august 6th

[rena-ko]

My honest condolences go out to the people of Hiroshima.

May their souls rest in peace.

[Mystil]

Is this the anniverasy of what I think it is?

[_J]

...Some of the deformed children (who were born after it happened) may still be alive...: / Heavy.

[Dangerous55]

Well, it saved lives.

[Allos]

Yes, lots of lives.

[Mystil]

I'm guessing this is about WWII..

[JTeebo]

I'd say that is a good guess...

[Guile]

It also took lives, many civilian lives.

[Zeebo]

poor people

[Dangerous55]

On 2003-08-06 20:50, Guile wrote:
It also took lives, many civilian lives.





Either those cities or half the population of Japan if not more.

[ShadowFOrce]

Uhh.....waht

[Dangerous55]

On 2003-08-07 00:11, ShadowFOrce wrote:
Uhh.....waht




What to me? Or the topic?

[Allos]

He's right. Had we invaded Japan the casualties on both sides would've skyrocketed and easily surpassed those of D-Day and the A-Bombs.

[_J]

He's right. Had we invaded Japan the casualties on both sides would've skyrocketed and easily surpassed those of D-Day and the A-Bombs.

If you said that to the families of the people who died, the mothers of the freak children, and people with various forums of cancer and deformities - I don't think they would be very fucking greatefull to you. Let's not even mention the people that died outright. It's not just "good" for everyone concerned. It was "good" for everyone who was not there, choose your words more carefully when your talking about something like this.

[RavenTW]

_J, it doesn't matter. There was bound to be casualties no matter what. Whether we invaded, whether we bombed, whether we just put the island under siege and kept asking them to surreneder, people were going to die. That's what happens in war. Ending the war with the fewest casualties as possible is what America wanted, and that's what those two bombs delivered.

[Blade21]

Well, casualties of War will always be their. . .But hey, they started it with Pearl Harbor. . .

[Allos]

If you said that to the families of the people who died, the mothers of the freak children, and people with various forums of cancer and deformities - I don't think they would be very fucking greatefull to you. Let's not even mention the people that died outright. It's not just "good" for everyone concerned. It was "good" for everyone who was not there, choose your words more carefully when your talking about something like this.

First I would like to say that "greatfull" isn't the correct spelling of the word, but that aside...

You have to realize that even more people would be dead if we hadn't dropped the bombs. As was said before, we were looking for the method of defeating Japan with the least amount of casualties

[_J]

_J, it doesn't matter. There was bound to be casualties no matter what. Whether we invaded, whether we bombed, whether we just put the island under siege and kept asking them to surreneder, people were going to die. That's what happens in war. Ending the war with the fewest casualties as possible is what America wanted, and that's what those two bombs delivered.



You have to realize that even more people would be dead if we hadn't dropped the bombs. As was said before, we were looking for the method of defeating Japan with the least amount of casualties



Okay, you both don't understand what I posted at all. I did not say it's bad that the bomb was dropped and ending the war in the quickest manner, I made a point of how you can't say it's best for EVERYONE. The poeple who were hit by the bomb, it was not the best solution for them - if you was there, you would not be saying what you are saying now, you have to try have a little something called PERSPECTIVE.


First I would like to say that "greatfull" isn't the correct spelling of the word, but that aside...


It's called a typo you petty little shit, it doesn't make you anymore correct, or me anymore "wrong" like you are implying there.

[Allos]

It's called a typo you petty little shit, it doesn't make you anymore correct, or me anymore "wrong" like you are implying there.


I never said it did make me more correct and I wasn't implying anything. I was just pointing it out to you so you don't do it again. And I don't appreciate being called a "pretty little shit".

[rena-ko]

hey hey, go flame yourself in another tread or take it over to private messages.

to answer the question, if the atom bombs were just or not, i'd like to quote something from the newspaper that day:
a christian who had a church near hiroshima that time and who survived the bombing (he fleed to the town before the bombing and helped 'cleaning up' afterwards) went to appologize to the mayor of the village he lived in for that christians like him had killed so many people. the mayor answered: 'what are you talking about? if we would have had the bomb, we would have used it as well.'

finally, it was war and i tend to say, dangerous55 is right
the atom bomb and its testing over a 200.000 people-city was a perverse act but seeing it only in the military point of view, it was the thing that ended the war and saved lots of people's lifes.

in the end, war is no way justice, but thats not the matter here.


once again, peace to the souls of those people who died up to now.

[rena-ko]

On 2003-08-07 06:49, Blade21 wrote:
Well, casualties of War will always be their. . .But hey, they started it with Pearl Harbor. . .

'there.'

and actually 'they' didnt started 'it', 'we' started 'it'. 'you' were just ignoring 'everything'.

now replace, with following (japanese, world war, germans, world war, USA, the obvious).


and about that 'mean attack', i still wonder why no british or french got killed at pearl harbour despite the fact that they were posted there until some days before...

[Dangerous55]

On 2003-08-07 07:46, rena-ko wrote:


and about that 'mean attack', i still wonder why no british or french got killed at pearl harbour despite the fact that they were posted there until some days before...



Because at least the British knew something was coming.

Do I blame them? Hell no, we were going to be in it anyway, and without out full support at that moment England is invaded and well, thats it.


Also _J, I think the people at Hiroshima, maybe not the ones at that time, but the people today realize it ended the war with alot of people still alive.

If we invaded Japan the world would be alot different.

[Cengah]

Are you guy's forgetting that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were cities and not army based facilities.

Why did america have to go and bomb two cities? They could have gone and just taken out military facilities and plants. But they didnt they bombed two of the largest cities at that time.

So you guy's say it saved lives. Whatever... More Japanese lives were sacrificed then there should have been.

[Sedyne]

Why should I have sympathy for people who attempted to fuck over my country? ........................

Not to be a dick but, They railed us in the arse first, it was just pay back.

but to the civilians/women/children...my condolences

[Allos]

Are you guy's forgetting that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were cities and not army based facilities.

Why did america have to go and bomb two cities? They could have gone and just taken out military facilities and plants. But they didnt they bombed two of the largest cities at that time.

So you guy's say it saved lives. Whatever... More Japanese lives were sacrificed then there should have been.


First of all, if we flew over a military facility we would've more than likely been shot down and no bomb would've been dropped. It would also have been illogical to drop an A-Bomb on a single military base or factory. Have you been reading this thread at all? You say more lives were sacrificed than should've been. I'm going to make this clear once and for all. MORE LIVES, CIVILIAN AND MILITARY ALIKE, WOULD'VE BEEN LOST IF THERE WAS A FULL-SCALE INVASION OF JAPAN.

[Dangerous55]

On 2003-08-07 11:56, Cengah wrote:
Are you guy's forgetting that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were cities and not army based facilities.





Uh, yes they were, thats why they were chosen as targets.


Allos is right too.

[Slicer238]

On 2003-08-07 12:30, Allos wrote:

Are you guy's forgetting that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were cities and not army based facilities.

Why did america have to go and bomb two cities? They could have gone and just taken out military facilities and plants. But they didnt they bombed two of the largest cities at that time.

So you guy's say it saved lives. Whatever... More Japanese lives were sacrificed then there should have been.


First of all, if we flew over a military facility we would've more than likely been shot down and no bomb would've been dropped. It would also have been illogical to drop an A-Bomb on a single military base or factory. Have you been reading this thread at all? You say more lives were sacrificed than should've been. I'm going to make this clear once and for all. MORE LIVES, CIVILIAN AND MILITARY ALIKE, WOULD'VE BEEN LOST IF THERE WAS A FULL-SCALE INVASION OF JAPAN.




Dude if we invaded Japan I don't think it would exsist today. My gramps served in WW2 Marines and beleive me they would not have quit until there was anything left. I don't know if you knew about this but the Marines sent a whole bunch of Japanese ears to the First lady. A bottle of human ears. Those bombs saved the lives of the Marines and a hell of alot more Civilians.

If I was in Hiroshima at that time and seen one bomber flying I would of had the common sense of "OH SHIT" and get as close to the falling bomb with wide arms.