Thread 18064189

>America only had 2 choices: Nuke 'em and kill 150 000, or invade the mainland and kill 1.5 million. They chose the humane option.

Meanwhile, in reality: The US could have picked the obvious third option of blockading Japan from things like oil, but allows things like basic food, fresh water, and medicine to pass. This blockade remains until Japan comes to its senses and accepts a peace offer.
The US instead: Let's see my new toy work. Let's see again

>>18064189 (OP)
>They should've just blockaded Japan but in a way that defeats the entire purpose of having a blockade

>>18064207
Are you Israeli?

>>18064214
Are you stupid?

>>18064214
Israel have the right to defend itself

>>18064214
>Hey man you know this country we're at total war with? That attacked us unprovoked and massacred millions of people? Well we shouldn't bomb them or invade them
We just wait them out. On no were not going to starve them out or do anything that would negatively impact their ability to function as a country that would cause them to surrender.

>>18064214
>Hey man you know this country we're at total war with? That attacked us unprovoked and massacred millions of people? Well we shouldn't bomb them or invade them
>We just wait them out. On no were not going to starve them out or do anything that would negatively impact their ability to function as a country that would cause them to surrender.

Come on anon, you know the Americans wanted to test their new toy and show it to the Soviets.

>>18064214
I think there's a difference between Palestinian children and the IJA

>>18064240
Should Israel have nuked Gaza?

Idk I kinda hate this normie tier ww2 narrative that bombing Japanese and German civilians was completely morally and logically justified because of the act of their government.

It's literally only ww2 that has this unconditional narrative. Some people even start seething when you question it.

>>18064249
>Should Israel have nuked Gaza?
Yes.

>>18064249
we should bomb krauts harder, they got away too easily compared to their crimes

>>18064249
Do Palestinians ever say
>Well the Israelis may have kicked us off our land and continue to bomb us but they suffered some attacks so I guess we're the bad guys here

>>18064249
>It's literally only ww2 that has this unconditional narrative.
Aside from Indochina it's also literally only ww2 that saw this scale of mass bombing, and unlike Indochina both sides were doing it. WW2 is really a category of it's own, when dealing with the scale of death that war had all comparisons really go out the window.
And even then you're wrong, the majority of people will defend Ukraine's attacks on Russia. There are those who'll defend Hamas' or Iran's attacks on Israel, or America's attacks on the middle east following 9/11. People defend the attacks of the IRA, the FLN, and countless other groups. And spend any time on this board and you'll find people defending the atrocities of preindustrial nations during war (the Spanish are particularly common in this regard, but all seem to do it)

>>18064279
I just don't think that killing civilians should be unconditionally accepted as fair, and I find it very puzzling how some people are okay with ww2 civilians being bombed but in a different discussion the same people screech about how civilians shouldn't have to pay the price for the atrocities of their government.

Make of that what you will.
There is a lot of gatekeeping done around ww2 unlike any other conflict and it bothers me.

>>18064288
there is no such thing as nazi "civilian", they declared a total war on their won and then got ofc bombed in retaliation

>>18064189 (OP)
They already did an oil blockade you dunce(abcd commission), that is why Japan attacked Pearl harbour and invaded Malaysia and dei
The only real choices were an historic show of force (harnessing atomic power to fuck them up) or full on invasion, and the first option was the more humane for both parties since the japs had plans to press gang their civvies into kamikaze style hopeless attacks in the event of invasion

>>18064288
>should be unconditionally accepted as fair,
No one's saying that retard, they're saying the conditions had been met, and that denying they haven't been met is stupid when dealing with states that showed as little concern of the lives of foreign civilians and combatants as the Japs and Germans did.
The typically accepted conditions are if the enemy did it it's fine to hit them back

>>18064291
Is there no such thing as "commie" civilians?

>>18064291
Is there no such thing as "Islamist" civilian?

>Nuking Japan was wrong and I'll support my argument by bringing up a bunch unrelated wars
>>18064300
Please ask the Vietnamese how they felt about Japanese occupation

>>18064298
>conditions had been met
Ok then tell me what conditions had been met.

>when dealing with states that showed as little concern of the lives of foreign civilians and combatants
So Gaza had met those conditions then seeing how their government indiscriminately targeted Israeli civilians. How come people had a problem with Gaza being bombed then?

>The typically accepted conditions are if the enemy did it it's fine to hit them back.
That's literally not an accepted condition neither morally or legally. And if it's acceptable legally then please show me.

