Staredit Network

I was watching a movie on TV. When the break for the news and weather-forecast began I switched channel. On the other channel there was a documentery about the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of WW2. Some of the survivors told their stories about all the suffering they got right after the bombs had exploded. They had also filmed some scenes to show how horrible it was for them. About 250 000 people died because of the nuke in Hiroshima, most of them because of the injuries the nuke caused or cancer.
Sometimes I hate USA... I dont really think those nukes was necessary to end the war. Japan was alone after Germany was defeated and had to fight both USA and Russia. I think they would have to surrender after a short time anyway. Instead USA nuked them and caused a lot of civilian losses. There are still some people that suffers because of the nukes. After what I've heard the area still got much radiation wich causes more people to get cancer and die. So... I think it was a mistake to nuke Japan...

No, nuke them, show the destructiveness of the nuclear bomb early to make the whole world fear and learn from this experience - not to nuke again. Japan's just a scapegoat really.

Plus, what are we really debating/ discussing on. You haven't set forth a moot.
It could be the discussion of "impact of the nuclear bombing in Japan on the world"
Or
"Whether the US should have nuked Japan or not"

I think kame had a similar topic quite a while ago.

Whether it was necessary or not I'm not sure. I suppose it might have saved lifes instead of having both sides actually fighting, yet the effects of the bomb were horrible. It's really disturbing to see what actually happened to the people who were killed.

I'm watching the Discovery Channel special on the bomb, and it has some survivors describing what happened, and some reenactments, and it really is horrendous.

One question I have was why was there a need to bomb Nagasaki after?

I also think it's sad when it's a good thing that a city is totally destroyed.

More lives would have been lost if we didn't use the bomb, also Japan has plans to use their own nuclear "bomb" on San Francisco, but the U-boat carrying the nuclear materials surrendered around the east coast of America. Lastly the war could have lasted well into the late 1940's since Japan was about to produce Jet aircraft.

I see why the 2nd bomb was necessary, yet war is still a horrible time.

The Japanese never had a Nuke. It was a 'Dirty Bomb', and all it did was scatter nuclear radiant particles across the bombed area.

By bombing the Japanese, we saved as many or more American lives that would have been fought to force the stubborn Japanese to surrender. They had a fight to the death policy, 'Death Before Dishonor' I beleive the quote was.

The reason we nuked Nagaski afterwards was to signify that Tokyo was next, and to make sure the point was hammered intot their minds.

It was, apparently you aren't aware of how patroitic the Japanese are. We would of had to invade the islands, and it would of been massive casualities. The Japanese were known for their suicidal defense. We warned Japan, but they didn't listen. Two were needed to get the point across. We saved more lives this way, sorry to say.

[center]Yeah, sorry about that... It was totally against my will.
I agree that they were a time saver, and maybe even a life saver, but I don't think they were necessary...
I'm way too hyper right now to get indepth, so I'll leave with that.[/center]

No, it saved more lives then it killed. Even if we didn't use them, Stalin would of invaded Japan and we would of had a possible Stalinist Japan similar to the situtation in Germany.

In my mind nuclear weapons shouldn't be used today. Period.

But I agree that the twin bombings on Japan were justified. Japanese warriors would have fought until their death. I seem to remember reading of a platoon of guys stationed in some small island in teh pacific and ended up getting stranded who didn't learn of Japan's defeat until 23 years after teh end of WWII, and they still didn't believe Japan really surendered.


Also, the effects we saw in japan also allow us to study why we shouldn't use nukes today.

In fact, a fav Sc/BW weapons in the ledgendary nuke.

In fact, the brothers of Korhal went against the Confederacy because their homeword got nuked, and nuked to blackened glass.

Ummmm.... anyone ever notice the first bomb was littleboy, yet it obliterated Hirosima?

Some times you hate the USA? The USA was a much different country back then than it is now.

If anything, the USA, as in Moral and unity, is worse off then WWII times. FDR really unified the country, and today, everybody is somehow against the war of terrorism. Be it, the reasons, the person, the means to the end, or the end itself.

Outrage against Bush is really hurting the country, and I think he wouldn't hesitate to use nukes against someone who used them first.

I'd just like to state that several tests have been run on the people living in the areas of the nuclear attacks. And they have found that although there is still massive amounts of radiation. The children born after the attack are much healthier than many around the world.

err.. nvm the studies were done on chernobyl.

ADDITION:
He also almost destroyed the economy with the institutions he set up. He has been speculated to be one of the reasons the depression went on as long as it did.

Compared to today's wepons, littleboy and fat man are nothing.


Um what was Arctuas Mengsk's favorite line:
1 dead, a casualty, a million, a statistic, or something like that.

dude, thats Stalin

W/e, mengsk says it some mission brief.

Rofl, mixing up SC and Reality



Yea, my dad mentioned that, today's weapons are way more powerful than they were back then, very scary. And imagine the damage littleboy and fatman did...

thats why i typed "bomb"

No, they wouldn't. They were being lead under outdated principals of fighting to the last man. It was the lesser of two evils (or at least, appeared so at the time). They didn't surrender after the first A-Bomb, because they didn't believe the U.S. had another, that in itself proves they wouldn't have. Want a source? Go on wikipedia or take a History course. I'm not a big fan of America's military history, it's quite frankly pathetic, but this was not a mistake.

It was a WORLD WAR, not a WOLRD WAFFLE EATING CONTEST, of course hundreds of thousands of people are gonna get killed. What did you expect? Everyone to grab a guitar and sing happy happy jesus songs? Please.

Well, I think it was one of the greatest things during that century. Other than me being born, of course. Imagine if we didn't do it. We'd keep letting the Japs push us around with their Kamakazi planes and just keep dying? My friends Little Boy and Fat Man sure shut them the hell up. And it's all because of the original, Trinity. donwano Bless America.

The war would of ended regardless of the use of the bombs, the combined force of the Soviet Union and U.S would of crushed the defense, but with heavy casualties. Hell, the Soviet Union could of done it alone, they were basically a steam roller near the end of the war.

Yea, those bombs saved thousands of lives. And yes, America's Army was pathetic pretty much up until WW2. After that we started kicking some ass.

The Russians had carved through a great portion of the Japanese army in China. America was scheduled to invade Japan in a few months. I read somewhere that the combined deaths of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were 100,000, and that statistic includes the after-effects of radiation. That amount alone would have been lost easily in Japanese numbers, not to mention American and Russian fatalities. Russia lost a good 20,000,000 soldiers during that war (and somehow they managed to be the biggest world power for a while). It's sad that we had to take out civilian targets, but millions of lives were "saved" in the process.

The Japanese traditions have transferred over to their business strategies, and it really showed in their economic collapse.