uhm the japanese didn't surrender because of the bombing (they would have kept fighting)
but because stalin was going to invade from the north to help his "allies" and to conquer at least half of japan
the japs feared stalin soviets more than nukes
and conventional bombing is nothing compared to getting nuked
the allies dropped thousands of regular bombs on germany but only 2 on japan..
That was the reasoning behind the a-bomb "strategy". Because the estimated numbers on both sides skyrocketed - especially on Japanese civilians.
I guess no one of us can imagine any heavy bombing. So I wont try to compare several month/years of nightly bombings to 2 bombs. Both are horrible.
Imagine applauding nuclear bombing, killing hundreds of thousands instantly and having people born with birth defects and increased numbers of cancers for many years after the bombings.
Thank God we have people like you advocating the vile use of weapons of destruction like this...
You even go on to say it's humane.... Dear lord....
Oh and just because one number is bigger than the other, doesn't make it good by any means.
I haven't "applaud" the a-bombs. I just mentioned the reasoning behind them and I said "
more humane" - that is a important word in this case. As I said above - if the US (and others) would have invaded mainland Japan the civilan casulties would have skyrocketed, because thy would have fought or killed their children and themselves - at least that is what was expected.
Giangreco says that many Americans and Japanese lives were saved by avoiding a land invasion of Japan.
"It's astounding," he says. "While we were looking at some of our own casualty estimates, the Japanese military was doing much the same thing, and the figure of 20 million appears again and again."
Giangreco says just the number "20 million" is horrific — but he is most stunned by the casualness with which it was used by Japanese military leaders who felt that the loss of life was worth it.
That were the numbers the Japanese military leaders expected for an invasion of the mainland. And yes - lower numbers in this case dont make it good, but at least better. There were not many options ... and imho they picked the least bad one.
O_O "reasonable"? they killed civilians! this where humans potential against the war or just regular people. not to forget that the radioactive fallout contaminate the land and sea. excusing this is not possible!
Civilians were killed on all sides in the UK, all over Europe or in Russia. - That was why the WW2 was so horrific. Before that most wars were fought on battlefields and not in the cities. (at least on such a large scale). Even before, in the bombing of Tokyo (~125k-200k killed and about 1 million injured) it were the civilians that died. But that had no impact on the war.
I dont try to excuse the a-bombs, but in the large scale they probably saved millions and millions of lives. Even if that wasnt the plan. Because they showed the world the potential outcome of a nuclear war. Without that, I think the cold war would not have stayed cold. And no one know what would have happend then - in a time with more than just a handful of a-bombs in the world but hundreds or thousands - without the knowledge of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
But yeah, I guess that is enough of that stuff in the thread of a game were you can fuck girls as Hitler ...
