Hiroshima is marking the anniversary of the 1945 Atomic Bombing

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#51 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts

[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="ThisIsTwoFace"]

Only a sick twisted country would be able to do the damage that had happened that day..

USA.

Still, very sad event.

Riverwolf007

Britain and the US had no problem fire bombing Dresden. THat was just as bad.

i already brought up dresden and essen nobody cares about those crackers.

or unit 731 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731

or the bataan death march.http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/bataandeathmarch.htm

or nanking.http://www.nanking-massacre.com/RAPE_OF_NANKING_OR_NANJING_MASSACRE_1937.html

or warsaw.http://ww2memories.wordpress.com/2011/08/30/siege-and-fall-of-warsaw-september-1939/

what we need to take away from this is there was only one group of a$$holes in that fight and we are them.

That's why war sucks. People always try to blame one side or one faction, but as you've shown, the atrocities usually don't take sides. Man is capable of bad things, especially during horrible conflicts. I just hope people from the past. Seems people in OT just want to villify groups of people and then - in a sense - proceed right down the same paths that led to those atrocities in the first place.
Avatar image for Ravensmash
Ravensmash

13862

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#52 Ravensmash
Member since 2010 • 13862 Posts
Why are you guys trying to play sides? Why not just accept that it was an extremely dark day for humanity, and something that will hopefully never happen again?
Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#53 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts
[QUOTE="Ravensmash"]Why are you guys trying to play sides? Why not just accept that it was an extremely dark day for humanity, and something that will hopefully never happen again?

My thoughts exactly.
Avatar image for ScorpionTroll
ScorpionTroll

810

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#54 ScorpionTroll
Member since 2012 • 810 Posts

[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

[QUOTE="thebest31406"]

America has invaded and dropped bombs on Indochina, Nacaragua, the Middle East, etc. I suppose that means that if the these areas had the will and the way, dropping atomic bombs on the American people would be totally justified?

thebest31406

If a state of war existed and those countries had the means, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the United States got bombed. Back in WW2, it's not like Japan and Germany didn't have that in mind. If it weren't for Germany having an incredibly stupid leader and Japan lacking crucial tech and materials, they would've rained bombs on the US given the chance.

You guys are talking like this is a C&C game. What possible strategic value could dropping two bombs on japan have besides ending a conflict in a quick hurry and pretty much running the country? Couldn't be because the wanted to save lives; millions died in one boom and they have felt the affects for generations.

An estimated 246,000 people died combined in Hiroshima and Ngasaki. An estimatd 60 million people died world wide during WWII. If the US had invaded Japan the war would have dragged on for god knows how much longer. And for what? For an exhausted United States army to storm Tokyo and kill every man and rape every women in sight like the Russians did to Berlin?

Avatar image for Dark__Link
Dark__Link

32653

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#55 Dark__Link
Member since 2003 • 32653 Posts
[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

I'm not sure that there was a "right move" in the situation that the US and Japan were in back then. It was a horrible thing. I would have probably dropped one of the bombs a few miles off the coast of Tokyo to show them (civilians included) what we were capable of. If they still didn't get it, I'd have dropped one on Tokyo. If that somehow wasn't enough, I'd have bombed the other cities until they capitulated.

jesuschristmonk
Lol. I can bet you our army didn't even think of showing the explosion off to show them what it would do. But if I remember correctly, we didn't truly know what would happen after it went off. The bombings on Japan were pretty much tests if you think about it. Not to mention bombing the ocean would kill all those fish. What did they ever do wrong? :P.

The military and government probably had 500 different plans for how the bombs were to be used, and 500 more contingency plans for when the originals went awry. You can bet they thought of everything. What happens if they decided to drop one off the coast, and it fails to detonate? They only had two... so what do you do with the second bomb? Attempt another strike off the coast? Hit an actual city? Even if it works, what if they don't surrender? You've got nothing after that, except an extremely costly invasion, or hoping that the eventual surrender in Western theater will coax the Japanese into giving up. But you don't know they will. There were too many possibilities and not enough insurance. They decided on the option that would end the war with the most certainty and the yield the least total loss of life.
Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#56 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts

[QUOTE="thebest31406"][QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

If a state of war existed and those countries had the means, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the United States got bombed. Back in WW2, it's not like Japan and Germany didn't have that in mind. If it weren't for Germany having an incredibly stupid leader and Japan lacking crucial tech and materials, they would've rained bombs on the US given the chance.

ScorpionTroll

You guys are talking like this is a C&C game. What possible strategic value could dropping two bombs on japan have besides ending a conflict in a quick hurry and pretty much running the country? Couldn't be because the wanted to save lives; millions died in one boom and they have felt the affects for generations.

An estimated 246,000 people died combined in Hiroshima and Ngasaki. An estimatd 60 million people died world wide during WWII. If the US had invaded Japan the war would have dragged on for god knows how much longer. And for what? For an exhausted United States army to storm Tokyo and kill every man and rape every women in sight like the Russians did to Berlin?

So why didn't they drop the A-bomb in germany? If dropping an a-bomb is about preventing prolonged war, why not use it now?
Avatar image for ScorpionTroll
ScorpionTroll

810

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#57 ScorpionTroll
Member since 2012 • 810 Posts

[QUOTE="ScorpionTroll"]

[QUOTE="thebest31406"] You guys are talking like this is a C&C game. What possible strategic value could dropping two bombs on japan have besides ending a conflict in a quick hurry and pretty much running the country? Couldn't be because the wanted to save lives; millions died in one boom and they have felt the affects for generations.thebest31406

An estimated 246,000 people died combined in Hiroshima and Ngasaki. An estimatd 60 million people died world wide during WWII. If the US had invaded Japan the war would have dragged on for god knows how much longer. And for what? For an exhausted United States army to storm Tokyo and kill every man and rape every women in sight like the Russians did to Berlin?

So why didn't they drop the A-bomb in germany? If dropping an a-bomb is about preventing prolonged war, why not use it now?

Because Germany had been defeated by this time. Germany went under as we were invading Okinawa.

Avatar image for Duckyindiana
Duckyindiana

3040

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#58 Duckyindiana
Member since 2006 • 3040 Posts

I'm not sure that there was a "right move" in the situation that the US and Japan were in back then. It was a horrible thing. I would have probably dropped one of the bombs a few miles off the coast of Tokyo to show them (civilians included) what we were capable of. If they still didn't get it, I'd have dropped one on Tokyo. If that somehow wasn't enough, I'd have bombed the other cities until they capitulated.

hartsickdiscipl
The US wanted to see what the bombs would do to a mass population and cities, if they had just wanted to just stop the war then yeah they could have done what you said.
Avatar image for Oleg_Huzwog
Oleg_Huzwog

21885

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#59 Oleg_Huzwog
Member since 2007 • 21885 Posts

So why didn't they drop the A-bomb in germany?thebest31406

Why didn't the Romans use fighter jets when fighting the Visigoths?

Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#60 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts

[QUOTE="thebest31406"]So why didn't they drop the A-bomb in germany?Oleg_Huzwog

Why didn't the Romans use fighter jets when fighting the Visigoths?

So the U.S. didn't have use of them at the time? We had them since then, why don't we them now?
Avatar image for Ravensmash
Ravensmash

13862

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#61 Ravensmash
Member since 2010 • 13862 Posts
[QUOTE="Oleg_Huzwog"]

[QUOTE="thebest31406"]So why didn't they drop the A-bomb in germany?thebest31406

Why didn't the Romans use fighter jets when fighting the Visigoths?

So the U.S. didn't have use of them at the time? We had them since then, why don't we them now?

Why would anyone use an atomic bomb at present?
Avatar image for Dark__Link
Dark__Link

32653

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#62 Dark__Link
Member since 2003 • 32653 Posts
[QUOTE="Oleg_Huzwog"]

[QUOTE="thebest31406"]So why didn't they drop the A-bomb in germany?thebest31406

Why didn't the Romans use fighter jets when fighting the Visigoths?

So the U.S. didn't have use of them at the time? We had them since then, why don't we them now?

Against whom? A couple al-Qaeda insurgents, their piece of sh*t truck, and 10,000 square miles of desert?
Avatar image for TehFuneral
TehFuneral

8237

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#63 TehFuneral
Member since 2007 • 8237 Posts

All that various health and environmental effects that bomb has caused....

This planet is fvcked up.

I'm not to argue if it was the right choice or not, but im sure Americans wouldn't consider it was the 'right' decision if it was dropped on them instead.

Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#64 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts

All that various health and environmental effects that bomb has caused....

This planet is fvcked up.

I'm not to argue if it was the right choice or not, but im sure Americans wouldn't consider it was the 'right' decision if it was dropped on them instead.

TehFuneral
Well no you can't talk basic moral principle to certain folk. That would be like speaking a foreign language.
Avatar image for noscope-ak47
noscope-ak47

1318

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#65 noscope-ak47
Member since 2012 • 1318 Posts

All that various health and environmental effects that bomb has caused....

This planet is fvcked up.

I'm not to argue if it was the right choice or not, but im sure Americans wouldn't consider it was the 'right' decision if it was dropped on them instead.

TehFuneral

Peace flows thru the barrel of a gun I am happy America has the most "peace".

Avatar image for jun_aka_pekto
jun_aka_pekto

25255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#66 jun_aka_pekto
Member since 2010 • 25255 Posts

[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

[QUOTE="thebest31406"]

America has invaded and dropped bombs on Indochina, Nacaragua, the Middle East, etc. I suppose that means that if the these areas had the will and the way, dropping atomic bombs on the American people would be totally justified?

thebest31406

If a state of war existed and those countries had the means, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the United States got bombed. Back in WW2, it's not like Japan and Germany didn't have that in mind. If it weren't for Germany having an incredibly stupid leader and Japan lacking crucial tech and materials, they would've rained bombs on the US given the chance.

You guys are talking like this is a C&C game. What possible strategic value could dropping two bombs on japan have besides ending a conflict in a quick hurry and pretty much running the country? Couldn't be because the wanted to save lives; millions died in one boom and they have felt the affects for generations.

What if the bombs were not dropped? What if the military rulers of Japan had their way and mobilized every man, woman, and child to resist the invading Allies? You have to remember that back in those days, Emperor Hirohito was a divine being, a living god to the Japanese. The rank and file could not even look him in the face and their devotion was fanatical. In just about every single battle in the Pacific, the Japanese fought to the last man, including civilians who would rather die than surrender.

If the Allied invasion took place, how many civilians do you think would've died fighting? You're talking about something akin to an extermination of a whole people. Whoever's left will not be in any position for anything. There would have been be no reason to spare Emperor Hirohito (who led his country through the subsequent Allied occupation). The Allies would've suffered heavy casualties and would not be in a position to be lenient. You have to consider the Russians as well. Who knows how far they would've gone in grabbing japanese territory besides the Kurile Islands which they continue to occupy to this day?

If I'm being pragmatic, it's because I'm in a forum and I'm not going to apologize if it sounds like C&C talk to you.

Do I feel for the survivors? Sure. I was born in Japan and have taken the time to learn what the country of my birth was like even though I'm not Japanese. I have Japanese friends which I still keep in touch with.

Avatar image for jesuschristmonk
jesuschristmonk

3308

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#67 jesuschristmonk
Member since 2009 • 3308 Posts
[QUOTE="jesuschristmonk"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

I'm not sure that there was a "right move" in the situation that the US and Japan were in back then. It was a horrible thing. I would have probably dropped one of the bombs a few miles off the coast of Tokyo to show them (civilians included) what we were capable of. If they still didn't get it, I'd have dropped one on Tokyo. If that somehow wasn't enough, I'd have bombed the other cities until they capitulated.

Dark__Link
Lol. I can bet you our army didn't even think of showing the explosion off to show them what it would do. But if I remember correctly, we didn't truly know what would happen after it went off. The bombings on Japan were pretty much tests if you think about it. Not to mention bombing the ocean would kill all those fish. What did they ever do wrong? :P.

