Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"Thank God for the Atom Bomb"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What about the long-term effects of the bombings?

    The Cancer? The pain and suffering of 100ks? Innocent civilians.

    It was wrong. And, although they did not know of it's later importance, we must remember that it helped to kick-start the cold war.
    I stand with Israel.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by RamHammer View Post
      What about the long-term effects of the bombings?

      The Cancer? The pain and suffering of 100ks? Innocent civilians.
      If we didn't drop them, millions of innocent civilians would certainly have died. Are you willing to second guess THAT decision?

      Originally posted by RamHammer View Post
      It was wrong. And, although they did not know of it's later importance, we must remember that it helped to kick-start the cold war.
      It was the right decision. And even if we didn't, the cold war was in the process already.

      Besides, if we didn't drop the bomb, the cold war might have turned hot in the 50s or 60s, with a real nuclear exchange between the US and USSR, simply because we didn't know what atomic weapons can do.
      "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by gunnut View Post
        If we didn't drop them, millions of innocent civilians would certainly have died. Are you willing to second guess THAT decision?



        It was the right decision. And even if we didn't, the cold war was in the process already.

        Besides, if we didn't drop the bomb, the cold war might have turned hot in the 50s or 60s, with a real nuclear exchange between the US and USSR, simply because we didn't know what atomic weapons can do.
        Right to the heart of the matter as usual bud:) ......What he said;) .On August 9th,even before they learned of the bombing of Nagasaki that same day,3 of the 6 men that controlled Japan's destiny at that point wanted continued resistance and made plans to pitch 2.3 million servicemen and 28 million male and female home guards into defense of the Home Islands.It took the second bomb falling on Nagasaki to convince them to surrender.Based on calculations from previous battles in the Pacific theater the estimated US casulties would have numbered around 500,000 for Operation Downfall.
        Last edited by Shamus; 30 Oct 07,, 01:52.
        "Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories." Thomas Jefferson

        Comment


        • It is so silly that some retard Japanese sorry about that cannot ever hear the "apologize" come from recently dead Pilot of plane that dropped A-bomb on Hiroshima Mr. Paul Tibberts

          Digg - Brutal Japanese Soldiers Butchered 20,000 Allied Seamen in Cold Blood

          Alive and safe, the brutal Japanese soldiers who butchered 20,000 Allied seamen in cold blood

          LJWorld.com / Japanese denial of WWII military brothels shocks former professor

          Riding Sun: Indoctrination, not education

          Unit 731

          These are Japanese version of ultimatum before A-Bombing...

          http://www.museumofworldwarii.com/Im...an-Leaflet.jpg

          http://www.museumofworldwarii.com/Im...er-Leaflet.jpg
          Last edited by Enzo Ferrari; 05 Nov 07,, 09:29.

          Comment


          • do old grudges die hard???? to this day

            Japan still awaits a formal apology from the US for Hiroshima and Nagasaki

            the US still awaits a formal apology for pearl harbor.

            Comment


            • The world was forever changed by the use of the Atomic bomb. In some ways we are more secure, now that world war is so terrible, wars are kept from spreading to World War proportions by this fact. But for the first time in human history, our very civilization's existance is threatened by something a few people can do in a single day. I beleive the use of nuclear weapons was inevitable once they were developed, it is unfortunate for Japan that it was the enemy when we aquired them. It is my hope that we have learned enough as a species not to use them against one another again. It is also significant that these weapons have grown and matured greatly since those first bombs were used -- the destructive capacity of modern nuclear weapons in hard to compare to the bombs used in 1945.
              sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
              If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

              Comment


              • For those that think the Japanese might have surrendered, prior to the bombs being dropped, when did the Japanese ever surrender? Maybe a few individuals did, but military units never did, even when completely beaten with no hope. There was no reason for Truman to think that they would.

                That being said, I would have waited longer to drop the second bomb, or maybe even exploded it on an island off the coast of Japan in plain view of the mainland so that the Japanese would have no doubt that we had more of the bombs.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Johnny W View Post
                  For those that think the Japanese might have surrendered, prior to the bombs being dropped, when did the Japanese ever surrender? Maybe a few individuals did, but military units never did, even when completely beaten with no hope. There was no reason for Truman to think that they would.

                  That being said, I would have waited longer to drop the second bomb, or maybe even exploded it on an island off the coast of Japan in plain view of the mainland so that the Japanese would have no doubt that we had more of the bombs.
                  The Soviets were invading, time was of the essence. Not only did Hiroshima and Nagasaki save millions of lives in the path of the invasion, but millions more who might have ended up under Soviet domination.

                  Comment


                  • Does the U.S. Strategic bombing survey carry much weight?

                    http://www.anesi.com/ussbs01.htm

                    After interviewing most of the important protagonists on both sides came to the conclusion that.....

