Two thousand, three hundred, eighty-eight people were killed in Hawaii today - GoFuckYourself.com

DearAbby · 12-07-2002, 05:59 PM

.... on Dec 7th 1941.

Which makes me feel sort of dumb being that I could'nt figure out why I saw so many Ford trucks driving around today with flags.

I have heard many people mention that one of the main reasons we bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, was in retaliation to the Japanese surprise attack of Pearl Harbor.

If the goal of using a nuclear weapon was to end WWII, why was it not dropped on Germany instead?

I know a lot of old timers and veterans who have ill feelings toward the Japanese for their attack on Pearl Harbor. Yes it was horible that they attacked us... but it "was" war, and a "was" a military base.

So what's the deal with dropping nuclear weapons on two large civilian cities? An estimated 250,000 Japanese were killed.

Could this be why the Japanese enjoy bukakkee so much?

Just the Village Idiot · 12-07-2002, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DearAbby
.... on Dec 7th 1941.

If the goal of using a nuclear weapon was to end WWII, why was it not dropped on Germany instead?

When did an a-bomb become a nuke?

gothweb · 12-07-2002, 06:05 PM

The atomic bombs were dropped in August of 1945. By that point, I believe the tide against the Germans was turned, (edit: they had in fact surrendered, so there you go) we were winning in Europe. The Japanese were not going to give up, due to their honor system-- the loss of life of invading Japan would have been catastrophic for both sides. The bombs were dropped in a hope that by demoralizing the Japanese into surrender, the war would end more quickly and fewer peopel would die.

DearAbby · 12-07-2002, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Just the Village Idiot

When did an a-bomb become a nuke?

Fuck if I know....Im not a scientist. I can barley spell for christs sake!

Just the Village Idiot · 12-07-2002, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DearAbby

Fuck if I know....Im not a scientist. I can barley spell for christs sake!

You used the term nuclear... not me.

pr0 · 12-07-2002, 06:10 PM

Because the germans were already all but defeated when we dropped the nukes. And an invasion on mainland japan would have killed many hundreds of thousands of U.S. & Allies.

StacyCat · 12-07-2002, 06:11 PM

The atomic bomb uses neuclear fision to create the explosion, therefore it is a nuke.

also, Germany told Japan not to attack the US. So far, up until that point, we had stayed out of their way. If they had waited until their other goals were accomplished, we all would be speaking Japanese right now.

DearAbby · 12-07-2002, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Just the Village Idiot

You used the term nuclear... not me.

Then shut the fuck up bitch.

Just the Village Idiot · 12-07-2002, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by StacyCat
The atomic bomb uses neuclear fision to create the explosion, therefore it is a nuke.

Bullshit

gothweb · 12-07-2002, 06:24 PM

Atomic bombs and nukes are the same thing. Both use atomic/nuclear energy... The energy that holds together the nucleus of an atom is what creates the explosion and so forth.

UnseenWorld · 12-07-2002, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DearAbby
.... on Dec 7th 1941.

Which makes me feel sort of dumb being that I could'nt figure out why I saw so many Ford trucks driving around today with flags.

I have heard many people mention that one of the main reasons we bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, was in retaliation to the Japanese surprise attack of Pearl Harbor.

If the goal of using a nuclear weapon was to end WWII, why was it not dropped on Germany instead?

I know a lot of old timers and veterans who have ill feelings toward the Japanese for their attack on Pearl Harbor. Yes it was horible that they attacked us... but it "was" war, and a "was" a military base.

So what's the deal with dropping nuclear weapons on two large civilian cities? An estimated 250,000 Japanese were killed.

Could this be why the Japanese enjoy bukakkee so much?

History lesson: Germany had surrendered by the time the bomb was ready, something they can be thankful for. The usual argument is that it ended the war so suddenly that it actually saved the countless lives that would have been lost had there been an invasion.

DearAbby · 12-07-2002, 06:37 PM

hmm..... I see.