>>18064316
>bunch unrelated wars
How is it unrelated to show examples of war when civilians were being bombed and we universally find it deplorable?
Does putting things into perspective bother you because it's becoming increasingly difficult to gatekeep the ww2 narrative?

>Please ask the Vietnamese how they felt about Japanese occupation
Probably not good because the Japanese government and military was ruthless.

>>18064331
hitler blown his brain out while Soviet HEROES had fun with german girls few streets away from him

>>18064334
Lol you're assuming I'm a nazi because I question the unconditional legitimacy of bombing millions of civilians which I'd strictly reserved to ww2 because it has a cultist narrative.

I generally don't give a shit about Hitler and the war happened because of him. That's not the focus of the debate however.
Cope.

>>18064305
>Northern Iraq 2017
>Literally grabbed a random photo of Arabs and tried to pass them off as Palestinians

>>18064343
>legitimacy of bombing millions of civilianss
doesn't exist
everyone agrees that bombing civlians and wars are bad
everyone also agrees that nazis were evil
you done? read something else than elementary schoolbooks if you are sick of "cultist narrative" you dishonest faggot

>>18064282
>Rome, you're gone
>he says, standing in Rome full of Romans
jews are a delusional people

>>18064291
>blot out amalek!
>smash the infants against the rocks!
>happy is he!
yahwism is a helluva drug

>>18064364
>He doesn't know how to rotate images

>>18064321
Not him but gazans are where they always were and the Japanese went out of their way and touched the boats, two different scenarios

>>18064321
>Ok then tell me what conditions had been met.
I just told you retard
>So Gaza had met those conditions then seeing how their government indiscriminately targeted Israeli civilians.
At first yes, over a thousand Israelis were killed on October 7th, and this gave Israel the right to proportional reaction. The problem being the war has passed out of proportion
>That's literally not an accepted condition neither morally or legally. And if it's acceptable legally then please show me.
International law is a young creature even today, nevermind back in the 1940s when it was basically nonexistent. But this has been the typical reaction of humans when their opponents ignore the rules of warfare, look at Spain in the Napoleonic wars, or Germany during the 30 years war for example.
You claim it is not moral - based on what?

>>18064343
So the better solution is for america to land invasion Japan, and Japan gives their citizens sticks with a bayonet on the end they get fucked up en masse?

>>18064355
>dishonest faggot
This this is what I mean, only ww2 can provoke this kind of resentful anger whenever the narrative is challenged. You don't want to even debate it, you're just telling me to go away, despite the fact that we are on a history board to debate.
Again this is strictly confined to ww2. You don't see these kind of responses to any other topic, even the more recent ones.
It's truly fascinating.
On reddit you literally get instantly banned for it.

>everyone also agrees that nazis were evil
Implying that every German civilian was a nazi, which they weren't. In fact, only a minority of the population were ideological, which was the same case with other authoritarian regimes such as the USSR.
Not a single historian will defend the idea that most Germans were dedicated nazies.
Even less with most Japanese.

>>18064386
>only ww2 can provoke this kind of resentful anger
>Bro why do people get really emotional about the largest conflict in human history that resulted in the death of 70 million people most of whom were Allied civilians

>>18064386
>You don't want to even debate it
debate what?
NO HISTORIAN DEFENDS BOMBING CIVILAINS, STOP BEING RETARDED OR DISHONEST

>>18064378
No, I can absolutely see the military rationale of dropping the nukes, just as I can see the military rationale of Israel using rockets to destroy a whole city block, instead of risking their soldiers.

There is of course alternatives.
The Japanese government for example were already contemplating surrender before the nukes dropped.

>>18064396
I think you need to calm down.

It's not about historians, it's the popular narrative of the general public, including you.

>>18064393
You're more emotionally invested in this debate rather than more recent wars where you would absolutely accept that targeting civilians is wrong as retaliation for the acts of the government.

Curious.
I still call the ww2 gatekeeping narrative cultist. Just look at you.

>>18064249
>Should Israel have nuked Gaza?
Yes
>Idk I kinda hate this normie tier ww2 narrative that bombing Japanese and German civilians was completely morally and logically justified because of the act of their government.
Well I mean… who voted for the Nazi Government…?
>It's literally only ww2 that has this unconditional narrative. Some people even start seething when you question it.
Because the Axis powers was a death cult where the end conditions were either “my race lives forever everywhere all by themselves” or “we fight and die to the last house”.

