the hiroshima pictures

[bluemax]

It doesn't matter WHERE the bomb was dropped, or WHO dropped it!

The whole point of this video and the historical site is to show the atrocity of nuclear weapons! If an entire city of 100k people were simply vaporized, it would be almost humane. However, only the epicentre has that lucky fate - anyone ELSE suffers atrocities that would be certainly classified as "war crimes" for being so heinous!

The effects of de/pressurization, intense light damage, extremely severe burns, organ & body rupturing, gamma/x-ray damage, immediate & residual radiation effects, long-term organ failure and cancer, and fallout.... Conventional bombs just don't have the same kinds of human effect!

The use of nuclear weapons by ANYONE should be considered war crimes, or crimes against humanity because of their severity! The human suffering simply cannot be descibed fully. Those paintings still only scratch the surface!

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: beyoku
:thumbsup:

Originally posted by: Czar
Can we agree that dropping an atomic bomb on two civilian cities is bad?

just like firebombing civilian cities is bad
just like enslaving neighboring countries is bad

asking those people to thank their killers is arrogance to the max

Can we agree that it was Japanese who started the war and refused to surrender unconditionally that led to the bombing on thosw two civilian cities?

 

[bluemax]

Originally posted by: rchiu
Can we agree that it was Japanese who started the war and refused to surrender unconditionally that led to the bombing on thosw two civilian cities?

Does it matter?

You can bet we'd hear Amercians talk about the horrors of nuclear warfare if it happened on their soil! (Other than testing on their own troops.)

 

[TravisT]

Originally posted by: bluemax

Originally posted by: rchiu
Can we agree that it was Japanese who started the war and refused to surrender unconditionally that led to the bombing on thosw two civilian cities?

Does it matter?

You can bet we'd hear Amercians talk about the horrors of nuclear warfare if it happened on their soil! (Other than testing on their own troops.)

It is a sad situation that it had to happen, but partial blame can be left on their leadership.

 

[bluemax]

Originally posted by: TravisT
It is a sad situation that it had to happen, but partial blame can be left on their leadership.

Whether they're to blame or not, whether they deserved it or not is simply not the point! I'm sure some nations feel the USA deserves to get nuked too!

This is just so far removed from conventional warfare, most people (including here in ATOT) can't wrap their heads around it! It's shouldn't happen anywhere!

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: bluemax

Originally posted by: rchiu
Can we agree that it was Japanese who started the war and refused to surrender unconditionally that led to the bombing on thosw two civilian cities?

Does it matter?

You can bet we'd hear Amercians talk about the horrors of nuclear warfare if it happened on their soil! (Other than testing on their own troops.)

If American started a war that killed millions with their soldiers raping, beheading people, sure I'd have absolutely no sympathy for American if nuclear warfare happened on American soil.

 

[marincounty]

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: bluemax

Originally posted by: rchiu
Can we agree that it was Japanese who started the war and refused to surrender unconditionally that led to the bombing on thosw two civilian cities?

Does it matter?

You can bet we'd hear Amercians talk about the horrors of nuclear warfare if it happened on their soil! (Other than testing on their own troops.)

If American started a war that killed millions with their soldiers raping, beheading people, sure I'd have absolutely no sympathy for American if nuclear warfare happened on American soil.

So when Iraqi casualties reach one million, you're in favor of nuking America?
We've already seen cases of Americans raping and killing innocent Iraqis.

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: marincounty

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: bluemax

Originally posted by: rchiu
Can we agree that it was Japanese who started the war and refused to surrender unconditionally that led to the bombing on thosw two civilian cities?

Does it matter?

You can bet we'd hear Amercians talk about the horrors of nuclear warfare if it happened on their soil! (Other than testing on their own troops.)

If American started a war that killed millions with their soldiers raping, beheading people, sure I'd have absolutely no sympathy for American if nuclear warfare happened on American soil.

So when Iraqi casualties reach one million, you're in favor of nuking America?
We've already seen cases of Americans raping and killing innocent Iraqis.

Heh, compared to the atrocities comitted by Japan all over Asia, American still have a way to go in Iraq to match that. But yeah, if American continue to mess up in Iraq and caused more death and destruction, somebody in the International community ought to stand up and do something. If you wanna nuke America, that's fine with me, but I am sure American will nuke you back 10 fold......

