Now, I understand that Nuclear Weapons are Dangerous but, according to History Books Plan B was a worse option, 3 Million Fatalities for a US led Invasion Force, so why do people always criticize the decision when in reality, Japan attacked the US first and in basic numbers, it actually saved lives...
2007-03-02
06:47:34
·
12 answers
·
asked by
eli
2
in
Politics & Government
➔ Military
Now I'm not asking for what were the residual affects of the bomb but, im simply asking why some people continue to criticize the decision, yea, i know it was the lesser of 2 evils and i also know about soviet involvement, what i'm asking is why do people constantly argue, if it wasn't the United States that developed the Nuclear Bomb it would have been Germany or the USSR, and as for people constantly trying to have minor and somewhat absurd opinons for what happen, i have to say all is fair in war, that was proven when Hitler bombed London, when Japan destroyed Manila and when Britain Used a drug to find leverage in China (opium)
2007-03-02
11:58:16 ·
update #1
Because of fear. Nuclear weapons scare the hell out of folk and so they wish they were never invented or used. The problem is that they would have eventually been invented anyway and we were lucky that we found them first. The other thing that people do not consider is that by dropping the bombs on Japan the world actually saw the devastation that they caused. I think that kept most nations from using them because they saw how dangerous they were.
2007-03-02 06:55:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by diogenese_97 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
While the dropping of "Lil boy" and "Fat man" on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, allowed for hasty end to hostilities in the pacific theatre and saved countless American lives, the residual fallout over theses two cities and surrounding areas were viewed as cruel and inhumane. The Devestation touched anyone and everyone with in a 50mi concentric ring around these two Cities, with themost devestaing effects being felt immediately at or near ground zero.
outside of this zone, Radiation sickness was the chief killer, all that couldbe done was to try and ease the suffering ofthose afflicted as the slowly wasted away in 24-72 hours.
Most ofthe effects of these two Bombs were still being felt, in the form of birth defects, sterility well after The occupation ofJapan ended,and even into the late 70's.
So in the end, the means were worse than the endsto the more "sensitive minded" folk.
2007-03-02 07:16:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by **Paradox_Slave** 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Some say thats true-many disagree. Nuclear weapons are a good thing, then? Dangerous? You seem to have no concept of the horror of nuclear weapons, including the aftermath-for generations to come.
A scientist said those many years ago: "If the United States were to be the first to release this new means of indiscriminate destruction upon mankind, she would sacrifice public support throughout the world, precipitate the race for armaments, and prejudice the possibility of reaching and international agreement on the future control of such weapons."
Because of the bombing, did we create the nuclear climate today?
2007-03-02 07:04:15
·
answer #3
·
answered by Middleclassandnotquiet 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
The USA dropped nukes on Japan because they feared a soviet invasion of Japan. Stalin had already pounded Japanese troops in Manchuria and they were planning an invasion of northern Japan via Sakhalin and Kuril islands.
The decision to drop nukes was derided by General Douglas MacArthur, and Japan was already in the process of surrendering. the Atomic bombs were a gambit by Truman to show the Soviet Union our power.
2007-03-02 09:37:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Are you stressful in any respect about what percentage civilian and military lives might want to were lost for the duration of an invasion of mainland Japan by the U. S.? did you know what percentage civilians were killed in WWII with accepted guns? perhaps you've somewhat extra to imagine about before you 2d wager those who made the options that finally ended an quite lengthy and expensive conflict. it does no longer be sturdy for a united states like North Korea or Iran to have any such weapon as they could be noticeably probable to apply it as easily as you would possibly want to toss a rock, while the different international places which have atomic guns seem to have know for them and the devastation that they reason.
2016-10-17 09:56:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by haberstroh 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The winner writes the history books.
2007-03-02 06:50:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by vanman8u 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Simple....those that keep complaining and castigating know nothing of the history of that war...or don't understand the the Japanese mindset of "to the last man".
2007-03-02 11:55:24
·
answer #7
·
answered by iraq51 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because this supports their hate America B.S. That single event liberated millions of people.
2007-03-02 06:52:52
·
answer #8
·
answered by Matt 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I agree 100% with the Questioner. Answer: They ignore facts and rewrite facts that are inconvenient for them.
2007-03-02 06:51:18
·
answer #9
·
answered by Scott T 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Because they can't see the forrest through the trees!
2007-03-02 06:50:28
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