Hall of FameHall of Fame  Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp  chatChat
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin
Questions and Discussions about Islam
 Whyislam.org Forums : WhyIslam : Questions and Discussions about Islam
Message Icon Topic: Who represents Islam? Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 2
Author Message
Sophmore Member
Sophmore Member

Religion: Agnostic(Agnostic)
Posts: 185
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Doris Replybullet Posted: 16 October 2017 at 8:35pm
Originally posted by Al-Cordoby

How did the Americans justify bombing Japanese civilians in WW2 with atomic bombs?Is the bombing of civilians with nuclear (or non-nuclear) bombs justified in the case of war?

Put the blame for this on the defeated Japanese rulers who refused to surrender. Rather they encouraged the 'civilians' to train to be soldiers so as to destroy any invading forces along with what was left of their homeland.

At the time of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it was expected that the war would continue for at least a year, possibly two years, with up to a million allied casualties and twice that many Japanese casualties.

This is not even to consider the thousands of civilian POWs in the Philippines, Bornea, and Thailand, and other places. How many of them could have survived another two years of Japanese treatment? Check with the survivors of Nanking and Bataan, for starters.

The Allies had offered peace terms, but the Japanese rulers refused to consider them, even after Hiroshima.They were determined to hold out until the last Japanese man, woman, and child were dead.

It was the second bomb that brought some of the military to their senses, although a considerable group wanted to assassinate Hirohito (the divine king) rather than allow him to speak to the Japanese people and admit defeat.

Who can judge one death against another in a world war? We have little to go on other than numbers. In this case, the numbers seem to be 200,000 against 2,000,000 or more.

I consider it a hopeful sign that although many countries have gone the nuclear route, the weapon has not been used in war since August of 1945. Not even the looniest dictator or fanatic has got to that point yet.

Maybe we humans have a modicum of common sense after all.

So what would you have done, looking at a war that would drag on for a year or more? You would try to end it however you could, for the sake of your own forces and for the sake of the people you were attacking.

(My father was part of the invasion force set for Japan. I can't be sorry that the invasion never took place.)
History Buff
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged

Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 2279
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Traveller Replybullet Posted: 16 October 2017 at 10:02pm
Originally posted by Non Believer

Originally posted by Traveller

Originally posted by Non Believer

Do you think these two views can co-exist? How does the first group view the second group? Why are there no representatives of this second group in this forum?
Coexist is what we have been doing all along, depending on geographical locations, of course, and political era.

It will not surprise me if the minority will eventually convince the majority. But again, this is for the learned to discuss. I only have opinions, like everyone else.
I see you as a bit of an optimist, Traveller. I, too, was an optimist but then I encountered the intransigence of "the majority".

"The minority" may be one of the most persecuted groups in the world. Being exposed as someone who disbelieves in the absolute truth of Muhammad would be devastating anywhere where Muslims are the majority. I've started a few threads where I've asked what room there is for a progressive Islam and the answer has always been that there is no room.

Many of our Islamic law in many Muslim countries were formulated long after the passing of the prophet. As such, calling for a review of that law does not make one disbelieve in Prophet Muhammad.

In the case of organ transplant, what was the minority is now the majority. Initially, the many scholars voted against it with only a few for it. Now, it's unanimous.

In life, be like a traveller. Take only what you need
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Non Believer  

Religion: Atheist(Secular Humanist)
Posts: 1033
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Non Believer Replybullet Posted: 18 October 2017 at 12:35pm
There is really only one opinion of "the majority" that needs to be overturned: that Islam is the only true religion and followers of other religions are misguided and are doomed to eternal damnation. This is strongly embedded in the Qur'an and I don't see how it is possible for us to live peacefully with people who have such a bigoted view.

I don't see much evidence that a "minority" that accepts a multicultural view that there are many paths to righteousness can coexist with this majority view.

Edited by Non Believer - 18 October 2017 at 12:39pm
Men do you harm either because they fear you or because they hate you.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 2
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums version 8.03
Copyright ©2001-2006 Web Wiz Guide
The opinions expressed by members of the Whyislam Forum do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of the Whyislam Team, or any of its subsidiaries, or parent organizations.