Why was America the first and only country to drop the nuke? - GoFuckYourself.com

FATPad · 10-01-2003, 09:14 AM

Is it because we're a bunch of dark age animals who relish the idea of randomly killing hundreds of thousands of women and children?

Or is it because we were the first to develop it and the only country to have one at the time and didn't fully understand the consequences?

If Britain, Germany, Japan, Italy or France had developed the nuke first do you think they would have used it during WW II knowing what everyone knew at the time?

sexyclicks · 10-01-2003, 09:16 AM

ytcracker · 10-01-2003, 09:17 AM

because we are the bomb

JamesK · 10-01-2003, 09:18 AM

because america is unique

rooster · 10-01-2003, 09:20 AM

i think a handful of reasons.

1. to put an end to the fighting on the south pacific. Guys were dying by the thousands on those islands and from kamikazees.

2. to send a message to the rest of the world

Oceansmedia James · 10-01-2003, 09:22 AM

The "dark age animals bent on random killings" theory is the one being proven every day since the bombs (two of them remember!) were dropped.

Buff · 10-01-2003, 09:23 AM

Because it was the right thing to do, and it's a real pity that we only had 2 atomic bombs at the time.

Thrawn$ · 10-01-2003, 09:27 AM

since this time, Japan became a US colonie, Damm they love and play Baseball in there

Theo · 10-01-2003, 09:32 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by FATPad
didn't fully understand the consequences
[/QUOTE

Yo Adrian · 10-01-2003, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ytcracker
because we are the bomb

yep.. so talk to the palm..

btw - didn't france drop bombs on their own people for testing purposes sometime around '97?

JamesK · 10-01-2003, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Yo Adrian

yep.. so talk to the palm..

btw - didn't france drop bombs on their own people for testing purposes sometime around '97?

keyDet79 · 10-01-2003, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Yo Adrian

yep.. so talk to the palm..

btw - didn't france drop bombs on their own people for testing purposes sometime around '97?

Lol, they dropped it in the pacific ocean if I'm correct.

galleryseek · 10-01-2003, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Buff
Because it was the right thing to do, and it's a real pity that we only had 2 atomic bombs at the time.

fuckin a.

BRISK · 10-01-2003, 09:42 AM

It is easy to be brave from a safe distance. - Aesop

ADL Colin · 10-01-2003, 09:43 AM

Because the US had the bomb first and because World War II was a war in which targetting civilians became increasingly accepted.

The idea that mostly European and Asian nations killing 50 million of each other including 17 million civilians is somehow overshadowed by at most 200,000 Japanese civilian casualties is an insult to those who lost their lives.

Get that. 17 million civilians were killed during World War II. How many died in Hiroshima or Nagasaki? 120k-200k depending on which estimates you use. Less than 1% of WW II civilian casualties occured at Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

The firebombing of Tokyo was more deadly than Hiroshima or Nagasaki. The bombing of Dresden was more deadly than Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Regular bombs killed 100x more civilians than atomic bombs did in World War II.

There should be no doubt in anyone's mind that the casualty figures for World War II would have been much higher had the US not used the atomic bomb. How many weeks of war between the USSR and US against Japan would create 200k casualties?

<IMX> · 10-01-2003, 09:49 AM

Truman didn't fully understand the consequences, (as v.p. he didn't have the info on the anglo-american program). The first side to have it would have used it, that's what spurned the anglo-american

side as it is called, although it was more an international program (against the Axies)...and why plenty of scientists from Europe joined the Manhatten project and later gave secrets to the ruskies.

So they (Truman) used it, but in comparison to firebombing and carpet bombing it wasn't any worse than conventional methods of warfare over cities in WWII as far as total damage.

It was just the sheer damage in comparison to the size of the bomb and the time it took.

blah blah blah blah blah... I'm bored already.

<IMX> · 10-01-2003, 09:51 AM

fucking liberal arts educated fuckers.

Quote:

Originally posted by Colin
Because the US had the bomb first and because World War II was a war in which targetting civilians became increasingly accepted.

The idea that mostly European and Asian nations killing 50 million of each other including 17 million civilians is somehow overshadowed by at most 200,000 Japanese civilian casualties is an insult to those who lost their lives.

Get that. 17 million civilians were killed during World War II. How many died in Hiroshima or Nagasaki? 120k-200k depending on which estimates you use. Less than 1% of WW II civilian casualties occured at Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

The firebombing of Tokyo was more deadly than Hiroshima or Nagasaki. The bombing of Dresden was more deadly than Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Regular bombs killed 100x more civilians than atomic bombs did in World War II.

