It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

USA - WW2 War crimes never addressed and held accountable!

page: 8
21
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Skippy1138
 


Just what I thought.




posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 01:09 AM
link   
reply to post by pinchanze
 


It's amazing how when they're presented with the actual historical facts they suddenly disappear. isn't it?



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 03:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skippy1138
reply to post by Havick007
 


To Havick and all the others in this thread who have never read a history book- you are what's called "Revisionists":


The people who are now questioning Truman’s motives are often known as Revisionists, because they attempt to revise common perceptions of history, proposing alternate theories and motives. As early as 1946 they begin to postulate new ideas, but their words only began to receive credence in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Revisionists contend that Truman either had ulterior motives in the dropping of the atomic bombs or that he used these bombs on Japan for an entirely different reason, one that had nothing to do with saving lives.




However, it is evident that in the “grand scheme of things” the use of the atomic bomb saved lives. About 105,000 Japanese lost their lives in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. While this is a high number, the number who died in the American bombing raids on the six largest Japanese cities is far greater, about 250,000. Consequently, such a large number of deaths is by no means unprecedented. An invasion of Japan would possibly have cost between 250,000 and three million Japanese and American lives and ended the war four months later, at the very earliest. It may be concluded that no more people died in the atomic bombings than would have in an invasion of Kyushu, and that said bombings did have the effect of ending the war more quickly.


Source:
www.essortment.com...
edit on 1-1-2011 by Skippy1138 because: (no reason given)


I see.

Because American conventional bombing of the six largest Japanese cities killed twice as many innocent people as the atomic weapons then the use of genocidal weapons of mass destruction on civilian populations is quite OK.

Fantastic logic.

Obviously Japan had already lost before the bombs were dropped. They had lost all their outlying military strongholds and were getting the crap bombed out of them at home.
As if the Army/Marines needed to physically invade the Japanese mainland!

The hypothetical lives 'saved' by the American's use of WMD are utterly non-existant.

America set a precedent that day that will (most unfortunately) come back to bite it. There's no way I'd live in Manhattan, because one day the city will vanish in a nuclear holocaust.

As for revisionism, as more facts are uncovered, knowledge is revised to include them. That's how History works.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 04:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Havick007
reply to post by sy.gunson
 


I am not focusing in that part of the war! The only point i am trying to raise is the nuclear bombing of what were 2 majority civilian cities - yes there were miltary targets as well but the point i am raising is that the USa was never held accountable for the use of nuclear weapons on a nation and 2 civilian cities!

I have been asking over and over, do you think there could have been a better way. The blatant disregard for human lives shown by military leaders, knowing that in dropping the bomb, 10's of thousands of civilians would lose thier lives.

They knew it and still dropped the bomb. That disregrad for fellow human lives is what is wrong with this world still to this day. It has to change!


It will change...


Really you were not focussing on the Rape of Nanking?

That proves my point that you practice selective morality, by choosing to ignore the context in which Hiroshima and Nagasaki happened and thus your whole argument is a nonsense, diviorced from reality.

The Rape of Nanking in 1937 sparked tensions which led to Pearl Harbour. I challenged you Havick007 to utter one word of condemnation about j\japanese attrocities and you could not even bring yourself to mention it or utter a simple word of agreement that the Japanese nation did anything wrong.

So flawed and selective is your judgement on this issue that you choose to ignore the murder of 16 million Chinese and question the deaths of civilians at Hiroshima and Nagasaki as if they were more barbaric, or were some form overkill... THESE ACTIONS WERE NOT OVERKILL

More people ... Chinese and POWs were killied at Unit 731 near harbin in live biological experiments on humands thatn the entire death toll at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Live vivisections, exposure to bubonic plague, anthrax, freezing victims to death to observe their agony and other greusome actions... That was baberism.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 05:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by felonius
One event I dont think has been addressed here.

The fire bombing of Dresden by the allies. Vast majority of casualties were civies.

en.wikipedia.org...



