HAHA Taiwan will be so pwned by china, the chinks can like swim and kill everybody with magic punjisticks and throw some rice, and some eggroles, that would pwn..
They made the atom bomb, because Hitler was also producing the Atomb bomb but the SOE sabotaged it.. and with WW II.. lots of new ideas came.. in tank warfare.. new plane designes.. but yeah there is also a con and that was that over 60 million people died and with the Atomb bomb on Japan, they immediatly capitulateed and so USA won the war, because who knows how long that war else would have continuedxX[Elangbam]Xx wrote:
I mean think about it, WWII was to crush a bunch or crazy racist dictators from controlling the world. I mean we lost over 5 millions people altogether but probably a hell of a lot more. I mean we still have nazis and this supremist groups everywhere. People go calling others jews as an insult but say that nazis suck? wtf, and then these mexican haters.
Moving onto the atom bomb. Japan was already losing and yet we dropped 2, not 1 atom bombs on innocent civilians. Although pearl harbor was bad, they were soldiers and they had enlisted for this type of stuff but the Japanese had women and children that although were trained were still just civilians so I really don't see why we had to use the atom bomb.
whens the last time china have step foot on this beutiful island? NEVER. they tried all their offensive, but we got some kick ass pilots (chopper and airplane) but we need better planes... were stuck w/ f-16C's, we need F-18's, our guns are shit, so we need upgrades. and chinks cant swim... they can only dive... and read my post:Sh1fty2k5 wrote:
HAHA Taiwan will be so pwned by china, the chinks can like swim and kill everybody with magic punjisticks and throw some rice, and some eggroles, that would pwn..
china does not have enough rowboats to invade taiwan
omg this is pwned.
Dropping the bomb killed many civilians. "civilians", Japan's patriotisme was even more present than American's. Woman, kids, the elderly learned how to fight and defend their land.
The invasion of the U.S. would have been a true massacre, and we tend to forget, that the USSR was at the footstep of Japan and preparing to attack. What Truman did was prevent the Rusky's to set foot on Japan by trying to win the war as soon as possible.
Berlin was already troublesome during the cold war, and the Berlin Tank crisis was THIS close to ruin the city, imagine what would Japan be during the cold war.
So yes, I won't bash the atomic bomb although I want to state one important point:
Why two populated cities? Why didn't they shoot in a deserted place (the north) just to show the Japanese people:
"See we can do this to your country, surrender now"
As I view it, it was pure bloodlust and vengeance from the Americans.
The invasion of the U.S. would have been a true massacre, and we tend to forget, that the USSR was at the footstep of Japan and preparing to attack. What Truman did was prevent the Rusky's to set foot on Japan by trying to win the war as soon as possible.
Berlin was already troublesome during the cold war, and the Berlin Tank crisis was THIS close to ruin the city, imagine what would Japan be during the cold war.
So yes, I won't bash the atomic bomb although I want to state one important point:
Why two populated cities? Why didn't they shoot in a deserted place (the north) just to show the Japanese people:
"See we can do this to your country, surrender now"
As I view it, it was pure bloodlust and vengeance from the Americans.
Last edited by Vartan (2006-01-04 07:15:37)
read the previus posts before u say sumthing that we already concluded.
btw, u think the US wants to waste an A-bomb just to show power? ever heard of tests?
btw, u think the US wants to waste an A-bomb just to show power? ever heard of tests?
Wasn't I supposed to give my view? You know, free speech....one of the reasons why Taiwan seceded from China.
As for the tests, none were made publicly, Japanese people had no means to know what was meant to happen. The movies of Atomic bombs you see are sure as hell old, but only were unclassified during the 70s.
As for the tests, none were made publicly, Japanese people had no means to know what was meant to happen. The movies of Atomic bombs you see are sure as hell old, but only were unclassified during the 70s.
im not talking about free speech... im saying u should read the posts we posted b4, and the conclusion why the A-bomb was worth it, as ur case is spamming...
I would love to hear what you got to say about the recent Taïwanese elections Mr. Chinese-hater
Random, as random as what you claim being spams
but seriously, I want your answer.
Random, as random as what you claim being spams
but seriously, I want your answer.
How many finished products come from china, most of the popular come from china for sure, China pretty mutch has their hand in every countries markets. And most major companies invest their computer needs in asia.
I read this post and picked up some contradictory information in what you're saying. Quote: "The invasion of the US would have been a true massacre" and "As I view it, it was pure bloodlust and vengeance from the Americans." It has been stated a number of times in this forum, as well as in many history books, interviews, statements from soldiers, etc, etc, that both sides would have lost tremendously if an Allied invasion occured in Japan. These same sources have said that losses would have been exponentially larger then what the two atomic bombs had caused. If Japanese "citizens" would have defended thier lands, then obviously these same "citizens" would have been massacred if an invasion occured. So tell me again how it was "pure bloodlust and vengeance from the Americans" when many lives were saved by dropping the bombs?Vartan wrote:
Dropping the bomb killed many civilians. "civilians", Japan's patriotisme was even more present than American's. Woman, kids, the elderly learned how to fight and defend their land.