The military and government probably had 500 different plans for how the bombs were to be used, and 500 more contingency plans for when the originals went awry. You can bet they thought of everything. What happens if they decided to drop one off the coast, and it fails to detonate? They only had two... so what do you do with the second bomb? Attempt another strike off the coast? Hit an actual city? Even if it works, what if they don't surrender? You've got nothing after that, except an extremely costly invasion, or hoping that the eventual surrender in Western theater will coax the Japanese into giving up. But you don't know they will. There were too many possibilities and not enough insurance. They decided on the option that would end the war with the most certainty and the yield the least total loss of life.

My thoughts exactly. But yah, we should just keep hoping that no more nuclear bombs go off...
Avatar image for CHOASXIII
CHOASXIII

14716

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#68 CHOASXIII
Member since 2009 • 14716 Posts

Sad it had to come to that to end a war.

Avatar image for gensigns
gensigns

1495

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#69 gensigns
Member since 2007 • 1495 Posts
[QUOTE="ScorpionTroll"]

[QUOTE="thebest31406"] You guys are talking like this is a C&C game. What possible strategic value could dropping two bombs on japan have besides ending a conflict in a quick hurry and pretty much running the country? Couldn't be because the wanted to save lives; millions died in one boom and they have felt the affects for generations.thebest31406

An estimated 246,000 people died combined in Hiroshima and Ngasaki. An estimatd 60 million people died world wide during WWII. If the US had invaded Japan the war would have dragged on for god knows how much longer. And for what? For an exhausted United States army to storm Tokyo and kill every man and rape every women in sight like the Russians did to Berlin?

So why didn't they drop the A-bomb in germany? If dropping an a-bomb is about preventing prolonged war, why not use it now?

Are you truly this stupid?
Avatar image for Riverwolf007
Riverwolf007

26023

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#70 Riverwolf007
Member since 2005 • 26023 Posts

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

If a state of war existed and those countries had the means, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the United States got bombed. Back in WW2, it's not like Japan and Germany didn't have that in mind. If it weren't for Germany having an incredibly stupid leader and Japan lacking crucial tech and materials, they would've rained bombs on the US given the chance.

jesuschristmonk

well technically they did bomb oregon. but it was oregon so we didn't really care.

http://www.tactical-life.com/online/exclusives/when-the-japanese-bombed-oregon/

Huh. Never heard about that through school (or maybe it just flew through my mind). I wonder why Oregon? Guess they didn't know about New York City? Lol.

it is what they could reach from the bases after the invasion of the aleutian islands.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/alaska-japan/

they also got 6 confirmed kills from a single balloon bomb that was launched from japan and followed the jetstream to north america.

they launched thousands but only one did any good and killed a reverends wife and five kids that were on a picnic.

http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/on-this-day/May-June-08/On-this-Day--Japanese-WWII--Balloon-Bomb--Kills-Six-in-Oregon.html

as a side note for you people that live in oregon and the surrounding areas there are most likely still hundreds of the things in the woods so if you find something wierd on a hike don't **** with it.

Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#71 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts

[QUOTE="thebest31406"][QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

If a state of war existed and those countries had the means, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the United States got bombed. Back in WW2, it's not like Japan and Germany didn't have that in mind. If it weren't for Germany having an incredibly stupid leader and Japan lacking crucial tech and materials, they would've rained bombs on the US given the chance.

jun_aka_pekto

You guys are talking like this is a C&C game. What possible strategic value could dropping two bombs on japan have besides ending a conflict in a quick hurry and pretty much running the country? Couldn't be because the wanted to save lives; millions died in one boom and they have felt the affects for generations.

What if the bombs were not dropped? What if the military rulers of Japan had their way and mobilized every man, woman, and child to resist the invading Allies? You have to remember that back in those days, Emperor Hirohito was a divine being, a living god to the Japanese. The rank and file could not even look him in the face and their devotion was fanatical. In just about every single battle in the Pacific, the Japanese fought to the last man, including civilians who would rather die than surrender.

If the Allied invasion took place, how many civilians do you think would've died fighting? You're talking about something akin to an extermination of a whole people. Whoever's left will not be in any position for anything. There would have been be no reason to spare Emperor Hirohito (who led his country through the subsequent Allied occupation). The Allies would've suffered heavy casualties and would not be in a position to be lenient. You have to consider the Russians as well. Who knows how far they would've gone in grabbing japanese territory besides the Kurile Islands which they continue to occupy to this day?

If I'm being pragmatic, it's because I'm in a forum and I'm not going to apologize if it sounds like C&C talk to you.

Do I feel for the survivors? Sure. I was born in Japan and have taken the time to learn what the country of my birth was like even though I'm not Japanese. I have Japanese friends which I still keep in touch with.

You can't justify targeting and exterminating a civilian population in order to expedite conflict. What, the civilians are suppose to pay for their governments actions? Should US civilian population pay for their country's mongering actions? And with regard to the russians, we can speculate how far they would go; but we know for sure that the US dropped the bomb.
Avatar image for Ring_of_fire
Ring_of_fire

15880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#72 Ring_of_fire
Member since 2003 • 15880 Posts
[QUOTE="TehFuneral"]

All that various health and environmental effects that bomb has caused....

This planet is fvcked up.

I'm not to argue if it was the right choice or not, but im sure Americans wouldn't consider it was the 'right' decision if it was dropped on them instead.

thebest31406
Well no you can't talk basic moral principle to certain folk. That would be like speaking a foreign language.

I doubt anyone in this thread thinks that nuclear weapons are a good thing in a war. It is great (easy, and lazy) to take "moral stand" against something that happened nearly 70 years ago. It is also incredibly naive, lazy to apply the logic of the pre-bombing to post-bombing.
Avatar image for Lonelynight
Lonelynight

30051

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#73 Lonelynight
Member since 2006 • 30051 Posts
I, as a descendant of someone who had to live under Japanese rule applaud America for their actions.
Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#74 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts
[QUOTE="thebest31406"][QUOTE="TehFuneral"]

All that various health and environmental effects that bomb has caused....

This planet is fvcked up.

I'm not to argue if it was the right choice or not, but im sure Americans wouldn't consider it was the 'right' decision if it was dropped on them instead.

Ring_of_fire
Well no you can't talk basic moral principle to certain folk. That would be like speaking a foreign language.

I doubt anyone in this thread thinks that nuclear weapons are a good thing in a war. It is great (easy, and lazy) to take "moral stand" against something that happened nearly 70 years ago. It is also incredibly naive, lazy to apply the logic of the pre-bombing to post-bombing.

Hey, I apply the same moral logic then as I do now. If it's morally wrong now, chances are it was morally wrong then.
Avatar image for l4dak47
l4dak47

6838

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#75 l4dak47
Member since 2009 • 6838 Posts

[QUOTE="TehFuneral"]

All that various health and environmental effects that bomb has caused....

This planet is fvcked up.

I'm not to argue if it was the right choice or not, but im sure Americans wouldn't consider it was the 'right' decision if it was dropped on them instead.

noscope-ak47

Peace flows thru the barrel of a gun I am happy America has the most "peace".

We haven't seen peace here in the last 100-150 years. We're in an almost constant state of war. Dat Military Industrial Complex.
Avatar image for Ring_of_fire
Ring_of_fire

15880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#76 Ring_of_fire
Member since 2003 • 15880 Posts
[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

[QUOTE="thebest31406"] You guys are talking like this is a C&C game. What possible strategic value could dropping two bombs on japan have besides ending a conflict in a quick hurry and pretty much running the country? Couldn't be because the wanted to save lives; millions died in one boom and they have felt the affects for generations.thebest31406

What if the bombs were not dropped? What if the military rulers of Japan had their way and mobilized every man, woman, and child to resist the invading Allies? You have to remember that back in those days, Emperor Hirohito was a divine being, a living god to the Japanese. The rank and file could not even look him in the face and their devotion was fanatical. In just about every single battle in the Pacific, the Japanese fought to the last man, including civilians who would rather die than surrender.

If the Allied invasion took place, how many civilians do you think would've died fighting? You're talking about something akin to an extermination of a whole people. Whoever's left will not be in any position for anything. There would have been be no reason to spare Emperor Hirohito (who led his country through the subsequent Allied occupation). The Allies would've suffered heavy casualties and would not be in a position to be lenient. You have to consider the Russians as well. Who knows how far they would've gone in grabbing japanese territory besides the Kurile Islands which they continue to occupy to this day?

If I'm being pragmatic, it's because I'm in a forum and I'm not going to apologize if it sounds like C&C talk to you.

Do I feel for the survivors? Sure. I was born in Japan and have taken the time to learn what the country of my birth was like even though I'm not Japanese. I have Japanese friends which I still keep in touch with.

You can't justify targeting and exterminating a civilian population in order to expedite conflict. What, the civilians are suppose to pay for their governments actions? Should US civilian population pay for their country's mongering actions? And with regard to the russians, we can speculate how far they would go; but we know for sure that the US dropped the bomb.

And conventionally bombings/invasion prevent civilian casualties? And the US would've been the only country to use the bomb in that time? Do you have any "moral principals" against Pearl Harbor?
Avatar image for Ring_of_fire
Ring_of_fire

15880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#77 Ring_of_fire
Member since 2003 • 15880 Posts
[QUOTE="thebest31406"][QUOTE="Ring_of_fire"][QUOTE="thebest31406"] Well no you can't talk basic moral principle to certain folk. That would be like speaking a foreign language.

I doubt anyone in this thread thinks that nuclear weapons are a good thing in a war. It is great (easy, and lazy) to take "moral stand" against something that happened nearly 70 years ago. It is also incredibly naive, lazy to apply the logic of the pre-bombing to post-bombing.

Hey, I apply the same moral logic then as I do now. If it's morally wrong now, chances are it was morally wrong then.

No, you can't have the same moral principals as you have now if you lived prior to the bombing. You wouldn't have had the same knowledge of the aftermath if you lived prior to 1970.
Avatar image for jun_aka_pekto
jun_aka_pekto

25255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#78 jun_aka_pekto
Member since 2010 • 25255 Posts

[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

[QUOTE="thebest31406"] You guys are talking like this is a C&C game. What possible strategic value could dropping two bombs on japan have besides ending a conflict in a quick hurry and pretty much running the country? Couldn't be because the wanted to save lives; millions died in one boom and they have felt the affects for generations.thebest31406

What if the bombs were not dropped? What if the military rulers of Japan had their way and mobilized every man, woman, and child to resist the invading Allies? You have to remember that back in those days, Emperor Hirohito was a divine being, a living god to the Japanese. The rank and file could not even look him in the face and their devotion was fanatical. In just about every single battle in the Pacific, the Japanese fought to the last man, including civilians who would rather die than surrender.

If the Allied invasion took place, how many civilians do you think would've died fighting? You're talking about something akin to an extermination of a whole people. Whoever's left will not be in any position for anything. There would have been be no reason to spare Emperor Hirohito (who led his country through the subsequent Allied occupation). The Allies would've suffered heavy casualties and would not be in a position to be lenient. You have to consider the Russians as well. Who knows how far they would've gone in grabbing japanese territory besides the Kurile Islands which they continue to occupy to this day?

If I'm being pragmatic, it's because I'm in a forum and I'm not going to apologize if it sounds like C&C talk to you.

Do I feel for the survivors? Sure. I was born in Japan and have taken the time to learn what the country of my birth was like even though I'm not Japanese. I have Japanese friends which I still keep in touch with.

You can't justify targeting and exterminating a civilian population in order to expedite conflict. What, the civilians are suppose to pay for their governments actions? Should US civilian population pay for their country's mongering actions? And with regard to the russians, we can speculate how far they would go; but we know for sure that the US dropped the bomb.

At that stage in the war, every major combatant already have their hands red with the blood of civilians. None of them are justified. Would you rather the blood-letting continued on painfully or ended painfully?

US civilians are *kittens* compared to Japanese civilians at the time. If the Japanese leaders told the populace to make human wave attacks, they'd do it. No questions asked. How do you deal with a people willing to die for their emperor?

Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#79 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts
[QUOTE="thebest31406"][QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

What if the bombs were not dropped? What if the military rulers of Japan had their way and mobilized every man, woman, and child to resist the invading Allies? You have to remember that back in those days, Emperor Hirohito was a divine being, a living god to the Japanese. The rank and file could not even look him in the face and their devotion was fanatical. In just about every single battle in the Pacific, the Japanese fought to the last man, including civilians who would rather die than surrender.

If the Allied invasion took place, how many civilians do you think would've died fighting? You're talking about something akin to an extermination of a whole people. Whoever's left will not be in any position for anything. There would have been be no reason to spare Emperor Hirohito (who led his country through the subsequent Allied occupation). The Allies would've suffered heavy casualties and would not be in a position to be lenient. You have to consider the Russians as well. Who knows how far they would've gone in grabbing japanese territory besides the Kurile Islands which they continue to occupy to this day?

If I'm being pragmatic, it's because I'm in a forum and I'm not going to apologize if it sounds like C&C talk to you.

Do I feel for the survivors? Sure. I was born in Japan and have taken the time to learn what the country of my birth was like even though I'm not Japanese. I have Japanese friends which I still keep in touch with.

Ring_of_fire
You can't justify targeting and exterminating a civilian population in order to expedite conflict. What, the civilians are suppose to pay for their governments actions? Should US civilian population pay for their country's mongering actions? And with regard to the russians, we can speculate how far they would go; but we know for sure that the US dropped the bomb.

And conventionally bombings/invasion prevent civilian casualties? And the US would've been the only country to use the bomb in that time? Do you have any "moral principals" against Pearl Harbor?

It would be a crime if a state targeted one civilian family. And yeh, I consider Pear Harbor to be a crime as well. Doesn't mean that the japanese civilians should pay for it.
Avatar image for lo_Pine
lo_Pine

4978

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#80 lo_Pine
Member since 2012 • 4978 Posts

Walp, good for them. :)

Avatar image for JwresB
JwresB

217

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#81 JwresB
Member since 2008 • 217 Posts

lol, watches once again as everyone crys a fukking river for hiroshima and nagasaki while forgetting about the other millions that died all around the world.

where is the anniversary for the remembrance of 300,000 civillians of nanking?

and dresiden? and essien? and warsaw? and about a thousand other places.

try not to forget there are plenty of atrocities to go around.

Riverwolf007

People seem to forgot or just not know about the Millions of civilians the Japanese murdered/raped during its invasion of china(nanking) and other places.

A whole lot more than both bombs killed.

Avatar image for Riverwolf007
Riverwolf007

26023

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#82 Riverwolf007
Member since 2005 • 26023 Posts

[QUOTE="thebest31406"][QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

What if the bombs were not dropped? What if the military rulers of Japan had their way and mobilized every man, woman, and child to resist the invading Allies? You have to remember that back in those days, Emperor Hirohito was a divine being, a living god to the Japanese. The rank and file could not even look him in the face and their devotion was fanatical. In just about every single battle in the Pacific, the Japanese fought to the last man, including civilians who would rather die than surrender.

If the Allied invasion took place, how many civilians do you think would've died fighting? You're talking about something akin to an extermination of a whole people. Whoever's left will not be in any position for anything. There would have been be no reason to spare Emperor Hirohito (who led his country through the subsequent Allied occupation). The Allies would've suffered heavy casualties and would not be in a position to be lenient. You have to consider the Russians as well. Who knows how far they would've gone in grabbing japanese territory besides the Kurile Islands which they continue to occupy to this day?

If I'm being pragmatic, it's because I'm in a forum and I'm not going to apologize if it sounds like C&C talk to you.

Do I feel for the survivors? Sure. I was born in Japan and have taken the time to learn what the country of my birth was like even though I'm not Japanese. I have Japanese friends which I still keep in touch with.

jun_aka_pekto

You can't justify targeting and exterminating a civilian population in order to expedite conflict. What, the civilians are suppose to pay for their governments actions? Should US civilian population pay for their country's mongering actions? And with regard to the russians, we can speculate how far they would go; but we know for sure that the US dropped the bomb.

At that stage in the war, every major combatant already have their hands red with the blood of civilians. None of them are justified. Would you rather the blood-letting continued on painfully or ended painfully?

US civilians are *kittens* compared to Japanese civilians at the time. If the Japanese leaders told the populace to make human wave attacks, they'd do it. No questions asked. How do you deal with a people willing to die for their emperor?

for some reason people like to forget u.s. servicemen would have been wading into these opponents.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQRAY3zabi9xAOFna3wShl

and that they had witnessed thousands of civilians commit mass suicide during the invasion of saipan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDUy0uzmaU4

Avatar image for Ring_of_fire
Ring_of_fire

15880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#83 Ring_of_fire
Member since 2003 • 15880 Posts
[QUOTE="thebest31406"][QUOTE="Ring_of_fire"][QUOTE="thebest31406"] You can't justify targeting and exterminating a civilian population in order to expedite conflict. What, the civilians are suppose to pay for their governments actions? Should US civilian population pay for their country's mongering actions? And with regard to the russians, we can speculate how far they would go; but we know for sure that the US dropped the bomb.

And conventionally bombings/invasion prevent civilian casualties? And the US would've been the only country to use the bomb in that time? Do you have any "moral principals" against Pearl Harbor?

It would be a crime if a state targeted one civilian family. And yeh, I consider Pear Harbor to be a crime as well. Doesn't mean that the japanese civilians should pay for it.

What did the 57 civilian casualities at pearl harbor do to deserve to be targeted by the Japanese? Not to mention the 2,402 casualties of the Navy that wasn't even in the war? As unfortunate as it is, civilians will die in the war. Doesn't mean the attackers are actually targeting family.
Avatar image for noscope-ak47
noscope-ak47

1318

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#84 noscope-ak47
Member since 2012 • 1318 Posts

[QUOTE="noscope-ak47"]

[QUOTE="TehFuneral"]

All that various health and environmental effects that bomb has caused....

This planet is fvcked up.

I'm not to argue if it was the right choice or not, but im sure Americans wouldn't consider it was the 'right' decision if it was dropped on them instead.

l4dak47

Peace flows thru the barrel of a gun I am happy America has the most "peace".

