- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - Animated
Posted on 7/23/23 at 8:47 am to Rip Torner
Posted on 7/23/23 at 8:47 am to Rip Torner
there were more atomic bombs waiting to be used if needed.
1
Posted on 7/23/23 at 8:49 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
What’s your point? I know and understand the justifications for the bombings.
He's asking you to choose from the same three options that were facing Truman in July 1945. Do you invade, continue blockading/conventional bombing, or nuke them?
Posted on 7/23/23 at 8:49 am to FlyFishinTiger
quote:
there were more atomic bombs waiting to be used if needed.
I can’t remember the exact number of bombs we had left after the first two, but it wasn’t many. It may have been like one or maybe two?
Posted on 7/23/23 at 8:50 am to RollTide1987
Is there an option to deploy a nuclear weapon on a purely military target or even a field outside of a city to eliminate civilian casualties while still displaying military might and still acting like a “warning shot” for what might come if the war was dragged on?
Posted on 7/23/23 at 8:51 am to RollTide1987
quote:
He's asking you to choose from the same three options that were facing Truman in July 1945. Do you invade, continue blockading/conventional bombing, or nuke them?
You don’t say.
Posted on 7/23/23 at 8:53 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
You don’t say.
I do. And if you can't answer that simple question then it says one of two things about you:
1. You know that the nuclear option was the best option on the table but don't want to admit it because you are too proud to say it.
2. You are indecisive and therefore should remain as far away from a position of critical leadership as humanly possible.
Posted on 7/23/23 at 8:55 am to Ross
quote:
Is there an option to deploy a nuclear weapon on a purely military target or even a field outside of a city to eliminate civilian casualties while still displaying military might and still acting like a “warning shot” for what might come if the war was dragged on?
That option was considered by the higher ups and rejected as too risky. What if the bomb was a dud? Japan scoffs at our demands to surrender and we're still forced to invade. Also...there was no military target big enough to use the atomic bomb on. And if you deploy it and detonate it in the middle of nowhere the psychological impact of the device is reduced significantly.
No, it had to be used on a city for maximum psychological and strategic impact.
Posted on 7/23/23 at 8:57 am to RollTide1987
Tell us all about your leadership skills.
It’s a meaningless exercise, because it proves nothing. I’ve already said that I know and understand the justifications for the bombings.
Posted on 7/23/23 at 8:58 am to Mo Jeaux
void
This post was edited on 7/24/23 at 8:30 am
Posted on 7/23/23 at 8:58 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
He's asking you to choose from the same three options that were facing Truman in July 1945. Do you invade, continue blockading/conventional bombing, or nuke them?
quote:
You don’t say.
It’s obvious you understand the options available to Truman at that time.
So, what’s your answer, Mr. President?
Posted on 7/23/23 at 8:59 am to Darth_Vader
void
This post was edited on 7/24/23 at 8:30 am
Posted on 7/23/23 at 9:00 am to TexasTiger33
quote:
TexasTiger33
Chode.
Posted on 7/23/23 at 9:00 am to Mo Jeaux
Jew
Posted on 7/23/23 at 9:01 am to RollTide1987
I think I’d have to diverge with the higher ups on the grounds of moral principle on that one. I believe in the doctrine of just war, I just don’t see how this instance can be made to reconcile with it.
Posted on 7/23/23 at 9:01 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
So, what’s your answer, Mr. President?
Don’t you have a model to build? I’ll ask again, what’s the point? And just to be clear, for you and Rolltide, that’s a rhetorical question. You shouldn’t take it literally.
Posted on 7/23/23 at 9:02 am to DMagic
quote:
Jew
I’m not, but ok. Posted on 7/23/23 at 9:02 am to Ross
quote:
I think I’d have to diverge with the higher ups on the grounds of moral principle on that one. I believe in the doctrine of just war, I just don’t see how this instance can be made to reconcile with it.
I’ll ask you the same question Mo is avoiding then. If you are Harry Truman, what would you do if you’re not going to use the atomic bomb?
Posted on 7/23/23 at 9:07 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
Don’t you have a model to build?
I thought better if you to think you’d resort to such a pathetic dodge.
quote:
I’ll ask again, what’s the point? And just to be clear, for you and Rolltide, that’s a rhetorical question. You shouldn’t take it literally.
My point is I want to know, in your opinion, should Truman have done. He had three options, I’ve already laid those out. So, again in your opinion, which option should he have chosen and why? I, and others, have explained why, in our opinion, dropping the bomb, while terrible, was the best option. If you disagree, you should at least offer your explanation of what other option was better and why was it better.
Posted on 7/23/23 at 9:08 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
Tell us all about your leadership skills.
Sure. I'm a Petty Officer First Class in the United States Navy. Currently I am in charge of the readiness and training of one department of 99 sailors who are stationed in deployable billets.
Posted on 7/23/23 at 9:08 am to Darth_Vader
I think I’ve already shown my hand personally. I’m hoping you can use shock and awe from the atomic bomb and not have to kill innocent people.
Page 13 of 21
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News