Was the atomic bombing of Japan really necessary?

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by Adam
1) Any idiot can find the anniversary of the many bombings of Dresden on the web anyway.

2) I posted this thread around the dates of the two nukings. I posted the thread at that time fpr that reason. Very simple.

So you acknowledge that this is NOT the worst event of the war. Good. Do you plan to start similar thread at the time of the other anniversaries? I haven't seen any others... So why not?

The WHY is that the sources were there at the time, involved in it, and had first-hand knowledge of the strategic situation. Pretty simple.

Yes, it is that simple - simply false. The vast majority of the provided quotes are from people who did NOT have first-hand knowledge of the strategic situation, namely scientists. As I said before, noteably lacking from your quotes are the very people who would have the necessary information: commanders in the pacific theater and in Japan.

A good 3/4 of the links on that website for example are devoted to ONE scientist who'se opinions are completely irrelevant.

There has BEEN no objection beyond "in some hypothetical mystery future, some people might have died". If there's anything other than that, please point it out.

The article provided by Lyuokdea was quite compelling and you haven't commented on it.

Remember, your speculation is based on a mirror image of that "hypothetical mystery future."

 

[Adam]

russ_watters

So you acknowledge that this is NOT the worst event of the war. Good. Do you plan to start similar thread at the time of the other anniversaries? I haven't seen any others... So why not?

I have only started coming here regularly quite recently. Simple. Get over it.

Yes, it is that simple - simply false. The vast majority of the provided quotes are from people who did NOT have first-hand knowledge of the strategic situation, namely scientists.

Good grief, this is ridiculous. Scientists would not have a knowledge of the strategic situation. The military commanders would. I quoted many military commanders.

As I said before, noteably lacking from your quotes are the very people who would have the necessary information: commanders in the pacific theater and in Japan.

Check again. And actually read them this time.

A good 3/4 of the links on that website for example are devoted to ONE scientist who'se opinions are completely irrelevant. The article provided by Lyuokdea was quite compelling and you haven't commented on it.

1) Ad hominems. Yay. Is he wrong?

2) The article provided by Lyuokdea was basically irrelevent. It's all about the almighty "what if". Thus, as previously explained, it is irrelevent.

Remember, your speculation is based on a mirror image of that "hypothetical mystery future."

As previously explained, it is based on the words of military and political leaders of the time.

 

[Andy]

Life is a What if, so for the argument to focus on what if's is logical.

To beat an army of 25 million soldiers, this is what japan supposedly had, you would have had to kill a large percentage of those 25 million so ask yourself this. Would you rather 200,000 people die or 25 million?

 

[Lyuokdea]

Ha, I got Andy confused with Adam for like 10 minutes, and I thought you were posting an answer to your own argument, which I didn't believe, because although I disagree with you on the issue, I think you are much smarter on that. Well, I guess I'm the one not paying attention.

Now,


How can every possible argument I make be disgarded mearly as a "What if" scenario, saying that the bomb ended the war, as that article said, is not a what if. It is the same class of observation as your articles saying the war would have ended anyway, there is no difference between the two.

My article clearly states that the peace movement in Japan was victorious in ended the war because of the atomic bombing, and that the war would not have ended in the near future otherwise, that is completely relevant to the conversation.

Most importantly on "What if" scenarios is that they are completely relevant to the situation, how can you weigh if a certain decision is just unless you find out the possible results of the other decisions you could make?