Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
20,682
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 19:
Line 19: + +
Debate:Was the United States right to drop atomic bombs so quickly on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? (view source)
Revision as of 18:45, September 25, 2008
, 18:45, September 25, 2008→It saved lives!
::Personally, I would rather the bombs had not been dropped, or at worst one dropped offshore would have made quite an impact on an already demoralised population. Dropping both was overkill. Anybody still in favour of atomic weapons should spend a 6<sup>th</sup> August at the Peace Memorial in Hiroshima. --[[User:JessicaT|KotomiT]]<sup>[[User talk:JessicaT|''Hajimemashite!'']]</sup> 13:42, 25 September 2008 (EDT)
::Personally, I would rather the bombs had not been dropped, or at worst one dropped offshore would have made quite an impact on an already demoralised population. Dropping both was overkill. Anybody still in favour of atomic weapons should spend a 6<sup>th</sup> August at the Peace Memorial in Hiroshima. --[[User:JessicaT|KotomiT]]<sup>[[User talk:JessicaT|''Hajimemashite!'']]</sup> 13:42, 25 September 2008 (EDT)
Besides American GI lives, just think of all the Japanese lives that were saved. We lost 4000 GI's the first week of Iwo Jima. An invasion of mainland Japan would have killed 100 times more than two atomic bombs. I would have favored nuc strikes in China for the interference in Korea. It was a problem left for another generation- ours. Now both countries are America's enemy and both coutries have nuc weapons. -- [[Image:50 star flag.png|14px]] [[User:Jpatt|jp]] 14:45, 25 September 2008 (EDT)
===="Quickly"====
===="Quickly"====