 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| ACS
| Commons
| Calendar
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | Color Chart | Photo album | IRC Chat |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| ACS
| Commons
| Calendar
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | Color Chart | Photo album | IRC Chat |
|
| | ||
2 users currently in General Chat:  Dark Vampriel |
| Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - General Chat - Survey: The Atomic Bomb |
 |  |  |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 | Add to favorites | "RSS" Feed | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
Was dropping 2 atomic bombs on Japan in 1945 justifiable?| Answer honestly, and if you wish, support your answer in a post | Yes |
46.8%, 22 votes | No |
42.6%, 20 votes | No decision |
10.6%, 5 votes | Multi-voting is disabled.
| |
| User | Post | ||
|
Kefka Indefinitely Unbanned Level: 81 Posts: 1904/3392 EXP: 4826208 For next: 166641 Since: 03-15-04 From: Pomona, CALIFORNIA BABY! Since last post: 4 hours Last activity: 4 hours |
| ||
I am doing this short survey for a small American History project. I would like to have the opinion of the general public. And since I'm too lazy to go out on the town and randomly grab people, I figured I'd just survey the general public that reads the General Chat forum in Acmlm's Board! So, I shall not vote, because I am not one of the people that is being surveyed. However, I may interject now and then if I feel like saying something. Just vote, and if you want, give reasons as to why it was or was not justifiable please. This helps me out a lot. Thanks.  |
|||
macks Level: 45 Posts: 201/900 EXP: 659955 For next: 209 Since: 03-15-04 From: Sweden Since last post: 1 day Last activity: 22 hours |
| ||
| Droping atomic bombs will never be justifiable. | |||
Silvershield Slime Level: 30 Posts: 188/345 EXP: 153029 For next: 12840 Since: 04-11-04 From: New Jersey Since last post: 60 days Last activity: 6 hours |
| ||
| The WWII-era Japanese were a fanatical, fearless people who had no intention of surrendering even though their Axis partners were otherwise defeated. Ultimately, the war would not conclude without Japan's fall, and American leaders saw two choices: a massive amphibious assault akin to a large-scale (and undoubtedly more bloody) Normandy, assuring the loss of hundreds of thousands of American lives; or the use of the newly developed megaweapons, saving the lives of American soldiers. The Japanese made the choice for us. They certainly could have surrendered and saved the lives of their people, but they did not. It was justifiable in that instance, though certainly regrettable. |
|||
Angel Hardhat Beetle Level: 37  Posts: 261/573 EXP: 335160 For next: 3093 Since: 03-15-04 Since last post: 21 days Last activity: 11 hours |
| ||
| They bombed pearl harbour, then they ate shit its really simple. | |||
Jarukoth  IRRATIONAL EXUBERENCE!!1! Level: 79  Posts: 1036/3194 EXP: 4402011 For next: 177456 Since: 03-17-04 From: New Jersey, U.S.A. Shoes: Yes. Since last post: 8 days Last activity: 1 day |
| ||
| Not quite, Angel. There is always the ever present question of morality. According to my beliefs, killing in itself is bad. Even if you kill someone to defend someone else, that is still wrong to a certain degree. During WWII, it was clear the Japanese were not going to give up, so we had no choice but to use it, lest we suffer more casualties. I believe Silvershield put it well, saying that The Japanese made the choice for us, since they really did. It may not be right or proper, but war is just ugly like that. |
|||
Dracoon Zelda The temp ban/forum ban bypasser! Level: 84  Posts: 422/3727 EXP: 5514391 For next: 147561 Since: 03-25-04 From: At home Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 5 hours |
| ||
| It was bad, but it was good. I have no true decision. We killed to many civilians, but then again it was the fastest way and germany may have taken over if we didn't. I am not quite sure it was bad but good. I can't decide. | |||
|
Kefka Indefinitely Unbanned Level: 81 Posts: 1916/3392 EXP: 4826208 For next: 166641 Since: 03-15-04 From: Pomona, CALIFORNIA BABY! Since last post: 4 hours Last activity: 4 hours |
| ||
Originally posted by Dracoon Germany was taken care of by the time the U.S. bombed Japan. |
|||
Waddler-D Deddorokku Level: 33  Posts: 89/442 EXP: 227132 For next: 2047 Since: 03-15-04 From: Orange Ocean, Popstar Since last post: 168 days Last activity: 123 days |
| ||
Well, while the Japanese sure did some horrible things to the US at times, I really doubt it was right to decimate 2 cities with atomic bombs. I think the main plan was that the US forces threaten Japan with these bombs, which was a good idea, but it wasn't right to use 2 bombs on Japan... One would have been more reasonable and would change my vote to a yes, but 2!? The people had to deal with an agonizing thing called radiation afterwards, and probably most of them were left homeless and other things.  So, I'm voting no... (edited by Waddler-D on 05-18-04 04:46 PM) |
|||
alte Hexe Star Mario I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night Alive as you and me "But Joe you're ten years dead!" "I never died" said he "I never died!" said he Level: 99  Posts: 642/5458 EXP: 9854489 For next: 145511 Since: 03-15-04 From: ... Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
| Japan was as cancerous as the Germans. They spread anti-Chinese and Korean propoganda to their people. They fuelled a fanatical Shinto based assault on Asia. They unleashed toxins and diseases (like salting the playgrounds of children with TB spores). They raped and killed millions of Chinese. Rape of Nanjing for example. 100'000 were killed in a contest between Japanese troops. You know, to see who could cut off the most heads. They killed 1000 Canadians stationed in Hong Kong. Which was a British Protectorate. They tortured people worse than the Germans. The bomb is never justified. I can't condone something of that magnitude. Even after the Japanese issued surrender to the US. I only voted yes, not out of justification of the cause, but of comparison of the cause. Although I'm sure some ignorant Otaku asshole is more than willing to argue with me on the point of Japan having a despicable role in WW2. You know, apparently they're an enlightened people, all of which adhere to some sort of BS Asian code of honour. |
|||
jasukan Panser Level: 30 Posts: 204/344 EXP: 155950 For next: 9919 Since: 03-15-04 Since last post: 135 days Last activity: 62 days |
| ||
| Well yeah, I don't think there was a better choice. It was either use the atomic bomb to wipe out the city, or send in the whole entire army to kill the people in the city. Remember that the people of Japan have the Samurai spirit, all of them would be glad to die for their country anyways, and the Japanese people refused to leave Hiroshima. We would've had to send our soldiers to every single house in that city and kill everyone to stop them, and risk a million or more American deaths. Hiroshima's people were warned about the atomic bomb and told to evacuate their city, but they didn't believe us. Then the U.S. said they would bomb Nagasaki (that is the other city, right?) as well, Japan didn't believe they had a 2nd bomb, even when one of their cities was already wiped out. Well, that was dropped too. Like Silvershield said, they had the choice to leave if they wanted. BTW, here's an interesting fact...the man who dropped the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima was a man named Tom Ferebee from the same town I'm from (Mocksville) in North Carolina, which has about 1,500 people or so. |
|||
Ed Lantern Ghost Level: 42  Posts: 262/761 EXP: 512715 For next: 8647 Since: 03-16-04 From: Dublin, Ireland Since last post: 215 days Last activity: 25 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Max That's exactly how I think of it. So obviusly, I vote no. (edited by Edsgravy0 on 05-18-04 04:56 PM) |
|||
|
Kasumi-Astra Administrator Level: 62  Posts: 367/1867 EXP: 1971846 For next: 12840 Since: 03-15-04 From: Reading, UK Uni: Sheffield, UK Since last post: 1 day Last activity: 12 hours |
| ||
| Nope. It was no more justifiable in 1945 than it would be today. It was a terrible thing to destroy two cities full of civilians. It is because of this that laws for war were written. Even if the bombs stopped the war there could've been a different way to use the technology to force the Japanese to surrender. |
|||
|
Kefka Indefinitely Unbanned Level: 81 Posts: 1926/3392 EXP: 4826208 For next: 166641 Since: 03-15-04 From: Pomona, CALIFORNIA BABY! Since last post: 4 hours Last activity: 4 hours |
| ||
