The Nuking of Nagasaki: Even More Immoral and Unnecessary than Hiroshima

[Unkotare]

....
Real historians will tell you that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were military targets, and that Japan didn't surrender until after both atomic bombs had already been dropped.

I'm getting the impression that you haven't cracked a history book in decades, Junior.

 

[Unkotare]

When children are told stories that they grow comfortable with, they are resistant to letting them go - ever. Some people never grow up.

 

[Vegasgiants]

Japan surrendered completely after the first bomb? Am I wrong?

Say NO Vegas....

I don't care what anyone says---I care only about the facts.

AGAIN for you slow marxist people out there...

The bombs ended the war--------ending the war was a good thing as it saved thousands if not millions of lives doing so.

Idiots upset about dropping the bombs would have preferred to see more people. These are the only two choices...drop the bombs and end the war, or continue to fight the war and lose more lives. Binary choice here hun.

But we didnt need the bombs to end the war

 

[Unkotare]

All your lies about Japan trying to surrender before the atomic bombs were dropped, and all your lies about the bombs not being dropped on military targets.
....

And all of the many, many direct quotes from the top US military leaders of the day are all "lies" too? All of those US military leaders are "anti-American"? Come on, Junior.

 

[Vegasgiants]

Facts say that we needed to...dropping the bombs ended the war..PERIOD. Ending the war saved hundreds of thousands of our troops and stop Japan from terrorizing others.

Dropping the bombs was the right and moral thing to do...only idiots don't realize and only idiots or liars claim otherwise.

Well the fact is the generals said we didnt need the bomb to end the war

 

[Open Bolt]

We only gave them two days to decide

So what?

What would have happened if we gave them a week?

What would have happened if we gave them five seconds between each bombing?

The war was over once we successfully tested the bomb at Alamogordo.
From that point on, we had the bomb and nobody else did. An invasion of Japan was no longer necessary

We were going to invade Japan if they had kept refusing to surrender.

The question was how best to demonstrate our nuclear weapon.
Were Hiroshima and Nagasaki better options than bombing a purely military target?

It's hard to think of a target more military than Hiroshima was.

Would Japan have surrendered if we had bombed military targets to demonstrate the weapon?
We Will never know
We didn’t give them the chance

That is incorrect. We did bomb military targets.

 

[Open Bolt]

I'm getting the impression that you haven't cracked a history book in decades, Junior.

That's because you are extremely ignorant and you don't know anything about this subject.

I've read more history books on this subject than you've read books.

That's why it is always so easy for me to correct all your untrue statements.

When children are told stories that they grow comfortable with, they are resistant to letting them go - ever. Some people never grow up.

That begs the question of why you find anti-American lies so comforting that you refuse to let go in the face of the truth.

And all of the many, many direct quotes from the top US military leaders of the day are all "lies" too?

I would characterize the quotes as being extra whiny.

The lies are when you claim that Japan tried to surrender before the atomic bombs, or that we didn't attack military targets.

All of those US military leaders are "anti-American"?

No. Just really really whiny.

Come on, Junior.

You have a big mouth for someone who doesn't know anything about the subject.

 

[Vegasgiants]

So what?



What would have happened if we gave them five seconds between each bombing?



We were going to invade Japan if they had kept refusing to surrender.



It's hard to think of a target more military than Hiroshima was.



That is incorrect. We did bomb military targets.

Actually the generals were pretty unanimous that we didnt need to invade either

 

[Open Bolt]

But we didnt need the bombs to end the war

Who cares?

Well the fact is the generals said we didnt need the bomb to end the war

It's a shame no one taught them not to whine so loudly.

Actually the generals were pretty unanimous that we didnt need to invade either

Had Japan kept refusing to surrender, we would have invaded.

How do you think the Cuban Missile Crisis would have turned out if the US and USSR had not had the example of Hiroshima to restrain them from launching a nuclear war?

 

[Vegasgiants]

Who cares?



It's a shame no one taught them not to whine so loudly.



Had Japan kept refusing to surrender, we would have invaded.

How do you think the Cuban Missile Crisis would have turned out if the US and USSR had not had the example of Hiroshima to restrain them from launching a nuclear war?

I care


I think your posts are really whiny

 

[Open Bolt]

I care

That's your prerogative I guess.

I certainly don't care though.

I think your posts are really whiny

That shows you have poor judgement. Perhaps that's why you care so much about irrelevant trivia.

How do you think the Cuban Missile Crisis would have turned out if the US and USSR had not had the example of Hiroshima to restrain them from launching a nuclear war?

 

[Unkotare]

That's because you are extremely ignorant and you don't know anything about this subject.
....

Very, very incorrect.

 

[Vegasgiants]

That's your prerogative I guess.

I certainly don't care though.



That shows you have poor judgement. Perhaps that's why you care so much about irrelevant trivia.

Yeah you got nothing


Dismissed

 

[Vegasgiants]

Very, very incorrect.

He doesnt want debate

 

[Open Bolt]

Yeah you got nothing
Dismissed

I have more than you have. All you have is irrelevant trivia.

He doesnt want debate

That depends. I'll be happy to debunk any untrue statements if you want to make any.

If all you are going to do is post irrelevant trivia though, the only response I have is "So what?"

How do you think the Cuban Missile Crisis would have turned out if the US and USSR had not had the example of Hiroshima to restrain them from launching a nuclear war?

 

[Vegasgiants]

I have more than you have. All you have is irrelevant trivia.



That depends. I'll be happy to debunk any untrue statements if you want to make any.

If all you are going to do is post irrelevant trivia though, the only response I have is "So what?"

How do you think the Cuban Missile Crisis would have turned out if the US and USSR had not had the example of Hiroshima to restrain them from launching a nuclear war?

I dont care


Hey....that works really well. Lol


Dismissed

 

[Open Bolt]

Very, very incorrect.

Not even remotely incorrect. You know nothing about this subject.

That's why you keep making untrue claims that you can't back up.

 

[Vegasgiants]

Not even remotely incorrect. You know nothing about this subject.

That's why you keep making untrue claims that you can't back up.

That sounds really whiny

 

[Open Bolt]

I dont care
Hey....that works really well. Lol
Dismissed

Feel free to try again if you ever come up with a relevant point to make.

That sounds really whiny

No it doesn't.

 

[Vegasgiants]

Feel free to try again if you ever come up with a relevant point to make.



No it doesn't.

We can move on without you. You are mot here for debate with comments like I dont care


You are dismissed