>>18064331
>Does putting things into perspective bother you because it's becoming increasingly difficult to gatekeep the ww2 narrative?
I don't get what you're trying to prove. The best you’ll get is “its sad we had to kill those civilians, but Germany was killing ours and the war had to end”.

>>18064331
>How is it unrelated to show examples of war when civilians were being bombed and we universally find it deplorable?
Because it's completely unrelated to the topic at hand unless you believe "you lynch negros" is a good counterargument.

>>18064403
>it's the popular narrative of the general public
nobody supports killing civilians, you are a dishonest faggot

>>18064410
>Yes
Ok. Glad you're unbiased.

>Well I mean… who voted for the Nazi Government…
Lol oh the classic argument.
Two problems.
1. NSDAP recieved only roughly 33% of the vote in the last free and fair election. Even the socialist parties combined recieved a larger share.

2. People overwhelming voted NSDAP for the economic situation, not because Hitler was going to start genociding and start world war.

>Because the Axis powers was a death cult
Aren't communists and jihadists a death cult too?
So why do normies morally question the legitimacy of bombing women and children in Vietnam or Lebanon even if it makes sense from a military perspective, but putting this perspective on ww2 makes same people foam at their mouths as we've already seen in this thread.
It's literally cultist gatekeeping that applies solely to ww2, even if the conflict was nearly 100 years ago and absolutely deserves to be discussed in earnest.

>>18064433
>but putting this perspective on ww2 makes same people foam at their mouths
it doesn't, you are imagining things because you are a dishonest faggot

>>18064189 (OP)
why was the us obligated to be humane in war?

>>18064419
If you would go and raise the argument that allied bombing was among the worst war crimes of ww2, and that the Japanese and German civilians didn't deserve it, you literally get banned.

Go ahead, go to a ww2 subreddit and try. Let me know how it went.

>Cry about civilian casualties
>Conveniently ignores that vast majority of civilian deaths were from Allied/Axis controlled nations

>>18064433
>1. NSDAP recieved only roughly 33% of the vote in the last free and fair election. Even the socialist parties combined recieved a larger share
I dislike this arguement.
Firstly while the Nazis alone did not have the majority vote, right wing authoritarians supportive of war in the east did. They just disagreed with who should lead Germany.
Secondly the German population absolutely had the ability to stop extreme Nazis policies when they were unpopular, as seen with the end of the aktion T4 program.
While the German populace might have disagreed with aspects of nazi ideology, they still were broadly supportive of its ideals.

>>18064453
>allied bombing was among the worst war crimes of ww2
yeah, because it downplays things like Holocaust or German crimes on Eastern Front/Balkans, so it's a lie to say that allied bombing was among the worst war crimes of ww2
still, nobody supports killing civilians, you are imagining things to pursue your agenda of downplaying nazism crimes

>>18064433
>Aren't communists and jihadists a death cult too?
Yes
>So why do normies morally question the legitimacy of bombing women and children in Vietnam and Lebanon
>Invade your neighbor while funding a guerilla movement within their borders
>Have the gall to accuse their allies as imperialists for upholding their sovereignty

>>18064473
How is it downplaying the holocaust/east front/Chinese front?

I never even said anything about them and if asked I wouldn't even try to downplay it.
But the bombing campaign is still up there in terms of suffering and destruction against a civilian population.

You clearly don't understand what it is I'm trying to debate, and you low-key admitted that the discussion is being suppressed based on arbitrary reasons of deflecting the topic because it's supposed to be gatekept.

Again, go on reddit and do it. I want you to prove me wrong.

>>18064331
>How is it unrelated
Oh man I remember when Palestinians conquered vast amounts of Europe and Asia and then proceeded to kill millions of people

>>18064433
The German people didn't lynch Hitler immediately so they at best were apathetic about nazi rule. And everyone knows of the barbarity of the Soviet Union, but the Soviets mostly stuck to slaughtering people in their own countries VS Nazis who wanted to come to YOUR country and kill YOU.

>>18064468
Ok so you basically deny what the overwhelming majority of historians affirm, that the majority of German population did not vote for NSDAP because of expansionist warmongering to the east, nor were they supportive of genocidal policies.
Göbbels himself wrote in his diary during the broken glass pogrom that he feared they may have gone too far because the German public resented such actions.
T4 was literally being kept away from the public, relatives were usual told that the victim had died of natural causes. TIK did a great episode on this.

Again, who is the deluded one between us two? You're literally holding the popular narrative of ww2 higher than the academic narrative at this point because you're seething at the existence of this very debate we're having.

