Date Posted:08:10:32 10/09/04 Sat Author: UBFree Subject: Re: Oppression In reply to:
Chris
's message, "Re: Oppression" on 02:37:13 10/09/04 Sat
Yes, you are correct, it was Rooselvelt who funded the nuclear development program and Truman who ordered the drop on both cities.
Also, in discussing the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima let us NEVER forget who brought us into war. America was living in peace not bothering anybody until Japan attacked us.
It was estimated that the cost in life of INVADING the Japanese mainland would be about a million casaulties. That includes both allied and Japanese deaths. To Japanese, surrender was a great dishonor and most Japanese people would fight to the death. We can speculate or debate about the number of deaths, but it would have been far more then the loss of life due to atom bomb. Also, let us not forget that there was far more loss of life due to conventional bombing than the atom bomb.(In WWII)
Also your point about "why not drop a bomb in ocean". This is the 'show them' your technology argument. Chris, why didn't the Japanese surrender after the first bomb was dropped? (This is a good question.)
Another point to consider is that the dropping of the atom bomb was the LAST time that something like that happened. Considering man's sinful nature that is almost a miracle.
Chris, thank you for your thoughtful posts, this OT board has helped me to understand the German/European way of thinking.
>Concerning WWI and Japan, there is another point I
>never understood. Why did America drop the nuclear
>bomb? As far as I know, everybody agrees that America
>would have one the war even without using the nuclear
>bomb, it was not even considered a "military
>necessity." Or they could have thrown the first bomb
>into the ocean close to Japan to demonstrate their
>strenght, and not immediately on two very large cities
>with thousands of innocent and unsuspecting people.
>Never understood this. By the way, as far as I know,
>the command was given by Truman, who was a Democrat.
