Should the States have dropped the atomic bombs?

[agent000_77]

Re: Should the States have dropped the atomic bombs?

lol, yes the neutron bombs are bad ones....

No, what you just stated is what i meant by retaliation. Nation A drops bomb on Nation B. Nation B retaliates by attacking Nation A. Nations A's ally Nation C drops another bomb on Nation B. Nation B's ally Nation Z attacks Nation C. Nation C attack Nation Z's ally Nation X to limit food production for Nation Z. Nation Z retaliates by attacking major resource facilities located in Nation J, D, and L. After a few days, everyone in every country is dead except Nation 42. Nation 42 moved to Mars.

[Cavernio]

Re: Should the States have dropped the atomic bombs?

I can't agree that using massive destructive powers is perfectly acceptable as long as yours is the only nation holding them.
My point still stands. Using weapons of mass destruction's insanity, and we all know and agree to that, yet you're backing it up. How many nukes need to go off before the line's been crossed? Until 50% of the world's destroyed? 1 goes off in your own country? 1 atom bomb going off is too much destruction all at once for me, and there's little you can say to change that.
I'm not saying that ending a war quickly is bad. Killing thousands of innocent people is wrong. Presuming that more deaths would ensue than due to the nukes is just that, presumption. How much time would it have taken of fighting to kill that many by-standers if the nukes weren't dropped?

[devonin]

Re: Should the States have dropped the atomic bombs?

Here's the thing though: Looking back at the situation now that a lot more information from both sides is publically available, we can say that yes, by some standards, using the nuclear weapons to force an end to the war was justified, or at least justifyable.

In each case where the use of nuclear weapons is a possibility, you don't have the luxery at the time of that level of information, and you definitely don't have the benefit of already seeing what the consequences were.

It might be accurate to say "At no time is the use of nuclear weapons acceptable, except for those times where, in retrospect, it was acceptable"

[og4lif]

Re: Should the States have dropped the atomic bombs?

Killing thousands of innocent people is wrong. Presuming that more deaths would ensue than due to the nukes is just that, presumption. How much time would it have taken of fighting to kill that many by-standers if the nukes weren't dropped?

*Final Thoughts*
It was not the state's intention to kill thousands of innocent people. The targets they selected were strictly meant to cripple the Japanese army. For example, Hiroshima was chosen as a target because it was a large industrial city that contained the Japanese Armies second Headquarters. That headquarters in Hiroshima was in charge of all the defense systems in Southern Japan. Also, Hiroshima had communication centers for its army. troop assemblies and storage points. Unfortunately, the ultimate downfall of the bomb was the fact that it could not avoid the innocent people living within Hiroshima. Finally, The war would have taken much longer to end as it is fact that the Japanese were not willing to surrender.
In conclusion, the bomb saved Japan from making a huge error that could of lead to their extinction from the map if they continued to fight and many casulties were avoided due to the bombs.

[Cavernio]

Re: Should the States have dropped the atomic bombs?

Justification doesn't mean that it was the best way to deal with the situation.

[devonin]

Re: Should the States have dropped the atomic bombs?

Nor did anybody say it was. Justified simply means that there is sufficient reason to accept it as a valid course of action.

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Should the States have dropped the atomic bombs?

EDIT: Dammit, ninja'd by devonin. =\\\\

Justification doesn't mean that it was the best way to deal with the situation.

Retrospect doesn't really care about that fact, though.

Wanna make things better? Go back in history and provide a better alternative. Since the bombs were dropped, though, our justification is what we have to keep us from tearing our hearts out too much.

Until we learn to time travel, "the best way" to deal with things is just a pipe dream.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[boo4u]

Re: Should the States have dropped the atomic bombs?

I think they should have dropped the bombs, but I think it would be better if they dropped it in the middle of a forest to just show what they had. They would look at the forest and all the trees would either be gone or be fallen in a a circler pattern collectively.

Dropping an atomic bomb in a forest is the most irrational thing I have ever heard in this thread so far. Fido do you realize the impact the bomb would have if dropped within a forest?

[jewpinthethird]

Re: Should the States have dropped the atomic bombs?

I can't agree that using massive destructive powers is perfectly acceptable as long as yours is the only nation holding them.
My point still stands. Using weapons of mass destruction's insanity, and we all know and agree to that, yet you're backing it up. How many nukes need to go off before the line's been crossed? Until 50% of the world's destroyed? 1 goes off in your own country? 1 atom bomb going off is too much destruction all at once for me, and there's little you can say to change that.
I'm not saying that ending a war quickly is bad. Killing thousands of innocent people is wrong. Presuming that more deaths would ensue than due to the nukes is just that, presumption. How much time would it have taken of fighting to kill that many by-standers if the nukes weren't dropped?

Hi, my name is Cavernio and I like talking about things out of historical context. My version of history is one that has all the sharp corners covered with padded foam.

[Relambrien]

Re: Should the States have dropped the atomic bombs?

Hi, my name is Cavernio and I like talking about things out of historical context. My version of history is one that has all the sharp corners covered with padded foam.

As much as I shouldn't be laughing at this...I have to say, it really made me laugh.

[boo4u]

Re: Should the States have dropped the atomic bombs?

Hydrogen bombs aren't the ones to worry about. Neutron Bombs on the other hand *shudder*

Hey I've got something interesting for you. Have you ever heard of the bomb referred to as the cobalt bomb (salted nuclear weapon). Do some research on this type of nuke. Apparently it is capable of wiping out all life on the planet.

*Now thats a shudder*

Thankfully, there is no evidence that a cobalt bomb exists and also that it was never built or used against Japan during World War II.

[devonin]

Re: Should the States have dropped the atomic bombs?

Erm, I'm pretty sure that Atomic, and Hydrogen bombs are also pretty capable of wiping out all life on the planet.

The thing that sets the theoretical Cobalt Bomb apart from the others is that it creates a -lot- of radiation for quite a long time over a pretty large area. The proper parsing isn't "Wipe out all life" it is "Wipe out only life" because since the explosion itself is not especially large, but the radiation dispersal is, it would be incredibly useful as an attacking device because it would leave infrastructure intact (Though you're looking at a good 20 years before you could move into the area)

Thankfully, such a bomb doesn't exist, and as I recall, some tests of a nuclear device using Cobalt as a tracer failed miserably.

[Cavernio]

Re: Should the States have dropped the atomic bombs?

EDIT: Dammit, ninja'd by devonin. =\\\\

Retrospect doesn't really care about that fact, though.


Wanna make things better? Go back in history and provide a better alternative. Since the bombs were dropped, though, our justification is what we have to keep us from tearing our hearts out too much.

Until we learn to time travel, "the best way" to deal with things is just a pipe dream.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

You have no idea how silly this post sounds to me. Discussion about other, possible alternatives, hoping to find 'the best way' to deal with a past scenario, is out of the question? Why the hell are we even discussing the issue then? Beyond being something to talk about, which is enough reason in and of itself, exploring other ways of doing things can be a very useful excersise for the future, in terms of understanding things and dealing with them. We don't always have the luxury of time to explore alternatives at key times, as has been pointed out. Best to do it now than never.

Rejecting a course of action while acknowledging it's usefulness is possible to do without getting depressed about it.

****, everything a person does is justified to someone, or else no one'd not do anything! Everyone, even crazy people, have their reasons.

The situation where bombs were dropped there was no immediate threat from Japan, and so yes, there WAS the luxury of taking time to think about other courses of action. I'm no military strategist or historian, but no one's yet to say that strategic, targeted bombing of key areas would've been stupid, or landing troops and taking control that way. Or simply upping defenses and let Japan shrivel from the inside. The ONLY reason people have said that we should've dropped the nukes because they're so sure that more people would've died if we didn't, ignoring that death over time is not the same as death all at once, and ignoring who was killed as well. Oh yes, and that people didn't want war anymore, if that can be said to be a reason.

Don't talk to me about the length of the war either, not for the US. They entered far later than any other allies.

jewp: I've discussed things outside of the historical context on this topic, because it's perfectly acceptable. Other people who have used outside historical context too, like "there's not the luxury during war". Furthermore, I've addressed things in context as well. Mookage's point, that Japan was having internal conflict, supports other things I've said. Perhaps you shouldn't be taking 1 post I've made out of the context of the rest of the posts made.

[hewhoishigh]

Re: Should the States have dropped the atomic bombs?

Yep, you're gone.