Title: Can we all have a moment of silence......
Description: A rememberence of the nuclear bomeing...
Fury OD - August 10, 2005 03:58 AM (GMT)
Im doing this today by acident... It was realy yesterday the bomb hit japan...I think it was Nagasaki witch got hit and many inoccents died...Please suport this topic and show the people who created Zoids your respect....But not only the people who created zoids but the people who gave us all anime...Don't be afraid to show your feelings...
Thank you all... :)
Sky Dragon - August 10, 2005 04:43 AM (GMT)
Heh.
I happen to believe that Nagasaki was an unnecessary act bordering on mass-murder. Hiroshima (one "small" (13 Kt) nuke) was, perhaps, justified, as the casualties from a long, conventional war would've been higher.
But the second bomb, and three days later, without giving the Japanese time to react, was just overkill.
So yes, a moment of silence, in rememberance of the essentially needless killing of thousands of Japanese...
Fury OD - August 10, 2005 04:45 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Sky Dragon @ Aug 9 2005, 11:43 PM) |
Heh.
I happen to believe that Nagasaki was an unnecessary act bordering on mass-murder. Hiroshima (one "small" (13 Kt) nuke) was, perhaps, justified, as the casualties from a long, conventional war would've been higher. But the second bomb, and three days later, without giving the Japanese time to react, was just overkill.
So yes, a moment of silence, in rememberance of the essentially needless killing of thousands of Japanese... |
:angry: Exacly my point...
Blade - August 10, 2005 06:11 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Sky Dragon @ Aug 10 2005, 12:43 AM) |
Heh.
I happen to believe that Nagasaki was an unnecessary act bordering on mass-murder. Hiroshima (one "small" (13 Kt) nuke) was, perhaps, justified, as the casualties from a long, conventional war would've been higher. But the second bomb, and three days later, without giving the Japanese time to react, was just overkill.
So yes, a moment of silence, in rememberance of the essentially needless killing of thousands of Japanese... |
First off, isn't this more of a General topic?
Ah, and I unfortunately disagree. I do believe that the bombs were an unnecessary instrument used in the war, but frankly you have to consider some of the political pressure Truman was under.
First of all, it was the beginning of the Cold War when WW II finished. But already, there was competition between USSR and USA. Truman wanted to put forth the US as a force to be reckoned with, and he was probably hoping that there would be less tensions between the USSR and USA with the unveling of such a destructive weapon.
So, Truman was hoping to avoid future conflicts with a much sinister threat. Before you all say that Truman was an arsehole for supporting this act, consider the political pressure he was under.
Secondly, the war would have been the US's anyway, and this is where I think that using the A-Bomb was unnecessary. The mighty fleet of Japan was already suffering with the loss at Okinawa Bay and Iwo Jima, and the US Air Force was bombing and overcoming its aerial adversaries. The US would have definetly won the war, but Truman only wanted to cause the loss of less lives (or so he and the gov't claims).
I believe that the loss of livse is a small justification for the use of the bomb. Surely, it devastated more lives with the radiation than just those of the initial detonation, but they were not fully aware of this back then (or so I think...this is more of an opinion).
[{Eh, what can I say, I took an interest in what happened during WWII...doesn't mean I think it was a good war, I just found it an interesting war}]
And, of course, I have mentioned that I think the loss of lives was sad and the loss of innocent lives - many people who had nothing to do with the war or those who did not support it - was a very cruel biproduct of Truman's actions.
Fury OD - August 10, 2005 01:23 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Blade @ Aug 10 2005, 01:11 AM) |
| QUOTE (Sky Dragon @ Aug 10 2005, 12:43 AM) | Heh.
I happen to believe that Nagasaki was an unnecessary act bordering on mass-murder. Hiroshima (one "small" (13 Kt) nuke) was, perhaps, justified, as the casualties from a long, conventional war would've been higher. But the second bomb, and three days later, without giving the Japanese time to react, was just overkill.
So yes, a moment of silence, in rememberance of the essentially needless killing of thousands of Japanese... |
First off, isn't this more of a General topic?
Ah, and I unfortunately disagree. I do believe that the bombs were an unnecessary instrument used in the war, but frankly you have to consider some of the political pressure Truman was under.
First of all, it was the beginning of the Cold War when WW II finished. But already, there was competition between USSR and USA. Truman wanted to put forth the US as a force to be reckoned with, and he was probably hoping that there would be less tensions between the USSR and USA with the unveling of such a destructive weapon. So, Truman was hoping to avoid future conflicts with a much sinister threat. Before you all say that Truman was an arsehole for supporting this act, consider the political pressure he was under.
Secondly, the war would have been the US's anyway, and this is where I think that using the A-Bomb was unnecessary. The mighty fleet of Japan was already suffering with the loss at Okinawa Bay and Iwo Jima, and the US Air Force was bombing and overcoming its aerial adversaries. The US would have definetly won the war, but Truman only wanted to cause the loss of less lives (or so he and the gov't claims). I believe that the loss of livse is a small justification for the use of the bomb. Surely, it devastated more lives with the radiation than just those of the initial detonation, but they were not fully aware of this back then (or so I think...this is more of an opinion). [{Eh, what can I say, I took an interest in what happened during WWII...doesn't mean I think it was a good war, I just found it an interesting war}]
And, of course, I have mentioned that I think the loss of lives was sad and the loss of innocent lives - many people who had nothing to do with the war or those who did not support it - was a very cruel biproduct of Truman's actions.
|
<_< He wanted to cause the war with less lives? Please , let the soldiors live and the towns people die.I belive in a war that the only people that should get hurt is the people who is acualy fighting the war ...I for one think that Truman just wanted to show the world how strong America is,by devestateing the world.
Tilly - August 10, 2005 05:02 PM (GMT)
This is meant to be a moment of silence, not a politcal and/or moral debate. I don't think the people who died would want their legacy to be people fighting, but rather the reverse.
Closing topic before it gets worse.