Was the US Just in Dropping Atomic Bombs in Japan

[Gohron]

Rules of war are good and everything but when you're fighting at a certain level they become abandoned, war sucks and there's nothing humane about it no matter how much anybody wants it to be. If I was fighting I would rather not fight a guerilla war but sometimes you gotta do it a certain way, I hate the Iraqi fundamentalists for blowing themselves up and fighting from the shadows but I would most likely do the same in their situation.

[Almaci]

I have to say this is an excellent question. I think we were probably just... but did we have to drop 2 bombs? That's the one problem I have... I think dropping just one could have been enough. But in the long run a lot of lives were saved.
And as mentioned, the bombing of Dresden was much much worse, and didn't even have any strategic value whatsoever.

No matter how repulsive the acts were one can follow the reasoning in dropping both bombs.
The US had three bombs, one of em was dropped in a US desert as a test.
After that they had two left, the reasoning for dropping both was the following.
If we drop one they might think its a fluke, that we managed to produce only one and that we have used the one we had, if we drop both they will think we have a thousand of em.

[Gohron]

No matter how repulsive the acts were one can follow the reasoning in dropping both bombs.
The US had three bombs, one of em was dropped in a US desert as a test.
After that they had two left, the reasoning for dropping both was the following.
If we drop one they might think its a fluke, that we managed to produce only one and that we have used the one we had, if we drop both they will think we have a thousand of em.

So what're your opinions on dropping the bombs?

[Almaci]

Kyoto's less densely populated than Hiroshima or Nagasaki, right? Anyone know whether we thought about trying to warn civilians (don't know if that would've done any good) before dropping the bomb?

I'm reading, and it looks like we could've dropped our third bomb 7 to 8 days after Nagasaki.

Kyoto is a city of around 2 million and I think the fifth largest city in Japan, its bigger then Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.

Then again this is McArthur we are talking about, the man who said he would rather slaughter a million Japanese civilians then see one of his soldiers die.

[Stone]

No matter how repulsive the acts were one can follow the reasoning in dropping both bombs.
The US had three bombs, one of em was dropped in a US desert as a test.
After that they had two left, the reasoning for dropping both was the following.
If we drop one they might think its a fluke, that we managed to produce only one and that we have used the one we had, if we drop both they will think we have a thousand of em.

I've read in a few different places that we could've dropped a 3rd (or 4th bomb) about a week after Nagasaki. We could've kept churning out bombs without much trouble.

[Almaci]

Here's a question - we nuked Japan in the fall of 1945.

In between 1945 and 1949, we were the only country in the world with nuclear weaponry. USSR didn't test a bomb until fall of 1949 (after, I believe, stealing the plans for our bomb).

We knew the USSR was trying to develop a bomb.

Could we have been more aggressive against the USSR, perhaps even using nukes against the USSR during that 1945-49 period, in an attempt to keep the USSR from ever developing nuclear weaponry? If we were able to accomplish that - there would've been no Cold War, and the US would've maintained nuclear hegemony for who-knows-how-long.

Actually the plans for the bomb were given to the USSR by one of the original team, almost all of the team were against the production and testing of the weapon after the war and wanted the plans destroyed, some of em commited suicide becouse they were unable to live with themselves anymore.
I forgot the name of the guy but he basicaly handed the plans to the Russians on a silver platter unbeknownst to the US since he feared that if the US was the only country that had them there would be no balance of power and the US would just be able to do whatever it pleased.

We could have saved a lot of money by dropping the first one on Tokyo.

That said, the amount of American lives saved justified dropping one, two, or twenty-two bombs.

Thats mister retards response, next?

[Gohron]

Kyoto is a city of around 2 million and I think the fifth largest city in Japan, its bigger then Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.

Then again this is McArthur we are talking about, the man who said he would rather slaughter a million Japanese civilians then see one of his soldiers die.

As much as I disagree with that logic it's a lot easier to hate who your fighting. The Japanese fought like savages and a lot of Americans had to fight like savages to beat their enemy, war sucks, but then again MacArthur was never down "in the shit" with his boys.

[Diff-chan]

Then again this is McArthur we are talking about, the man who said he would rather slaughter a million Japanese civilians then see one of his soldiers die.

I want a guy in command of my country's military forces to say something like that... and mean it.

You should too.

[Almaci]

I've read in a few different places that we could've dropped a 3rd (or 4th bomb) about a week after Nagasaki. We could've kept churning out bombs without much trouble.

No they couldnt after the test they had two left and that was it.

[Gohron]

I want a guy in command of my country's military forces to say something like that... and mean it.

You should too.

In the overall perspective things I guess I would agree. We wern't liberating the Japanese we were trying to beat them, like I said, war sucks, there is no humanity in it.