Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Dropping of the atomic bombs... saved lives?

Discussion in 'WWII General' started by futballman, May 12, 2008.

Tags:
?

nessasary?

  1. un-nessasary

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. nessasary

    8 vote(s)
    100.0%
  1. Tomcat

    Tomcat The One From Down Under

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2008
    Messages:
    4,048
    Likes Received:
    267
    Although Left and Right governments mean absolutely nothing to me, mainly because I know nothing about, nor want to know much, about politics.

    Anyway back to our new and clearly rash friend.

    There is a way to fight a war honestly now?

    So John, you are saying that they should have invaded the Japanese mainland? Killed millions more in civilians and soldiers from both sides? Have a divided Japan, just like Germany? Destroy the Japanese infrasture, cities and lands?

    I do not agree with the nuking of any civillians, it is not a gentlemens way to fight a war, however, we are not in the 1800's, morals change and so does the rules of war, and they sacraficed 2 Japanese cities to save the others, as well as all the soldiers and civillians.
     
  2. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Aquila non capit muscas

    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Messages:
    8,809
    Likes Received:
    372
    Location:
    Portugal
    Which is a way to say you surrender your choices to others. Later on don't come and tell us how sorry you are :p

    Like "I have a rash in my butt"?

    Good, find me a gentleman's way to wage war.

    Ah, yes, the XIXth century was made famous by the gentlemanly wars that were fought back then.

    Last time I heard the USAAF was trying to force a surrender in order to save invading force lives, not exactly in order to spare more Japanese lives, but you shuld know :D
     
  3. Richard

    Richard Expert

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    5,847
    Likes Received:
    333
    This is one of the many WW2 What If it had played out in the other way, true to say the Atomic Bombs were a dreadful weapon which shocked the world when they were dropped on Japan. In the cold light of day Japan attacked America and started an event which lead to the A-bombs being dropped, was it wrong to drop them? I say no, for these two reasons. The A-bombs saved more American lives and bought the war with Japan to an end.

    The lesson of these two bombs was to show us the full effects on what they could do and thankfully to date they have not been used again. Japan like Germany paid the price in starting a war which would lead to there downfalls. In the case of Japan they paid the price with the only act of the ultimate weapon being dropped on them.
     
  4. Doxie

    Doxie Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    1
    Hello John Smith,
    Do you have knowledge of some magical region in Japan that was populated entirely by soldiers? I'm sorry but your comments show that you have no real knowledge of the events that transpired in that war. You are aware i hope that in all theaters of that conflict it was the civilian population that suffered the worst? Two soviet civilians died for every soviet soldier. Why would you expect it to be different in the densely populated Japanese home islands? I'm sorry but this makes no sense. ALL of the evidence given to us by the war shows that the civilians would have paid a disastrous price. You also assert that invasion wasnt necessary either. Where would this battle you speak of be taking place?

    So what are your alternatives? Blockade? Is starvation a more humane way to end a war? It is impossible to be logical and yet use modern values on singular instances of the war. This is a war that had already claimed scores of MILLIONS of lives. At what point in this vast bloodletting do you expect the participants to stop and decide on a more gentle means of waging world war? If by cowardice you mean "looking for a way to save millions of lives" then I guess i'll stand to be counted with the cowards..

    And your joke made no sense. Was Vietnam woman and child-less?


    I understand your reasoning. I dont think anyone in their right mind would disagree that the bombing were terrible acts and a crime. But the entire war was a crime. Some times there is no "right" thing to do.
     
  5. german mauser k98k man

    german mauser k98k man Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    149
    Likes Received:
    6
    Was the Atomic bombing of heroshemia and nagasaki rellly nessasary? :chainsaw:
     
  6. ozjohn39

    ozjohn39 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    594
    Likes Received:
    31
    'Olympic' would probably have FAILED!!!

    Necessary!