The Bombing of Dresden was a military bombing by the British Royal Air Force (RAF) and the United States Army Air Force (USAAF) as part of the allied forces between 13 February and 15 February 1945 in the Second World War. In four raids, 1,300 heavy bombers dropped more than 3,900 tons of high-explosive bombs and incendiary devices on the city, the Baroque capital of the German state of Saxony. The resulting firestorm destroyed 15 square miles (39 square kilometres) of the city centre.[1]

Adam Tooze, the British economic war historian states, "Wreaking havoc on the German home front was the essence of Britain's strategy and the atomic bomb was the ideal weapon for that job. On 7 May 1942, the British cabinet formally agreed that the RAF Bomber Command was to destroy 58 of Germany's largest towns and cities."[2] It was Britain's policy to destroy German cities. This was well known. The River Rhine was not crossed until 23 March 1945, after the Dresden raid. German V rockets were dropping on London and Antwerp at the time of raid.

A 1953 United States Air Force report written by Joseph W. Angell defended the operation as the justified bombing of a military and industrial target, which was a major rail transportation and communication centre, housing 110 factories and 50,000 workers in support of the Nazi war effort.[3] Against this, several researchers have argued that not all of the communications infrastructure, such as the bridges, were in fact targeted, nor were the extensive industrial areas outside the city centre.[4] It has been argued that Dresden was a cultural landmark of little or no military significance, a "Florence on the Elbe," as it was known, and the attacks were indiscriminate area bombing and not proportionate to the commensurate military gains.[5][6]

In the first few decades after the war, some death toll estimates were as high as 250,000, which are now considered unreasonable.[7][8][9] An independent investigation commissioned by the city council in 2010 reported a minimum of 22,700 victims with a maximum total number of fatalities of 25,000.[10]

In direct comparison with the bombing of Hamburg in 1943, which created one of the greatest firestorms raised by the RAF and United States Army Air Force,[11] killing roughly 50,000 civilians in Hamburg and practically destroying the entire city, and the bombing of Pforzheim in 1945, killing roughly 18,000 civilians,[12] the bombing raids over Dresden were not the most severe of World War II. However, they continue to be recognised as one of the worst examples of civilian suffering caused by strategic bombing, and have become exposed among the moral causes célèbres of the Second World War.[13] Post-war discussion, popular legends, historical revisionism and Cold War propaganda of the bombing includes debate by commentators, officials and historians as to whether or not the bombing was justified, and whether its outcome constituted a war crime.



and let me tell you why Dresden was bombed so late in the war...

Dresden was home to a still classified effort by the Nazis to develop nuclear warheads in the plasma physics laboratory of Baron Manfred von Ardenne, under leadership of Max Steenbeck. Ardenne confessed to Soviet plasma physicist and Soviet nuclear physicist Igor Kurchatov in 1945 that the so called nazi Bell device (die Glocke) was a cyclotron.

Heisenberg at Farm Hall identified the heavy particle accelerator project as a "super klystron" to harvest Proactinium for an atomic bomb. Proactinium beta decays within 27 days into pure bomb grade Uranium 233. Dresden was the heart of a project aimed at stockpiling Uranium 233 for nuclear weapons.

If you doubt this then I direct you to pages 17-18 of the Wood memorandum, Cordell Hull Papers, US national archives. These contain a report summary from OSS spies within high positions inside the Nazi government.

Pro Nazi Noregian plasma physicist Rolf wideroe described in his autobiography salvaging much of the equipment from the bombed laboratory at Dresden in march 1945.

You want your reason Why Dresden was bombed?

Dresden housed a vital Nazi atomic bomb laboratory in 1945.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by pikestaff
 


Oh please. The boys just had a new toy, and they wanted to play with it.
We should never have dropped those bombs. It's the most heinous crime in our history.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 09:21 AM
link   
sorry, we won.

suck it up.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by aethron

Originally posted by Skippy1138
reply to post by Havick007
 


To Havick and all the others in this thread who have never read a history book- you are what's called "Revisionists":


The people who are now questioning Truman’s motives are often known as Revisionists, because they attempt to revise common perceptions of history, proposing alternate theories and motives. As early as 1946 they begin to postulate new ideas, but their words only began to receive credence in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Revisionists contend that Truman either had ulterior motives in the dropping of the atomic bombs or that he used these bombs on Japan for an entirely different reason, one that had nothing to do with saving lives.