TeraBabes · 12-07-2002, 06:40 PM

I wonder if that is the number of *people* who died that day or the number of *Americans* who died.

Anyone know what the Japanese casualty count was that day?

Just the Village Idiot · 12-07-2002, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gothweb
Atomic bombs and nukes are the same thing. Both use atomic/nuclear energy... The energy that holds together the nucleus of an atom is what creates the explosion and so forth.

Atomic or nuclear??? Please give me you dissertation on the subject.

Shooter · 12-07-2002, 06:46 PM

Without the bombings, a mainland invasion would have been necessary, where it was estimated a million men would be lost defeating the Japanese who weren't going to surrender easily.

theking · 12-07-2002, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Just the Village Idiot

Atomic or nuclear??? Please give me you dissertation on the subject.

Provide yours. An A Bomb is and always has been classified as a nuke.

gothweb · 12-07-2002, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Just the Village Idiot

Atomic or nuclear??? Please give me you dissertation on the subject.

Huh? You do know what the two words mean, right? Atomic as in "atom", nucleus as in "nucleus of the atom". Anything that is atomic that isn't nuclear is electric, as in "electron". Where is your confusion?

theking · 12-07-2002, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gothweb

Huh? You do know what the two words mean, right? Atomic as in "atom", nucleus as in "nucleus of the atom". Anything that is atomic that isn't nuclear is electric, as in "electron". Where is your confusion?

I am not confused. Look in the mirror. I repeat an A Bomb is and has been classifed as a nuke from the beginning. Sorry about that gothweb. I just looked in the mirror. And I saw confusion.

Just the Village Idiot · 12-07-2002, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

Provide yours. An A Bomb is and always has been classified as a nuke.

Why bother.... the JFK assasination has always been classified as the act of one crazed indiivual.

Classification means something... heh

I asked the question you answer it.

Bill8 · 12-07-2002, 07:00 PM

Both fission and fusion bombs are called nuclear bombs.

The fission bomb has a greater right to be called nuclear than a fusion bomb.

Just the Village Idiot · 12-07-2002, 07:00 PM

double

Jay_StandAhead · 12-07-2002, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DearAbby

Could this be why the Japanese enjoy bukakkee so much?

gothweb · 12-07-2002, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

I am not confused. Look in the mirror. I repeat an A Bomb is and has been classifed as a nuke from the beginning. Sorry about that gothweb. I just looked in the mirror. And I saw confusion.

I was agreeing with you, Pathfinder. Don't get your panties in a bunch.

theking · 12-07-2002, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gothweb

I was agreeing with you, Pathfinder. Don't get your panties in a bunch.

I saw that and that is why I made the edit. But you can

for the Pathfinder remark.

KC · 12-07-2002, 07:37 PM

You guys are agruing over semantics...

Here's the definition of an atom bomb from dictionary.com:

atom bomb
n.
1. An explosive weapon of great destructive power derived from the rapid release of energy in the fission of heavy atomic nuclei, as of uranium 235. Also called A-bomb, atomic bomb, fission bomb.

2. A bomb deriving its destructive power from the release of nuclear energy.

atom bomb

n : a nuclear weapon in which enormous energy is released by nuclear fission (splitting the nuclei of a heavy element (uranium 235 or plutonium 239))

-----

nuclear weapon
n.
A device, such as a bomb or warhead, whose great explosive power derives from the release of nuclear energy.

nuclear weapon

n : a weapon whose explosive power derives from a nuclear reaction

nuclear warhead

n : the warhead of a missile designed to deliver an atom bomb

nuke
n.
1. A nuclear device or weapon.
2. A nuclear-powered electric generating plant.

---

They're different types of nuclear reactions (Fission or Fusion) but they are still nuclear reations.. Here's a cool site too..

http://www.howstuffworks.com/nuclear-bomb.htm

Sambuka · 12-07-2002, 08:53 PM

Ok firstly, Japan still had 1 Million soldiers on there main land, and pretty much every man woman and child who was japanesse would fight to the death to fuck over as many Americans as possible.