    OJ
     
  7. german mauser k98k man

    german mauser k98k man Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    149
    Likes Received:
    6
    i am nutrual in this debate so i am not going to comment
     
  8. 1911Colt

    1911Colt Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    5
    Sure as hell better than having 6 digit casualties with an invasion.

    So yes, it was necessary.
     
  9. german mauser k98k man

    german mauser k98k man Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    149
    Likes Received:
    6
    right about that
     
  10. ozjohn39

    ozjohn39 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    594
    Likes Received:
    31
    I once made the observation in another forum on this flogged to death subject:-


    If Marshall had gone to Truman, and said that the bomb would kill ONE MILLION japanese mothers and babies, but save 100,000 American sons, fathers, husbands and brothers the Truman had a LEGAL and MORAL duty to do what he did.

    He was POTUS and Commander in Chief. They were his ONLY responsibities.

    If he had not, in 1946 when the nation found out, they would have dragged him out of the White House and LYNCHED him!




    I was called a RACIST!

    OJ
     
  11. JCFalkenbergIII

    JCFalkenbergIII Expert

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    10,480
    Likes Received:
    426
  12. ozjohn39

    ozjohn39 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    594
    Likes Received:
    31
    JCF,


    On TWO occasions, whilst a member of the 'Compuserve' Military Forum, I missed out on a 'real-time' discussion between members and Gen Paul Tibbetts. The general was a persoanal friend on the 'manager'? of the Forum and he kindly allowed the Forum his time.

    Both times I was on a very long highway driving to Queensland and missed them. I do have the transcript of one of the events though.

    Gen Tibbetts had NO regrets!

    Another of my USA thrills was seeing the 'Enola Gay' in the Smithsonian Museum at Washington Airport. I was like a kid in a toy shop.


    OJ
     
  13. Joe

    Joe Ace

    Joined:
    May 22, 2007
    Messages:
    2,948
    Likes Received:
    125
    Yes. For many reasons which I will not go into at this time of night.

    However, your chainsaw smiley was not necessary.
     
  14. texson66

    texson66 Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    Messages:
    3,095
    Likes Received:
    592
    OJ, I have posted some pix of the NASM with the Enola Gay in the Members Gallery:)
     
  15. Soviet man

    Soviet man Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    3
    In these cities lived only pieceful citizens and it was un-nessary to destroy piecefull cities which even don't have bases! USA want to keep in fear USSR and other countries that's why they killed so many piecefull japans! In this cities were many old mans and children. They can't fight.
     
  16. J.A. Costigan

    J.A. Costigan Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    19
    Necessary - Japan absolutely refused to surrender to the Allies in August 1945. A conventional invasion would have prolonged the war at least another year or more and killed several million more people. More Japanese civilians would most likely have been killed through conventional means instead compared to the Atomic Bomb.

    Option A: Kill 120,000 Japenese (risking civilians) with an Atomic Bomb and end the war in a week.

    Option B: Sustain over 1,000,000 Allied casualties and and unknown amount (most likely also in the millions or at least upper 100,000's) through conventional means and end the war in a year.

    I choose Option A.
     
  17. J.A. Costigan

    J.A. Costigan Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    19
    Sorry, accidental double post.
     
  18. JCFalkenbergIII

    JCFalkenbergIII Expert

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    10,480
    Likes Received:
    426

    What a load of :bullshit:. I suggest you read the other threads where it has been stated the many MILITARY reasons that both were bombed. As I have mentioned earlier this has been dscussed Ad Naseum before.

    http://www.ww2f.com/wwii-general/238...ved-lives.html

    http://www.ww2f.com/wwii-general/101...ping-bomb.html
     
  19. J.A. Costigan

    J.A. Costigan Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    19
    ^ I second that statement.
     
  20. Soviet man

    Soviet man Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    3
    In Irak now you can use atomic weapon how it was in Herosima and Nagasaki. Why you don't do this? Kill all terrorist and all people without loses for USA. Lets use atomic weapon everywere!!! Destroy all terrorist's towns with atomic bomb to destroy all nature and piecefull citizens. Lets destroy our planet.
     

Share This Page