However, it is evident that in the “grand scheme of things” the use of the atomic bomb saved lives. About 105,000 Japanese lost their lives in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. While this is a high number, the number who died in the American bombing raids on the six largest Japanese cities is far greater, about 250,000. Consequently, such a large number of deaths is by no means unprecedented. An invasion of Japan would possibly have cost between 250,000 and three million Japanese and American lives and ended the war four months later, at the very earliest. It may be concluded that no more people died in the atomic bombings than would have in an invasion of Kyushu, and that said bombings did have the effect of ending the war more quickly.


Source:
www.essortment.com...
edit on 1-1-2011 by Skippy1138 because: (no reason given)


I see.
No Havick, you can't see that's the whole problem.
Because American conventional bombing of the six largest Japanese cities killed twice as many innocent people as the atomic weapons then the use of genocidal weapons of mass destruction on civilian populations is quite OK.

Fantastic logic.
You have no logic.
Obviously Japan had already lost before the bombs were dropped. They had lost all their outlying military strongholds and were getting the crap bombed out of them at home.
As if the Army/Marines needed to physically invade the Japanese mainland!

The hypothetical lives 'saved' by the American's use of WMD are utterly non-existant.
It was mathematical,not hypothetical. Actuaries do it every day.
America set a precedent that day that will (most unfortunately) come back to bite it. There's no way I'd live in Manhattan, because one day the city will vanish in a nuclear holocaust.
We don't want you in this country. you don't deserve to be.
As for revisionism, as more facts are uncovered, knowledge is revised to include them. That's how History works. [/quote

Hey Havick! No need to tell me that your not Australian. I found out who you are. Oh Yea,your pants are to baggy and you really need to get some sun. Hey Skippy! This kid aint gotta clue. Maybe we could build us a fire and sit down for some corn shine sometime and slice up a couple sticks of black bear or some wild boar while the kids outside huggin tree's. We got lotsa them. He'd be busy for months. No offense kid ya just gotta do some more readin.



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 07:55 AM
link   
reply to post by sy.gunson
 


Once again i state my original post....again and again!!

This goes to you and anyone / everyone else in this thread that is justifying the bombings!! You know who u are.

The questions i asked isnt whether we should have won the war.... That is simple, yes we should have!! My question is, in the dropping of the Atomic / Nuclear Bombs on those poor cities and in turn putting ourselves on the same level as all the Japanese atroctites that pre-ceeded the boms, do you think it was worth it?

Killing and affecting all the innocent civililians, not only on that day but for years past the event? The cancer's and after effects of the bomb that affected all those poor people that didnt want anything to do with the war?


Do you feel empathy? Can you imagine being punished for the actions of your government....wait i am sure you can, we all remember 9/11 - these people didnt attack you because of you. They attcked because of past actions of your government and military. However the reason it was a disgusting act is because in this case of attck they did not target direct military targets but instead targeted the civilians that didnt want anyhting to do with the conflict??

So what then do you say, will you cintinue to justify the actions? This is the problem with humanity! Instead of facing up to our mideads and error's in judgement, we conitnue to justify and defend these actions by any means at all.


You can post and throw all the pre-bomb stats at me you want, it doesnt change the fact that on that day or days, the USA brang itself down to the same level as the Japanese Military.

The actions of those officers and government officials cost the lives of many japanese citizensa dn civilians that didnt want any part of that war!



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 07:57 AM
link   
For the record it makes me sick all the people trying to justify this act of civilian deaths and destruction. That is all it was!!



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Havick007
Once again i state my original post....again and again!!


And nothing has changed, you are STILL wrong!


My question is, in the dropping of the Atomic / Nuclear Bombs on those poor cities and in turn putting ourselves on the same level as all the Japanese atroctites that pre-ceeded the boms, do you think it was worth it?


Yes, it was well worth it, as you would realise except that you are a apologist for the japanese.


Killing and affecting all the innocent civililians


You mean the ones supporting the war by working in factories, making ships and weapons for the Japanese...


that didnt want anything to do with the war?


How do you know that?



This is the problem with humanity! Instead of facing up to our mideads and error's in judgement,


Again yiou are a japanese apologist - Japan did not face up to there misdeeds and errors...


the USA brang itself down to the same level as the Japanese Military.


No it did not - what a silly claim to make!


many japanese citizensa dn civilians that didnt want any part of that war!


