Hiroshima justified? (was Enola Gay: Burnt flesh and other magnificent technological achievements)

From: Charles Gray
Date: 12/21/2003 9:33 PM Pacific

post snipped

Excellent post, sir. Summed up the reality of the days and the mind-set for
when these events occurred. Next, these armchair war critics will start
arguing with Washington's tactics at Yorktown.

Using a bomb like this on a city, or hundreds of thousands of bombs, is wrong
in my opinion. But in the context of a war that I wasn't around to fight, and
the fact that it ended the bloodiest war in history, practically overnight,
suggests that the atomic bombing of these two home island targets was no
different than conventional missions by LeMay's forces, with the exception that
these two missions accomplised an end to the war, which all the other massed
missions and thousands of casualties had not.

Gordon

nt (Krztalizer) wrote:
From: Charles Gray
Date: 12/21/2003 9:33 PM Pacific

post snipped

Excellent post, sir. Summed up the reality
of the days and the mind-set for
when these events occurred. Next, these armchair
war critics will start
arguing with Washington's tactics at Yorktown.

Using a bomb like this on a city, or hundreds
of thousands of bombs, is wrong
in my opinion. But in the context of a war
that I wasn't around to fight, and
the fact that it ended the bloodiest war in
history, practically overnight,
suggests that the atomic bombing of these two
home island targets was no
different than conventional missions by LeMay's
forces, with the exception that
these two missions accomplised an end to the
war, which all the other massed
missions and thousands of casualties had not.

Gordon
The bombs were necessary. Alternatives such as a combined blockade and
bombing campaign, or the invasion that was already approved and scheduled
for "on or after 1 November 1945" would succeed, but length of the former
(up to 18 months) and the cost and length of the latter (c.370,000 casualties
and at least a year for the combined invasions of Kyushu and the Kanto Plain)
were considered unacceptable to Truman now that the bomb worked. The weapon
worked, a delivery platform equipped a suitable unit (509th CG), and that
unit had deployed and was ready to go. The domestic political cost of NOT
USING the bomb was also unacceptable, as the US population was war-weary.
Given the info Truman had, and an intransigent Japanese government where
the Army was calling most of the shots (in some cases literally, as assassination
fears infected the civilian members of the govt and the Navy command, who
supported the civilians), he had no choice but to unleash Little Boy and
Fat Man. And more if necessary to accomplish the goal of Japanese Surrender.
Fortunately, only two were needed.

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

nt (Krztalizer) wrote:

From: Charles Gray
Date: 12/21/2003 9:33 PM Pacific

post snipped

Excellent post, sir.

Exactly...I wholeheartedly concur...
--

-Gord.