Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
The Russians and Oliver Stone have been revising again.If you believe that two atomic bombs leveling two city in an instant didn’t have anything to do with the wars end that's just fucking crazy.
The Russians and Oliver Stone have been revising again.If you believe that two atomic bombs leveling two city in an instant didn’t have anything to do with the wars end that's just fucking crazy.
If you believe that two atomic bombs leveling two city in an instant didn’t have anything to do with the wars end that's just fucking crazy.
It was a small factor, not the deciding factor, and not only my opinion but that of all the generals and admirals I listed above, they must have been crazy too.If you believe that two atomic bombs leveling two city in an instant didn’t have anything to do with the wars end that's just fucking crazy.
It was a small factor, not the deciding factor, and not only my opinion but that of all the generals and admirals I listed above, they must have been crazy too.
unless, of course, they dumb us down with fluoride and chemtrails!Why we don't hold the president accountable for knowing it was going to happen and allowing it to happen so we could enter the war is beyond me. Power, greed, and corruption are a MF.
In 40-50 years we will "discover" that BushCo did 911. Disgusting.
The only two nuclear weapons ever used against an enemy were a 'small factor'?
I'm just having a lot of trouble swallowing that idea.
I know, the common knowledge says otherwise and its a hard idea grasp at first, but the firebombing of Tokyo caused more deaths than Hiroshima or Nagasaki. The vast majority of buildings in Japan were wood. Fires would join and create a firestorm that would be devastating. Even underground shelters were not safe because the firestorm would suck all the air out. Also the Japanese had been wanting to surrender for a while, the sticking point was we wanted unconditional surrender and the Japanese wanted to keep the Emperor, which we finally relented on. I think someone mentioned that another reason we dropped the bomb was to intimidate the Russians.The only two nuclear weapons ever used against an enemy were a 'small factor'?
I'm just having a lot of trouble swallowing that idea.
I think they were a huge factor in the cold war that lasted decades and cost a fortune.
I know, the common knowledge says otherwise and its a hard idea grasp at first, but the firebombing of Tokyo caused more deaths than Hiroshima or Nagasaki. The vast majority of buildings in Japan were wood. Fires would join and create a firestorm that would be devastating. Even underground shelters were not safe because the firestorm would suck all the air out. Also the Japanese had been wanting to surrender for a while, the sticking point was we wanted unconditional surrender and the Japanese wanted to keep the Emperor, which we finally relented on. I think someone mentioned that another reason we dropped the bomb was to intimidate the Russians.
They certainly were; I think they helped keep that war cold, cuz going hot would have cost so many more lives.
Yeah, close calls (1962) don't count so I would say you were very correct. Fortunately.
I clearly remember Mom & Dad watching the nightly news intently during October of 62, seeing the ships & missiles.
Extremely tense is not an adequate description to convey the vibe of that time.
Someone else said that people had no idea, how could you keep something like that unknown?I'm not disputing the fact that other attacks killed more people or did more damage, but none came near the awesome power of a single bomb.
Also, I've read several accounts of survivors and whoever told you that most people in Japan had no idea of the nuclear attacks was dead wrong; the whole country knew in days.