Reflectionist
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2004
FireHawk said:
I didn't say it was a bad idea. Probably not the best, but not the worst thing they could've done.
[World War III]
- Thread starter FireHawk
- Start date
I didn't say it was a bad idea. Probably not the best, but not the worst thing they could've done.
Stenners
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2004
- Location
- Brighton.UK
I would agree on ur assumption that they where military targets..... if they used othodox bombs to take out targets specific to the war effort.
Clogz
Loud and Proud
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2004
No matter what we would have done, it would have been a masacre either way. Japan was entrencthed nation-wide with hidden bunkers and kamakazie planes. Even many civilians were ready to take up arms to fight for the Japanese empire. An amphibious assault would have made D-Day look a fart.
I think that, considering the damage it could have done to our side, dropping the bombs was the lesser of two evils. I don't like the idea of dropping those bombs at all, but it was better then half the Allied forces in the Pacific dying in a ground war.
I think that, considering the damage it could have done to our side, dropping the bombs was the lesser of two evils. I don't like the idea of dropping those bombs at all, but it was better then half the Allied forces in the Pacific dying in a ground war.
Stenners
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2004
- Location
- Brighton.UK
Despite the fact the Japanease where on the verge of surrender and the death toll continued counting long after the bombs had been dropped.
Clogz
Loud and Proud
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2004
Stenners said:
They weren't on the verge of surrender. Emperor Hirohito was ready to defend Japan at all costs. Like I said in my last post, they had started arming civilians, hiding kamakazi planes in caves along the shore, and building huge military defenses in all thier major cities.
They were no where near close to waving the little white flag...not a bit. the only reason japan surrendered was because the loss of the two cities severely crippled thier defense capabilites...they had no hope of winning. Plus, the US could just keep dropping bombs until Japan was reduced to rubble anyway.
djwakka
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2005
Even if you were right, it's not worth the future wars and nuclear conflicts, inflicting more casualties for generations to come.Clogz said:
Nope. The U.S. did not have any more nuclear bombs to spare after the 2nd bombing. Nowhere close to waving the white flag? Is that why they were preparing for a surrender but couldn't because America wouldn't accept it unless it was fully unconditional? They had no hope of winning weeks, maybe months, before the bombs had dropped.
He didn't tell his people to defend the country. It was the peoples' own decision to defend themselves. Mostly with makeshift ones, like bamboo spears and if available, pistols from a veteran. If it was known that there was a possible invasion of America, people would bear arms to defend themselves. Duh. That's what Middle-Eastern civilians are doing now and the demand for AK-47s couldn't be higher. There were no hidden bunkers, or hidden kamikazi planes. Looks like you saw the wrong history movie.
They had started arming civilians? No, sorry, the Japanese military weren't abundant with weapons and they did not give any guns to the citiziens.
The building of huge military bases in all their major cities in preparation for an invasion? Name one.
Fort_Underground
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2005
- Location
- Hey Look, A Song
Well said Wakka. When it comes down to it, it's hard to say which choice would have been the better one. I mean sure, the US would have lost a lot of troops, but look at what happened. Tens of thousands of civilians died. They weren't part of the army, they weren't gonna go on a komakazi run. They were just trying to get by while their country was losing a war. And then one day BAM, a bomb gets dropped and the entire city is left in ruins. There was no chance to get away. No chance to say goodbye, just the biggest bomb ever being dropped on the city and killing all the people with it. And yes I'm aware not everyone died from the bomb, but a bunch more were killed by the radiation afterwords. Very few people survived that. And what did the US do after that? Dropped another one. As if Japan didn't get the message the first time. Sure the US death toll for soliders would be high, but what war did America need to go to after Japan? You can always rebuild an army. However Truman is the one who has to deal with the decesion he made.
Clogz
Loud and Proud
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2004
djwakka said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki#Prelude_to_the_bombings
Click on the "Support" section of this article, and read it. You will find all my statements supported...save the comment about military bases. That is my bad. The article also mentions elsewhere, in the planning stages, that if Japan had not surrendered after the first two bombings that more bombs would be made and dropped.
acdcrules04
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2004
- Location
- VW Bus
Wikipedia is one of the worst sources out there, anyone can edit the info. I don't believe anything from there.
djwakka
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2005
- directly from the page you gave me.
Sorry, but most, if not all of the info you provided is false and biased. Even the source itself claims that. More atomic bombs would be made after the second bombing? Complete bullshit. They didn't have any left and did not even fathom using a third. And even if so, made by who? Do you really think Albert Einstein would build another bomb or let people do so using his blueprints from a project he already had deep regrets about?
All information from wikipedia is null and void from discussion.
