what was the first country that used nuclear weapon? how many people were killed ? Now who is the terrorist?

Answer 1

We used those weapons to actually save lives. If we had invaded Japan many more lives on both sides would have been lost. Japan would have fought to the death of every last person. We didn't start that bloody war, but we finished it. We are not terrorist, and will not stand still while we are attacked.

Answer 2

There is a big difference between open warfare and terrorism. For one thing it is a lot different for an american war plane with clear military markings to drop a bomb on military targets, than for a murdering terrorist disguised as a civilian to push an old man in a wheel chair over the side of a cruise ship, or bash in the skull of young child with the butt of a rifle.

I don't know if the use of atomic weapons was justified in WWII. I don't believe the story that it was the only alternative to an invasion of the Japanese mainland. Fact is Japan's surrender was not unconditional and the same conditiions Japan demanded before the nuke attack were agreed to after the attack.

I believe the WWII use of atomic weapons was a warning to the Soviets would had already taken eastern Europe, North Korea, and were set to make their own invasion of Japan.

However, I would support the use of nuclear weapons against Iran and Syria right now today. And would have supported and preferred the nuclear destruction of Iraq to the invasion. There is no reason to to separate murdering terrorist who disguise themselves as civilians and the civilian populations that harbor, support and conceal them. Iran has made itself a clear and present danger by moving to obtain nuclear weapons and has indicated that the purpose will be to attack the United States.

There's no point in maintaining a nuclear arsenal unless it is a real detourant to your enemies. That means your enemies have to believe that you will use them. Seeing is believing a massive strike against a state sponser of terrorism like Iran would go a long way toward that end.

Answer 3

The USA was the first country to use nuclear weapons when Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed. Each bomb was the equivalent of 20,000 tons of TNT.

The debate continues to go on regarding how many people died, but it seems to hover around 203,000.

President Truman reasoned that even more soldiers and civilians would have died if the war lingered on. The Japanese, the aggressors, just refused to surrender, even when meetings were held to explain to them what would happen if this new weapon were used.

Even though the Japanese viewed Americans as barbarians, they continued to believe that Truman was just bluffing and would never do something of this magnitude.

As to your terrorist question, if you win the revolution you're called a "freedom fighter." If you lose, you are a "terrorist." If the American colonies had lost the Revolutionary war against the British, our forefathers would have been considered terrorists, and they would have been strung up and gutted.

Answer 4

I see it's time to dispel the myth that dropping the A-bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki "saved lives."

Would the Japanese have fought bitterly to protect the homeland if we'd invaded? Almost certainly, and for most folks, there the argument ends. The invasion of the mainland would have been worse than any of the earlier island-hopping campaigns, and therefore lives were saved.

However, you miss the particular political context in which these decisions were made. The U.S. was demanding an unconditional Japanese surrender. The Japanese only wanted one condition - they didn't want anything to happen to their emperor. No war crimes trials, his person and his family unmolested. The United States could easily have ceded this small concession, and not only would there no longer have been a need for a blood invasion costing hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides, but we needn't have killed all the civilians on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But it's hard to say how much of that is the benefit of hindsight. I would say that with their "blood up", the Americans were unwilling to consider anything but an unconditional surrender. That's not an excuse, it's just an explanation. Call it a crime of passion, then, maybe.

In Hiroshima, 45,000 people died on the first day, and another 19,000 during the next four months. At Nagasaki, 22,000 the first day, 17,000 over the following four months.

Total = 103,000.

Terrorism. The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

This suggests there is a lawful use of such force, and of course, there is. The state has the monopoly on the lawful use of violence. When the U.S. floats 40,000 pounds of diplomacy in the form of a carrier battle group off your shore in a show of force operation, it is a threat of the use of force, and the intention is to coerce your society and your government. But this is lawful.

States can violate the laws of war, and then be legitimately open to accusations of terrorism. The question is: were Hiroshima and Nagasaki legitimate military targets under the laws of war at the time?

I'd argue that at the time, they were. Certainly, there were legitimate military targets within both cities. Nuclear weapons, by their very nature, are indiscriminate, however. It's sort of like the Israeli use of cluster bombs in south Lebanon these last weeks. Clearly, that's an illegal use of those weapons, and a militarily ineffective one, unless it is your intent to terrorize the civilian population, which, in my opinion, it obviously is. Cluster bombs are most effective against concentrations of enemy troops in the open. Since they are like landmines, in that they continue to cause civilian casualties long after hostilities are ended, they should not be used near civilian populations. Since Hezbollah never operates in formations larger than squad-size, and since they do fight near civilian centers, the use of cluster bombs by the Israelis is a certain violation of the laws of war. Given that the Israelis initially denied their use, it's clear that they are aware that their use is illegal and immoral.