 

[Stumps]

well this thread certainly got fed to the dogs

 

[Aisengard]

Originally posted by: bluemax
It doesn't matter WHERE the bomb was dropped, or WHO dropped it!

The whole point of this video and the historical site is to show the atrocity of nuclear weapons! If an entire city of 100k people were simply vaporized, it would be almost humane. However, only the epicentre has that lucky fate - anyone ELSE suffers atrocities that would be certainly classified as "war crimes" for being so heinous!

The effects of de/pressurization, intense light damage, extremely severe burns, organ & body rupturing, gamma/x-ray damage, immediate & residual radiation effects, long-term organ failure and cancer, and fallout.... Conventional bombs just don't have the same kinds of human effect!

The use of nuclear weapons by ANYONE should be considered war crimes, or crimes against humanity because of their severity! The human suffering simply cannot be descibed fully. Those paintings still only scratch the surface!

I agree with this interpretation.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Aisengard

Originally posted by: bluemax
It doesn't matter WHERE the bomb was dropped, or WHO dropped it!

The whole point of this video and the historical site is to show the atrocity of nuclear weapons! If an entire city of 100k people were simply vaporized, it would be almost humane. However, only the epicentre has that lucky fate - anyone ELSE suffers atrocities that would be certainly classified as "war crimes" for being so heinous!

The effects of de/pressurization, intense light damage, extremely severe burns, organ & body rupturing, gamma/x-ray damage, immediate & residual radiation effects, long-term organ failure and cancer, and fallout.... Conventional bombs just don't have the same kinds of human effect!

The use of nuclear weapons by ANYONE should be considered war crimes, or crimes against humanity because of their severity! The human suffering simply cannot be descibed fully. Those paintings still only scratch the surface!

I agree with this interpretation.

:thumbsup:

 

[fubar569]

soooooo releasing VX or anthrax or something like that would be OK, cause its not nuclear...right?

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Aisengard

Originally posted by: bluemax
It doesn't matter WHERE the bomb was dropped, or WHO dropped it!

The whole point of this video and the historical site is to show the atrocity of nuclear weapons! If an entire city of 100k people were simply vaporized, it would be almost humane. However, only the epicentre has that lucky fate - anyone ELSE suffers atrocities that would be certainly classified as "war crimes" for being so heinous!

The effects of de/pressurization, intense light damage, extremely severe burns, organ & body rupturing, gamma/x-ray damage, immediate & residual radiation effects, long-term organ failure and cancer, and fallout.... Conventional bombs just don't have the same kinds of human effect!

The use of nuclear weapons by ANYONE should be considered war crimes, or crimes against humanity because of their severity! The human suffering simply cannot be descibed fully. Those paintings still only scratch the surface!

I agree with this interpretation.

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

 

[bluemax]

Originally posted by: fubar569
soooooo releasing VX or anthrax or something like that would be OK, cause its not nuclear...right?

Of all the wartime atricities, including gas, bubonic fleas / germ warfare, etc. I'd call nuclear weapons the greatest of horrors. This is NOT because of the massive death toll - it's because of the incredible human suffering it causes to those who survive the initial blast! That's 90% of an effected attack area! 10% are lucky and just *whoof* disappear. Some die very quickly and painfully by fire, but the vast majority suffer from injuries that will not kill them quickly; radiation poisoning, organ damage/failure, painful flash blindness, 3rd degree burns over much of the body, and far more.

I've always been morbidly fascinated by nuclear weapons (for about 25 years now) and have studied about them and their effects in my spare time.... but I never quite realized the level of suffering until seeing those pictures! Like so many others, I thought of only two things - those killed by initial blast, and the long-term effects of radiation and fallout.

 

[beyoku]

:thumbsup:

Originally posted by: Dumac

Originally posted by: uhohs
a prolonged blockade = russians entering the pacific theatre and claiming japan or atleast parts of it. which might've eventually lead to direct conflict with the USA.

japan would be a craphole today if that happened.

The japanese cultured was basically destroyed after WWII, and I doubt Japan will rise anywhere near how it was before anytime soon.

The atomic bomb can be argued about. Yes, it most likely saved lives. Yes, millions of people died other places. However, none of these facts should prevent you from acknowledging the tragedy. You don't have to cry, mope, and complain about it, but you should at least feel a little sad that OTHER PEOPLE DIED. Whether they were civilians or soldiers, thousands died. You should be depressed that such an atrocity happened, just as you should be depressed with the rest of the death occuring during the war.