The invasion of the U.S. would have been a true massacre, and we tend to forget, that the USSR was at the footstep of Japan and preparing to attack. What Truman did was prevent the Rusky's to set foot on Japan by trying to win the war as soon as possible.
Berlin was already troublesome during the cold war, and the Berlin Tank crisis was THIS close to ruin the city, imagine what would Japan be during the cold war.
So yes, I won't bash the atomic bomb although I want to state one important point:
Why two populated cities? Why didn't they shoot in a deserted place (the north) just to show the Japanese people:
"See we can do this to your country, surrender now"
As I view it, it was pure bloodlust and vengeance from the Americans.
As I view it, it was necessary to save more lives in the long run by dropping the bombs.
Next, wasn't it the American 506 PIR 101st Airborne that had a significant role in liberating your country, Belgium? Ever heard of the Battle of the Bulge and Battle at Bastogne? Both cost many American lives (70,000 between Dec 44 and Jan 45) to save your country from the evil vice of Naziism and Hilter.
As I view it, it was American blood, sweat, tears and lives that allowed you to be born and live like you do today, instead of being controlled by a radical nazi regime. Where was your army?
Last edited by Teebaggs1 (2006-01-04 08:18:02)
No need to be so offensive against me, I said it was "pure bloodlust" because bombing some other place would have spared many lives and probably have the same conclusion.
Read on this, or some other thread, I'm grateful to Americans. (I even used a <3 )
And for your own information, Belgium is a very young country and our army was non existant. We always were neutral (and always ended up being caught in war).
Read on this, or some other thread, I'm grateful to Americans. (I even used a <3 )
And for your own information, Belgium is a very young country and our army was non existant. We always were neutral (and always ended up being caught in war).
All apologies. I came off a bit too strong. Been reading a lot on WWII lately and am enamoured with the whole thing. What some men (American, Canadien, Russian, British and Germans alike) went through to fight is amazing to me and it seems that all is but forgotten sometimes.Vartan wrote:
No need to be so offensive against me, I said it was "pure bloodlust" because bombing some other place would have spared many lives and probably have the same conclusion.
Read on this, or some other thread, I'm grateful to Americans. (I even used a <3 )
And for your own information, Belgium is a very young country and our army was non existant. We always were neutral (and always ended up being caught in war).
I mean no offense.
On another subject, I'm looking for a book about WWII coming from a German point of view or even a Belgium/Netherland citizens point of view of the war. I have plenty from the American and British point of view but want to learn all sides.
ps...I'm too old. What does <3 mean again?
Last edited by Teebaggs1 (2006-01-04 08:36:27)
Bombing a "deserted place" wouldn't have worked. The Japanese wouldn't surrender after we dropped the first bomb as it was; we had to drop the second before they finally surrendered.
Baah, it's alright
Ummm if you want a book that covers EVERYTHING about WW2, I don't know if Belgian or any other European books will do it, since they'll miss out the whole pacific theater.
And you are right, no matter which country they served, those warriors deserve a lot more than what they won. Gone through so much for what they thought was "right".
I didn't read many books about it, but either way, know about it a lot more than other people my age.
Most interesting sutff are the stories my French grandfather told me.
He was an orphan of war and was adopted by a Dutch couple owning a restaurant/hotel near the German border (The french city of Metz) where Americans stayed. He was young and said that those times were probably the most happy times of his childhood...what an irony: it was war.
The American soldiers would give him chocolates, taught him English (he talks english like a real american now), would give him rides in those american war jeeps.
But then went to war in Algeria and saw the other true face of war
Ummm if you want a book that covers EVERYTHING about WW2, I don't know if Belgian or any other European books will do it, since they'll miss out the whole pacific theater.
And you are right, no matter which country they served, those warriors deserve a lot more than what they won. Gone through so much for what they thought was "right".
I didn't read many books about it, but either way, know about it a lot more than other people my age.
Most interesting sutff are the stories my French grandfather told me.
He was an orphan of war and was adopted by a Dutch couple owning a restaurant/hotel near the German border (The french city of Metz) where Americans stayed. He was young and said that those times were probably the most happy times of his childhood...what an irony: it was war.
The American soldiers would give him chocolates, taught him English (he talks english like a real american now), would give him rides in those american war jeeps.
But then went to war in Algeria and saw the other true face of war
Last edited by Vartan (2006-01-04 08:46:02)
To get back on topic,
Atom bomb worth it?
I've read a lot of conjecture in this thread (a lot of people would have died during an invasion etc). What I find most interesting is no one has pointed out the whole political aspect. Truman just came into presidency after Roosevelt's untimely death having no clue about the Atom bomb. During that point in time it was clear that the Russians and Americans would probably come out the strongest. The Atom bomb had two purposes. 1. End the war with Japan. 2. Contain Russia.
