Thread
:
Hiroshima justified? (was Enola Gay: Burnt flesh and other magnificent technological achievements)
View Single Post
#
3
December 23rd 03, 09:27 PM
Charles Gray
external usenet poster
Posts: n/a
On 23 Dec 2003 11:30:54 -0800,
wrote:
(B2431) wrote in message ...
I ask again, how would YOU have taken out the legitimate targets in Nagasaki
and Hiroshima using only weapons available in WW2?
The same way that all previous legitimate targets were taken out
during WWII.
While I'll admit that the firebombing of German metros led to civilian
casualties approaching the same number of Hiroshima/Nagasaki, there is
no comparison between the destruction of architecture as women and
children huddle underground - and the bright shining incineration of
all life within miles, poisoning the land for a generation.
You do realize that most of those Women and children huddling
underground died as the oxygen was pulled from their lungs, tehir
shelters turned into underground ovens? You do realize that the
various raids the "destroyed architecture" killed more people than the
A bombs did?
With humblest respect for your past service to our country, I must
admit that the question you pose illustrates the main problem behind
why the Bomb was used: Because no one knew a "better" way. This
represents a militarily trained, "any-means-necessary" bias.
No, it represents something you don't seem to understand-- a
realistic appreciation of the difficulties of invading an island with
as many as 10 million fanatics defending it.
But the anti-atomic crowd believes in a specific philosophical
principle: that regardless of what "gets the job done", atomic/nuclear
weaponry crosses a moral and humanitarian line that should never be
breached. It exists outside the "any means necessary" category as a
unique horror above and beyond conventional warfare.
Why? What's so bad about a really big ass bomb? Do demons come out
of its ass? All the A-bomb means is that I can fry YOUR city while
risking only one plane load of my troops. Effecient, and elegant.
As for "beyond conventional warfare" ROTFL-- do go visit a VA
hospital, or take a trip to vietnam, or some of the Russian war
monuments. Conventional warfare is just as horrible as atomics-- more
so because it's much easier to get into. Consider the fact that right
now, in 2003, we've enjoyed the longest period between major great
power wars since the end of the napolionic era. The damned bomb
should be given a nobel peace prize.
Charles Gray