We haven't seen peace here in the last 100-150 years. We're in an almost constant state of war. Dat Military Industrial Complex.

As long as Americans are safe I have no problem defending America. I would rather kick somebody's ass than have my ass kicked is the old saying.

Avatar image for jun_aka_pekto
jun_aka_pekto

25255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#85 jun_aka_pekto
Member since 2010 • 25255 Posts

[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

[QUOTE="thebest31406"] You can't justify targeting and exterminating a civilian population in order to expedite conflict. What, the civilians are suppose to pay for their governments actions? Should US civilian population pay for their country's mongering actions? And with regard to the russians, we can speculate how far they would go; but we know for sure that the US dropped the bomb. Riverwolf007

At that stage in the war, every major combatant already have their hands red with the blood of civilians. None of them are justified. Would you rather the blood-letting continued on painfully or ended painfully?

US civilians are *kittens* compared to Japanese civilians at the time. If the Japanese leaders told the populace to make human wave attacks, they'd do it. No questions asked. How do you deal with a people willing to die for their emperor?

for some reason people like to forget u.s. servicemen would have been wading into these opponents.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQRAY3zabi9xAOFna3wShl

Nice try. Now imagine them carrying live grenades and running towards you. What would you do?

Avatar image for worlock77
worlock77

22552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#86 worlock77
Member since 2009 • 22552 Posts

[QUOTE="jesuschristmonk"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

I'm not sure that there was a "right move" in the situation that the US and Japan were in back then. It was a horrible thing. I would have probably dropped one of the bombs a few miles off the coast of Tokyo to show them (civilians included) what we were capable of. If they still didn't get it, I'd have dropped one on Tokyo. If that somehow wasn't enough, I'd have bombed the other cities until they capitulated.

Dark__Link

Lol. I can bet you our army didn't even think of showing the explosion off to show them what it would do. But if I remember correctly, we didn't truly know what would happen after it went off. The bombings on Japan were pretty much tests if you think about it. Not to mention bombing the ocean would kill all those fish. What did they ever do wrong? :P.

The military and government probably had 500 different plans for how the bombs were to be used, and 500 more contingency plans for when the originals went awry. You can bet they thought of everything. What happens if they decided to drop one off the coast, and it fails to detonate? They only had two... so what do you do with the second bomb? Attempt another strike off the coast? Hit an actual city? Even if it works, what if they don't surrender? You've got nothing after that, except an extremely costly invasion, or hoping that the eventual surrender in Western theater will coax the Japanese into giving up. But you don't know they will. There were too many possibilities and not enough insurance. They decided on the option that would end the war with the most certainty and the yield the least total loss of life.

The Unted States did not only have two atomic bombs. And at that point we already had perfected the means to mass produce them. In fact the Truman administration had drawn up plans to drop one on Japan every few days, indefinately, until they surrendered.

Avatar image for Riverwolf007
Riverwolf007

26023

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#87 Riverwolf007
Member since 2005 • 26023 Posts

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

At that stage in the war, every major combatant already have their hands red with the blood of civilians. None of them are justified. Would you rather the blood-letting continued on painfully or ended painfully?

US civilians are *kittens* compared to Japanese civilians at the time. If the Japanese leaders told the populace to make human wave attacks, they'd do it. No questions asked. How do you deal with a people willing to die for their emperor?

jun_aka_pekto

for some reason people like to forget u.s. servicemen would have been wading into these opponents.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQRAY3zabi9xAOFna3wShl

Nice try. Now imagine them carrying live grenades and running towards you. What would you do?

dude, that is what i am saying. the bombing kept that from happening.

Avatar image for worlock77
worlock77

22552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#88 worlock77
Member since 2009 • 22552 Posts

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

lol, watches once again as everyone crys a fukking river for hiroshima and nagasaki while forgetting about the other millions that died all around the world.

where is the anniversary for the remembrance of 300,000 civillians of nanking?

and dresiden? and essien? and warsaw? and about a thousand other places.

try not to forget there are plenty of atrocities to go around.

JwresB

People seem to forgot or just not know about the Millions of civilians the Japanese murdered/raped during its invasion of china(nanking) and other places.

A whole lot more than both bombs killed.

Just curious, do the moral failings of others excuse our own moral failings?

Avatar image for jun_aka_pekto
jun_aka_pekto

25255

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#89 jun_aka_pekto
Member since 2010 • 25255 Posts

[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]for some reason people like to forget u.s. servicemen would have been wading into these opponents.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQRAY3zabi9xAOFna3wShl

Riverwolf007

Nice try. Now imagine them carrying live grenades and running towards you. What would you do?

dude, that is what i am saying. the bombing kept that from happening.

I'm glad I don't have to either. If I was one of those invading Japan, I'd have so many conflicting emotions if I came face to face with kids rigged to blow up. I'd either hesitate and get killed or survive and live out my later days in a nut house.

Avatar image for WhiteKnight77
WhiteKnight77

12605

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#90 WhiteKnight77
Member since 2003 • 12605 Posts

[QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

[QUOTE="thebest31406"]You guys are talking like this is a C&C game. What possible strategic value could dropping two bombs on japan have besides ending a conflict in a quick hurry and pretty much running the country? Couldn't be because the wanted to save lives; millions died in one boom and they have felt the affects for generations.thebest31406

What if the bombs were not dropped? What if the military rulers of Japan had their way and mobilized every man, woman, and child to resist the invading Allies? You have to remember that back in those days, Emperor Hirohito was a divine being, a living god to the Japanese. The rank and file could not even look him in the face and their devotion was fanatical. In just about every single battle in the Pacific, the Japanese fought to the last man, including civilians who would rather die than surrender.

If the Allied invasion took place, how many civilians do you think would've died fighting? You're talking about something akin to an extermination of a whole people. Whoever's left will not be in any position for anything. There would have been be no reason to spare Emperor Hirohito (who led his country through the subsequent Allied occupation). The Allies would've suffered heavy casualties and would not be in a position to be lenient. You have to consider the Russians as well. Who knows how far they would've gone in grabbing japanese territory besides the Kurile Islands which they continue to occupy to this day?

