It's a totally different issue in Hindsight. Look at it from the point of view of someone before the bombs hit.

Just like we make assumptions about an Invasion, had we made the invasion with horrifying casualties, we would make assumptions about dropping the bomb.

I'm sort of confused about what part of this issue we are disputing, I mean, I don't see a possible invasion as a better option, if I was in the shoes of those that made the decision.

[quote="Scorched Earth":261a5] Uh...well when whole towns are obliterated to dust and whole populations are vaporized, you might be a bit less organized after. Ya need recoup and then make the decision. Im sure they were jus thinking survival of their own people before signing because we obviously made our point and did our damage.[/quote:261a5]

The military officials and the Emperor weren't in either Nagasaki, or Hiroshima. They had 3 days between the bombings. It shouldn't take that long to decide, "We're fucked. Lets give up."

If they actually cared about their citizens they would have made the smart decision after the first bomb. But politicians rarely ever actually care about their own people, I guess.


[quote="Short Hand":261a5]
You have to be the largest child on this site, 80 % of your posts involve childish insults or talking about a cock you had a few nights back....[/quote:261a5]

If you want to flame me about the way I act in offtopic, bring it up there. Otherwise, stfu and stop ruining the thread.

[quote="Short Hand":261a5]Your sole purpose in the political forum seems to be finding my posts and insulting a word I forgot to capitilize...[/quote:261a5]

Please quote ONCE where I have done anything like this on the Political forum, before you go shooting your mouth off. Otherwise you are just making pointless flames - Something we don't want in this forum. At least with my critical judgements of your arguing, I had clear and obvious evidence.

[quote="Short Hand":261a5]
rolleyes: You could just fuck off and act a little older.. but that will never happen. Continue on chav. eek: [/quote:261a5]

LOL - Look at this post you made, buddy. Telling me to act a little older? Get a fucking grip. You're the guy who went nuts simply because I proved him wrong. If someone ever proves me wrong, at least I accept the fact and move on - You just throw a hissy fit, just like you've demonstrated now.

I don't think you're ready for this forum, yet. You need to stop being so pathetic and move on.

Chillax Dudes

[img]http://www.computerclubhouse.org/flagship/people/Mel/images/chill'n.jpg[/img]

You both are disproving yourselves by letting this go on. So stop and get back on topic.

Hey, I'm not the one who brought flaming into this thread. oOo:

But whatever, I'm done now - Made my point.

I based my estimates using the same reports Truman had. I understand that pre-battle estimates on Iwo Jima, and Okinawa were pretty close. Of course during both of those battles about the only prisoners captured were too wounded to fight. If we had invaded Japan it would have been a blood bath. And the only Japanese to survive would have been the Japanese that were not in Japan.

To have set off the bomb outside of a city, where loss of life would not be so great, would have been seen as a sign of weakness on our part, and would have spurred them on. (Short that means to keep on fighting) The war could have dragged on into 1946, even 1947. Japan could have finished their atomic bomb program, and guess where they would have tried to deploy their bomb?

Yeah people often forget that the axis also were developing nuclear weapons.

Do you think a country like 1940s Japan would not use them if they were given enough time to make one?

its a safe bet that any one of the axis powers would have bombed a major US city , if they had atomic weapons.

Yeah and germany was developing self-propelled rockets like the V1 and V2. A nuclear warhead on a V2 Rocket could have easily been launched from an Axis battleship to London or Paris, and maybe even Washington.

It was horrible. No doubt about it. The pictures that I saw in Hiroshima will forever be etched in my brain, but stories such as the ones you have told stick with me as well. Hiroshima has a couple of rivers or canals running through right where the bomb went off. I remember the guide telling us about the intense heat and that people were jumping in the rivers to get away from the fire ball but the water was boiling from the heat and they were boiled alive. Nasty stuff. But, as Gen. Forrest said, "War means fightin' and fightin' means killin'." What difference does it make if you die in an instant from a bomb or from being riddled with M1 rounds? Is there a difference in dying from radiation and starving to death due to food shortages? Dead is dead. Ultimately the bombs resulted in a lot less suffering.

So sensitive...... rolleyes:

The difference I see is that if the bomb haden't of been dropped, the casualties would have mostly been military. With the bomb being dropped, nearly all the casualties were civilian. The people that died didn't really have any control over their government or its policies.

Ninty I think you should look into the civilian deaths on Okinawa. You will find that the Japanese army made civilians jump to their dearths from the cliffs. They conscribted civilians whenever they could to augment their ranks. If the Allies would have invaded the home islands I think the Japanese people would have been wiped out.

It never happned.. so we can never really find out. + I thought Japenese culture forbid conscripting their own women to fight..

[quote="Short Hand":babdd] + I thought Japenese culture forbid conscripting their own women to fight..[/quote:babdd]i'm pretty sure that the japanese military left stockpiles of grenades and things for the women and children to give the americans hell.

Someone said that here..... but that was second hand knowledge...I am sure they did but I need something more solid backing up that they were handing out zee grenades like candy.

yeah, i dunno. I only remember hearing it somewhere--history channel or someone's word.

I've heard and read that plenty of times....It's true. Women and children were taught how to deal with paratroopers, by gouging eyes, biting, kicking etc etc

you also have to consider the technology availble at the time. There were no laser guided missles. Those bombs were state of the art at the time. A surgical strike was not possible at the time

[url=http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8853603/site/newsweek/:e6e18]Here[/url:e6e18] is an article from Newsweek that shows how far the Japanese were willing to go to keep from surrendering.

[quote:11fd7]A kamikaze plane came right at the Defense, but at the last instant it tilted its wings and flew right behind the ship's smokestacks. "I was staring right at the pilot," recalls Bowell. "He had a look of absolute terror. It was 'Errr, what am I doing?'"[/quote:11fd7]


[quote:11fd7]Surrounded by the Americans, they were trapped behind an outcropping of rocks. When the Americans called on them to surrender, the Japanese held grenades to their chests and blew themselves up.[/quote:11fd7]


stupid: stupid:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/0 ... index.html

dont think they feel too sorry for the Japanese eiither.

Considering that Japan still refuses to take any responsibility for their atrocities (Thai-Burma Railroad, The Rape of Nanking, etc), I can't really blame them rolleyes: