de oorlog in europa was afgelopen maar japan vocht nog steeds door dus het is onzin om te stellen dat ze het enkel deden om te tonen waartoe men in staat was.
Het is allang bekned dat het niet nodig was die bommen op Japan te gooien omdat het leger tot niks meer in staat was. Alle vliegtuigen waren kapot, de landingsbanen waren om zeep en het leger was verwakt tot louter 10000 stijders die strijdden met antieke wapens;
**The war was over. We knew it.
Europe knew it. Hitler knew it.
Japan knew it. In fact, many
of the remaining Japanese soldiers
were busy committing suicide, for
they had disgraced their ancestors
by their failure
**Hiroshima and Nagasaki were
highly populated cities as were
the surrounding areas; chock
full of women, children, infants
**These were not vital tactical target
sites bombed by the US. The war
was over. There were no bases
here for munitions, no harbors full
of enemy ships and armed forces.
**There was no rationale as to
why these two cities must be
destroyed.
**On the other hand, there may
have been ... a very smart move
on the part of the US to strengthen
our "position at the bargaining table"
as the Allied Forces began to divide
the spoils of WWII.
**The Soviet Union did not possess
such a bomb. Nor did any other of
the Allied Forces. The USA were the
strongest, we had the "upper
hand" - we could have things
"our way"
**Was that worth what was done
to those two Japanese cities?? Was
it worth the after effects, and the
after, after effects of the radiation,
the poisoning, the burning, the
deformities. Many people were
literally atomized, blessedly blown
into oblivion... these were the lucky
ones. Scores of others lived,
suffering, dying, burning, surviving
for hours,days,weeks,months.What a
ghastly sight that must have been.
twee dergelijke nukes gebruiken op die manier was zwaar overdreven dus.
EricR die de koninklijke scepter zwaait over landbouw en nijverheid, Dani de nieuwe Aphrodite en Lauw als hofnar.
