Beef Jerky Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 (edited) It was needed to end the war... Actually it ended all future world wars b.c the next one would be the last one. Still crazy to think that something this tragic is still needed which is why other countries try to build... Holding the bigger stick. Always the innocent that die from this type of engineering. Edited August 7, 2015 by Beef Jerky
Dante Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 (edited) The relentless fire bombings that were going on well before the atomic bomb are largely ignored but those were arguably causing as much pain as the big one did. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo Edited August 7, 2015 by Dante
DC Tom Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 The relentless fire bombings that were going on well before the atomic bomb are largely ignored but those were arguably causing as much pain as the big one did. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo More pain. The fire bombings were brutal. There's never been a bombing worse than the Tokyo firebombing.
Pete Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 More pain. The fire bombings were brutal. There's never been a bombing worse than the Tokyo firebombing. True. Dresden was brutal too. My profile pic is a famous picture of a girl looking up from the Hiroshima rumble, and she is smiling and happy to be alive. Pretty incredible photograph.
John from Riverside Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 The stories of the delivering of the bombs and everything that happened are great backstories as well. Hopefully the world will be smart enough to learn from these trag and not repeat them.
Deranged Rhino Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 Because some one has to ask in this thread, I will. Do any of the armchair historians here believe Truman would have dropped the bomb on Germany had it been needed? Just curious for people's opinions...
FireChan Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 Because some one has to ask in this thread, I will. Do any of the armchair historians here believe Truman would have dropped the bomb on Germany had it been needed? Just curious for people's opinions... Yes.
The Poojer Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 but without those two atomic bombs we never would have found out how useful school desks were in protecting ourselves from attacks, so out of tragedy comes some good.... ...too soon?
LeviF Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 (edited) Little three-part video with footage of the atomic bombs being loaded onto the planes, for you history nerds: Part II: Part III: Edited August 7, 2015 by LeviF91
BarleyNY Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 Just watched WWII from Space on Netflix. It gives background, aerial views of major engagements, strategies employed, etc. A good watch. Interestingly it was noted that if there was any decision to cross a moral barrier having to do with dropping the atomic bombs, that it had already been made when the firebombings were okayed. They went into other factors as well, including: - the Japanese utilization of suicide bombers on land as well as Kamakazi pilots - the Japanese fighting to the last soldier and civilians committing mass suicide instead of surrendering - the immense loss of life expected by both sides If an invasion occurred - political repercussions and outrage of US public if it was found out that huge US casualties could have been avoided by use of the A-bomb - to strike fear into Stalin I don't see how Truman could have decided otherwise. Some could argue that one would have been enough, but while their use killed so many it also saved many times more.
Canadian Bills Fan Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 It had to be done and Japan was warned and they also were the ones who attacked the USA without warning or decleration of war CBF
dib Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 Because some one has to ask in this thread, I will. Do any of the armchair historians here believe Truman would have dropped the bomb on Germany had it been needed? Just curious for people's opinions... The reason Japan was bombed twice was because Germany had surrendered. One bomb was destined for Berlin, one for Japan. Dont forget, Aug.6,1945 would not be possible without Dec. 7, 1941
sodbuster Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 The reason Japan was bombed twice was because Germany had surrendered. One bomb was destined for Berlin, one for Japan. Dont forget, Aug.6,1945 would not be possible without Dec. 7, 1941I'm not saying that Japan was in the right, but Dec 7 was an attack on a military installation, and Aug 6 was an indiscriminate flattening of an entire city. And then we did it again. I don't think it is fair to compare the two. Now what Japan did to other nations around the Pacific rim, like Korea, China, and the Philippines for example, was just flat out terrible.
eball Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 True. Dresden was brutal too. My profile pic is a famous picture of a girl looking up from the Hiroshima rumble, and she is smiling and happy to be alive. Pretty incredible photograph. My dad (7 at the time) survived the Dresden bombing. He, his mother, and his younger brother escaped the city in a pickup truck driven by their uncle.
Pete Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 My dad (7 at the time) survived the Dresden bombing. He, his mother, and his younger brother escaped the city in a pickup truck driven by their uncle The horror. In all, over three waves of attacks, 3,300 tons of bombs were dropped on the city. Many of the bombs that were dropped were incendiary bombs. These created so much fire that a firestorm developed. The more the city burned, the more oxygen was sucked in – and the greater the firestorm became. It is thought that the temperature peaked at 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit. The surface of roads melted and fleeing people found that their feet were burned as they ran. http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/world-war-two/the-bombing-campaign-of-world-war-two/the-bombing-of-dresden/
dpberr Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 While the bombs were bad, a full invasion of mainland Japan would have been a bloodbath for both sides, with three times the casualties. As for dropping one on Germany, I recall when I read a book about Oppenheimer that dropping a bomb on Germany was a non-starter due to the fear of fallout on Allied countries and the large numbers of Allied military in and around the city.
Recommended Posts