Outrage as Trump compares Iran strikes to Japan atomic bombing

Thanks for bringing that up, trying to justify atomic bombs that way is specious reasoning.

Yeah, that is actually one of the other points people sometimes use to refute the atom bombs being a war crime. That they didn't kill as many civilians as firebombs or carpet bombing... I know you aren't, just brought it to mind. But yeah, that only makes those other types of bombs also war crimes. Hehe.

During his feature length interview in _The Fog of War_, MacNamara said explicitly that if they had lost the war, he and his team would have been tried for war crimes. He cries a bit at one point while describing the firebombing of wooden cities, at how it was worse than the atomic bombs they dropped.

I’d love to ask him “for any type of weapon you use, would you be okay having it used on you?”

I think there's a tug of war going on between his Zionist handlers, his Russian handlers and more recently his Gulf handlers. The Russians called dibs first so they're currently on top.

Most probably.

Edit: I wouldn't be surprised if they ended up using nukes.

His handlers are neocon Zionists and they are itching to destroy Iran

It could also be cope due to him wanting to be remembered for something big. The atomic bombings were massive, and will stand throughout history as the first, and so far (and hopefully), the only time nuclear weapons were used on civillians. Sure it *may* have stopped the war, and that *may* be what Donald is equating it to, however I do feel he wants to be remembered throughout history for something good. His ego needs it, he needs it. No-one else has plastered their name over buildings and coveted gold and other gaudy decor options. Nothing more than a narcissistic moron who wants to be remembered throughout all of time as the greatest person to have ever lived.

Mandatory Brandolini's Law plug.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini's_law

Yeah 'strategy' usually implies intelligence.

This is more of a stratidiocy. I hate that it has been working - ao far.

I like the phrase "flooding the zone with shit". It even comes with a catchy song that attributes the phenomenon to Steve Bannon.

And the news cycle can't keep up or spend appropriate amounts of time/outrage on the things that are criminal, abhorrent and hurting people.

Throw a bunch of stupid shit to the media, let them feast. Sneak around while they are busy and get the truely hurtful stuff into law (or just skip the law part, and do it).

That's exactly the strategy. He's basically a human (term used loosely) "Denial of Service" attack on our collective psyche.

Constant output of garbage information we're forced to evaluate, until we're overwhelmed, overloaded, and shut down from being mired in so much sheer volume of stupidity.

People have said that, but I disagree. I think that fascists really are that stupid. It looks like a strategy because a lot of mainstream media has been happy to embrace the chaos, all they want is that 24-hour news cycle. But if you look at reliable political writers, people who think long-term, none of Trump's bullshit baffles anyone.

If you think about the tariffs, he was trying to flex because he's a narcissist, and people around him, perhaps including himself, were getting richer through insider trading. It's a basic scam. Everyone understands it. No one is baffled.

The only upside... the only one, is that maybe it'll get so bad that if Republicans lose control that maybe it will be a long time before we again give them control. Maybe.

I suspect that is their strategy (if you could call it that): boggle the populations minds and then do what you want.

At this point it's kind of entertaining to see him keep raising the stupidity bar. Absolutely fucking terrifying too, but still also kinda entertaining.

it's completely mind-boggling how fucking stupid he is

Is this just cope because he _really_ wants to drop a nuke but his handlers won't let him?

Does he not know that using the atom bombs to kill civilians was kind of considered a bit of a no-no?

The justification that "it ended the war early, actually 'saving' lives" is moot, killing civilians to save soldiers, is pretty much strongly considered the opposite of the point. It is a war crime.

Not having been charged with it, isn't something you want to go poking at. Everyone has kind of loosely agreed to leave it in the past. But that doesn't have to stay the case if you make people upset enough like that.

Surely _this_ will win him the Nobel Peace Prize!