Also, altvolunteer, there was only three days between the dropping of the two different types of atomic bombs. Not enough to time to wait for a surrender since Hirohito would surrender six days after the second bomb was dropped.
Atom bomb worth it?
I've read a lot of conjecture in this thread (a lot of people would have died during an invasion etc). What I find most interesting is no one has pointed out the whole political aspect. Truman just came into presidency after Roosevelt's untimely death having no clue about the Atom bomb. During that point in time it was clear that the Russians and Americans would probably come out the strongest. The Atom bomb had two purposes. 1. End the war with Japan. 2. Contain Russia.
Also, altvolunteer, there was only three days between the dropping of the two different types of atomic bombs. Not enough to time to wait for a surrender since Hirohito would surrender six days after the second bomb was dropped.
Worth what? The WW2 was a european and east asian war. When the USA joined the nazis were already losing.
And the atombombs, cmon, were just a demostration of power. Japan was about to surrender.
And the atombombs, cmon, were just a demostration of power. Japan was about to surrender.
i only hate the chinese government, not the ppl.Vartan wrote:
I would love to hear what you got to say about the recent Taïwanese elections Mr. Chinese-hater
our recent county elections? KMT won most votes coz some of the DDP's are being assholes now, especially our president since he released medical information about taichung mayor jason hu that had a stroke, so what? hes still healthy and a hell better mayor than the other candidate. i cant vote for anything, why? coz im an austrailian citezen working in taiwan.
well they were but they want to die w/ honour!! they should have surrendered after the first bomb, so the second was necicerryub3r-elite wrote:
And the atombombs, cmon, were just a demostration of power. Japan was about to surrender.
heres a clip of what might happen if there was a nuclear war http://www.ebaumsworld.com/flash/endofworld.html
cyborg ninga (PROPERTY) not propety change the word and add a R, PROPERTY....... sorry but it really shits me when people cant spell simple words
it shits me when ppl try to change my name
OMG, im swedish and my grandfather fought with the USMC on the Phillipines, and he's not even American. And my mothers father fought commies in finland and pretty much every1 in my family has been in a war (those who are older than 75). I think some of the things that bind the world togheter is the fact that WW2 was really a global war and EVERY family took part in it. And i have some german family, and the old man there fought commies in stalingrad and lost his life in a soviet KZ-camp in 1953. Thats life. I hope im not gonna fight a real war, BF2 will do it for me. And by the war please visit www.collegefuckfest.com
And it's the fault of the civilians that their government didn't care about their lives? There was no chance for japan to win that war, yet the USA decided to kill 400.000+ civilians just because they didn't want to lose any more ships/ground troops. That are tactics that you expect from dictators like saddam hussein, but definately not from a democratic and free country like the USA claims to be.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
well they were but they want to die w/ honour!! they should have surrendered after the first bomb, so the second was necicerry
I guess you didn't read the entire thread before posting. The general consensus is that a lot more people would have died (both Japanese and American) if the US would have invaded Japan instead of dropping the atomic bombs.Ub3r-ElitE wrote:
And it's the fault of the civilians that their government didn't care about their lives? There was no chance for japan to win that war, yet the USA decided to kill 400.000+ civilians just because they didn't want to lose any more ships/ground troops. That are tactics that you expect from dictators like saddam hussein, but definately not from a democratic and free country like the USA claims to be.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
well they were but they want to die w/ honour!! they should have surrendered after the first bomb, so the second was necicerry
There is a BIG difference between soldiers and civilians. It's the free decision of any soldier to fight or to refuse fighting(at least that's what it should be). Civilians have no decision. They are not involved in the war, in other words: innocent people. And now tell me: Why did the USA nuke 2 of Japan's largest cities at that time? Why didn't they just nuke military factories, power stations or barracks? Because they wanted to demonstrate their power of being able to kill 100.000nds of people with 1 bomb. Not only to Japan but also to the Soviets and their other rivals.atlvolunteer wrote:
I guess you didn't read the entire thread before posting. The general consensus is that a lot more people would have died (both Japanese and American) if the US would have invaded Japan instead of dropping the atomic bombs.Ub3r-ElitE wrote:
And it's the fault of the civilians that their government didn't care about their lives? There was no chance for japan to win that war, yet the USA decided to kill 400.000+ civilians just because they didn't want to lose any more ships/ground troops. That are tactics that you expect from dictators like saddam hussein, but definately not from a democratic and free country like the USA claims to be.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
well they were but they want to die w/ honour!! they should have surrendered after the first bomb, so the second was necicerry
The main point is: They didn't care about the victims of their nuclear attack. That's why i see them on one level with people like saddam hussein.
I'm just going to quote part of a previous post:
Teebaggs1 wrote:
It has been stated a number of times in this forum, as well as in many history books, interviews, statements from soldiers, etc, etc, that both sides would have lost tremendously if an Allied invasion occured in Japan. These same sources have said that losses would have been exponentially larger then what the two atomic bombs had caused. If Japanese "citizens" would have defended thier lands, then obviously these same "citizens" would have been massacred if an invasion occured.