57 years ago today the US killed 10's of thousands of civilians

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.


Oct 31, 2000
Originally posted by: rahvin

Civillian cities surround nearly every millitary base in the world. I couldn't name a US millitary base that isn't situated in or on the border of a city with significant population. Civilians work in millitary bases, even during times of war. When using nuclear weapons there is also the strategic nature of the strike besides millitary. Is the city a major transport point? A major port? A central communication point? The soviets could have never invaded Japan, they didn't have the amphibious assault capability. And you forget one important item. Japan attacked the US on US soil, we weren't afraid to invade them, we just choose a path that resulted in less loss of life than an invasion would have ever produced.
Here's 3, off the top of my head (this comment has nothing to do with the nuclear discussion though)

Cherry Point AFB (Goldsboro, NC)
Camp Lejune (Jacksonville, NC)
Fort Bragg (Fayetteville, NC)

Fayetteville is the largest of those cities, and it's not even a 100,000 person city (and would be much smaller without the army :) ).

There's also a harrier base in Havelock, NC, but I can't remember its name.


Diamond Member
Jun 14, 2001
Did you even open up your book in history class? Oh the poor Japanese.
Nuclear weapons may be pure "evil" but what about those inhuman medical experiments they were doing on POWs?

All these kids that have never read a book on the topic think they have all the answers. This is revisionist history at it worst, Have any of you actually talked to a WWII vet? Before you start talking out of your ass about a topic you know nothing about why don't you actaully open up a book and READ on the topic.

I am actually in awe of how many people here don't think we should have dropped the two bombs. You people have no real clue about how horrid the fighting in the SP was. The Japanese would have inflicted such staggering losses on the invasion it would have made all the other landings in the SP and the landings on D-Day look like walk in the park.


Jul 11, 2002
I hear plently of reasons why we were justified in dropping the nuke, yet all I hear on the opposite side is, it was bad! I really wish at times like these, all you "thinkers" could be placed in a concentration camp, then on the shores of Normandy, and in China during the rapings. I'd like you to see how horrible and massive those events were. Lets not stop there though, lets go to an alternate past where we invaded Japan and 4 million people on both sides perish. Will you be born now or has your grandfather died?

For all you people who think there could have been a better way, look how things turned out. Today, Germany and Japan are two of the most prosperous countries in the world, Japan being second only to the US in industrial production. I think things turned out pretty damn well for them. Instead of an emperor, they have a prime minister. With Europe, we didn't get involved early enough and look what happened. Millions of Jews, Russians and Chinese died. And what did America get? A long Cold War with the USSR that instilled decades of fear in Americans. If anybody got screwed in the long run by that nuke, it wasn't Japan, it was us.

I see now that the middle east today has nothing to do with WWII. I'm sorry but genocide, torture, slavery, and raping of millions of people around the world is a lot fscking worse than pieces of disputed land smaller than Rhode Island (West Bank and Pakastan-India). And they say people back then were crazy?