Nuclear weapons are similarly bound to cause a lot of civilian deaths. So the moral calculus becomes: how many non-combatant deaths are acceptable to avoid the deaths of combatants? Is it morally justified to kill 103,000 Japanese civilians to avoid the 103,000 American soldiers? 206,000?

I would conclude by saying that I don't believe the use of nuclear weapons makes one a de facto terrorist. I don't believe the bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki makes the United States a terrorist nation. There were, and are, difficult moral questions about the use of atomic weapons against those cities, but that's as far as I'd go.

Answer 5

Japan exploded their Atomic Bomb of the coast of Korea 6 days after Hiroshima! Japan had plans to put their Atomic Bomb on a sub and blow it up in San Francisco Bay! Japan had subs that carried bombers and would have dropped Atomic bombs on several US cities had we not out done them.

Americans were smarter and faster, we beat them to it!

Americans are not terrorists we are winners!

America will always be the winner!

You Arabs aren't a pop corn f@rt in a hurricane!

America now no longer needs Nuclear weapons.

We can blow away entire nations, without Nuclear weapons, we have MOABs. 22,000lb conventional smart bombs with nuke blast power but NO radiation.

M…..Mother
O…..of
A…..all
B…..bombs

WE have Tomahawks with fuel-air explosive war heads. The big Tomahawks can carry 10 war heads. They can burn entire cities with fuel-air explosive.

First the MOAB, when the shock wave clears, in comes the Tomahawk. The entire city is flattened and then burned with fuel-air explosive. The fuel-air explosive burns everything left and it burns off all the oxygen. There is no way to survive!

With our satellites we can target every Arab city in any terrorist nation, and then lock them all into a firing solution. Then at 3am any morning the order was given, every Arab city targeted could be blown clean off the face of the Earth, all at the same time.

We could land our troops 30 minutes later and own the entire nation. There wouldn’t even be anyone left to shoot at our soldiers. The only thing that would be left are giant smoking holes in the sand.
Maybe then the other nations would say “ What ever you do don’t piss off the Americans! They can blow away our whole nation with the push of a button, just like they did to those stupid Arabs!” Maybe being “ Dust in the Wind” would stop all stupid BS America bashing.

This would NOT be a good thing, America would be greatly saddened to be force into useing such a measure. That would a day of mourning for all that were lost.

The terrorists will be stopped, to think for one second that America lacks the resolve or the ability to stop the terrorists is stupid and foolhardy. I ask you to PLEASE! Give your friends a word of advice. Stop the terrorists before something terrible happens.

Arab failure to do this, could such harsh results that an entire could be vaporized with the push of a button. Again I say this would NOT be a good thing. We wish for peace! OUR religion gives us an example of how to deal with a pit of snakes, remember or read the story of Soddom and Gamorrah! This would be the result of pushing America into our Jihad!

If I know this from watching TV, then our military has many more even more terrible weapons. To have such weapons unleashed upon any nation would be beyond my flow of speech to describe.
PLEASE stop the terrorists before something this terrible happens!

PLEASE! PRETTY PLEASE WITH SUGAR ON TOP! FOR GOD'S SAKE!

Answer 6

America. there were 214 000 people killed
it's more than a terrorist attack
USA- along with israel- who do massacres and genocides against arabian muslims and christians are the real terrorist and now these two countries has the most sophisticated nuclear arsenals in the world

many people, brainwashed by medias that are mostly owned by jewish, does not realize it, they are still quarelling which one is the threat, muslim or communist, without realizing that everyday israel with help of USA do killings, almost without opposition. even people support these terrorist
what a stupid world!

Answer 7

A World War and what the Americans are doing now are very different things.

And to correct a lot of the ignorance here, when they dropped the first bomb on Hiroshima I don't think anyone, either Japanese or American, knew what would happen.

The Americans are however the real terrorists in todays world or to be fair, their leaders.

Answer 8

The whole world knew It was America. The first world war created the terrorism. When the world war time whole world divided in to two parts and fight each other to proof them self as superior. Now days If BUSH give guns and rockets to the uniform terrorists it's called US Army . Who ever else against him will be terrorist. That is his socialism. To US whole word should be refugees under his superiority. That's what it's expect.

Answer 9

but you have to think of the problems we will face, we already got that big enough problem of the ozen layer depleating and the nukes sure arent helping, america invaded a country and slaughtered its people in the Iraq war, we may not have planted a bomb in an airport cause the us does it the american way, that is to bomb the **** out of everything in sight. this country is a terrorist and it created what will be the death of our planet, nukes are going to be used by many and we will destroy oursleves

Answer 10

Um....I think we killed a hell of alot more people with all the firebombings than with the 2 nukes. And even after the first one..they didn't surrender....yeessshh. Talk about some sore losers.
Also, last time I checked...we don't go around yelling out "Death to all Arabs!!!" in the streets....