So instead of wasting 100,000's of American lives by invading Japan, they decided to drop a couple of nukes and make the nips surrender.

Thats one story, the other story I heard was that Japan was getting ready to surrendar to Russia and that the Americans had spent so much time and money on this amazing new technology NUKES, and they hadn't seen it used on real people before and wanted to know its effectiveness, what it did to the people, how much radiation was left, how long it took to go away. All that stuff they didn't have. And so they thought, we are justified in nuking these fucking nips they started this war we'll end it.

And fair fucking enough too, the Japans were ruthless bastards back in those days, torturing our NZ, Aussie & USA Soldiers who were caught. They were so ruthless they should of dropped 10 nukes for good measure ;)

Anyways, saw on Discovery channel (yeah I know), that after they nuked the fuck out of Japan, and the nips surrendered they sent in a shitload and I mean SHITLOAD of scientists dressed in full body anti radiation gear and they tested 1000's of people and documented as much as they could.

So I personally believe that the nips had it coming and we could of dropped a couple more for good measure. And I think the Americans may or may not of had to nuke Japan but were fully justified in doing so even if Japan was about to surrender.

Sammy

DearAbby · 12-07-2002, 08:58 PM

...hmmm

[Labret] · 12-07-2002, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sambuka

So I personally believe that the nips had it coming

Had it coming? We pushed the Nips to war. You think they just attacked us for no reason?

America slapped Japan in the face first. Pearl Harbor was the end result.

Quote:

When France capitulated in June 1940, Japan moved into northern French Indochina. And though the United States had no interest there, we imposed an embargo on steel and scrap metal. After Hitler invaded Russia in June 1941, Japan moved into southern Indochina. FDR ordered all Japanese assets frozen.

But FDR did not want to cut off oil. As he told his Cabinet on July 18, an embargo meant war, for that would force oil-starved Japan to seize the oil fields of the Dutch East Indies. But a State Department lawyer named Dean Acheson drew up the sanctions in such a way as to block any Japanese purchases of U.S. oil. By the time FDR found out, in September, he could not back down.

Japan had no choice. Suck American cock, or fight.

PornoDoggy · 12-07-2002, 09:04 PM

They may have been on the verge of surrendering, but we didn't know that ... and in all likelyhood the military fanatics who wanted to continue the war would have staged a coup. U.S. estimates for an invasion were at 1,000,000 causualties, a high number of them deaths. Japanese causualties were estimated at 4-5 TIMES that.

I love the "atomic bomb or nuke" discussion, though. I needed a good laugh.

bawdy · 12-08-2002, 01:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sambuka
the Americans had spent so much time and money on this amazing new technology NUKES, and they hadn't seen it used on real people before and wanted to know its effectiveness, what it did to the people, how much radiation was left, how long it took to go away.

after visiting Hiroshima a couple of years ago and going to the museum in peace park it seems that this comment seems pretty valid... Hiroshima is flat is surrounded by mountains etc... made a good location to test the bomb... and once Japan surrended there where much testing and recording of medical conditions of the locals etc... maybe I swallowed a little propaganda that day but it does make some sense

Fletch XXX · 12-08-2002, 01:10 AM

Remember the Crew of the Arizona

<img src=http://www.aerotechnews.com/starc/2000/120800/arizona.jpg border="1">

http://www.essentialpearlharbor.com/osehphussaz.html

Zebra · 12-08-2002, 01:48 AM

I had a history teacher who was a fanatic about Hiroshima and he had a bunch of books and original photgraphs taken right after people started getting to the city to assess the damage. I don't think in any of those pics I ever saw anyone wearing a rad suit. I don't think they really knew enough about the radiation yet to know they had to protect themselves.