                    ....There is little point in attempting precisely to impute Japan's unconditional surrender to any one of the numerous causes which jointly and cumulatively were responsible for Japan's disaster. The time lapse between military impotence and political acceptance of the inevitable might have been shorter had the political structure of Japan permitted a more rapid and decisive determination of national policies. Nevertheless, it seems clear that, even without the atomic bombing attacks, air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion.

                    Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated......

                    As the survey was done AFTER the war, it was no help at the time of the bombing, and the Americans thought the invasion would be necessary, so they went ahead and dropped them, fair enough, but ''if'' you believe the survey is correct in their findings, does the casualties in the invasion have any value as a reason for dropping the bombs from TODAYS posters?

                    On the other hand, if you think the survey got it all wrong, and the Japanese still wouldn't have surrendered, then I guess we're back to square one, and those posts will keep on coming.

                    Comment


                    • As well as the question above..........

                      Could I also put this question to you guys........

                      If the Japanese didn't surrender, why was it imperative for the invasion to go ahead. The blockade and fire bombing would eventually bring them to their knees for minimal U.S. casualties, so why invade and suffer those massive casualties?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by ANZAC View Post
                        As well as the question above..........

                        Could I also put this question to you guys........

                        If the Japanese didn't surrender, why was it imperative for the invasion to go ahead. The blockade and fire bombing would eventually bring them to their knees for minimal U.S. casualties, so why invade and suffer those massive casualties?
                        Firebombing and blockade would be time consuming. Dropping at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was quick. The U.S. and allied forces had been through enough. :)
                        Last edited by HazeGrey; 27 Dec 08,, 10:27.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by ANZAC View Post
                          Does the U.S. Strategic bombing survey carry much weight?



                          Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated......

                          .
                          It was done IMO to show the world who was the worlds master ,and still is (like it or lump it ) ,showed the power of A bombs , and stopped Russia from :as has been said: ,coming to a nuclear conflict .

                          But the coming few months in 2009 may prove that wrong .

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by ANZAC View Post
                            On the other hand, if you think the survey got it all wrong, and the Japanese still wouldn't have surrendered, then I guess we're back to square one, and those posts will keep on coming.
                            The survey is irrevelent. If the Emperor was determined, then so was Japan. I remind you that there was a coup against him when he surrendered.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by ANZAC View Post
                              If the Japanese didn't surrender, why was it imperative for the invasion to go ahead. The blockade and fire bombing would eventually bring them to their knees for minimal U.S. casualties, so why invade and suffer those massive casualties?
                              Would it? The Japanese paid the butchers' bill even with civilian lives in Okinawa and Saipan. There was never once a case of mercy asked nor given by them. Why should have the allies expected any different?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by HazeGrey View Post
                                Firebombing and blockade would be time consuming. Dropping at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was quick. The U.S. and allied forces had been through enough. :)
                                Didn't explain myself too well, I meant if the Nukes didn't bring about surrender, what would you do then if you were C in C, the slow option of
                                firebombing and blockade or the quicker solution of invasion?


                                Originally posted by tankie View Post
                                It was done IMO to show the world who was the worlds master ,and still is (like it or lump it ) ,showed the power of A bombs , and stopped Russia from :as has been said: ,coming to a nuclear conflict .

                                But the coming few months in 2009 may prove that wrong .
                                You could be on the ball there tankie.
                                But cripes, what do you know that I don't with your last remark.

                                Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                                The survey is irrevelent. If the Emperor was determined, then so was Japan. I remind you that there was a coup against him when he surrendered.
                                Well I guess you think the survey got it all wrong, and the Japanese still wouldn't have surrendered, so the need to drop the bombs were the way to go, fair enough.

                                Personally I think the survey was pretty much on the money, wasn't Hirohito determined to end the war, but the sticking point was guaranteeing the imperial line.

                                On the attempted coup, it's amazing the power one man [or God] has over his people isn't it?
                                When he ordered the military to quit the fight, they did almost to a man, out of 2 million men under arms in Japan, [100,000 in the Tokyo district,] plus millions more throughout the Pacific and the mainland, all chucked it in on his order, except for a few dozen renegades.


                                Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                                Would it? The Japanese paid the butchers' bill even with civilian lives in Okinawa and Saipan. There was never once a case of mercy asked nor given by them. Why should have the allies expected any different?
                                Not too sure what you mean, Hirohito surrendered to spare Japan any more devastation or Soviet occupation, [without guarantee for the Emperor] which is what Japan would have been facing in the next few months, mass starvation by blockade, and devastation by fire bombing, or Soviet occupation.

                                Think he would have called it quits before the invasion date, without the nukes.

                                But lets say they didn't surrender by the invasion date, why not just continue the blockade and bombing, for as long as it took, the last series of bombing raids cost the USAAF a casualty rate of 0.03% vs an invasion casualty bill of one million.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X