nt (Krztalizer) wrote:
I ask again, how would YOU have taken out
the legitimate targets in
Nagasaki
and Hiroshima using only weapons available
in WW2?

The same way that all previous legitimate
targets were taken out
during WWII.

High explosive, followed by incendiaries?

Resulting in higher casualty counts, if Tokyo
is any indication.

Bingo. But you see its much more humane to
kill with a stick of bombs and a
firestorm than to use a nuke. Because, you
see, we knew so fricking MUCH about
fallout and radiation effects in 1945, our psychic
president really HAD to have
known what an awful thing he was doing, in exchange
for sending troops ashore
to end a bloody six year global struggle.

but the whiners on the other side of this goofy
60-years-too-late
afternoon-quarterbacking think we should have
allowed the war to continue,
people to continue to die, all because they
grew up knowing everything about
the Bomb and why it should not be used. Well,
surprise, dorks, in 1945, the
best possible choice available to the US President
was to end the war with
alacrity, using whatever weapon he had. He
made several attempts to get Japan
to surrender -all efforts were turned away.
Angelfarts that think we could
have just outwaited the defeated Japanese dont
seem to have an answer to the
million-man Imperial Japanese army on the mainland,
still fighting.

Truman was known as "give em hell" Harry because
he had the guts to do whatever
was required to end the war and stop the deaths
to Allied soldiers and
civilians - folks that look back with 60+ years
of hindsight and think
themselves mighty damn outraged by the deaths
of Japanese civilians are doing
so without the benefit of watching friends and
relative perish in a long,
bloody war. Truman did his best with the info
and technology available to a
world leader in 1945.

Gordon
Gordon's right: ask the naysayers what THEY would have done in 1945, as
events happened. Japanese military intransigent and willing to keep fighting,
civilian leaders and Emperor want peace, but fearful of assassination/coup
d'etat if they push things too far. Invasion of Kyushu scheduled for 1 Nov
45 and that of Kanto for 1 March 46. Casualty estimates for Kyushu according
to MacArthur up to 70,000 (slightly higher than Normandy, comparable to Luzon,
twice that of Okinawa). No estimate for Kanto, but best guess is X2 of Kyushu's.
Bombing and blockade will take up to 18 months to work. Invasion(s) up to
a year.
Bomb is availiable anytime from 1 August. Soviets plan to attack exactly
three months from Germany's defeat-likely D-Day is 9 Aug. What do the naysayers
suggest out of these options?

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!