Here are the casualty #'s from the Dept. Of Energy
Instantly Killed:
70,000
total death toll by December 1945:
140,000
total death toll by 1950:
200,000

My grandfather was an Army cook on Tinian and served the crew of the Enola Gay their meal before they took off. He had to prepare the food under guard and serve it to them personally along with a few other cooks. He said that everyone who came in contact with them that morning knew that something big was going to happen, but they had no idea just how big it would really be.

Kimmykim · 12-08-2002, 02:02 AM

Sorry to disillusion you Labret, but the Japanese had no reason to attack Pearl Harbor in 1941 other than to force the Americans into war. Obviously lend-lease was working to an extent the Axis forces were uncomfortable with it -- not saying it worked perfectly, but saying it worked well enough -- and the Germans were in no position to attack the US.

Unfortunately for both the Japanese and the Euro allies led by the Germans, the US did at that point have enough manpower to fight two fronts at once, and be successful eventually on both fronts.

As for why Japan was the recipient of the atomic bomb, not once, but twice, did you see any German planes bombing Pearl Harbor?

That's what I thought.

My family lost more than one member in Hawaii on PH Day, and my grandfather spent quite a while as a POW shot down in Europe, while I like you alot, if you want to go to school on either World War, we can go for it, since there's not been a war that America was involved in that my family hasn't been a part of.

theking · 12-08-2002, 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kimmykim
Sorry to disillusion you Labret, but the Japanese had no reason to attack Pearl Harbor in 1941 other than to force the Americans into war. Obviously lend-lease was working to an extent the Axis forces were uncomfortable with it -- not saying it worked perfectly, but saying it worked well enough -- and the Germans were in no position to attack the US.

Unfortunately for both the Japanese and the Euro allies led by the Germans, the US did at that point have enough manpower to fight two fronts at once, and be successful eventually on both fronts.

As for why Japan was the recipient of the atomic bomb, not once, but twice, did you see any German planes bombing Pearl Harbor?

That's what I thought.

My family lost more than one member in Hawaii on PH Day, and my grandfather spent quite a while as a POW shot down in Europe, while I like you alot, if you want to go to school on either World War, we can go for it, since there's not been a war that America was involved in that my family hasn't been a part of.

Not correct. The US had basically issued a cease and desist order to the Japanese for there expansionism in Asia and their war with China and the US was preparing to set up a Naval blockade against Japan which in and of itself is an act of War.

Kimmykim · 12-08-2002, 02:13 AM

What part is not correct pathfinder? You can argue most any US military action with me and win, but not PHD. That I can promise you, its quite significant in my family history.

theking · 12-08-2002, 02:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kimmykim
What part is not correct pathfinder? You can argue most any US military action with me and win, but not PHD. That I can promise you, its quite significant in my family history.

Quote:

Originally posted by Kimmykim
Sorry to disillusion you Labret, but the Japanese had no reason to attack Pearl Harbor in 1941 other than to force the Americans into war. Obviously lend-lease was working to an extent the Axis forces were uncomfortable with it -- not saying it worked perfectly, but saying it worked well enough -- and the Germans were in no position to attack the US.

Now reread my post. They either had to withdraw from their expansionist activities in Asia or attack the US because Japan is an island nation and cannot survive if a blockade were in place. By the way for the Pathfinder remark.

Kimmykim · 12-08-2002, 02:21 AM

Um, whatever you say pathfinder == we'll go happily around on it, after all if you aren't pathfinder, you aren't old enough to remember anyway.

theking · 12-08-2002, 02:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kimmykim
Um, whatever you say pathfinder == we'll go happily around on it, after all if you aren't pathfinder, you aren't old enough to remember anyway.

I was raised by Pathfinder. He was a professional soldier for 30 years. He studied war. I was a professional soldier for 12 years. I studied war. Have you heard of history books? For your Pathfinder remark.

theking · 12-08-2002, 02:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kimmykim
Um, whatever you say pathfinder == we'll go happily around on it, after all if you aren't pathfinder, you aren't old enough to remember anyway.

You are much older than I thought.