If I'm being pragmatic, it's because I'm in a forum and I'm not going to apologize if it sounds like C&C talk to you.

Do I feel for the survivors? Sure. I was born in Japan and have taken the time to learn what the country of my birth was like even though I'm not Japanese. I have Japanese friends which I still keep in touch with.

You can't justify targeting and exterminating a civilian population in order to expedite conflict. What, the civilians are suppose to pay for their governments actions? Should US civilian population pay for their country's mongering actions? And with regard to the russians, we can speculate how far they would go; but we know for sure that the US dropped the bomb.

You really do not have a grasp of what happened during WWII. From the sounds of things, you have to be under 18 years old to be talking the ignorance you are.

US POWs in Japan, in camps on the west coast at that, watched as Japanese civilians sharpened sticks and other instruments to use as weapons. Japanese civilians were getting ready to repel any invasion that took place on any of the Japanese islands. The Kanto plains surrounding Tokyo (I lived in a place called Kanto Mura that was base housing for Fuchu Air Station in the late 60s) were a likely landing zone for US forces and just one of the places civilians would have been used to "fend" off invaders.

While you worry about ~ 200,000 dead and injured in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Hilter and Stalin killed some 14,000,000 people that were not directly involved in combat (civilians) both before and during war time. Why not mourn over the Ukranians that were starved to death?

Whomever asked why not bomb Tokyo needs to remember that Tokyo was already bombed out by firebombing. There was nothing left to destroy really. Killing the emperor would have made things more difficult during the post war occupation.

Avatar image for JwresB
JwresB

217

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#91 JwresB
Member since 2008 • 217 Posts

[QUOTE="JwresB"]

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

lol, watches once again as everyone crys a fukking river for hiroshima and nagasaki while forgetting about the other millions that died all around the world.

where is the anniversary for the remembrance of 300,000 civillians of nanking?

and dresiden? and essien? and warsaw? and about a thousand other places.

try not to forget there are plenty of atrocities to go around.

worlock77

People seem to forgot or just not know about the Millions of civilians the Japanese murdered/raped during its invasion of china(nanking) and other places.

A whole lot more than both bombs killed.

Just curious, do the moral failings of others excuse our own moral failings?

No but all I ever read is how terrible the US is because of dropping the bombs on Japan. When in fact Japan was far more evil than the US was.

Avatar image for kingkong0124
kingkong0124

8329

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#92 kingkong0124
Member since 2012 • 8329 Posts

Some of the comments in this thread...smh

Avatar image for Riverwolf007
Riverwolf007

26023

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#93 Riverwolf007
Member since 2005 • 26023 Posts

[QUOTE="JwresB"]

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

lol, watches once again as everyone crys a fukking river for hiroshima and nagasaki while forgetting about the other millions that died all around the world.

where is the anniversary for the remembrance of 300,000 civillians of nanking?

and dresiden? and essien? and warsaw? and about a thousand other places.

try not to forget there are plenty of atrocities to go around.

worlock77

People seem to forgot or just not know about the Millions of civilians the Japanese murdered/raped during its invasion of china(nanking) and other places.

A whole lot more than both bombs killed.

Just curious, do the moral failings of others excuse our own moral failings?

of course it does not but it does provide a framework in which to judge whose moral failings are the most justifiable.

some might say if you sneak up behind a guy and clobber him and later you get hunted down and have all your teeth knocked out that there is a difference.

maybe there is not any difference , i really don't know, but to me it feels that way.

since in the example of nanking 300,000 civillians were killed and the japanese papers at home ran stories of japanese beheading contests all bets are off when it comes to the application of mercy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contest_to_kill_100_people_using_a_sword

http://books.google.com/books?id=_H0JEjAqMcsC&lpg=PP1&dq=The+Nanjing+Massacre:+A+Japanese+Journalist+Confronts+Japan's+National+Shame&pg=PA126&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false

when veterans sued the japanese paper that broke the story in 1967 this is what the judge had tosay.

"Tokyo District Court Judge Akio Doi dismissed the case saying, "the lieutenants admitted the fact that they raced to kill 100 people. We cannot deny that the article included some false elements and exaggeration, but it is difficult to say the article was fiction not based on facts.""

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2005/08/japanese-court-rules-newspaper-didnt.php

Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#94 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts

[QUOTE="thebest31406"][QUOTE="jun_aka_pekto"]

What if the bombs were not dropped? What if the military rulers of Japan had their way and mobilized every man, woman, and child to resist the invading Allies? You have to remember that back in those days, Emperor Hirohito was a divine being, a living god to the Japanese. The rank and file could not even look him in the face and their devotion was fanatical. In just about every single battle in the Pacific, the Japanese fought to the last man, including civilians who would rather die than surrender.

If the Allied invasion took place, how many civilians do you think would've died fighting? You're talking about something akin to an extermination of a whole people. Whoever's left will not be in any position for anything. There would have been be no reason to spare Emperor Hirohito (who led his country through the subsequent Allied occupation). The Allies would've suffered heavy casualties and would not be in a position to be lenient. You have to consider the Russians as well. Who knows how far they would've gone in grabbing japanese territory besides the Kurile Islands which they continue to occupy to this day?

If I'm being pragmatic, it's because I'm in a forum and I'm not going to apologize if it sounds like C&C talk to you.

Do I feel for the survivors? Sure. I was born in Japan and have taken the time to learn what the country of my birth was like even though I'm not Japanese. I have Japanese friends which I still keep in touch with.

WhiteKnight77

You can't justify targeting and exterminating a civilian population in order to expedite conflict. What, the civilians are suppose to pay for their governments actions? Should US civilian population pay for their country's mongering actions? And with regard to the russians, we can speculate how far they would go; but we know for sure that the US dropped the bomb.

You really do not have a grasp of what happened during WWII. From the sounds of things, you have to be under 18 years old to be talking the ignorance you are.

