First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
Hirosima Anniversary
544 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M
Posted 8/7/13 , edited 8/7/13

Kanade_Yagami wrote:

It's Hiroshima, not Hirosima. At least get city names right.

It's "広島市". Whether one romanises "し" as "shi" or "si" is one's proper own decision. Even though it was a typo here.
49919 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / So Cal
Posted 8/7/13 , edited 8/7/13

tedn wrote:

68 years ago America issued an ultimatum to imperial Japan, surrender or the bomb. 300,000 mostly civilians paid the ultimate price for their military leaders arrogance. Were we right? Is the use of atomic weapons inhumane under any circumstance?
IMHO, Japan was bent on world domination and committed crimes equal to the Nazi's.
But I cannot say we were justified, we all lost.
Ironically,with no army of its own Japan is dependent the US nuclear arsenal for protection.

The Nagasaki bomb was the one that actually forced their surrender.

August 6, 1945: Little Boy(Hiroshima bomb) killed about 80k instantly and an unknown number thought to be between 90-140k from injuries and radiation.
August 9, 1945: Fat Boy(Nagasaki bomb) killed about 70k instantly and hundreds of thousands from injuries and fallout.

Using the bomb saved Japanese lives. The Japanese propaganda machine convinced everyone that if they lost, we'd rape and kill all their women and children, much like the Japanese did during the Rape of Nanking, otherwise known as the Nanking Massacre, in 1937.

If you look at the bombing of Tokyo, 1944-45, over 100k were killed, millions were injured and millions more were left homeless. This, however, did nothing to lessen their zeal. Can you imagine if we had to do that to every major city of Japan? We're talking millions dead. After all, it took a SECOND atomic bomb to make them realize they had lost.

In short, by showing them what we're capable of and that they have no chance of victory what-so-ever, they were forced to surrender, rather than fighting till the last man.

It was the more humane thing to do.

As for Japan being "dependent on the US nuclear arsenal for protection." That is not the case.
If we dropped a nuke to protect them, everyone would start nuking. So nukes aren't a viable defense option.

What's protecting them is our military might. Our technology, training and ongoing experience in war, trump every other country, and the sheer number of our military personnel is only second to China.

The only purpose a nuke provides at this point, is making sure nobody else uses one.
40434 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
57 / M / Portland, Oregon
Posted 8/7/13 , edited 8/7/13
Nuclear arms are very much a part of our military prowess. Although it may seem absurd, they do represent a threat and power, that is why
every country wants its own arsenal. We are not disarming, the Chinese and Russians are not disarming- maybe if you wrote Obama( Mr. NSA) and told him how you feel he would just dismantle every nuclear weapon we have. He won't and there is a reason. It is a defensive shield for our country and our allies. However absurd.
First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.