![]() |
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? |
Quote:
|
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.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
You used the term nuclear... not me. |
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.
|
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. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
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.
|
Quote:
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. |
hmm..... I see.
|
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? |
Quote:
|
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.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Classification means something... heh I asked the question you answer it. |
Both fission and fusion bombs are called nuclear bombs.
The fission bomb has a greater right to be called nuclear than a fusion bomb. |
double
|
Quote:
:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
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 |
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 |
...hmmm
|
Quote:
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:
Japan had no choice. Suck American cock, or fight. |
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. |
Quote:
|
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 :smokin |
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. |
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. :) |
Quote:
|
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:
Quote:
|
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.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I'm getting a real kick out of the ignorant posts which try to justify the use of nuclear weapons.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
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.. |
Quote:
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 |
<font size=+1>LOL the Japanese never surrendered!</font>
|
Quote:
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? |
Quote:
:1orglaugh |
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? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
A Good read on, the Next War. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...5537?vi=glance |
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:50 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123