The U.S. did not nuke an empty field to impress generals. It chose dense urban civilian targets to achieve a psychological and political effect that went far beyond the battlefield. That is the textbook definition you just tried to confine to "terrorist groups."
https://x.com/nxt888/status/2012583697166520781
You are using "precision" the way Washington uses "regrettable."
As a sedative.
"Hiroshima and Nagasaki were acts of war in 1945 against an imperial state" is not precision.
It is a polite way of saying:
We incinerated two cities in order to terrorize a government into surrender and to send a message to Moscow.
What do you think "shock effect" means in every internal memo.
Urban centers chosen instead of purely military targets.
A second bomb dropped days later on a different city while the world was still trying to grasp the first one.
That is not careful battlefield targeting.
That is a demonstration.
You say "not terrorism aimed at spreading fear for political theater."
Explain to me what is not "spreading fear" in vaporizing children to show you have a sun in your pocket.
Explain what part is not "political theater" when the audience was not only Tokyo, but also the Soviet Union, the colonial world, and every future negotiating table.
You hide behind the word "war" as if it magically changes the physics.
If a non state group detonates a nuclear device over a civilian population to force a political outcome, you would call it terrorism.
When a state does it and writes it into the end of a war, you call it "acts of war."
Same weapon.
Same civilians.
Same intention to break a society by terror.
Only the logo is different.
That is the whole point of my sentence.
"No terrorist organization ever dropped nuclear bombs on civilians."
Because no one else had that level of impunity.
You appeal to the millions Japan killed.
As if previous atrocities upgrade you to moral landlord with nuclear rights.
By that logic every side that suffers enough gets a "free city" coupon to erase.
Precision would mean admitting:
The U.S. did not nuke an empty field to impress generals.
It chose dense urban civilian targets to achieve a psychological and political effect that went far beyond the battlefield.
That is the textbook definition you just tried to confine to "terrorist groups."
History does not demand that I protect American vocabulary.
It demands that I describe reality:
If burning a city alive to send a message is not terror, then the word has no meaning left except "violence we do not like."
posted by Satish Sharma at
04:53
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home