.:Frog:. · 12-08-2002, 03:15 AM

I'm getting a real kick out of the ignorant posts which try to justify the use of nuclear weapons.

theking · 12-08-2002, 03:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by .:Frog:.
I'm getting a real kick out of the ignorant posts which try to justify the use of nuclear weapons.

An invasion would have prolonged the agony for all involved and the estimated cost in lives were in the millions, the over whelming majority of which would have been Japanese lives. Bottom line is, using the nukes saved lives. Are you against the saving of human lives? Maybe you will be willing to expand on your comment?

unconnected · 12-08-2002, 05:27 AM

Quote:

Sorry to disillusion you Labret, but the Japanese had no reason to attack Pearl Harbor in 1941 other than to force the Americans into war. Obviously lend-lease was working to an extent the Axis forces were uncomfortable with it -- not saying it worked perfectly, but saying it worked well enough -- and the Germans were in no position to attack the US.

Besides the fact that your facts are being clouded over by family loss can you offer any evidence whatsoever to back up this claim?
As far as every documentary I have ever seen you are dead wrong on this one..
But hey, what do PBS, the BBC, and The discovery channel know?
I am not patronizing your families loss that day, but your family was one in thousands that lost family members, The japanese suffered that toll 100 times worse and then some...

You hurt us, we will hurt you more was the logic on the american generals mind that day.. Let them come up with as many rational and logical explanations as they can, the bottom line is that there is no logic in nuclear weapons or their use, just a lot of rage and personal bias..

Sambuka · 12-08-2002, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by unconnected

Besides the fact that your facts are being clouded over by family loss can you offer any evidence whatsoever to back up this claim?
As far as every documentary I have ever seen you are dead wrong on this one..
But hey, what do PBS, the BBC, and The discovery channel know?
I am not patronizing your families loss that day, but your family was one in thousands that lost family members, The japanese suffered that toll 100 times worse and then some...

You hurt us, we will hurt you more was the logic on the american generals mind that day.. Let them come up with as many rational and logical explanations as they can, the bottom line is that there is no logic in nuclear weapons or their use, just a lot of rage and personal bias..

Well perhaps America was playing the peace card again cause fucking Japan was invading China and raping 10,000's of woman, they had camps setup for there soldiers where all the chinesse woman were constantly raped by Japanesse soldiers stantioned there. Japan was fucking bad back then, they were invading every damn country they could get there hands on. I heard America issued to santions or warnings or some shit, don't know the full details. But for whatever reason Japan WAS the BAD egg at that time, they were not peacfully expanding, they were fucking wagging war with lots and lots of little countries and growing pretty huge.

The nukes saved lives, 100,000's of lives, both American and Japanesse. And the Japs were the bad ones for starting all this mess, don't even try to tell me the Japanesse were justified in attacking America.

Sammy

TheFLY · 12-08-2002, 08:44 AM

<font size=+1>LOL the Japanese never surrendered!</font>

TheFLY · 12-08-2002, 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

Not correct. The US had basically issued a cease and desist order to the Japanese for there expansionism in Asia and their war with China and the US was preparing to set up a Naval blockade against Japan which in and of itself is an act of War.

Hmm... So the attack on PH was to reduce the # of ships that were to be used for a Naval blockade against Japan...

Interesting.

So what's the latest in "warfare" strategy? We are beyond naval blockades and bombs now... What's the next "big thing" ? Missle defense?

TeraBabes · 12-08-2002, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

...For your Pathfinder remark.

For a guy who says over and over and over that you "don't care" if people think you are Pathfinder or not, you sure jump through a lot of hoops.

Paul Markham · 12-08-2002, 10:16 AM

Sorry but maybe you are looking at too narrow a picture. Think back to Europe at the time.

Stalin had intimidated a sick FDR and and an isolated Churchill into letting him have half of Europe. Stalin had an enormous well equipped army ready and willing to go further West. He was a paranoid leader.

Do you think that dropping the TWO Atomic bombs was designed to show him what the West had in store for him?

UnseenWorld · 12-08-2002, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TeraBabes
I wonder if that is the number of *people* who died that day or the number of *Americans* who died.

Anyone know what the Japanese casualty count was that day?

Jeez, we were at WAR, man! Plus, even when not at war, the US government (like any government) has a responsibility to its own citizens it doesn't have to any other country's citizens, and especially when those others are the enemy.

UnseenWorld · 12-08-2002, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bawdy

after visiting Hiroshima a couple of years ago and going to the museum in peace park it seems that this comment seems pretty valid... Hiroshima is flat is surrounded by mountains etc... made a good location to test the bomb... and once Japan surrended there where much testing and recording of medical conditions of the locals etc... maybe I swallowed a little propaganda that day but it does make some sense

It was all valuable information that any responsible government would have needed to have after using a weapon like that for the first time. I don't see how that in itself can be faulted.

Fletch XXX · 12-08-2002, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TheFLY

So what's the latest in "warfare" strategy?

I've read this.

A Good read on, the Next War.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...5537?vi=glance

12-07-2002, 05:59 PM	#1
DearAbby Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: NoCal Posts: 979	Two thousand, three hundred, eighty-eight people were killed in Hawaii today .... on Dec 7th 1941. Which makes me feel sort of dumb being that I could'nt figure out why I saw so many Ford trucks driving around today with flags. I have heard many people mention that one of the main reasons we bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, was in retaliation to the Japanese surprise attack of Pearl Harbor. If the goal of using a nuclear weapon was to end WWII, why was it not dropped on Germany instead? I know a lot of old timers and veterans who have ill feelings toward the Japanese for their attack on Pearl Harbor. Yes it was horible that they attacked us... but it "was" war, and a "was" a military base. So what's the deal with dropping nuclear weapons on two large civilian cities? An estimated 250,000 Japanese were killed. Could this be why the Japanese enjoy bukakkee so much?

12-07-2002, 06:05 PM	#3
gothweb Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Back in the USSA Posts: 8,849	The atomic bombs were dropped in August of 1945. By that point, I believe the tide against the Germans was turned, (edit: they had in fact surrendered, so there you go) we were winning in Europe. The Japanese were not going to give up, due to their honor system-- the loss of life of invading Japan would have been catastrophic for both sides. The bombs were dropped in a hope that by demoralizing the Japanese into surrender, the war would end more quickly and fewer peopel would die. __________________ Photos by Ian X.: Distinctive photos of goth babes. Blood Money:Your traffic, my sites, our money. MojoHost: Still the best. Last edited by gothweb; 12-07-2002 at 06:07 PM..

12-07-2002, 06:10 PM	#6
pr0 rockin tha trailerpark Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: ~Coastal~ Posts: 23,088	Because the germans were already all but defeated when we dropped the nukes. And an invasion on mainland japan would have killed many hundreds of thousands of U.S. & Allies. __________________ __________ Loadedca$h - get sum! - Revengebucks - mmm rebills! - webair (gotz sErVrz)

12-07-2002, 06:24 PM	#10
gothweb Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Back in the USSA Posts: 8,849	Atomic bombs and nukes are the same thing. Both use atomic/nuclear energy... The energy that holds together the nucleus of an atom is what creates the explosion and so forth. __________________ Photos by Ian X.: Distinctive photos of goth babes. Blood Money:Your traffic, my sites, our money. MojoHost: Still the best.

12-07-2002, 06:40 PM	#13
TeraBabes Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Under Water Posts: 2,067	I wonder if that is the number of people who died that day or the number of Americans who died. Anyone know what the Japanese casualty count was that day? __________________ This place is too big.

12-07-2002, 06:11 PM	#7
StacyCat Confirmed User Join Date: May 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 1,167	The atomic bomb uses neuclear fision to create the explosion, therefore it is a nuke. also, Germany told Japan not to attack the US. So far, up until that point, we had stayed out of their way. If they had waited until their other goals were accomplished, we all would be speaking Japanese right now.