Again, how do you know that they wanted no part in the war? What action did they take to demonstrate that?
edit on 3/1/11 by dereks because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Havick007
For the record it makes me sick all the people trying to justify this act of civilian deaths and destruction. That is all it was!!


It makes me sick seeing you twisting history and the facts to apologise for Japan's actions!



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 


waaiit a sec, i am NOT apologising for the Japanese at all and yes they should also be accountable for their crimes! But who? The consripts and soldiers or the people that directed them and gave the orders?



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 


I am not at all ignoring the actions of Japan as per my above post! That was not the question i implied at all or am not trying to defend Japan. The entire WW2 was wrong and advoidable but unfortuantly was not....

The germans were wrong and created many attrocities - the worst and most horrible things.

The Japanese were also committing crimes of War.

I do not defend any of these nations and do not support anyone of thier acts, i am happy the allied nations one the war with the scale of the enemy we were faced with.
I have to emphasise again i do defend the acts of these nations during the war and do not support or condone the acts of violence commited during those years.

My great grandfather fought in both WW1 and 2 and died in years past the war suring injury sustained.

We have all been touched in many ways by this war.


The only question i posed was the cost of civilians lives on the days of first and last 2 nuclear weapons drop on a populated city. Remeber these cites while they did contain military targets that were valid targets during this age of war. However i have only asked were the civilian lives worth it?


Here is some info and numbers on the effects of dropping an A bomb on a populated city...



Due to crosswind, it missed the aiming point, the Aioi Bridge, by almost 800 feet (240 m) and detonated directly over Shima Surgical Clinic.[31] It created a blast equivalent to about 13 kilotons of TNT (54 TJ). (The U-235 weapon was considered very inefficient, with only 1.38% of its material fissioning.)

The radius of total destruction was about one mile (1.6 km), with resulting fires across 4.4 square miles (11 km2). Americans estimated that 4.7 square miles (12 km2) of the city were destroyed. Japanese officials determined that 69% of Hiroshima's buildings were destroyed and another 6–7% damaged.

70,000–80,000 people, or some 30% of the population of Hiroshima were killed immediately, and another 70,000 injured.Over 90% of the doctors and 93% of the nurses in Hiroshima were killed or injured—most had been in the downtown area which received the greatest damage.

Although the U.S. had previously dropped leaflets warning civilians of air raids on 35 Japanese cities, including Hiroshima and Nagasaki,[38] the residents of Hiroshima were given no notice of the atomic bomb.


Source:

en.wikipedia.org...


Related Images:

upload.wikimedia.org...

upload.wikimedia.org...


Hiroshima before the bombing:

upload.wikimedia.org...


Hiroshima After the bombing:


upload.wikimedia.org...


Here is one last link to some images related to the bombing and and it's survivors and the after effects they have dealt with. ( Warning: graphic images )


zazpics.com...



edit on 3-1-2011 by Havick007 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 06:58 AM
link   
reply to post by pinchanze
 


yeah touch'e just as i thought... nothing to say to that!!

Get over self and stop making excuses for dropping a WMD on another nation, because that is the plain truth. You will always be the nation that dropped 2 WMD's on cities of a foreign nation.

Stop justifying your actions and realise the truth. USA is the first and last nation to do it. ( when i say WMD's i mean A-bombs or Nuclear weapons )

Chemical and Bio weapons are not apart of this discussion!

Although in saying that i am sure you can admit to going to war with Iraq the second time round was under false pretences, and that the CIA never actually had any credicle intel on the WMD's - only specualtion. Not reasonable doubt however. Yet you and your military waged war on a nation that couldnt care less about America. Bush should be arrested along with all the cabinet members of that time. The problem eas, the american population were blinded by 9/11. That wasd the whole point and purpose, whether they started it or just let it happen, either way the whole thing stinks!!!

Defence contractors and allies got richer and more power and all the while the civilions of Iraq got FKD over. Dont deny all the crap going on in Iraq! The collateral damage clip was the first to surface, still classified! Why was it classified, because it showed the killing and basic execution of journalists and civilians.

That is less than 1% of the war! How much more do you think has occured since then?? or before?



The American culture is guns and weapons and viloence!!!


