
Posted by:

Military vs Civilian.

  It seems to be a matter of personal philosophy. If you believe that the ends justify the means, then dropping the bomb may seem justified. However, then you seem to indicate that you do not regard an attack on civilians, regardless of the extent they are involved in the war effort, to be any different than an attack on military. A military is a fighting force who at least expects that they are putting their life on the line to serve their country, for whatever purpose that may entail. They have willingly made a commitment understanding that death is a possibility. That is their sacrifice, and we should all greatly appreciate them for that. Civilians are completely different. Their involvement in war rarely extends so far. How can you possibly consider them to be necessary to a war effort, unless you have no particular regards to whom you kill to get done what you need to get done? If that is so, then yes, you believe the ends justify the means. Just know then that you have no right to complain about any action similar to such, like 9/11. We meant to send a message to the Japanese with a bomb on their civilians. The terrorists meant to send a message to us when attacking the WTC. The message may be different, but both chose to attack civilians to get our message across. If you choose to see it differently, then it is because you are making it personal. Perhaps then you should consider how others may make what we did personal, similar to how you view what 9/11 did to us. I have not served in a military, so perhaps my viewpoint is skewed when I say this, but if I personally had to make the choice, I think I would rather continue to fight a long and hard struggle, rather than slaughter innocents. I guess it depends on whether you value the victory or integrity of the nation more.
wellnowyouknow says2013-04-07T23:45:56.937
Brilliant. I fully agree with your reference to the 9/11 attack. People often neglect to see our military as terrorist organization when it most certainly is.
Anonymous says2013-04-09T20:36:34.557
THANK YOU!! I was waiting for someone to mention the 9/11 attacks.
Anonymous says2013-04-25T03:13:59.577
I agree, civilians should never have to enter a war and be slaughtered in the millions. But that is what W.W. 2 was, a war that forced civilians into its wake. If the fighting continued, I am almost positive that the same number of civilians would have died in Japan and thousands more from other countries, maybe millions.
Mikael9 says2014-04-30T02:41:50.490
One sec back up... How quickly have you forgotten the fact that the Japanese military had trained the civilians to fight with Bamboo sticks till they very end? "killing of innocents" that would have happened anyway it just depends how many 200,000 vs over 2 million or so civilians...
DJ117 says2014-07-30T08:31:56.550
Japanese men, women and children were expected to give up their lives in the defense of the home islands for the "final victory". There were no distinction between soldier and civilian in Japan at the end. Millions of people would had died and Japan would not the one you have today.
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.