US POWs in Japan, in camps on the west coast at that, watched as Japanese civilians sharpened sticks and other instruments to use as weapons. Japanese civilians were getting ready to repel any invasion that took place on any of the Japanese islands. The Kanto plains surrounding Tokyo (I lived in a place called Kanto Mura that was base housing for Fuchu Air Station in the late 60s) were a likely landing zone for US forces and just one of the places civilians would have been used to "fend" off invaders.

While you worry about ~ 200,000 dead and injured in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Hilter and Stalin killed some 14,000,000 people that were not directly involved in combat (civilians) both before and during war time. Why not mourn over the Ukranians that were starved to death?

Whomever asked why not bomb Tokyo needs to remember that Tokyo was already bombed out by firebombing. There was nothing left to destroy really. Killing the emperor would have made things more difficult during the post war occupation.

Sharpened sticks isn't? Today is the anniversary of the bombing, that's why we're talking about it.
Avatar image for frannkzappa
frannkzappa

3003

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#95 frannkzappa
Member since 2012 • 3003 Posts

[QUOTE="Dark__Link"][QUOTE="jesuschristmonk"] Lol. I can bet you our army didn't even think of showing the explosion off to show them what it would do. But if I remember correctly, we didn't truly know what would happen after it went off. The bombings on Japan were pretty much tests if you think about it. Not to mention bombing the ocean would kill all those fish. What did they ever do wrong? :P.worlock77

The military and government probably had 500 different plans for how the bombs were to be used, and 500 more contingency plans for when the originals went awry. You can bet they thought of everything. What happens if they decided to drop one off the coast, and it fails to detonate? They only had two... so what do you do with the second bomb? Attempt another strike off the coast? Hit an actual city? Even if it works, what if they don't surrender? You've got nothing after that, except an extremely costly invasion, or hoping that the eventual surrender in Western theater will coax the Japanese into giving up. But you don't know they will. There were too many possibilities and not enough insurance. They decided on the option that would end the war with the most certainty and the yield the least total loss of life.

The Unted States did not only have two atomic bombs. And at that point we already had perfected the means to mass produce them. In fact the Truman administration had drawn up plans to drop one on Japan every few days, indefinately, until they surrendered.

try once every 1 to 2 months.

Avatar image for worlock77
worlock77

22552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#96 worlock77
Member since 2009 • 22552 Posts

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="JwresB"]

People seem to forgot or just not know about the Millions of civilians the Japanese murdered/raped during its invasion of china(nanking) and other places.

A whole lot more than both bombs killed.

Riverwolf007

Just curious, do the moral failings of others excuse our own moral failings?

of course it does not but it does provide a framework in which to judge whose moral failings are the most justifiable.

some might say if you sneak up behind a guy and clobber him and later you get hunted down and have all your teeth knocked out that there is a difference.

maybe there is not any difference , i really don't know, but to me it feels that way.

since in the example of nanking 300,000 civillians were killed and the japanese papers at home ran stories of japanese beheading contests all bets are off when it comes to the application of mercy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contest_to_kill_100_people_using_a_sword

http://books.google.com/books?id=_H0JEjAqMcsC&lpg=PP1&dq=The+Nanjing+Massacre:+A+Japanese+Journalist+Confronts+Japan's+National+Shame&pg=PA126&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2005/08/japanese-court-rules-newspaper-didnt.php

If a guy slaughters a family in a city far away from me and I'm later locked in a fight with that same man am I justified in then slaughtering his family? That's what it sounds like to me.

Avatar image for Jebus213
Jebus213

10056

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#97 Jebus213
Member since 2010 • 10056 Posts
[QUOTE="ScorpionTroll"]

[QUOTE="thebest31406"] You guys are talking like this is a C&C game. What possible strategic value could dropping two bombs on japan have besides ending a conflict in a quick hurry and pretty much running the country? Couldn't be because the wanted to save lives; millions died in one boom and they have felt the affects for generations.thebest31406

An estimated 246,000 people died combined in Hiroshima and Ngasaki. An estimatd 60 million people died world wide during WWII. If the US had invaded Japan the war would have dragged on for god knows how much longer. And for what? For an exhausted United States army to storm Tokyo and kill every man and rape every women in sight like the Russians did to Berlin?

So why didn't they drop the A-bomb in germany? If dropping an a-bomb is about preventing prolonged war, why not use it now?

Are you really that ignorant? The first nuclear test was in July. Germany surrendered in May... Damn the rest of what you said is just so stupid. "Why not use it now"..... It's so stupid I just don't even want to reply to it.
Avatar image for worlock77
worlock77

22552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#98 worlock77
Member since 2009 • 22552 Posts

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="Dark__Link"] The military and government probably had 500 different plans for how the bombs were to be used, and 500 more contingency plans for when the originals went awry. You can bet they thought of everything. What happens if they decided to drop one off the coast, and it fails to detonate? They only had two... so what do you do with the second bomb? Attempt another strike off the coast? Hit an actual city? Even if it works, what if they don't surrender? You've got nothing after that, except an extremely costly invasion, or hoping that the eventual surrender in Western theater will coax the Japanese into giving up. But you don't know they will. There were too many possibilities and not enough insurance. They decided on the option that would end the war with the most certainty and the yield the least total loss of life.frannkzappa

The Unted States did not only have two atomic bombs. And at that point we already had perfected the means to mass produce them. In fact the Truman administration had drawn up plans to drop one on Japan every few days, indefinately, until they surrendered.

try once every 1 to 2 months.

They had immediate plans to drop another on or around August 17th, followed by three in September and three in October. Sure that's a bit longer than every few days, but it's certainly more than once every 1 or 2 months.

Avatar image for hensothor
hensothor

522

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#100 hensothor
Member since 2011 • 522 Posts

lol, watches once again as everyone crys a fukking river for hiroshima and nagasaki while forgetting about the other millions that died all around the world.

where is the anniversary for the remembrance of 300,000 civillians of nanking?

and dresiden? and essien? and warsaw? and about a thousand other places.

try not to forget there are plenty of atrocities to go around.

Riverwolf007
Everyone is scared of an atomic blast incinerating them, so they will of course mark such an event with utter scorn and hate. Who cares about other atrocities in the face of one that strikes such fear in the hearts of almost every one?