>>18064520
Ok so the actions of the government makes targeting millions of civilians justified?

Also, the German government framed ww2 as completely defensive. The invasion of Poland was framed as defensive. The war against the west was framed as defensive. The war against the USSR was framed as defensive.
This isn't any more weird than North Korea framing the Korean War as defensive and you're literally punished if you believe otherwise.

Yet according to you, the civilians should pay the price of their authoritarian government doing what authoritarian governments always do; they lie to their population and break any dissidents.

>>18064516
>How is it downplaying the holocaust/east front/Chinese front?
because bombing was not as evil as holocaust or german policies in eastern europe and balkans, happy?

>>18064433
>So why do normies morally question the legitimacy of bombing women and children in Vietnam or Lebanon
>Why are you criticizing me for comparing apples to oranges
That's because these wars involve a larger state acting aggressively against a smaller, weaker state for not falling within their sphere of influence. Which doesn't work for WW2 since it was a near peer conflict with the Axis powers being heavily industrialized and wealthy nations.

>>18064529
>The German people didn't lynch Hitler immediately so they at best were apathetic about nazi rule.
Kinda like most dictatorships.
Yet only ww2, only nazi Germany, we're supposed to make an exception.
And you don't call this narrative cultist?
We literally make exceptions in every other authoritarian government where we DONT blame the population for not bringing down their authoritarian government.
And again, the nazi government successfully framed the war as defensive, as incomprehensible as this might seem to you, it was the case.

>VS Nazis who wanted to come to YOUR country and kill YOU.
I seem to remember the Soviets coming to others countries. I dont hold the average Russiwn in the 1930s responsible for not overthrowing Stalin and being 'complacent' in his ruthless acts against his own and on others people.

>>18064545
So would it be morally justified for Russia to start bombing cities around Ukraine and target millions of civilians?
Or vice versa?
I mean both sides are largely equal in military might. I'd even argue that it was far more disproportionate between the axis and the allies.

The simple answer is no. Targeting civilians by their millions isn't justified even if it's militarily logical.

>>18064534
>that the majority of German population did not vote for NSDAP because of expansionist warmongering to the east, nor were they supportive of genocidal policies.
Germans were broadly supportive of recovering previously German lands in the east. What they feared was war with the west. They were certainly overall supportive of an authoritarian system, and there were no backlash against the system of settlement and genocide in the east against poles despite it being common knowledge, like there was against aktion T4.
>T4 was literally being kept away from the public, relatives were usual told that the victim had died of natural causes.
What does that have anything to do with what I said? the public still found out about it and it was stopped because of the backlash. Are you trying to deny this basic fact now?
>TIK did a great episode on this.
Read actual history books retard.
I suggest "The Question of Unworthy Life" by Dagmar Herzog for something actually academic about Aktion T4
>You're literally holding the popular narrative of ww2 higher than the academic
Tikhistory isn't academic history you utter retard

>>18064567
>B...but whatabout but whatabout but whatabout
NOBODY CARE FAGGOT. If you cannot not create an argument without bringing up unrelated examples than you have no real arguments other than an endless stream of whataboutisms.

>>18064570
Were the ebil nyatzees making the bombs in their own houses just like the ebil ccchhhhamass?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehousing

>>18064567
>B...but whatabout but whatabout but whatabout
NOBODY CARES FAGGOT. If you cannot not create an argument without bringing up unrelated examples that have no relation to actual topic at hand than you have no real arguments other than an endless stream of whataboutisms

>>18064586
Did Hamas cause the deaths of almost 60 million people

>>18064569
>Germans were broadly supportive of recovering previously German lands in the east.
If it could be achieved peacefully yes, not through war, not even through local war. But I'm expecting you to create this narrative now that they were.

>and there were no backlash against the system of settlement and genocide in the east against poles despite it being common knowledge
Curious, there was no backlash from the Russian population against Stalins rule either despite him killing millions and invading other states.
It's almost as if they had limited knowledge and lived under an oppressive regime, and generally just tended to their own lives, which seems incomprehensible to a man of 2025 that people were not politically tuned in 24/7.

How many British rioted over the Boer war and mistreatment of civilians? Can we now start saying that the British public carry a responsibility for failure to act? What about Belgian civilians passivity towards the government rule in Congo. Do we hold them accountable for not resisting?
Historians have long debated this, and used countless of letters from German soldiers serving in the east where they express doubt and concern whenever they witness hints of ruthless government policies.