There should be no doubt in anyone's mind that the casualty figures for World War II would have been much higher had the US not used the atomic bomb. How many weeks of war between the USSR and US against Japan would create 200k casualties?

ADL Colin · 10-01-2003, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by <IMX>
fucking liberal arts educated fuckers.

Here's to the Sons of Eli.

sperbonzo · 10-01-2003, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Colin
Because the US had the bomb first and because World War II was a war in which targetting civilians became increasingly accepted.

The idea that mostly European and Asian nations killing 50 million of each other including 17 million civilians is somehow overshadowed by at most 200,000 Japanese civilian casualties is an insult to those who lost their lives.

Get that. 17 million civilians were killed during World War II. How many died in Hiroshima or Nagasaki? 120k-200k depending on which estimates you use. Less than 1% of WW II civilian casualties occured at Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

The firebombing of Tokyo was more deadly than Hiroshima or Nagasaki. The bombing of Dresden was more deadly than Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Regular bombs killed 100x more civilians than atomic bombs did in World War II.

There should be no doubt in anyone's mind that the casualty figures for World War II would have been much higher had the US not used the atomic bomb. How many weeks of war between the USSR and US against Japan would create 200k casualties?

Actually all the estimates of projected casualties at the time if we had had to invade Japan were in the millions. This to finish a war with a country that had committed so many horrific slaughters throught southeast asia and china that it makes the germans look kinda' civilised.....

But anyway Colin....you should know better.....there's no room for the use of historical fact and logic on this board!

Lonny · 10-01-2003, 09:56 AM

Why was America the first and only country to drop the nuke?

To prove a point "ours is bigger then yours"

ADL Colin · 10-01-2003, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sperbonzo

Actually all the estimates of projected casualties at the time if we had had to invade Japan were in the millions. This to finish a war with a country that had committed so many horrific slaughters throught southeast asia and china that it makes the germans look kinda' civilised.....

But anyway Colin....you should know better.....there's no room for the use of historical fact and logic on this board!

Yup. I didn't mention that because I know the counter-argument. "Maybe the estimates were wrong. Look who made them"

Of course, it doesn't really matter what the estimates were. You'd have to be pretty nutty to think the USSR and Japan wouldn't have inflicted far more casualties on each other than those that died at N. and H. The continued US bombing of Japan alone wouldn't have killed any less than at Hiroshima or Nagasaki either.

Oh, yeah. The US had to end the war before the USSR got to Japan. In retrospect that was a fine idea. Japan has the world's second largest economy in the world and is a strong ally of the US. Only Japan and the US have economies > $2 trillion US.

Yo Adrian · 10-01-2003, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by keyDet79

Lol, they dropped it in the pacific ocean if I'm correct.

LOL I guess I did phrase that wrong

I didn't mean I thought they were bombing Paris or anything hehe

But I remember reading that there were inhabited islands in the area they were testing. There were huge protests all over Europe during that time.

Veterans Day · 10-01-2003, 10:11 AM

if there was no pearl harbor there wouldn't have been nagasaki

BRISK · 10-01-2003, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Colin
Only Japan and the US have economies > $2 trillion US.

Wrong.

China = $5.7 trillion

India = $2.66 trillion

Germany = $2.184 trillion

TheSaint · 10-01-2003, 10:19 AM

Its a stupid question, revisionist history notwithstanding.

My father, still living, was a fighter pilot in the navy and we have discussed this many times.

Fact: We were dying like flies on each island as we made our way to Japan, as many as 25,000 americans dead per island.

Fact: Invasion plans called for one million dead Japanese after we invaded the homeland (mostly civillians) and 100,000 or more additional dead Americans.

Fact: It was not well understood then that low level radiation was dangerous.

Fact: The nuke saved at least a million Japanese lives, and many Americans. Anyone with a brain would appreciate that another 2 years of war would not have been good for the Japanese, who refused to surrender even after the first atom bomb fell.

Greg B · 10-01-2003, 10:35 AM

Because We Do Chicken Right!

sperbonzo · 10-01-2003, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by TheSaint
Its a stupid question, revisionist history notwithstanding.

My father, still living, was a fighter pilot in the navy and we have discussed this many times.

Fact: We were dying like flies on each island as we made our way to Japan, as many as 25,000 americans dead per island.

Fact: Invasion plans called for one million dead Japanese after we invaded the homeland (mostly civillians) and 100,000 or more additional dead Americans.

Fact: It was not well understood then that low level radiation was dangerous.

Fact: The nuke saved at least a million Japanese lives, and many Americans. Anyone with a brain would appreciate that another 2 years of war would not have been good for the Japanese, who refused to surrender even after the first atom bomb fell.

Now c'mon now! There are WAAAY too many facts there! You know that FACTS are not tolerated here on GFY whenever a serious topic about world events is being discussed! We just won't stand for it!
We will only deal with crackpot theories, revisionist history, and slanted, single-view sources of information. Any statements resulting from an in-depth, board-reaching knowledge of actual events will please be expunged from the record imedeately!

FATPad · 10-01-2003, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by TheSaint
Its a stupid question, revisionist history notwithstanding.

My father, still living, was a fighter pilot in the navy and we have discussed this many times.

Fact: We were dying like flies on each island as we made our way to Japan, as many as 25,000 americans dead per island.

Fact: Invasion plans called for one million dead Japanese after we invaded the homeland (mostly civillians) and 100,000 or more additional dead Americans.

Fact: It was not well understood then that low level radiation was dangerous.

Fact: The nuke saved at least a million Japanese lives, and many Americans. Anyone with a brain would appreciate that another 2 years of war would not have been good for the Japanese, who refused to surrender even after the first atom bomb fell.

Well, it's not a stupid question. I see people continually mentioning the US using nukes on Japan as if everyone else had the chance to use a nuke first and refused out of some moral superiority.

So I figured I would ask.

btw, I agree with your answer.

ADL Colin · 10-01-2003, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BRISK

Wrong.

China = $5.7 trillion

India = $2.66 trillion

Germany = $2.184 trillion

No, you're wrong Einstein. I specifically said US$ to distinguish it from "purchasing power parity" which you used.

These are the numbers you should use since the nations themselves use them.

http://www.australianpolitics.com/fo...conomies.shtml

Xplicit · 10-01-2003, 01:12 PM

More people would have died by NOT dropping the bomb.

Although Japan was the target, it made all our rivals in WWII back the fuck off.

loverboy · 10-01-2003, 01:13 PM

blame the Japanese

pimplink · 10-01-2003, 01:15 PM

Germany developed rocket technology during WW2 and had no qualms in using it first. However, its reluctance and decision to not use chemical weapons does support your second alternative theory.

junction · 10-01-2003, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Veterans Day
if there was no pearl harbor there wouldn't have been nagasaki

scoreman · 10-01-2003, 03:00 PM

A few issues that have not been brought up here:

The USA did not know for sure that the bombs would work. True, they had tested them and found them to work, but the reality was that they had only a few bombs made and they were left with a situation where they could announce to the world we are going to drop the bomb on some island and then it was a dud. Or they could bomb the chosen city without announcement and let the results speak for themselves.

The United States had an effective blockade of Japan and could have chosen a path of starving the enemy into submission. Japan had strong peace negotiations with the Russians and a good blockade could have accomplished the same result of the ending of the war. As previously mentioned in this thread, the USA also had issues with other Allies in the war they were addressing with the bomb's use. A blockade certainly did not have the same impact as everyone in world seeing firsthand the macdaddy weapon we possessed in action.

On-top · 10-01-2003, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BRISK
It is easy to be brave from a safe distance. - Aesop

Good quote.

StuartD · 10-01-2003, 03:24 PM

I hope that history thinks of American's as being really really violent...

so that when a new highschool needs a mascot, it can be called "The American"

ADL Colin · 10-01-2003, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by scoreman
Japan had strong peace negotiations with the Russians and a good blockade could have accomplished the same result of the ending of the war.

Hey Scoreman,

Stalin broke the terms of his treaty with Japan towards the end of the war and invaded Manchuria which was occupied by Japan at the time.

iroc409 · 10-01-2003, 04:40 PM

and if the germans had 1-2 more years in the war, the US would have been FUCKED, and nyc would have been a wasteland.

Amputate Your Head · 10-01-2003, 04:42 PM

to smack the world's proverbial forehead with our huge mighty cock and leave a cumstain that'd last for generations.

US = big mutha fuggin pimp.

pauliewalnutz · 10-01-2003, 04:43 PM

Funny I was watching a show on one of the discovery channel about WWII.

The reason is we were the only ones who had it, we were attacked and we did it instead of invading. It saved alot more lives than it took believe it or not.

Hitler was trying to develop one and had plan to drop one on NYC but, the Russian starting winning the war at that t9ime, they suffered over a 1,300,000 deaths man unbelievable never knew that.

StuartD · 10-01-2003, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pauliewalnutz
It saved alot more lives than it took believe it or not.

Who's lives? Americans or Japanese?

scoreman · 10-02-2003, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Colin

Hey Scoreman,

Stalin broke the terms of his treaty with Japan towards the end of the war and invaded Manchuria which was occupied by Japan at the time.

No you misunderstood me. Russia was a key player at the time with peace negotiations. They were brokering an unconditional surrender and the diplomatic channels were very active. Peace was soon to be at hand if the issue of the emperor of Japan was resolved. There are reams of evidence that the USA was well aware of all of this and that they could have just sat on a blockade instead of bombing.

You seem very well versed on USA history, were you a history major in college or are historical works on your reading list alot?

pauliewalnutz · 10-02-2003, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MaskedMan

Who's lives? Americans or Japanese?

both if america invaded Japan there would have been millions of deaths.

edit: dont get me wrong here the intention was to save american lives, the japanese lives that were saved were just a side effect basically. this was also done to send a message to the russian about americas power

pauliewalnutz · 10-02-2003, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by scoreman

No you misunderstood me. Russia was a key player at the time with peace negotiations. They were brokering an unconditional surrender and the diplomatic channels were very active. Peace was soon to be at hand if the issue of the emperor of Japan was resolved. There are reams of evidence that the USA was well aware of all of this and that they could have just sat on a blockade instead of bombing.

You seem very well versed on USA history, were you a history major in college or are historical works on your reading list alot?

idiot. Everyones history in everyones country is biased toward their counry, to say US history is untrue and your history lessons were is just plain fucking stupid, bottom line US #1 country in the world. The world hates us but somehow some reason they want to live here and be part of it.

also Russians decalred war on Japan the day before the 2nd bomb was dropped on Nagasaki!

ADL Colin · 10-02-2003, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by scoreman

No you misunderstood me. Russia was a key player at the time with peace negotiations. They were brokering an unconditional surrender and the diplomatic channels were very active. Peace was soon to be at hand if the issue of the emperor of Japan was resolved. There are reams of evidence that the USA was well aware of all of this and that they could have just sat on a blockade instead of bombing.

You seem very well versed on USA history, were you a history major in college or are historical works on your reading list alot?

Hey, man. You too :-)

Was a physics major. Just read a lot. ;-)

AdultXXXRobert · 10-02-2003, 08:43 AM

They dropped it on my ass!!!

pauliewalnutz · 10-02-2003, 08:46 AM

weird thing is the 2nd bomb also missed the target by 3 miles, this i did not know.

the hills or mountains shielded people from the second bomb otherwise there would have bene alot more deaths.

Total deaths were appox. 160,000 and the includes the following years of radiation posioning and all.

uranidiot · 10-02-2003, 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Buff
Because it was the right thing to do, and it's a real pity that we only had 2 atomic bombs at the time.

Hick.

uranidiot · 10-02-2003, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by galleryseek

fuckin a.

Shut your pie hole junior.

uranidiot · 10-02-2003, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BRISK

Wrong.

China = $5.7 trillion

India = $2.66 trillion

Germany = $2.184 trillion

Yup.

I've seen Colin try to pass that myth other times too.

hahah

10-01-2003, 09:16 AM	#2
sexyclicks Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: c9media.com Posts: 3,240	yes

10-01-2003, 09:17 AM	#3
ytcracker stc is the greatest Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: rip sean murray Posts: 12,403	because we are the bomb __________________ www.ytcracker.com \| www.digitalgangster.com i love you

10-01-2003, 09:18 AM	#4
JamesK hi Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 16,731	because america is unique __________________ M3Server - NATS Hosting

10-01-2003, 09:22 AM	#6
Oceansmedia James Registered User Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver Posts: 17	The "dark age animals bent on random killings" theory is the one being proven every day since the bombs (two of them remember!) were dropped. __________________ -PROFIT SHARE ADS ON PORN DVD'S- James www.oceansmedia.com

10-01-2003, 09:27 AM	#8
Thrawn$ Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Mtl Posts: 4,596	since this time, Japan became a US colonie, Damm they love and play Baseball in there __________________ Tracking 202 \| Start Tracking PPC Campaigns Like A Pro

10-01-2003, 09:14 AM	#1
FATPad Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 6,693	Why was America the first and only country to drop the nuke? Is it because we're a bunch of dark age animals who relish the idea of randomly killing hundreds of thousands of women and children? Or is it because we were the first to develop it and the only country to have one at the time and didn't fully understand the consequences? If Britain, Germany, Japan, Italy or France had developed the nuke first do you think they would have used it during WW II knowing what everyone knew at the time? __________________ <a href="http://www.adultcontent.co.uk">Adult Content UK - Great British Content</a>

10-01-2003, 09:20 AM	#5
rooster Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 2,384	i think a handful of reasons. 1. to put an end to the fighting on the south pacific. Guys were dying by the thousands on those islands and from kamikazees. 2. to send a message to the rest of the world

10-01-2003, 09:23 AM	#7
Buff GFY Assassin Industry Role: Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 2,993	Because it was the right thing to do, and it's a real pity that we only had 2 atomic bombs at the time.

10-01-2003, 09:32 AM	#9
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,515	[QUOTE]Originally posted by FATPad didn't fully understand the consequences [/QUOTE

10-01-2003, 09:42 AM	#14
BRISK Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 12,240	It is easy to be brave from a safe distance. - Aesop __________________ I post on GFY so that when people ask me what I do, I can tell them that I work with the mentally retarded.

10-01-2003, 09:43 AM	#15
ADL Colin Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Tube Titans, USA Posts: 11,929	Because the US had the bomb first and because World War II was a war in which targetting civilians became increasingly accepted. The idea that mostly European and Asian nations killing 50 million of each other including 17 million civilians is somehow overshadowed by at most 200,000 Japanese civilian casualties is an insult to those who lost their lives. Get that. 17 million civilians were killed during World War II. How many died in Hiroshima or Nagasaki? 120k-200k depending on which estimates you use. Less than 1% of WW II civilian casualties occured at Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The firebombing of Tokyo was more deadly than Hiroshima or Nagasaki. The bombing of Dresden was more deadly than Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Regular bombs killed 100x more civilians than atomic bombs did in World War II. There should be no doubt in anyone's mind that the casualty figures for World War II would have been much higher had the US not used the atomic bomb. How many weeks of war between the USSR and US against Japan would create 200k casualties? __________________ Adult Date Link - $50 PPS starting NOW! -- good and JUICY! skype = "adultdatelink" Last edited by ADL Colin; 10-01-2003 at 09:46 AM..

10-01-2003, 09:49 AM	#16
<IMX> Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 2,728	Truman didn't fully understand the consequences, (as v.p. he didn't have the info on the anglo-american program). The first side to have it would have used it, that's what spurned the anglo-american side as it is called, although it was more an international program (against the Axies)...and why plenty of scientists from Europe joined the Manhatten project and later gave secrets to the ruskies. So they (Truman) used it, but in comparison to firebombing and carpet bombing it wasn't any worse than conventional methods of warfare over cities in WWII as far as total damage. It was just the sheer damage in comparison to the size of the bomb and the time it took. blah blah blah blah blah... I'm bored already. __________________ $$$ Check out NICHE PAY the leader of Micro Niche Sites! They offer $1 Trials! $$$ $$$ Check out 10 FREE TRIAL SALES equals 1 FREE LAP TOP ! $$$

10-01-2003, 09:56 AM	#20
Lonny Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Riverside Ca. Posts: 3,539	Why was America the first and only country to drop the nuke? To prove a point "ours is bigger then yours" __________________ crakrevenue

10-01-2003, 10:11 AM	#23
Veterans Day Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: The Windy City Posts: 8,403	if there was no pearl harbor there wouldn't have been nagasaki __________________ Build a Massive Traffic Network, Hands FREE, Totally Automated

10-01-2003, 10:19 AM	#25
TheSaint Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Everywhere at once Posts: 991	Its a stupid question, revisionist history notwithstanding. My father, still living, was a fighter pilot in the navy and we have discussed this many times. Fact: We were dying like flies on each island as we made our way to Japan, as many as 25,000 americans dead per island. Fact: Invasion plans called for one million dead Japanese after we invaded the homeland (mostly civillians) and 100,000 or more additional dead Americans. Fact: It was not well understood then that low level radiation was dangerous. Fact: The nuke saved at least a million Japanese lives, and many Americans. Anyone with a brain would appreciate that another 2 years of war would not have been good for the Japanese, who refused to surrender even after the first atom bomb fell.

10-01-2003, 10:35 AM	#26
Greg B So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: EARTH (for the time being) Posts: 7,014	Because We Do Chicken Right!

10-01-2003, 01:12 PM	#30
Xplicit Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Location: █◄►█ Posts: 3,558	More people would have died by NOT dropping the bomb. Although Japan was the target, it made all our rivals in WWII back the fuck off.

10-01-2003, 01:13 PM	#31
loverboy When it rains, it pours Industry Role: Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 20,609	blame the Japanese

10-01-2003, 01:15 PM	#32
pimplink Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Closer than you think Posts: 9,535	Germany developed rocket technology during WW2 and had no qualms in using it first. However, its reluctance and decision to not use chemical weapons does support your second alternative theory. __________________ Need Mainstream Content and SEO? SEO * Website Copy * Blogs Blogging - PR Work - Forum Marketing - Social Marketing - Link building - Articles 100% Guaranteed Content!

10-01-2003, 03:00 PM	#34
scoreman Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Miami, Florida Posts: 1,491	A few issues that have not been brought up here: The USA did not know for sure that the bombs would work. True, they had tested them and found them to work, but the reality was that they had only a few bombs made and they were left with a situation where they could announce to the world we are going to drop the bomb on some island and then it was a dud. Or they could bomb the chosen city without announcement and let the results speak for themselves. The United States had an effective blockade of Japan and could have chosen a path of starving the enemy into submission. Japan had strong peace negotiations with the Russians and a good blockade could have accomplished the same result of the ending of the war. As previously mentioned in this thread, the USA also had issues with other Allies in the war they were addressing with the bomb's use. A blockade certainly did not have the same impact as everyone in world seeing firsthand the macdaddy weapon we possessed in action. __________________

10-01-2003, 03:24 PM	#36
StuartD Sofa King Band Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Outside the box Posts: 29,903	I hope that history thinks of American's as being really really violent... so that when a new highschool needs a mascot, it can be called "The American" __________________ This is me on facebook This is me on twitter

10-01-2003, 04:40 PM	#38
iroc409 Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: midwest side, yo Posts: 4,728	and if the germans had 1-2 more years in the war, the US would have been FUCKED, and nyc would have been a wasteland. __________________ <a href="http://www.iroc409.com/"><img src="http://www.iroc409.com/adv/120x60.gif" border=0></a> icq: 1 7 6 4 2 0 9 6 0 Gallery templates for ONLY $25! w00t!

10-01-2003, 04:42 PM	#39
Amputate Your Head There can be only one Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Somewhere else Posts: 39,075	to smack the world's proverbial forehead with our huge mighty cock and leave a cumstain that'd last for generations. US = big mutha fuggin pimp. __________________ SIG TOO BIG

10-01-2003, 04:43 PM	#40
pauliewalnutz Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Hell Posts: 486	Funny I was watching a show on one of the discovery channel about WWII. The reason is we were the only ones who had it, we were attacked and we did it instead of invading. It saved alot more lives than it took believe it or not. Hitler was trying to develop one and had plan to drop one on NYC but, the Russian starting winning the war at that t9ime, they suffered over a 1,300,000 deaths man unbelievable never knew that. __________________ <a href="http://netverifier.com/getpaid.asp?siteid=10018799"><img src="http://www.skyweb.net/~kgosselin/banners/newbanner.gif" border="0"></a><br><font color=white size=2> We provide the content to keep your members sticking around!<BR></font> <font color=white size=3>$45.00 per sale!</font>

10-02-2003, 08:43 AM	#46
AdultXXXRobert Registered User Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: North Kakalakiiii Posts: 5	They dropped it on my ass!!! __________________ Robert Sons [email protected] Marketing Consultant ICQ - 248328178 IM - AdultxxxRobert

10-02-2003, 08:46 AM	#47
pauliewalnutz Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Hell Posts: 486	weird thing is the 2nd bomb also missed the target by 3 miles, this i did not know. the hills or mountains shielded people from the second bomb otherwise there would have bene alot more deaths. Total deaths were appox. 160,000 and the includes the following years of radiation posioning and all. __________________ <a href="http://netverifier.com/getpaid.asp?siteid=10018799"><img src="http://www.skyweb.net/~kgosselin/banners/newbanner.gif" border="0"></a><br><font color=white size=2> We provide the content to keep your members sticking around!<BR></font> <font color=white size=3>$45.00 per sale!</font>