Opinion of the atomic bombings of Japan (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 16, 2024, 12:49:27 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Opinion of the atomic bombings of Japan (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: ?
#1
Hiroshima and Nagasaki should have been bombed as IRL.
 
#2
The atomic bomb should not have been used at all.
 
#3
A single bomb should have been dropped on a less populated area, and Japan should have received more time to surrender.
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 72

Author Topic: Opinion of the atomic bombings of Japan  (Read 6308 times)
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


« on: June 02, 2013, 07:23:39 AM »

What would be the alternative to dropping these two bombs? Since the Japanese were nowhere near to surrender, would that be an invasion? Invasion, that would cost thousands of hundreds lives on both sides?

I've frequently heard "invasion wouldn't be nessesery, because the U.S. already controlled the air and bombings would make the Japanese quit at some point". Fair point, but it would take burning more and more cities (LeMay was very good at it), so it might have been far more deadly than two atomic bombs.

I'm not sure about drooping it on less populated area or demonstrating it on non-populated target. After all, it took two bombs to make Tokyo call it quits. I think Truman made a horrific, but right call.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.02 seconds with 14 queries.