We outlawed weapons as soon as a madman went crazy with a semi-auto and killed 20 people -


Source: en.wikipedia.org...(Australia)

Yet in the past years we have had many attacks and acts of violence of your own citizens! Do i need to gothrough the list? It would stretch for 8-10 pages!!!


Yet your government never learns as do your citizens.

You are a country born under violence and will continue that way. You have no regard for lives outside your own country and that is the goal of your government! When you begin to see that, then you may begin to see the truth.

I tell you this, come and live in Australia for 1 year and you will see safer streets, no so called -- terror threats or amber alerts....blah blah.

We are at peace here. We support our allies such as yourself and your country, our men and women go to afganistan and suffer losses for no reason.


Why the hell after 10 years cant they win, it's a joke!!

There are more US military in Iraq than Afganistan... Why?? What was the point of war? What was the pre-curser??

Wake up!

Although i am not placing blame on you, your friends or family. Not even the current admistration, however i do ask for some realisation of your actions as a nation. I am scraed to say that if history shows anything Japan can be shifty and i would hate to see any after affects........

Just because it has been over 50 years does not mean they hold a grudge, also let me make it clear that i worry about this as well as Australia is closer to Japan than the USA.


You and the people that symphsise with you dont seem to get this thread. You point a finger at me!! WTF how dare you, but this only shows the way of many US citizens, you totally agree with your government's actions even though it was before or not long before you were born.

Perhaps you should have visted Hiroshima or Nagasaki days after the bombs were dropped, oh wait you werent born yet so how could you....

You defend something you know really nothing about except from your perception of history, a history given to you by the very people the created these attrocites!

Dont you dare defend those bombings, it is disgusting and worst yet how dare you call me a japanese sypmathisor... Disgracful and a blatant attempt to deflect blame!!!
edit on 4-1-2011 by Havick007 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Havick007
reply to post by pinchanze
 


yeah touch'e just as i thought... nothing to say to that!!

Get over self and stop making excuses for dropping a WMD on another nation, because that is the plain truth. You will always be the nation that dropped 2 WMD's on cities of a foreign nation.

Stop justifying your actions and realise the truth. USA is the first and last nation to do it. ( when i say WMD's i mean A-bombs or Nuclear weapons )

Chemical and Bio weapons are not apart of this discussion!

Although in saying that i am sure you can admit to going to war with Iraq the second time round was under false pretences, and that the CIA never actually had any credicle intel on the WMD's - only specualtion. Not reasonable doubt however. Yet you and your military waged war on a nation that couldnt care less about America. Bush should be arrested along with all the cabinet members of that time. The problem eas, the american population were blinded by 9/11. That wasd the whole point and purpose, whether they started it or just let it happen, either way the whole thing stinks!!!

Defence contractors and allies got richer and more power and all the while the civilions of Iraq got FKD over. Dont deny all the crap going on in Iraq! The collateral damage clip was the first to surface, still classified! Why was it classified, because it showed the killing and basic execution of journalists and civilians.

That is less than 1% of the war! How much more do you think has occured since then?? or before?



The American culture is guns and weapons and viloence!!!


We outlawed weapons as soon as a madman went crazy with a semi-auto and killed 20 people -


Source: en.wikipedia.org...(Australia)

Yet in the past years we have had many attacks and acts of violence of your own citizens! Do i need to gothrough the list? It would stretch for 8-10 pages!!!


Yet your government never learns as do your citizens.

You are a country born under violence and will continue that way. You have no regard for lives outside your own country and that is the goal of your government! When you begin to see that, then you may begin to see the truth.

I tell you this, come and live in Australia for 1 year and you will see safer streets, no so called -- terror threats or amber alerts....blah blah.

We are at peace here. We support our allies such as yourself and your country, our men and women go to afganistan and suffer losses for no reason.


Why the hell after 10 years cant they win, it's a joke!!

There are more US military in Iraq than Afganistan... Why?? What was the point of war? What was the pre-curser??

Wake up!

Although i am not placing blame on you, your friends or family. Not even the current admistration, however i do ask for some realisation of your actions as a nation. I am scraed to say that if history shows anything Japan can be shifty and i would hate to see any after affects........