Originally posted by Kasumi-Astra Now, I am neutral on this, or perhaps even more on your side, but I must ask: can you give examples for the statement "there could've been a different way to use the technology to force the Japanese to surrender"? |
|||
|
Surlent サーレント Level: 49  Posts: 295/1077 EXP: 863920 For next: 19963 Since: 03-15-04 From: Tower of Lezard Valeth Since last post: 16 hours Last activity: 1 hour |
| ||
| There's no "debt" which should have be paid back by dropping such a devastating bomb; plus the people who didn't get killed in the bomb impact centre, will be dead as well and suffering ldue to the radiation. Hitler treated the Jews also no comfort way at all, but no one of these crimes must be sued with an Atomic Bomb ... |
|||
|
Kasumi-Astra Administrator Level: 62 Posts: 368/1867 EXP: 1971846 For next: 12840 Since: 03-15-04 From: Reading, UK Uni: Sheffield, UK Since last post: 1 day Last activity: 12 hours |
| ||
| The bombs could be used to destroy military targets. I know the scale of the destruction the bombs means that you can hardly be precise about the targets you select, but what won the war was the surrendering of Japan, not the defeat of Japan. Japan was not significantly crippled enough to halt it's war machine, it was instead daunted with the firepower of the dawn of the nuclear age. The technology only needed to be used in a responsible way as to convince the Japanese had nothing that could match nuclear weapons. |
|||
|
The SomerZ Summer, yay! Level: 45  Posts: 254/862 EXP: 618182 For next: 41982 Since: 03-15-04 From: Norway Since last post: 2 days Last activity: 3 hours |
| ||
Originally posted by jasukan There's a racist statement if I ever saw one. People are individuals, they think and act different from each other. And I don't think it is justifiable to drop nuclear bombs. I know the arguments, I've been in a US History class myself and I have been given the arguments pro the Atomic bomb, I have also been in a History class back home in Norway and been given the arguments against them. I've made up my mind and I don't think it was right to drop nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. |
|||
Joachim Mole Level: 30  Posts: 138/358 EXP: 165561 For next: 308 Since: 03-15-04 From: Neo Kobe Since last post: 3 hours Last activity: 3 hours |
| ||
| It was a long time ago and some stuff might have been stretched and I didn't live back then so I vote no decision. | |||
Weasel Missionary in PeruLevel: 34  Posts: 326/454 EXP: 236444 For next: 17207 Since: 03-15-04 From: Washington Since last post: 467 days Last activity: 339 days |
| ||
| I think the bombs proved to the world: 1) The reality of the destructive force we had 2) The fact that we had more than one, so we could do this kind of damage again. Without a doubt, I think it was right to drop both bombs. It further shows the U.S. as a leading military power, and it gave the world second thoughts on using their own weapons like this. |
|||
|
Cymoro PATRICK DUFFY WILL LASER YOUR SOUL   Level: 67  Posts: 480/2216 EXP: 2549743 For next: 43129 Since: 03-15-04 From: Cymoro Gaming Since last post: 6 hours Last activity: 4 hours |
| ||
| I'll tell you what they were for. 1) We dropped a bomb on Hiroshima. They get smacked in the face, but think we don't have anymore. 2) Two days later, we drop our last, and final one on Nagasaki. Japan thinks we have more, Hitler thinks we have more, and Russia thinks we have more. 3) War ends a little while later after the bombs. Cold War starts with Russia, who thinks we have more. It was a fake out. If Japan had known that that was it, they wouldn't have quit. |
|||
ShadowKnight Stone axe Level: 14 Posts: 14/59 EXP: 10840 For next: 2231 Since: 04-09-04 From: Marshall, Michigan Since last post: 79 days Last activity: 20 days |
| ||
| I'm a bit iffy here. One good thing that happened after the bombings was that the battles in the pacific theater end, giving a stop in further blood shed in that part of the world. The bad thing, though was the idea of total war(attacking cvilian targets, weakening support for wars on a certain side). The bombings killed a rather large group of civilians. Heck, all bombings are horrible(like the incineration bombs used on Germany). |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 | Add to favorites | "RSS" Feed | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - General Chat - Survey: The Atomic Bomb |
| | |
