No I have a fairly easy time putting myself in different situations and seeing what they say. I don't have much patience when people judge events with the benefits of hindsight
yeah, like when people criticize the bombing of hiroshima and Nagasaki. In hindsight a lot of people want to point out the atrocity. But honestly, If I were in their shoes after the grueling war and found out there was a bomb that could have ended the war faster and saved the lives of my friends and family, I would have been very angry. very angry indeed.
yeah, like when people criticize the bombing of hiroshima and Nagasaki. In hindsight a lot of people want to point out the atrocity. But honestly, If I were in their shoes after the grueling war and found out there was a bomb that could have ended the war faster and saved the lives of my friends and family, I would have been very angry. very angry indeed.
What would make your friends and family worth more than the japanese? If everyone would kill in self-defence there would be no people left (sry I had to, my thread, this is the kind of patriotic americans I hate the most).
Dan Carlin talked about this in his podcast Common Sense, and I agree. People forget we were already fire bombing the cities. Personally i would rather die in an immediate blast and heat than die burning to death. every inch of my body napalmed (or whatever they were using) Even radiation poisoning doesnt seem as bad compared to a flaming deathRight, we killed more people bombing Tokyo with conventional bombs, and we would have continued doing so.. but everybody forgets that.
But virtually any historical event that people rail about makes sense when judged from its own historical context. Not with the 21st century hindsight people judge it from.
What would make your friends and family worth more than the japanese? If everyone would kill in self-defence there would be no people left (sry I had to, my thread, this is the kind of patriotic americans I hate the most).
I see your point, but when we're talking about war it's hundreds of thousands of people, not trading a life 1:1. I don't think dropping a nuclear bomb on an innocent city can be justified in any way.
I see your point, but when we're talking about war it's hundreds of thousands of people, not trading a life 1:1. I don't think dropping a nuclear bomb on an innocent city can be justified in any way.
It's similar to the argument that if you knew terrorists hijacked a plane full of civilians and were planning to crash it into something, is shooting the plane down justifiable? Some would say no, I would say yes.
The people in the plane are going to die anyway. Shoot it down over the least populated area as possible. That's the best you can do. It sucks being stuck between a rock and a hard place, but do the best with what you got.
that's right. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers that we love, or hundreds of thousands of people we don't know and are trying to kill us. You have to realize that we were already fire bombing what you call "innocent cities" and that is horrid. Read eye-witness accounts of those who experienced fire-bombing. Watching their loved ones become human torches. Trying to escape as the road beneath you becomes liquid magma tar, effectively holding you until nearby fires from buildings could reach you and kill you, or you just slowly die from the terrible heat.
You call these cities innocent. They were just as innocent as american cities during the war. Even though Americans at home didn't have a gun in their hands, they were supporting the war effort through the production of ammunitions, vehicles, and other supplies. The same was going on in these cities. And the mentality that they had, had we reached the point of invasion, these "innocent people" probably would have become terrorist to the invading forces. Just like in Vietnam and Iraq. Crashing airplanes and strapping bombs to themselves.
I truly believe, had I seen the horrors that they had seen. Had I watched as many of my comrades killed and known the lengths the Japanese were willing to go to before they surrendered, then I would have believed the bombs would have saved 1.25 million American and UK lives (as well as whatever number of Japanese), and would have chosen to kill no more 400 thousand of the enemy. (depending on how many who had injuries and were made homeless ended up dieing.
it is easy to sit in our comfortable homes. IN our comfortable aircondition. In our chairs on computers and judge these people. but they were fighting to defend the freedom, they had seen the realities that we can never imagine. And went off of the information they had available to do, wherever you agree or not, what probably most (if not all) of the american population would have agreed was the right thing to do.
I'm not trying to convince you that the dropping of the bombs was the right thing to do, I'm just trying to get you to empathize and not judge our great grandparents and great great grandparents. See it from their perspective.