You're literally fabricating arguments that the German people were completely fine with the acts of their government based on a fantasy premise that is ONLY applied on ww2, because this narrative have a strange cultist gatekeeping.

>>18064587
It's not whataboutism. It's about putting things into perspective since we're not 'allowed' that flexibility when discussing ww2.

>>18064542
This is an interesting argument because with this rationale we could justify so many atrocities to be madd because two wrongs in fact does make one right.

>>18064605
>It's not whataboutism it's whataboutism
>I have to compare to historical events to modern day whig morality

So what I'm getting from this thread is if you kill your, they enemies they win

So what I'm getting from this thread is if you kill your enemies, they win

>>18064554
No one gives a shit but Slavic shitholes and F*nland or their people. Hitler was dropping bombs on Paris and London.

>>18064611
Whataboutism means you're trying to deflect the topic from being discussed. It's when you want to suppress the debate.
Perspective is about adding layers to how we view the values that we hold.
You can only challenge your values if you broaden your perspective. Using other conflicts and question why we hold different values on the same principles is absolutely reasonable.

>>18064629
>Perspective is about adding layers to how we view the values that we hold.
You can only challenge your values if you broaden your perspective. Using other conflicts and question why we hold different values on the same principles is absolutely reasonable.
Nigga that's just Presentism

>>18064629
>Perspective is about adding layers to how we view the values that we hold.
>You can only challenge your values if you broaden your perspective. Using other conflicts and question why we hold different values on the same principles is absolutely reasonable.
Nigga that's just presentism

>>18064189 (OP)
>until Japan comes to its senses and accepts a peace offer.
Anon it took 2 nukes and a Soviet invasion to convince them to surrender. What makes you think a blockade would make them 'come to their senses' when the war was obviously lost by 1945 yet they continued to resist?

>>18064629
>Using other conflicts and question why we hold different values on the same principles is absolutely reasonable.
>Bro it's not whataboutism
>I'm just going keep comparing X to Y and call you a hypocrite for saying X and Y are different

>>18064610
What do you think was worse
Holocaust or bombing of Germany?

>>18064648
Holocaust

>>18064658
Yes? What's your point?

>>18064643
Unironically you're the one using whataboutism.
Your main argument literally was "what about holocaust/general plan ost".
That's literally whataboutism because you're trying to deflect the debate on the morality of the bombing campaign on civilians.

We literally had this conversation before. Just because an authoritarian government commits an unspeakable crime, that doesn't automatically mean that killing millions of civilians yourself isn't a crime, norr does it mean that those civilians suddenly weren't civilians or were responsible.

>>18064683
>You say the Axis are bad because they killed people
>But don't you know the Allies also killed people
>Checkmate libtard

>>18064658
I really think you're low IQ by the way, because you had no point with this.

I'm guessing your point was that you now "disproved" me, that killing millions of civilians was justified because the holocaust, done by the German government, was worse., which it was, but it neither resolves the act of killing millions of civilians yourself or legitimize those civilians as responsible targets.

>>18064602
>If it could be achieved peacefully yes, not through war
Again, debatable in regards to the east alone.
>Curious, there was no backlash from the Russian population against Stalins rule either
What do you think I'm going start defending the Soviets? No of course I'm not you faggot.
>It's almost as if they had limited knowledge
Yes I am aware of this, hence why I focused on the crimes against the polish, as opposed to the Holocaust as the true scale of the latter was hushed up, while the former was common knowledge.
>How many British rioted over the Boer war and mistreatment of civilians? Can we now start saying that the British public carry a responsibility for failure to act?
Yes actually, the liberal campaign In the 1900 general election explicitly rallied against "barbarism" carried out in the Boer war and lost the election, so the British population carry blame for the horrors of the war.
>on a fantasy premise that is ONLY applied on ww2
Where did I say this only applies to the Germans and ww2? You're a dishonest faggot who's trying to misrepresent my whole point. Why do you keep resorting to whataboutism?
I like how you dropped trying to argue about aktion T4, I hope you soon realise you're just as wrong about everything else.

>>18064189 (OP)
Intelligence confirmed Japan was developing atomic capabilities.
A blockade would have given them time to complete their own bomb.

>>18064214
You think Israel invented blockades? Do you know what a blockade is in the context of actual warfare and not just the jewy shit that Israel does in Gaza?

