NationStates Jolt Archive

Do you think we should have dropped the atomic bombs on the two Japanese citites?

Do you think we should have dropped the atomic bombs on the two Japanese citites?

Yes, because those civilians were about to teleport into mainland U.S and eat our children.

Yes, because those civilians were about to teleport into mainland U.S and eat our children.

lol, so vote your response in the poll.

lol, so vote your response in the poll.

You forgot to represent libertarians, centrists, etc. on your poll.

You forgot to represent libertarians, centrists, etc. on your poll.

I know but I could only include the two main parties because the poll limits to 8 so I cant fit all the parties on there.

Thats why I put or close enough beside each one.

Yes, since it was a lot better than the alternative of sending Chuck Norris.

i believe it was good because it brought an end to the war, and stopped an invasion which would have cost many lives, however the bombs themselves cost many lives. So I am neither for nor against, and I'm a conservative.....

The other option besides dropping the atom bomb is of course invading Japan itself. The only problem is that the Japansese government would force every man, woman, and child to fight and thus it would result in millions of deaths. Let's not forget the American casualities as well. Oh we can't forget the Russians who were in Mongolia and eager to invade Japan too. It was either the atomic bombs or tens of millions of lives wasted for no purpose. I choose "yes"

Do you think we should have dropped the atomic bombs on the two Japanese citites?
This topic has been beaten to death several times over on here!

Yes, yes, yes! The use of the atomic bombs saved over a million American lives and probably twice that many Japanese lives, so the use was appropriate. Besides, we weren't there and didn't have responsibility for making the decision and thus are not privy to all the decision-making process.

Now can I go post on some threads that actually have new, interesting questions to ask? ;p

Do you think we should have dropped the atomic bombs on the two Japanese citites?

...goes to hangar...looks for keys to B-29...checks bomb bay...starts engines...

The other option besides dropping the atom bomb is of course invading Japan itself. The only problem is that the Japansese government would force every man, woman, and child to fight and thus it would result in millions of deaths. Let's not forget the American casualities as well. Oh we can't forget the Russians who were in Mongolia and eager to invade Japan too. It was either the atomic bombs or tens of millions of lives wasted for no purpose. I choose "yes"

Exactly...My Grandfather was being loaded up along with the other American troops and about to be sent to the Japanese mainland, but then we dropped the bombs....He told me that before we dropped the bombs, around 40% of the Americans that were going to be attacking the mainland would die.

This topic has been beaten to death several times over on here!

Yes, yes, yes! The use of the atomic bombs saved over a million American lives and probably twice that many Japanese lives, so the use was appropriate. Besides, we weren't there and didn't have responsibility for making the decision and thus are not privy to all the decision-making process.

Now can I go post on some threads that actually have new, interesting questions to ask? ;p

I agree with you....although I have never seen a thread like this before.

Exactly...My Grandfather was being loaded up along with the other American troops and about to be sent to the Japanese mainland, but then we dropped the bombs....He told me that before we dropped the bombs, around 40% of the Americans that were going to be attacking the mainland would die.
That's probably an optimistic estimate: taking the Home Islands by force would have involved a terrible loss of life on both sides. (Whether that's adequete reason to use nuclear weapons, of course, is a whole other issue...)
Weren't the japanese planning to slaughter POWs and civilian prisoners in the case of a conventional invasion as well?

Yes, since it was a lot better than the alternative of sending Chuck Norris.
Chuck Norris would have had sex with all the women simultaneously causing an orgasmic explosion that would have sunk Japan and parts of Korea.

That's probably an optimistic estimate: taking the Home Islands by force would have involved a terrible loss of life on both sides. (Whether that's adequete reason to use nuclear weapons, of course, is a whole other issue...)
Weren't the japanese planning to slaughter POWs and civilian prisoners in the case of a conventional invasion as well?

I have actually heard this, although I'm not sure of its truth....look it up...?

That's probably an optimistic estimate: taking the Home Islands by force would have involved a terrible loss of life on both sides. (Whether that's adequete reason to use nuclear weapons, of course, is a whole other issue...)
Weren't the japanese planning to slaughter POWs and civilian prisoners in the case of a conventional invasion as well?

Yes they were planning on doing that because they wanted to leave no survivors. The United States was thinking of nuking parts of Japan they were going to invade from the sea. To kill any of the defenders of course but then the troops were going to wade through toxic land and get cancer and other side effects. The Russian Army, which was comprised of an estimated 1.5 million men, were on the verge of invading Japan from the east. It would've been slaughter. Oh and you know how Russians treat captured people (take a look at West Germany) you can probably guess what they would've done to the Japanese women.

I agree with you....although I have never seen a thread like this before.

It pops up about once a month or more. Just hang around a while and you'll see it again. :rolleyes:

I have actually heard this, although I'm not sure of its truth....look it up...?
Not a bad idea.

Not a bad idea.

Of course its not, thats why I thought of it;)

I did an entire term paper on the bombings last year. Trust me, dropping the bombs was a lot more humane than the alternative.

I voted Yes/Liberal, but my vote is a little biased because my Grandfather was most likely going to be involved in invading Japan.

The other option besides dropping the atom bomb is of course invading Japan itself. The only problem is that the Japansese government would force every man, woman, and child to fight and thus it would result in millions of deaths. Let's not forget the American casualities as well. Oh we can't forget the Russians who were in Mongolia and eager to invade Japan too. It was either the atomic bombs or tens of millions of lives wasted for no purpose. I choose "yes"


Which leads us to a new thread:
what would have happened if we didnt drop the bombs. I mean, we could start a debate about this. The new thread could include american and jap tactics, racial remarks, popcorn, brilliant shows of american intelligence(it does exist!), and people who think they know military tactics yelling at people who think they know military tactics.

Lets do it!

oh..and I think we should have dropped the bombs.

Which leads us to a new thread:
what would have happened if we didnt drop the bombs. I mean, we could start a debate about this. The new thread could include american and jap tactics, racial remarks, popcorn, brilliant shows of american intelligence(it does exist!), and people who think they know military tactics yelling at people who think they know military tactics.

Lets do it!

oh..and I think we should have dropped the bombs.

I'll make the popcorn and bring some beer. :D

I voted Yes/Liberal, but my vote is a little biased because my Grandfather was most likely going to be involved in invading Japan.
Same, I've heard stories about both of my grandparents getting ready to be shipped off to the "great battle of Japan."

Same, I've heard stories about both of my grandparents getting ready to be shipped off to the "great battle of Japan."

Well, my grandparents were still busy in Europe, but I agree that dropping the bombs probably saved many lives (as odd as killing people to avoid killing more people may seem).

"We" (meaning my country) didn't drop anything, but I do think the USA was right to do it.

As a libertarian I feel discriminated against in this poll.

As a libertarian I feel discriminated against in this poll. Classic liberal ? libertarian (that's an "approximately equals" if you can't see it).

Yes, you did well in dropping the bombs, for all the reasons everyone else mentioned.