Just because it has been over 50 years does not mean they hold a grudge, also let me make it clear that i worry about this as well as Australia is closer to Japan than the USA.


You and the people that symphsise with you dont seem to get this thread. You point a finger at me!! WTF how dare you, but this only shows the way of many US citizens, you totally agree with your government's actions even though it was before or not long before you were born.

Perhaps you should have visted Hiroshima or Nagasaki days after the bombs were dropped, oh wait you werent born yet so how could you....

You defend something you know really nothing about except from your perception of history, a history given to you by the very people the created these attrocites!

Dont you dare defend those bombings, it is disgusting and worst yet how dare you call me a japanese sypmathisor... Disgracful and a blatant attempt to deflect blame!!!
edit on 4-1-2011 by Havick007 because: (no reason given)


Hey Havick!

I like your passion kid but I must say......You are a Oxymoronic,Contradicting Baffoon. Domo wakarimasen! Tasukete! See, my father spent 2yrs in Japan after the war and taught me some of the culture. One of the things he taught me was about "Bushido". You know about that don't you Havick? Loyalty,not only to their neighbors and friends but to their Emperor. Death before dishonor! Even suicide. I forgot what he called it. It took Hirohito to finally understand that the gig was up but the military leaders didn"t give a crap about the Emperor anymore.The military leaders in their finite wisdom thought Hirohito was a sell-out,you know...lost his Bushido. So they were ready, and so were the brainwashed people, to die at all costs to keep Bushido. So it took the 2nd bomb to convince them. Quite unfortunate but thtats what happens when you give one or two people too much power. Sorry man but thats just the way it is! Oh,Hea Skippy, Sorry I didn't get back to your last thread. God Bless The USA!



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 11:53 PM
link   
I saw a Japanese soldier who said that had the bombs NOT been dropped, he and his subsequent family wouldn't have been alive.

In 81 days of fighting for Okinawa, more total deaths than both atomic bombs together killed.

When you take the total population and military on Okinawa, they pretty much all died. Same identical thing would have happened on the mainland.

It was an extrapolation based on the Okinawa casualties, but it indicated about a million American casualties, and up to 7,000,000 Japanese casualties to take the mainland.

Let's see. Let's be conservative and divide those numbers by half. 8,000,000 divided in half is 4,000,000 total dead on both sides.

Keep in mind, this is going to take quite a while, meaning a lot of suffering in the meantime before a lot of these people are going to either get killed or kill themselves. Lots of suffering.

OR, we can drop these bombs and the war is over, and only kill 100,000.

Is a 100,000 deaths good? Of course not!

Which is preferable? Which is more humane?

100,000 dead this week and it stops, or 4,000,000 spread over the next twelve to sixteen months?

And you're one sick SOB if you don't choose the former.
edit on 4-1-2011 by FarArcher because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-1-2011 by FarArcher because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 04:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by FarArcher
I saw a Japanese soldier who said that had the bombs NOT been dropped, he and his subsequent family wouldn't have been alive.

In 81 days of fighting for Okinawa, more total deaths than both atomic bombs together killed.

When you take the total population and military on Okinawa, they pretty much all died. Same identical thing would have happened on the mainland.

It was an extrapolation based on the Okinawa casualties, but it indicated about a million American casualties, and up to 7,000,000 Japanese casualties to take the mainland.

Let's see. Let's be conservative and divide those numbers by half. 8,000,000 divided in half is 4,000,000 total dead on both sides.

Keep in mind, this is going to take quite a while, meaning a lot of suffering in the meantime before a lot of these people are going to either get killed or kill themselves. Lots of suffering.

OR, we can drop these bombs and the war is over, and only kill 100,000.

Is a 100,000 deaths good? Of course not!

Which is preferable? Which is more humane?

100,000 dead this week and it stops, or 4,000,000 spread over the next twelve to sixteen months?

And you're one sick SOB if you don't choose the former.
edit on 4-1-2011 by FarArcher because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-1-2011 by FarArcher because: (no reason given)


If there was an award for the most simplest answer, it would be yours. Thank you!



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 07:55 PM
link   
Skippy,

We won!



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   
What I find most sickening and ironic is that most of the people who claim that the Abombs on Japan were a good thing get all high and mighty about "terrorists" attacking "civilians" on 9/11.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join