I get the feeling you are reading selectively. All this speculation about what other states would have done had they acquired the nukes before the US are just that, speculations. Fact is, they didn't and even after they acquired nukes (though as you said this might largely be due to nuclear deterrents) they did not use them. The US did, and then a few days later, they did it again.
Like said before, with all the atrocities of Nazi Germany, Stalin Sovjet and Japanese empire you cant seriously belive they would stay away from using the bomb. This is not speculation, these guys killed 50-100 million together in a short span of time.
you have a serious double standard mate, who are you to decide that certain bombings have a purpose and others don't? I'm sure if you were Russian you would be arguing the complete opposite of what you are arguing now..
Dresden bombing was unnescessary and without purpose, in the US case there was an ultimatum they hoped would work. We have the bomb and will instead of invading Japan use it in city after city until the Japanese government surrender, that is reasonable even if cold and maybe unethical even against an unethical enemy. When brittain bombed Dresden it had no purpose at all, it was just revenge.
I am not american ,russian, german or anything else. Russians invaded Nazi germany with blood in their mouth to have revenge for the horrible crimes Nazi Germany had done in their own country. What they did to Germany was alot worse then what the US did to Japan, but not worse than what germans had done to Russia previously.
My strength in debating this issue is that I have no emotional attachment to any of these countries and feel no one is much worth defending. I chose to defend the US because I get tired of the two dimensional view anti-americans have of the world, they are ready to support almost any of America's enemies.
ugh the uniqueness about the US is not it's corruption, it's the fact that everyone goes along with it. Other countries doing the exact same thing would have been condemned or worse invaded and rendered helpless, and rightly so I might add. And please stop trivialising deaths of people.
No, not great powers doing the same. See China in Tibet, Russia in Chechnya and so on. Also some smaller countries can do atrocities with support of any of these great powers. See Israel with support of US, Sudan with support of Russia/China, Syria's regime and so on. Big countries can do as they like, anyway only the US has the military strength to truly go around the world to start wars. For now.
The behaviour of the US government (and yes of the UK before, and most likely the Romans and Egyptians before, ie every superpower) is that of a selfish state which is interested in having as much power as possible, regardless of the consequenses, either to others, or even their own people.
You rightly name Tibet, which is an atrocity. The list of similar atrocities by the US however is so much longer. Cuba, Haiti, Vietnam, Indonesia, Iraq, Afghanistan, just to name a few.
You mix some real illegitimate atrocities like Vietnam and Iraq, then legitimate wars like the one in Afghanistan and even East Timor independence in Indonesia which in my eyes was legitimate, the complete catastrophy which is Haiti is barely US problem and no atrocity has been done there and neither in Cuba, I do think the veto is wrong now that the cold war is over, but a veto is no atrocity. I hope you are not claiming the failed invasion of Cuba by Kennedy was an atrocity, it was just an atrocity of stupidity.
US has done some good things aswell, I think it was good they saved Korea from North Korea's communist regime even if it cost 2 milion people's lifes, ofcourse it is always easy to look back when we now have the results at hand. Overall the US was a force for good in the second world war together with Brittain. Thank god US existed to counter balance the Sovjet Union.
So many assumptions...what you describe sounds pretty much like the world today tbh. You are completely contradicting yourself in the last sentence, because that is exactly what happens to the US.
I said that we are not yet ready for this, but it is also an inevitability. Cultures and languages are already breaking down, globalization will lead to this.
I am not pro-american, I am pro-america that existed in the late 19th century, were the civil society was free from government intervention to build their own futures as they like. I think Washington with less power and back to state-level solutions will bring US back to be something both you and I would be happy with, a non-militaristic US that is more difficult to be controlled by big interests.
Anyway, I can sometimes be worried by the vacuum such a more isolated US would leave in the world, there is always some meaner wolf to come and eat all the sheep when the big bear goes to sleep.