2007-11-01 22:22:07 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
They should do it in 1950 or 1951 when China entered the Korean war
2007-11-02 09:40:19 · answer #1 · answered by Peiper 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
There was no need to. Striking targets in China in 1945 would have been wasteful of both life and of the weapon used.
As for there only being two bombs (an argument the Imperial General Staff made in trying to convince the emperor to continue the war), records are very clear that the complete components for a third device were held ready at Moffett Field, CA, and could be assembled and shipped in a day or two a third strike was needed.
As it happens, more weapons would be shortly available: the plans for Operation Downfall, the invasion of the Japanese home islands, called for as many as nine atomic strikes as part of the overall plans--none of them outside Japan. (See The West Point Atlas of American Wars, COL Vincent Esposito, editor.)
2007-11-02 08:41:34 · answer #2 · answered by psyop6 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Because we were fighting the Japanese, Shanghai wouldn't qualify for thermonuclear annhialiation. Hiroshima and Nagasake were vaporized; effectively ending WWII.
Shanghai, being in China (with whom we were allied at the time) would have been a bad place to lob a big 'ole nuke.
Prolly would'a killed a lot of our own guys, stationed there, like Gen. Claire Chenault's Volunteer Air Group, The Flying Tigers, for instance.
So thats prolly why, man.
Google a map, will ya?
2007-11-02 05:38:18 · answer #3 · answered by omnisource 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
China was a US ally at the time, and so was Russia. And you woundn't bomb an ally, do you?.
In the same way, would it be fair to say that it could have been correct if the US fought alongside the Japanese and the Germans during WWII, considering that these two countries are America's friends today?. Or would you accept that the US committed a serious mistake in helping the Taliban and Bin Laden with weapons to fight the Soviets during the Soviet-Afghan War, considering that America is fighting against these same groups today?. Or would the US still have supplied Saddam with weapons when Iraq was at war with Iran?.
2007-11-02 06:35:35 · answer #4 · answered by Botsakis G 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Douglas you are an idoit do u realy think the US wouldnt of get a retaliation from the soviet union if the US dropped a bomb on china in the korean war?
2007-11-03 13:38:23 · answer #5 · answered by swiz 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because there was no strategic value in using an A-Bomb on Chinese territory, and killing thousands of Chinese nationals, the bombs were dropped on Japan to convince the Japanese High Command that the war was over and unconditional surrender was there only option.
2007-11-02 05:36:51 · answer #6 · answered by conranger1 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
As China was an Allied with the US in WWII it would have been quite rude to drop a nuclear bomb on them, even if there were Japanese soldiers there.
2007-11-02 05:40:01 · answer #7 · answered by US_DR_JD 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Chiang Kai Chek was running the show in China then and he was a good guy. Why would we bomb the good guys?
2007-11-02 16:32:22 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
We ran out of bombs. We only had 2
2007-11-02 18:17:20 · answer #9 · answered by guns155mm 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
We didn't have anymore bombs. I don't think they had the material to build another. They used it all building the three. (The test bomb and the 2 on Japan.)
2007-11-02 07:05:34 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