Before & After Pic of Hiroshima

[What'sThatSmell]

And don't forget Dresden..

[marijuanaman123]

highdave I completly agree, people act like we did somthing bad what about attacking Americans while most were in prayer services or asleep fuck em they got what they deserve.HOOAH!!!!

[slippersman.]

If you're the leader of a country and you have beef with another country's leader, why the fuck do innocent people have to do your dirty work for you. Thats a bitch move man.

[slippersman.]

Originally Posted by marijuanaman123

highdave I completly agree, people act like we did somthing bad what about attacking Americans while most were in prayer services or asleep fuck em they got what they deserve.HOOAH!!!!

Not that I'm anti American, but the Japenese didn't destroy that much. Sure it was a tragedy, but we destroyed a good chunk of their population, two major cities, and their whole fuckin economy. Which is worse? An eye for an eye, not an eye for a whole fuckin family.

[PhoenixInFlames]

I find it funny that not many people believe this is going to happen soon??

Think about the past 100 years. How much world changing events have happened? How many wars? Etc. A LOT. Lets see, Late 1800s America was fighting itself, early 1900s were in the first world war, then a great depression, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Gulf, 9/11, etc. Thats just a small percentage of shit that has happened.

Its only a matter of time before something major happens. Its ridiculous to think otherwise. Think how fast technology has grown in the past 100 years. Think about the last 10 years...imagine what we'll have in 5 years from now. As time goes on, people learn to advance faster, die faster, live faster, fight faster etc.

This is just the calm before the storm people! Shits about to go down, you know it, I know it, everyone knows it.

[indica_x]

And thats not the only time we targeted japanese civilians. The carpet bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other major cities killed alot more people than Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They used incendiary bombs because houses were built out of extremely flammable material. Imagine being on the ground, the temperature would have been well over 100. There was an alternative to the nuclear attack or mainland invasion. The Japanese had already lost their navy and were kicked out of the Philippines and China, we could of just blockaded them until they surrendered.

[AlphaQ]

This was a more complex issue than a quick end to the Pacific arena in WWII.

If you look at WWII in Europe, a lot of damage to cities was done by aerial bombing over civilian cities. If the cities and their people cannot function, there will not be enough resources/logistics/personnel/strategic position to maintain a massive war, not to mention morale. Dropping another bomb, a big one, seemed like an easy/quick/safe way to achieve success for the U.S.

It was well known how devoted the Japanese military was to victory. The kamikaze missions helped prove this as did Iwo Jima. If the U.S. had to resort to invading the Japanese mainland there was a distinct possibility that hundreds of thousands of U.S. soldiers would have to give their lives to end the war.

Additionally, the U.S had been attacked on U.S. territory for the first time in a while. Pearl Harbor was a sneak attack that was essentially unprovoked (conspiracy theorists may deny this). What they can't deny is that the Japanese also invaded the Aleutian islands of the Alaskan Territory. With most troops already sent to the European arena, the battle in the pacific looked to be long and deadly.

After the German's lost in Europe, troops could have been redeployed, but the nuclear weapons were ready. Most military leaders will gladly take the solution that results in the least amount of harm to their troops. Additionally the nuclear bomb would be used as a deterrent for those still willing to fight.

I disagree with dropping nuclear bombs on civilian cities at the stage the war was at, military targets would have been the proper targets. At this point in time, most of the world did not know the true horrors of atomic weapons on civilization. I imagine many military leaders did not know the true extent of the devastation this would cause (radiation poisoning in particular) as tests on humans were never conducted by the U.S.

It is easy for us to judge them now, knowing the devastation of such weapons. Back then, the U.S. was trying to end the worst war in world history and felt this was a way to do it. They certainly were correct.

[Salvial]

Originally Posted by CosmicSerpent

it's a sad thing that the United States has to take the burden of carrying out the only nuclear attacks in the history of warfare.

Then why didn't they stop the Pearl Harbor bombing? They knew about it.

[Arnack]

Originally Posted by CosmicSerpent

Pearl Harbor was an attack on a U.S. Naval Base, which killed a total of 2,345 American military and 57 civilians. The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed as many as 220,000 Japanese civilians immediately, and thousands more from injuries and illness. Not a very appropriate response in my opinion... it's a sad thing that the United States has to take the burden of carrying out the only nuclear attacks in the history of warfare.

While I think it was wrong, it was quite a tactical way to end a war. We asked the Japanese to give up several times and we even said we would drop the bomb. We didn't want to do it, but after they rejected our pleads over and over we had to or even more lives would have been killed through the wars.. maybe even worse.

[Misf1t]

It's hilarious how many ignorant people browse these forums.

[CAZx7]

i get chills whenever i think about hiroshima. what the us did is beyond fucked up. how could they kill so many innocent people after the japanese attacked a NAVAL base. its so sad thinking about how many lives ended that day and people still suffer from it to this day. but dont worry, sometime in the future america gonna get it back-maybe not in our lifetimes but i have a feeling that within the next 150 years there will be some sort of nuclear attack.

[Chiefin_Ls]

Originally Posted by speakonitgod

Not like it matters now, but FDR could've prevented Pearl Harbor from happening. The reason he allowed the incident to happen was because he would be able to have propaganda backing to support our joining of WWII. This shit goes so deep.

exactly.. he just wanted a way into the war, that's why they didn't join until the end after pearl harbor.

[EustaceBugles]

There is no question that the bombing was provoked. Raise as many questions as you want about their choice for where they bombed, and other such things, but just know, retaliation was necessary. You have no idea what could have happened, had we not immediately put an end to the situation.

Also, enough of this "the punishment should fit the crime" mentality because wars don't work that way.

[JohnnyWeedSeed]

i usta live near hiroshima and let me tell you those pics do it no justice. ive stood in the shadow of the ownly building left standing, well, half standing, and saw the outlines of people burned into the cement where they sat. the city is surrounded by mountains which look like they contained the blast and everything else was totally flattened. now the entire city is built on a gigantic slab of cement to keep the radiation down and not one plant grows there that was not planted.

[Tokamano8o]

Originally Posted by CosmicSerpent

Pearl Harbor was an attack on a U.S. Naval Base, which killed a total of 2,345 American military and 57 civilians. The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed as many as 220,000 Japanese civilians immediately, and thousands more from injuries and illness. Not a very appropriate response in my opinion... it's a sad thing that the United States has to take the burden of carrying out the only nuclear attacks in the history of warfare.

It had to be done. If we didn't a lot of of OUR OWN people would have died. Its sad but it had to be done.