It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by WolfofWar
Just to play devils advocate....lets take this thought into consideration: was it RIGHT to drop two atomic bombs on CIVILIAN cities instead of military only bases?
The fact remains that it won the war, and it saved many lives of the US and Japanese armies and citizens alike. But heres the question, was it right to drop two atomic bombs on major civilian cities? could the war have been ended by just hitting military bases instead? I mean in the end, if they hit the military bases, it would've shown Japan still how destructive the weapon was, and without civilian death.
Originally posted by JediMaster
That dropping of the bomb was justified. Millitary experts even now say that an assualt on Japan would've resulted in many Allied deaths, the war would've conitnued on for many more years. The Japanese did not surrender, they would always die in combat. By dropping them bomb twice it showed them that we would'nt stop either.
Also it did show Russia that if you were going to backstabb us anytime soon Moscow would meet the same fate as Nagasaki or Hiroshima.
Originally posted by Ambient Sound
Unfortuantely there had to be an example of the horror involved and that is probably one of the reasons it hadn't happened again. The world needed to know. We can hope those horrible pictures of the devestation in Japan that we have all seen, would make any world power think twice before taking that final ugly step.