The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed about 250.000 people and became

Helium_Junkie said:
Really?! We probably should never talk of it again then! Everyone forget it happened, ok?
Crisis averted, thanks for the warning wordy! :) That could have been nasty.
Click to expand...

No but because as you've just shown people get petty and try to insult others rather than hold reasonable debate.
 
Tefal said:
Because of the current state of nuclear science they thought you needed massively more uranium than you did, without proof it was repeatable they might have thought it was the only one that could be built.
Click to expand...

sorry lost me a bit, do you mean that the 2nd bomb was as much used to verify results ?

if so, not heard that before, certainly interesting
 
Helium_Junkie said:
Really?! We probably should never talk of it again then! Everyone forget it happened, ok?
Crisis averted, thanks for the warning wordy! :) That could have been nasty.
Click to expand...

You're welcome mate. Now thats sorted I'd now like to draw everyone attention the possible arguements caused by disussing muslims, immigrants and even muslim immgrants :p
 
seek said:
Straight from the BBC documentary.

Doesn't make it fact.
Click to expand...

what documentary :confused:

Just going on what I know about nuclear physics at the time, and the mentality of the Japanese at the time, as long as they had a fighting chance, or even the ability to see the enemy they would fight. Nuclear weapons made it so the Americans would never have to send in troops, and so they had to surrender as there was no one to fight.
 
Rotty said:
sorry lost me a bit, do you mean that the 2nd bomb was as much used to verify results ?

if so, not heard that before, certainly interesting
Click to expand...

No to prove to the Japanese that they could do it again and again. Because at this point everyone outside the us and the uk, believed that there was not enough fissile material in the world to make a bomb. So the detonation of one, might make them think that the Americans found more fissile material, or it needed slightly less, but they would still be unsure as to whether they could do it again.

Also if the Japanese, did figure out how much was needed (size of bomb/carrying weight of plane etc), and weren't made to surrender immediately, then they might ave been able t if not build one get enough information to the Germans for them to make one.

Of course theres still the fact that it was very handy for the Americans and other Allies to see how each type of bomb worked on a city environment. And this was the only time they where going to get permission to do it.
 
I find people attitude to the atomic bombing of Japan very odd and is usually fueled by a poor historical knowledge of the final phases of the war. The destruction and death resulting from the 2 attacks was horrible, but it is nothing compared to the destruction and death that resulted from the firebombing of Japanese cities. Conventional aerial bombardment had been targeting civilian areas for some time.

Towards end of the war the US high command was concerned that they were actually running out of targets, as most Japanese cities of any industrial value had been destroyed. The only difference between the convential and nuclear attacks was the instantanious nature of the distruction.

I would thoroughly recommend anyone interested in this issue reading "Nemises" by Max Hastings. It's an excellent read that goes along way to explaining why the US felt the need to drop the bomd and also how badly the Japanese Administration failed their people.
 
Last edited:
The only contribution the bombs had was to preempt any further use of such weapons - arguably the most valid contribution any weapon has had to humanity and as a result, the 'sacrifice' of these 300k poor souls must be seen with the bigger picture and the -possible- avoidance of all-out nuclear war and the resultant (likely) extinction of the human race.
 
Ex-RoNiN said:
The only contribution the bombs had was to preempt any further use of such weapons - arguably the most valid contribution any weapon has had to humanity and as a result, the 'sacrifice' of these 300k poor souls must be seen with the bigger picture and the -possible- avoidance of all-out nuclear war and the resultant (likely) extinction of the human race.
Click to expand...

I agree, the horror resulting from the atomic bombing of Japan has arguably prevented the use of further Nucear weapons. Considering the power of the current generation of nucelar weapons, we should all be thankful for that.
 
Ugh all so petty, i don't think atomic weapons should be allowed until it gets to a WW3 where we just need something to end it there and then. You could say it was a 'fair fight' until america did that. For my school me and some guys did presentations on nuclear power and weapons ect. People afterwards were left devastated and totally againast the idea.

many people claim Iraq was all about the oil...erm what about religion, i'm pretty sure if arabic countries were christian then it wouldn't have happened. Periods of war have always alternated between hunger for land then religion. Right now i see the current wars as more of a religion and beliefs problem.


Western world - Iraq

Ireland

General Middle East buisiness

But before that there was WWII ect which was more of a land hunger issue, I know there was the holocaust, but WWII was huge and covered many issues. The main one being Hitler just wanted General POWER of land and say
 
Ok, lets have a look at what they did to our soldiers at POW camps, they DESERVED it!

They were going to fight to the death and the only way to stop them was to kill them and lots of them.
 
I went to Hiroshima earlier this year and I would strongly recommend anyone who has the chance to go there to go to the museum in the memorial park. The exhibits are very good and extremely powerful.

What did strike me was the lack of blame in the exhibits. They were generally just showing the aftermath and the effects on the survivors and were anti-nuclear weapons in general as opposed to anti the people who did this to them. I won't comment on the behavior though of some of the American high school students who were there at the time I visited.

One of our tour guides had grown up in the Hiroshima area after the war so she could add insights into what it was like to be there then.

Hiroshima is a nice place for a visit now though, nice okonomiyaki :)
 
Ever since WWII Japan decided to turn into a peaceful country and i beleive now they have more of a peace army or something. They are certainly a very nice welcoming nation and look up to western countries rather than hate us like they would sort of have a right to.
 
dark_shadow said:
Innocent civilians deserve it? Wow, just wow.


Killing approx 250k+ innocents was worth it?

You make me sick.
Click to expand...

You know people like you make me laugh. It's all well and good commenting of events of over 60 years ago from the comfort of your house on your comfortable chair, but for those who were actually there and had to fight in those wars for our freedom the fact that Japan was completely unwilling to surrender would have meant the deaths of thousands more allied soliders, airmen and navy members.

The fact of the matter is the atomics bombs averted the deaths of thousands of soldiers who simply wanted the war to end and Japan wasn't willing to accept it could not win.

In some ways such as the fact they are so open to peace now it's brought about a lot of positive developement, and on the opposite end it also brought the world into a new age of nuclear fear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom