What if...

Post Reply New Topic

I agree with you in many parts. So I understand why these bombs were thrown, and that the US didnt know on their own what catastrophe this weapon were.

The question remains: Why not wipe out 2 military targets instead of two civilian cities. So a complete camp with some thousand soldiers, military gear, .... would have shown the power of that weapon as well, and would have been similar impressing.

Throwing these on two small cities is a criminal act of terror in my eyes, and will never be anything else and cannot be excused. So my country also got f****d up more then once by italian politics and due to tricks parts of my country are still property of italia. This s**t has happened, this s**t is real: But this s**t never gives me an excuse to shoot an uninvolved italien civilian or bomb uninvolved italien children. There simply is no "But because of .... I should be allowed to bomb uninvolved civilians." Such an excuse simply dont exist and never will exist.

If they had chosen military targets, then it would be much less likely that the Japanese would have surrendered prior to operation Downfall (which would most definitely have caused much more casualties than the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings).

And there is evidence to suggest that key members of the Japanese government cared very little for the lives of their own people. (Or lives of anyone, for that matter - Just ask the Chinese POW's that were released from Japan after WWII - all 56 of them).

For instance, Admiral Takijirō Ōnishi (the mastermind behind the Kamikaze attacks) is quoted for suggesting to the Japanese cabinet that they could achieve victory by sacrificing 20 million Japanese lives in suicide attacks (roughly half of the male population of Japan at the time).

People with such a fanatic disposition are not "impressed" easily.


A romantic notion.

Any realistic alternative to the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombing would likely have resulted in much higher casualty rates.

Should hundreds of thousands - or probably millions more - die needlessly just for the sake of principle?

Why should have millions more died, because of the Japanese country giving up, after two bombs on two military targets, instead of giving up after two bombs on two civilian targets.

That the lives of their own people didnt count much for Japanese military I know. One reason more to bomb an "expensive, essential" target with real loss to the Japanese leaders, instead of two small cities with "worthless civilians".

Because the claim "... the Japanese country giving up, after two bombs on two military targets" is pure speculation...