{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Bearbeitet von OhtheHugeManity:
1/30/2016 11:56:58 PM
222
The Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Your Opinion
Do you approve or disaprove to Atomic Bombings that took place?
Whoops. Opinion*
Edit 1:
So I was researching the bombings which lead to this poll and I'm seeing a few misconceptions
Mainly in the amount of civilians killed. The deathtoll is estimated at around 80-120 thousand with around the same number injured.
As for my opinion. I find it hard to decide
On one hand it lead to Nuclear Energy, and put an end to the war.
On the other hand a lot of civillians were killed. I think maybe it wasn't necessary to drop them on populated cities. Maybe instead start with farmland to threaten Japan. If they continue to attack then bomb a city.
Another downside to me is that now it just takes a few people in the US alone (not to mention other places armed with nukes,) to authorise the launching of nukes capable of levelling the planet.
Edit 2: So I've been researchong nukes some more and came upon some interesting info. Over the 70 or so years from its invention, about 2200 nukes have been tested. 1000 by the USA and almost as many by Russia.
How much money must these countries have used on nukes? Doesn't sound like a very efficient use of cash considering nukes aren't going to be used much or ever, in warfare again.
English
#Offtopic
-
Bearbeitet von Fr33-StuF-pl0x: 1/30/2016 8:49:14 AMThey threw a rock and we threw a boulder back. Life lesson, don't throw rocks at America. [spoiler]Should have aimed for the knee.[/spoiler]
-
Bearbeitet von Smarkdow: 1/30/2016 7:43:03 AMUnfortunate, but considering the circumstances, necessary to avoid further casualties and bloodshed on both sides. Ultimately demonstrated to us the destructive power of nuclear weapons and scared us into accepting the responsibility of ensuring their use never happens again.
-
This is why people vote for trump
-
6 AntwortenHere's the real question. How do you justify the fire bombing of Dresden?
-
10 AntwortenRelevant.
-
58 AntwortenWow 60% of people approve what happened??! Some sick people out there
-
Those shirt yellow dwarves can die for all I care.
-
2 AntwortenThey did Pearl Harbor, we do Hiroshima
-
3 AntwortenBearbeitet von car15: 1/30/2016 6:07:39 AMIt was a necessary evil. Make no mistake. Dropping the bomb was an act of evil. BUT. If we hadn't dropped the bomb, millions of our own soldiers, as well as millions of Japanese soldiers [i]and civilians[/i], would have died in the ground invasion of Japan.
-
Necessary, but unfortunate.
-
War is not justified but sometimes there are no other options
-
Bearbeitet von ANGRY ASIAN 500: 1/30/2016 4:05:10 AMThe military was full of fanatics who were willing to fight to the last man, woman, and child, was it justified? No. But nothing in war ever is, it was the most reasonable option at the time.
-
Bearbeitet von ViperVenom1224: 1/30/2016 3:45:08 AM1. A land invasion would have had even more casualties, many being American. 2. Japan would have literally fought to the last man, woman, and child. 3. They attacked us first. We didn't provoke them at all, in fact, we were having peace talks DAYS before. If you attack America, America will attack you back. 4. It was a freaking war. People die. Better them than us 5. Hindsight is 20/20
-
Tricky Poll. Do I approve? Well...no. How can I approve of killing? It's entirely preferrable they weren't dropped, that there'd never be a reason for them to drop. Was it justified, understandable? Completely. The US looked at the estimated costs, American lives, Japanese lives of an invasion versus the bombing..and the bombing was the clear choice. Precedent was shown for civilians on the Japanese side committing mass suicide rather than be under control of US forces. With this, and the Japanese's rather fanatical soldiers-so much so to use suicide planes, so much so that isolated Japanese soldiers continued fighting DECADES after the war ended- it's not hard to say that an invasion of Japan would've been far, far worse.
-
We warned them.
-
We only had 2 bombs at the time, we actually bluffed our asses off and told them we would keep bombing until they stopped. After those 2 dropped we were 6 months minimum from getting another bomb. Japan was a pretty different country militarily then, had to put fear in them somehow I guess.... They didn't have the knowledge we have today either take that into consideration.
-
*sits in a polished black leather chair* "There is no way to see this war other than every country, man, woman, and child fought for survival and knew the outcomes of war, Germany invading caused the chained lash out of many and the moral of the Axis paralleled those of the Allies, The Axis being terrible offenders in their crimes of war and the horrible truth of war itself bestowed upon everyone. No one was safe from the great wars in any aspect, the enactments of war is a terrible thing but cannot be justified in the situations of dire outcome. The bombs were to silence the offenders, Japan and that of the Axis alliance, who were developing their weapons two years behind our nuclear arsenal. Without the act of silencing the arrogance in offenders the world would have been ruled, changed, or destroyed by the Axis and Hitler himself."
-
I feel like people see this poll as a loaded question. If you approve, then you support tens of thousands of innocent civilians dying, but if you disapprove, you're a communist that supports terrible wars. My opinion, is that it was a very terrible thing to do, but it was also the most neccasary. An agreement could not have been reached between the US and Japan, and the length of the war really was indeterminable, no matter how wore out both sides appeared to be; an example needed to be made to show that enough was enough. Without the atomic bombs, other civilian massacres would happen on both ends, and the brutal treatment of each others people would continue. At least the world was able to see the power of atomic energy and come to terms on never using nuclear arms again (kinda). TL;DR, atom bombs are suck, but we need them for the greater good (like condoms).
-
I'm Australian and I'm thankful the US bombed Japan, if not they would have invaded our country next.
-
4 AntwortenThey were going to surrender anyway. They did it to see the effects on a populated area. If they really wanted to use it to end the war they would have used it on a nearby island with few/no inhabitants to scare them.
-
If we didn't bomb japan try then more people would of died. They were willing to use [b]every[/b] Japanese person until they were all dead. If was a tough decision but in the end it killed people but the casualties could of been worse
-
Relevant
-
-
Don't mess with America
-
1 AntwortenThe body count from a land invasion would have been astronomically higher.
-
Was it necessary... no probaboy not but efficient... your dam right it was
