From: (cave fish)

Charles Gray wrote in message
...
On 21 Dec 2003 22:22:27 -0800, (cave fish)
wrote:


However, in a case of open war between nations, while it may be
justified to bomb key industrial areas supplying the war effort, do
tell me how a newborn baby in a Hiroshima is guilty of anything? Or,
kindergarten students? Or, members of the opposition? Or, those in
jail for standing up to Japanese militarism? Or, old folks living out
their last days?

Um, Hiroshima was HQ for several major Japanese Army and Navy
units. It was also a location of numerous factories and transport
facilities, which in the normal order of things woudl have been
leveled by the same sort of raid you saw on Tokyo.
Also, you might look at Stalingrad to see the result of a full scale
ground battle-- or the starvation that comes attendent a longer
blockade.

If Hiroshima had factories or military units,then you bomb those
targets. You don't indiscrimately destroy hospitals and kindergartens
and homes. Granted, even in conventional bombing raids, some bombs go
astray, but to willfully destroy an entire civilian population is
insane.

OK, try this: look at pictures of the aftermath conventional bombing raids.
They are all over the www. Look at the target and count the craters there. Now
look how far away bombs hit. That "few" bombs turns out to be the majority,
doesn't it?

You talk like the ONLY reason to bomb Nagasaki and Hiroshima with atomic bombs
was to slaughter civilians. If conventional bomb raids were used they
thousands of civilians would have been killed anyway. The raids would probably
not strike 100% of the targets the first time so they's have to go back to
finish the job. More civilians would have died on each subsequent raid. Neither
you now I know if any civilian lives would have been saved by not using atom
bombs but we can assume there would be U.S. casualties.

Your repeated insistance that the only reason for the atomic bombings was to
kill civilians simply shows your bias.

Just because a city has legitimate targets
doesn't make the entire city a legitimate target. If the city YOU live
in has industrial centers, then they are legitimate targets to the
enemy. However, the schools, hospitals, suburban homes, nursing homes,
etc are NOT legitimate targets. Even when only legitimate targets are
targeted, many civilians end up as casualties. That's bad enough but
when you knowingly target an entire civilian population, that's
insanity.

No one targeted hospitals and schools as you suggest except the Japanese in
this case.

Please think about this instead of being so stubborn. If there were no
civilians in either city they still would have been bombed.

I say again: civilians, other than those in tha factories etc, were NOT the
prime targets as you suggest.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired