Greg Hennessy wrote:
On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 05:54:25 GMT, "weary"
wrote:


I never claimed that every bomb would be
on target,

Ohhh it attempts to move the goalposts.

Liar - quote where I said that there would
be no civilian
casualties or every bomb would be on target.

You have done so repeatedly by claiming that
there was an 'alternative'
where none existed.


but feel free to
construct strawmen,


Not a strawman, a fact, you were asked to
provide the alternatives, you
havent.

I have


You haven't, you selectively quoted the bombing
survey figures but were too
stupid to figure out that 2/3s of all bombs
dropped fell more than 1000
feet from the target.

Which of course is *meaningless* given the
CEP needed to hit and destroy a
point target.

Aircraft factories, oil refineries etc aren't
point targets.

Ahhh, its manages to contradict itself yet again
through complete
cluelessness.

and averaged 35 to 40 percent within 1,000
feet of the aiming point in daylight attacks
from 20,000 feet or lower. "

ROFLMAO!! You idiot, you still don't know
what CEP means now do you.

Your delusions and proclivity to inappropriate
fits of laughter
don't concern me, but you should seek professional
help.

You produced figures which completely undermined
your idiotic argument
about the allies having the means to precisely
hit targets anywhere, never
mind urban areas.

One can only laugh at such stupidity.


It is revisionism to claim that B29s had
the means to accurately deliver
HE
on military targets in urban areas as an
alternative to fire raids or the
atom bomb. Its pure unadulterated fantasia.

B29s did and could do so accurately enough
to inflict less casualties
than area bombing or atomic bombs.

Yet another attempt at misdirection.

They clearly couldn't accurately target any
facility in anywhere when
2/3rds of bombs dropped fell more than 1000
feet from the aimpoint.

Or have you forgotten those inconvenient bombing
survey figures yet idiot.


What is the effect of demanding that the
'target' be in an urban area
with regard to civilian casualties - are
they minimised or maximised?
Why is the value of the 'target' somehow
increased by being in a
large urban area?

I suggest you ask the targeting committee,
the one which detailed
'military' targets as a clear contradiction
of your idiotic line about
civilians.

Why did the target have to be in a large urban
area?


Like DUH! One generally finds large urban areas
around key facilities such
as ports, dockyards and regional military headquarters
controlling tens of
thousands of personnel.



I asked you to tell us how *you* would have
targeted the dozen or so key
targets in hiroshima using the technology
of the period. Your reply was a
non sequitur.

"Industrial plants had been targetted successfully
by B-29s
virtually from the start of the bombing campaign
against
the Japanese home islands."

What was special about the targets in Hiroshima
that
the usual bombing ststistics wouldn't apply?

That is a non sensical question.


Given you've already told us that 60-70 %
of bombs dropped will fall more
than 1000 feet from the target, even your
limited comprehension skills
should be aware what 12 air raids by 3-500
B29s will do to a city, even if
they drop only HE.

Yet below you provide a quote that says the
same damage to Hiroshima
could have been inflicted by 220 B-29s and
details the bomb load.

Not loaded with HE alone they wouldnt.

Nearly a quarter of the load was ant-personnel
bombs

Cue yet another clue free attempt at moralising.


so about fifty
planes could have been left behind unless the
aim was specifically
kill civilians,

Of course you will tell us how anti personnel
bombs which 'specifically
kill civilians' would managed to kill those
who would have been warned at
least 45 mins before hand by air raid sirens
and are now sitting in bomb
shelters.

given that the vast majority of casualties
were civilians.

'civilians' who were providing the means to
murder millions of real
civilians across the pacific. Tough.


A far cry from the figures (3600-6000)you
pluck out of the air above.

You're the one claiming that B29s could accurately
target anything without
causing collateral damage, not I.

Very hard to do when the initial CEP for B29
operations was 6%.

You've been repeatedly asked for a meaningful
alternative to the fire
raids
or the A bomb and you haven't provided one.

I have - your chauvinism prevent you from considering
it.

You haven't, all you've done is peddle revisionist
agit-prop, your
hilarious nonsense about anti personnel bombs
being the latest emission of
pomo moralising.



Which proves that the cities were not treated
any differently to any other
B29 target in Japan.

Which doesn't say anything about the legality
or morality of that treatment.


It doesn't have to. There was nothing illegal
or immoral in using a weapon
which ended the war and saved the lives of nearly
1 million allied POWs and
Internees held by the Japanese.



You also neglected the detail the terminal
effects on Nagasaki, something
to do with the PBS tearing another great
hole in your drivel about the
poor
ickle 'civilians'.

???

Ohh, it evades yet again. Please tell the audience
what was damaged and
destroyed by the nagasaki bomb , or it is too
embarrassing for you.

You are aware that armies require more prosaic
items, like vehicles, small
arms, uniforms, a wide variety of munitions
including, bullets, grenades
and shells which were turned out by the millions
across the kanto plain.

The USBS states
"By 1944 the Japanese had almost eliminated
home industry in their war
economy. "

LMAO! Of course it snips the following sentence
which proves my point


" They still relied, however, on plants employing
less than 250 workers for
subcontracted parts and equipment. Many of these
smaller plants were
concentrated in Tokyo and accounted for 50 percent
of the total industrial
output of the city. Such plants suffered severe
damage in urban incendiary
attacks. "


Do try harder dear boy.


greg
--
You do a lot less thundering in the pulpit against
the Harlot
after she marches right down the aisle and kicks
you in the nuts.
Targets of the Nagasaki bomb:
HQ, 122nd Infantry Brigade; Mitsubushi shipyard, Mitsubushi torpedo factory,
airfield, District Naval base, local RR net,
small industry as quoted by USSBS.
All legitimate targets. And all got trashed by 20 Kt.

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!