12-07-2002, 06:37 PM	#12
DearAbby Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: NoCal Posts: 979	hmm..... I see.

12-07-2002, 06:46 PM	#15
Shooter Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 2,842	Without the bombings, a mainland invasion would have been necessary, where it was estimated a million men would be lost defeating the Japanese who weren't going to surrender easily.

12-07-2002, 07:00 PM	#20
Bill8 Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 1,901	Both fission and fusion bombs are called nuclear bombs. The fission bomb has a greater right to be called nuclear than a fusion bomb.

12-07-2002, 07:00 PM	#21
Just the Village Idiot Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Earth Posts: 581	double __________________ <a href="http://refer.ccbill.com/cgi-bin/clicks.cgi?CA=921196-0000&PA=337888&HTML=http://www.wow18cash.com/"> We may as well just give this fucking $$$ away!</a>

12-07-2002, 07:37 PM	#25
KC Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 1995 Posts: 2,417	You guys are agruing over semantics... Here's the definition of an atom bomb from dictionary.com: atom bomb n. 1. An explosive weapon of great destructive power derived from the rapid release of energy in the fission of heavy atomic nuclei, as of uranium 235. Also called A-bomb, atomic bomb, fission bomb. 2. A bomb deriving its destructive power from the release of nuclear energy. atom bomb n : a nuclear weapon in which enormous energy is released by nuclear fission (splitting the nuclei of a heavy element (uranium 235 or plutonium 239)) ----- nuclear weapon n. A device, such as a bomb or warhead, whose great explosive power derives from the release of nuclear energy. nuclear weapon n : a weapon whose explosive power derives from a nuclear reaction nuclear warhead n : the warhead of a missile designed to deliver an atom bomb nuke n. 1. A nuclear device or weapon. 2. A nuclear-powered electric generating plant. --- They're different types of nuclear reactions (Fission or Fusion) but they are still nuclear reations.. Here's a cool site too.. http://www.howstuffworks.com/nuclear-bomb.htm

12-07-2002, 08:53 PM	#26
Sambuka Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: - Posts: 500	Ok firstly, Japan still had 1 Million soldiers on there main land, and pretty much every man woman and child who was japanesse would fight to the death to fuck over as many Americans as possible. So instead of wasting 100,000's of American lives by invading Japan, they decided to drop a couple of nukes and make the nips surrender. Thats one story, the other story I heard was that Japan was getting ready to surrendar to Russia and that the Americans had spent so much time and money on this amazing new technology NUKES, and they hadn't seen it used on real people before and wanted to know its effectiveness, what it did to the people, how much radiation was left, how long it took to go away. All that stuff they didn't have. And so they thought, we are justified in nuking these fucking nips they started this war we'll end it. And fair fucking enough too, the Japans were ruthless bastards back in those days, torturing our NZ, Aussie & USA Soldiers who were caught. They were so ruthless they should of dropped 10 nukes for good measure ;) Anyways, saw on Discovery channel (yeah I know), that after they nuked the fuck out of Japan, and the nips surrendered they sent in a shitload and I mean SHITLOAD of scientists dressed in full body anti radiation gear and they tested 1000's of people and documented as much as they could. So I personally believe that the nips had it coming and we could of dropped a couple more for good measure. And I think the Americans may or may not of had to nuke Japan but were fully justified in doing so even if Japan was about to surrender. Sammy

12-07-2002, 08:58 PM	#27
DearAbby Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: NoCal Posts: 979	...hmmm

12-07-2002, 09:04 PM	#29
PornoDoggy Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 1,053	They may have been on the verge of surrendering, but we didn't know that ... and in all likelyhood the military fanatics who wanted to continue the war would have staged a coup. U.S. estimates for an invasion were at 1,000,000 causualties, a high number of them deaths. Japanese causualties were estimated at 4-5 TIMES that. I love the "atomic bomb or nuke" discussion, though. I needed a good laugh.

