Headlines
News paper ad 1944
- Thread starter boatme
- Start date
clayinaustin
Charter Member
You would never get away with dropping one or two atomic bombs on another country either.
I think that completely destroying two Japanese cities with atomic bombs more than makes up for them bombing a naval shipyard.
MarylandMark
Charter Member
I beg to differ- they woke up the sleeping giant!
fund razor
Founding Member
This is why we shouldn't have rebuilt their industry. We were even.
cuda
Banned
If you read your history, it was estimated it would cost over one million allied lives if we had to invade Japan. Instead, we dropped a couple of bombs on them because they were showing no signs of surrender, even though the allies had dropped bombs all over Japan, turning their wooden cities into giant bonfires.
It took guts to give the order to drop the bombs. The US waited a couple days after dropping the first one, when they didn't surrender, Truman gave the order to drop the second. That did the trick. I'd have fried everyone of them. Have you ever read the attrocities they inflicted on prisoners, or during their rape of Manchuria? Made the Nazis look like humanatarians.
Last edited by a moderator:
cuda
Banned
That's a pretty cavalier attitude. I don't suppose YOU had any relatives at Pearl Harbor at the time, or you may think differently. You should take trip to the Pear Harbor Memorial.
clayinaustin
Charter Member
I never doubted the need to drop the atomic bombs on Japan. My dad served in the Pacific Fleet during WWII, so I know that those two atomic bombs probably saved his life.
However, posting old (possibly racist) newspaper ads from the 1940's don't serve any useful purpose.
Just my two-cents...
However, posting old (possibly racist) newspaper ads from the 1940's don't serve any useful purpose.
Just my two-cents...
fund razor
Founding Member
However, posting old (possibly racist) newspaper ads from the 1940's don't serve any useful purpose.
Just my two-cents...
I found it more interesting than the average claymate thread. Especially lately, since the quality drop.
Just my two cents.
Wobble
Charter Member
Like the reason I dont buy Fords.
fund razor
Founding Member
Sea-Dated
Charter Member
Visit that shipyard and see if you feel the same after words.
If you do, you need some help......
clayinaustin
Charter Member
I have been to Hawaii, and I have visited the Arizona. I was an Army officer for four years. I understand the tragic loss of life and the death of thousands of military personel during the surprise attach on Pearl Harbor.
I also understand the need (at the time) to drop two atomic bombs on two Japanese cities and kill hundreds of thousands of citizens.
My dad served in the Pacific Fleet in WWII. You will not find anyone more patrotic than me.
However, I still feel that dropping two atomic bombs on two cities more than makes up for dropping hundreds of non-atomic bombs on a naval base.
Just imagine the damage that one atomic bomb would do to New York City. It would be much much worse than two jumbo jets flying into the World trade Center.
phragle
Charter Member
War is war..yes war sucks... but the entire point of war is to crush, kill and destroy your adversary. thats how it has been since the beginning of time. Today we don't fight wars.. we do surgical strikes.. we are still in Iraq and Afghanistan.. had we fought war like we used too.. we would have gone in and carpet bombed the place from one end to the other, our troops would be home and the rest of the world would once again realize that if you poke us with a stick, we beat you severely about the head with a baseball bat. That is called a deterrent. Thats called being a superpower. Had we done that, and Bin Laden still escaped to Pakistan, would they still shelter him when we said " his head on a silver platter in 24 hours or Pakistan ceases to exist" Or would the Paki's said "OH CHIT...Here he is"
Would have made a great Dune Buggy track if we did it that way:iagree:
MarylandMark
Charter Member
Just imagine the damage that one atomic bomb would do to New York City. It would be much much worse than two jumbo jets flying into the World trade Center.
In both your examples (WTC & Pearl Harbor) the BIG difference is we were at war when we attacked; we weren't at war when we were attacked. We were/are reacting to being attacked and now at war, if they would have never attacked us we wouldn't have been at war (well at least not over these 2 reasons in this example).
BIG, BIG difference
Airpacker
New member
IMHO, that would have been a huge mistake. Killing millions of poor dirt farmers in an attempt to strike back at a few thousand whack jobs would have only served as a rally call for Islamic extremists from around the world to focus all their energy on striking the PUBLIC in the US as retribution.
The Saudis would have probably turned off the oil supply to your country as well. They are staunch Muslim and "carpet bombing" several million civilians who all just happen to be Muslim would have put some serious internal pressure on their ruler to say FU to the US.
Threatening Pakistan would have probably ended up in Isreal being targeted with Nukes as well. Remember, they are nuke capable and somewhat crazy.
You give them 24 hrs warning and that leaves 23 after Isreal disappears.
The Big Stick threat of nukes only works when the other side doesn't have any. Thats why Japan surrendered.
cuda
Banned
Well said.
Similar threads