>>18064300
>>18064305
>no sar, there are no civilians in the territories we occupy
>these hovel dwellers are all jewish collaborators and members of the international jewry o algo
Lol

>>18064189 (OP)
The third option is a non-unconditional surrender which the Japs were almost certainly willing to do, although of course it makes less sense from a purely militaristic point of view.

>>18064334
Kys Yid

>>18064189 (OP)
Japan wanted a peace agreement mediated by neutral countries (Sweden, Switzerland, USSR) with the US to end the war prior to August 1945. This could've ended the war earlier in 1945 saving hundreds of thousands of lives. The US refused this because they wanted to test nuclear weapons on a civilian population and intimate the Soviets. The narrative that the US "had" to drop the bombs to avoid an invasion is post war Allied propaganda

>>18064245
There is. The Imperial Army was a respectable military which fought to protect the people of Japan and liberate Asia, whereas Palestinian "children" are Hamas terrorists who needlessly slaughter civilians in both Israel and Palestine

>>18064249
Bombing German civilians was justified since they actively supported the Hitler regime

>>18064316
>Please ask the Vietnamese how they felt about Japanese occupation
Only the communist Viet Mihn opposed the Japanese. Viet nationalists supported Japan for liberating Indochina from French rule

>>18065614
>Bombing jewish civilians will be justified since they actively support the jewish identity

>>18064240
>Hey man you know this country we're at total war with? That attacked us unprovoked and massacred millions of people?
So 9/11 was justified, is that what you're saying?

>>18064316
>Nuking Japan was wrong and I'll support my argument
Why would I need an argument to prove that mass murder of civilians is wrong? Isn't that obvious? Would you be okay with getting mass murdered as a civilian?

>>18065697
>America killed six gorillion Afghans before 2001

>>18064364
>Rome, full of Romans
>who are all fat fucks who can barely waddle into the office to run the country each day, then finish early and go back to their parents house where they still live at the age of 47.

>>18064189 (OP)
Correct. The Nips were legitimately bonkers in the 30s-40s and were never going to give up during an invasion. Why would they? They have no where to go and nothing to lose. Never mind the fact that they're most suicidal people in history to begin with.

There were many accounts of women throwing their babies and themselves off of cliffs b/c the propaganda dept. convinced them the baka gaijin would literally eat them alive. The Chinese would've and so would many of their other Asian neighbors and the Nips were even known to go cannibal at times(see: George Bush Sr. war stories....it's the most fucked up shit you'll ever read. It was classified even from him until the early 2000s. He was a cunt IRL, but he and Kennedy were good soldiers too).

It's sounds funny, but it's not. Le Nippon was Western on the outside, but still had a very strong Imperial/Emperor worshiping cult. It wasn't a joke. It was Taliban tier crazy. When a people are that far gone, there's no way to reason with them, you have to knock them the fuck out and let them wake up in the hospital under treatment.

It sucks because it broke the soul of a noble and beautiful people, but they fucked up, really, really, really, really, really, really bad by attacking Pearl Harbor. Arguably, the greatest miscalculation in military history. They still haven't lived down the shame of it. The only thing that will help them get up and running again is another war they can win and fell proud of. Maybe help defend Tiawan against the Chinks, or something.

As it is, they're a whipped cur slowly dying of cowardice in the corner. It's a damned shame, but they ultimately brought it upon themselves, which means they can also remove it from upon themselves.

>>18065606
Japan fucked around and found out. They were in no position to dictate, or negotiatie anything ever. The fact that they even tried showed their arrogance. When someone is kicking your teeth in after you sucker punched them, the last thing you should do is say "Hey, let's talk!". No STFU, take your ass whooping and be quiet, or it will ONLY get worse.

>>18065611

Imperial......liberators......

Hamas(tm) is a wholey owned subsidiary of Israel, Inc., so they're the one's "sponsoring terrorism", or whatever.

Jews have to "flex" on kids to feel tough. Beyond pathetic.

>>18065614
>Burning Jewish civilians was justified because they actively supported the (foreign) Zionist regime.

>>18065837
Unironically yes, but Hamas is brown and retarded so they get bombed twice as hard and slaughtered like cattle.

>>18064189 (OP)
> implying the blockade wasn't already on
> implying starving millions to death over years is more "humane" than a shock to end the war
> ignoring the Soviet invasion that forced the choice
> not realizing the military was ready to fight to the last civilian and rejected surrender even AFTER the nukes

Your "third option" is a weeb fantasy. Read a history book.

>>18065829
nigger

>>18066987
I win again!