The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

[dt3]

Another thread made me think of this. Do you think we were justified in dropping the A-Bombs on Japan to end WWII? Why or why not?

 

[debbie t]

certainly not the second bomb..the effects had already been witnessed by that point and the japanese had all but surrenderd

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

certainly not the second bomb..the effects had already been witnessed by that point and the japanese had all but surrenderd

In fact they had not. I personally do not think they were going to surrender well, until bomb #2.

Justified, well they did in fact attack us. I mean they had a whoopin' coming to them. I will have to think about the whole, vaporization issue, although it's either take heavy casualties for us in a ground war, or drop a couple of bombs and call it a day.

War sucks, we all know it, and it's like a street fight, no such thing as fair if you ask me. Was it horrible, of course. Needed?

Well they have left us alone the better part of 60 years.

 

[Peter Parka]

No, I do not believe in killing innocent people!

 

[Pudding Time]

Considering who was killed, not at all. To be honest, I think it's something Americans should be ashamed of. In fact, anyone who uses nuclear weapons on people should be ashamed.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Well, either conventional, or nuclear, people are going to die....Correct?

The Europeans, the ones that turn their noses up at Americans now, the French, The English for exapmle.

How many thousands of people did they slaughter, how many women did they rape, how much land did they take from enemies to establish their own collective empires?

I think some of you forget, that England ruled the planet for about a gozillion years.

and they didn't have nuclear weapons. They had only swords, hatchets, horses. eventually firearms.

But they damn near extincted cultures as well. Now it's this elite tone, like the rest of us are barbarians.

 

[redsMULLT1]

It was an extreme flex of power. It drove a hard point across.
It did kill alot of innocents. But do you think they would have thought twice about doing the same to us? War is war. I have to say at the time... justified.

 

[Peter Parka]

Who said I agreed with what Britain did in the past, let alone currently?

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Who said I agreed with what Britain did in the past, let alone currently?

Nobody did...

And?

 

[Peter Parka]

Nobody did...

And?

Then your post about what the English did has no relivence.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Then your post about what the English did has no relivence.

Oh but it did, Peter. My point was right or wrong, good bad or indifferent, many innocent souls have lost life for the growth of empires.

The nuclear approach was, although horrible in its impact, it was just a more efficient manner. Agree or not, it is really no different than what has been done to civilizations since the first club was made.

 

[Peter Parka]

Oh but it did, Peter. My point was right or wrong, good bad or indifferent, many innocent souls have lost life for the growth of empires.

The nuclear approach was, although horrible in its impact, it was just a more efficient manner. Agree or not, it is really no different than what has been done to civilizations since the first club was made.

And I think they are wrong too but this is about the bombs dropped on Japan, not war over the course of history.

 

[gLing]

If dropping the bombs meant an invasion was avoided, then yes the US was justified in using them.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

And I think they are wrong too but this is about the bombs dropped on Japan, not war over the course of history.

Well to me they are one and the same, it was a course in history.

I digress.

 

[All Else Failed]

We didn't need to drop bombs at all, actually. They were done for, and were actually trying to negotiate with us long before the bomb. We simply dropped them to flex our muscles towards our future enemy: Russia. We could have just made a complete naval blockade of the island and waited them out.

 

[Peter Parka]

Well to me they are one and the same, it was a course in history.

I digress.

Not really, this was the first example of mass genocide done quickly and easily on this scale, I really don't see how it can be compared to war crimes committed hundreds of years before.

 

[All Else Failed]

Well see, its OK if America does it.

 

[gLing]

The allies wiped out several cities in both Europe and Japan with carpet bombing during the war. How was using nukes any different from that?

 

[Peter Parka]

The allies wiped out several cities in both Europe and Japan with carpet bombing during the war. How was using nukes any different from that?

I personally think that was wrong too but this thread is supposed to be about the nukes on Japan so I really dont thing diverting attention away from the point to other war crimes has much to do with it really. Just my opinion though.

 

[gLing]

I personally think that was wrong too but this thread is supposed to be about the nukes on Japan so I really dont thing diverting attention away from the point to other war crimes has much to do with it really. Just my opinion though.

Asking how was using nukes any different from other mass bombings is not diverting attention away from the nuking in Japan especially since my question was about the nuking itself. :smiley24: