Survivor of 2 Atomic Bombs Dies at 93 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

LaRondo · #1 01-07-2010, 03:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4x4_Welder

Well, he should consider himself lucky that he did survive the nuclear blasts, and even be thankful for the bombs- The other option was a direct assault, costing many millions of lives on both sides. I personally think the bomb was the right decision in the sense it was the lesser of two horrible choices.

The lesser of two choices...??
That's an interesting way of thinking, esp when the other option is based of pure presumption.
I understand that this is the wide spread understanding and how it is been tought to the American people in order to justify what has been done and to think it is ok to kill 200k civilian in a matter of seconds, if we do it.

cmac2012 · #2 01-07-2010, 03:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaRondo

The lesser of two choices...??
That's an interesting way of thinking, esp when the other option is based of pure presumption.
I understand that this is the wide spread understanding and how it is been taught to the American people in order to justify what has been done and to think it is ok to kill 200k civilian in a matter of seconds, if we do it.

I dunno man, I think the hawks are right on this one. Japanese soldiers had a religious sort of devotion to fighting to the bitter end, to death that is hard to find a match for in history. The incredibly hard fighting that our guys (my Dad among them) endured fighting just for distant islands gave a good indication of how intractable the fighting was going to be on the main islands.

We humans have never built a weapon that we didn't eventually use. With any luck, the 2 bombs in Japan will be the first and only conflict they were used in.

LaRondo · #3 01-07-2010, 05:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

I dunno man, I think the hawks are right on this one. Japanese soldiers had a religious sort of devotion to fighting to the bitter end, to death that is hard to find a match for in history. The incredibly hard fighting that our guys (my Dad among them) endured fighting just for distant islands gave a good indication of how intractable the fighting was going to be on the main islands.

We humans have never built a weapon that we didn't eventually use. With any luck, the 2 bombs in Japan will be the first and only conflict they were used in.

Too many various angles to determine a single view to be right or wrong.
The Japanese devotion for the way they fought is just as righteous as the willingness to drop an atomic bomb or 2 on civilian areas as it's been done.

Maybe "the hawks" knew and may not have been victorious as they were by facing Japanese soldiers in conventional battles.

And yes, there was very clear determination behind the development of the bombs, already during the pretext of The Manhatten Project.

cmac2012 · #4 01-07-2010, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaRondo

Too many various angles to determine a single view to be right or wrong.
The Japanese devotion for the way they fought is just as righteous as the willingness to drop an atomic bomb or 2 on civilian areas as it's been done.

Maybe "the hawks" knew and may not have been victorious as they were by facing Japanese soldiers in conventional battles.

And yes, there was very clear determination behind the development of the bombs, already during the pretext of The Manhattan Project.

It's tough to put ourselves in that environment, IMO. Germany was working on a nuke, Einstein thought so anyway and we now know he was right. Combined with their advanced (for the day) missile tech, if they'd got the bomb first, would have been a different ballgame. One wonders how many nukes they would have used on Allied cities.

The Japanese were pretty harsh in WW2. Not saying they deserved to be nuked but I can see how people at the time could have felt justified in that.

LaRondo · #5 01-07-2010, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

It's tough to put ourselves in that environment, IMO. Germany was working on a nuke, Einstein thought so anyway and we now know he was right. Combined with their advanced (for the day) missile tech, if they'd got the bomb first, would have been a different ballgame. One wonders how many nukes they would have used on Allied cities.

The Japanese were pretty harsh in WW2. Not saying they deserved to be nuked but I can see how people at the time could have felt justified in that.

War is a harsh thing, nothing nice about it. My Dad was on the Westfront as an infantrist, during the final episode. Not to mention all the others.

Ofcourse, everybody felt justified to drop those bombs, or were made to feel that way. This is how wars are, without all the emotional manipulation. There are no wars with manipulation of the masses.

From a strategic point of view, it would have been stupid not to drop the bombs, once they had them.

It is the phrasing of the term, "it ended the war", to create the belief, it was a "good thing", rather than stating, 'chances are we may not have defeated the Japanese on their island with conventional means'.

Hypocritical and apologetic, to say the least. But than again, propagandist rethoric is part of the equation.