leetom
there's too many of them!
and could have been done with a much lower civilian death toll.0Jade0 said:No matter how many times you say.......
Well guess what history boy, history can't be re-written. The bomb was dropped.
and could have been done with a much lower civilian death toll.0Jade0 said:No matter how many times you say.......
Well guess what history boy, history can't be re-written. The bomb was dropped.
But see my point was..... IT WASN'T.leetom said:and could have been done with a much lower civilian death toll.
The problem being is that Japan did not give an unconditional surrender even when faced with "prompt and utter destruction". I do not know the full details of their response so I'll refrain from commenting but Im wondering did it entail more conditions then their final surrender?leetom said:and could have been done with a much lower civilian death toll.
Well send fighter support or something. The whole bombing could have been avoided through the bombing of something like, an insignificant island of the Japanese coast. The point was to prove the weapon's power.Xayma said:An advanced warning would only serve to shoot down the plane.
What about those civilians tortured to death by the Japanese in POW camps, they were civilians because they did not choose to fight they were forced to.
An eye for an eye does not work, but do not make it seem so innocent on the part of the Japanese Emporer.
Well that's great. Your only purpose now is to point out historical facts. Thanks, but I think we are all aware that an atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima and that the city and it's people took considerable damage.0Jade0 said:But see my point was..... IT WASN'T.
Japan, in light of total defeat, held only one condition and that was the preservation of the head of state (the Emperor).The problem being is that Japan did not give an unconditional surrender even when faced with "prompt and utter destruction". I do not know the full details of their response so I'll refrain from commenting but Im wondering did it entail more conditions then their final surrender?
0Jade0 said:Just like Albert Speer didn't know about the concentration camps.....
I'm quite capable of recalling significant events without your help.Yep, that's what I'm here for.
Those are mighty large conditions. I admit there could've been a better way to do it. However, I would not go so far as to say it is an act of terroism.leetom said:Admittedly, before the bomb Japan had three conditions, the other two being 1) no foreign troops occupy Japan and 2) Japanese war criminals be tried in Japanese courts
0Jade0 said:Wouldn't that make him a poor leader if he didn't know what was going on?
OK... I'm out of a job... and going to bed. Have fun!
my point being is that your criteria for leadership is questionable. Just because Hirohito didn't have the information, that doesn't make him a bad leader. If you're provided with only a limited amount of info, you can only base decisions on what you;ve got.0Jade0 said:Well, yes Howard is a poor leader.... what was your point?
good observationstattoodguy said:Do you think america cheated in ww2 by dropping the atom bomb?
i read that 120,000 people died from the bombing.
America whines about terrorism targeting civilians, yet it didnt have any problem targeting them.
Does anyone here think terrorism is a good thing and justified?
Some one has to be accountable for the actions of our governments -- in a democracy i guess its the civilians.