12-08-2002, 01:10 AM	#31
Fletch XXX GFY HALL OF FAME DAMMIT!!! Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: that 504 Posts: 60,840	Remember the Crew of the Arizona <img src=http://www.aerotechnews.com/starc/2000/120800/arizona.jpg border="1"> http://www.essentialpearlharbor.com/osehphussaz.html __________________ Want an Android App for your tube, membership, or free site? Need banners or promo material? Hit us up (ICQ Fletch: 148841377) or email me fletchxxx at gmail.com - recent work - About me

12-08-2002, 01:48 AM	#32
Zebra Banned from Kimmy's couch Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Down at Fraggle Rock Posts: 5,091	I had a history teacher who was a fanatic about Hiroshima and he had a bunch of books and original photgraphs taken right after people started getting to the city to assess the damage. I don't think in any of those pics I ever saw anyone wearing a rad suit. I don't think they really knew enough about the radiation yet to know they had to protect themselves. Here are the casualty #'s from the Dept. Of Energy Instantly Killed: 70,000 total death toll by December 1945: 140,000 total death toll by 1950: 200,000 My grandfather was an Army cook on Tinian and served the crew of the Enola Gay their meal before they took off. He had to prepare the food under guard and serve it to them personally along with a few other cooks. He said that everyone who came in contact with them that morning knew that something big was going to happen, but they had no idea just how big it would really be. __________________ Old School

12-08-2002, 02:02 AM	#33
Kimmykim bitchslapping zebras!!!!! Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: In a shack by the beach Posts: 16,015	Sorry to disillusion you Labret, but the Japanese had no reason to attack Pearl Harbor in 1941 other than to force the Americans into war. Obviously lend-lease was working to an extent the Axis forces were uncomfortable with it -- not saying it worked perfectly, but saying it worked well enough -- and the Germans were in no position to attack the US. Unfortunately for both the Japanese and the Euro allies led by the Germans, the US did at that point have enough manpower to fight two fronts at once, and be successful eventually on both fronts. As for why Japan was the recipient of the atomic bomb, not once, but twice, did you see any German planes bombing Pearl Harbor? That's what I thought. My family lost more than one member in Hawaii on PH Day, and my grandfather spent quite a while as a POW shot down in Europe, while I like you alot, if you want to go to school on either World War, we can go for it, since there's not been a war that America was involved in that my family hasn't been a part of.

12-08-2002, 02:13 AM	#35
Kimmykim bitchslapping zebras!!!!! Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: In a shack by the beach Posts: 16,015	What part is not correct pathfinder? You can argue most any US military action with me and win, but not PHD. That I can promise you, its quite significant in my family history.

12-08-2002, 02:21 AM	#37
Kimmykim bitchslapping zebras!!!!! Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: In a shack by the beach Posts: 16,015	Um, whatever you say pathfinder == we'll go happily around on it, after all if you aren't pathfinder, you aren't old enough to remember anyway.

12-08-2002, 03:15 AM	#40
.:Frog:. Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: ~ C A N A D A ~ Posts: 2,123	I'm getting a real kick out of the ignorant posts which try to justify the use of nuclear weapons. __________________ <a href="http://www.pornopayouts.com/?rid=pp3076">PornoPayouts</a> Tons of Hosted Galleries.

12-08-2002, 08:44 AM	#44
TheFLY So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: http://www.thefly.net/ --- Quit your job and live off steady traffic. Posts: 11,856	<font size=+1>LOL the Japanese never surrendered!</font>

12-08-2002, 10:16 AM	#47
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	Sorry but maybe you are looking at too narrow a picture. Think back to Europe at the time. Stalin had intimidated a sick FDR and and an isolated Churchill into letting him have half of Europe. Stalin had an enormous well equipped army ready and willing to go further West. He was a paranoid leader. Do you think that dropping the TWO Atomic bombs was designed to show him what the West had in store for him? __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70