re: Do you think the US was "evil" to drop bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

quote:

---

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States

---

cornell university

quote:

---

If your representative undermines your position at the beginning,he has sold out everything that you stand for.

---

Maybe you can point out where Obama did this for me.

quote:

---

Let all the souls here rest in peace, for we shall not repeat the evil,” the president said.

---

The speech was posted a few pages back. He never said those words.

Cause we boned ourselves at Pearl Harbor. Obama is no American.

quote:

---

"I still think the Munich Agreement was the right idea".

---

quote:

---

an historian who thought Hiroshima was fine, but Nagasaki was a war crime.

---

Did the historian comment about the fire bombing raids? They were more devastating and killed more people than the 2 atomic bombs. It was war, and war is hell.

Indiscriminate killing of women and children is a war crime, and the Allies were just as guilty as the Axis were in World War 2. The firebombing of Tokyo, which was planned specifically to burn as much of the city and incinerate as many civilians as possible, was worse than either of the A-bombings in terms of destruction wreaked and lives lost. Curtis LeMay said after the war that he knew, if we had lost, that he would have been tried as a war criminal. The Allies were the "good guys" simply because their enemies managed to be even worse.

It can be argued whether or not the use of the atomic bombs was militarily necessary to end the war with the least human cost. Honestly, war is hell and the purpose is not to minimize losses all around, but to minimize your own losses while maximizing the enemy's, so from that point of view the bombs were absolutely justified. However, I think that, when looked at from a historical perspective, the true "justification" for the use of the bombs becomes clear, even if it was perhaps not the one that was intended. At that point in history two world wars between great powers had been fought, and the second was poised to end like the first: with tensions high and the likelihood of another horrible war looming, this time between the US and the USSR. Only the use of atomic weaponry, and the sudden realization that another war would mean the wholesale destruction of nations on a scale beyond even what Germany and Japan had just experienced, prevented a Third World War from being fought soon after the second. In that sense, the use of the bombs was not only justified, but crucial to preventing the second half of the twentieth century from being just like the first.

I wish he'd give equal attention to all the appalling atrocities that the Japanese committed.

quote:

---

but those things are inherently evil. We shouldn't ever use them again.

---

O agree that they have some inherent evil. But to say we should NEVER use it again is foolish and short sighted.

They should never be a first line weapon, but I would keep it as an option.