Some of you type as if you are glad thousands of civilians died. It is terrifying. Don't hate a whole country of people because of how their goverment directs them. Some of you type as if, had you the power, you world have decimated every last person on Japan.

You don't have to feel guilty about the decision, but acknowledge the tragedy of death, in any way.

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: beyoku
:thumbsup:

Originally posted by: Dumac

Originally posted by: uhohs
a prolonged blockade = russians entering the pacific theatre and claiming japan or atleast parts of it. which might've eventually lead to direct conflict with the USA.

japan would be a craphole today if that happened.

The japanese cultured was basically destroyed after WWII, and I doubt Japan will rise anywhere near how it was before anytime soon.

The atomic bomb can be argued about. Yes, it most likely saved lives. Yes, millions of people died other places. However, none of these facts should prevent you from acknowledging the tragedy. You don't have to cry, mope, and complain about it, but you should at least feel a little sad that OTHER PEOPLE DIED. Whether they were civilians or soldiers, thousands died. You should be depressed that such an atrocity happened, just as you should be depressed with the rest of the death occuring during the war.

Some of you type as if you are glad thousands of civilians died. It is terrifying. Don't hate a whole country of people because of how their goverment directs them. Some of you type as if, had you the power, you world have decimated every last person on Japan.

You don't have to feel guilty about the decision, but acknowledge the tragedy of death, in any way.

Supporting the decision to use atomic bomb doesn't mean we ignore the pain and suffering by the Japanese citizen killed. Like you said, we should acknowledge the tragedy of any death, in anyway. We have to look at the overall picture and see which decision minimized the overall death and tragedy, and support such decision. Finally, let us not forget who the real culprit was for causing the death and tragegy, it was not the people who made the decision to drop the atomic bomb. It was the people who started the war in the first place.

 

[bluemax]

This is a particularly good read for this thread.

Takes "Japan" out of the picture - replaces it with the issue that should be addressed - why nuclear warfware is bad.

 

[bluemax]

Forget that... see the whole film!

Warning: It makes "The Day After" look like a trip to Disneyland.

 

[1EZduzit]

I just don't understand some of you. Was dropping the A-bomb in WW2 a good thing? Of course not, but you know what, I'll bet that not one of you was even alive then. I for one am not going to feel guilty about something that happened before I was even born.

I think it would be interesting if we could turn the clock back, let you fight at Iwo Jima, and then give you a choice, either we drop the bomb to coerce Japan's surrender or YOU get to lead the invasion.

I highly doubt many would cose the latter over the former.

 

[bluemax]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
I just don't understand some of you. Was dropping the A-bomb in WW2 a good thing? Of course not, but you know what, I'll bet that not one of you was even alive then. I for one am not going to feel guilty about something that happened before I was even born.

I think it would be interesting if we could turn the clock back, let you fight at Iwo Jima, and then give you a choice, either we drop the bomb to coerce Japan's surrender or YOU get to lead the invasion.

I highly doubt many would cose the latter over the former.

Oy...... you just.... don't.... get it.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: bluemax

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
I just don't understand some of you. Was dropping the A-bomb in WW2 a good thing? Of course not, but you know what, I'll bet that not one of you was even alive then. I for one am not going to feel guilty about something that happened before I was even born.

I think it would be interesting if we could turn the clock back, let you fight at Iwo Jima, and then give you a choice, either we drop the bomb to coerce Japan's surrender or YOU get to lead the invasion.

I highly doubt many would cose the latter over the former.

Oy...... you just.... don't.... get it.

Yes I do. Nuclear warfare just isn't and can't be an option anymore. That's a given, but 60 years ago was an entirely different situation. WE were the only nation with nukes so we didn't have to worry aboput retailiation, but Japan was trying to get them and I believe they even had some radioactive material that Germany had sent them to make dirty bombs with. Not only did the desicsion to drop those bombs saved tens of thousands of American lives (and more Japanese lives then would have been lost in an American invasion), it also prevented the possibility of the Japanese dropping dirty bombs on us and Japan had proved it wasn't above dropping dirty bombs. It also shortened the war preventing the possibility of Japan developng it's own nuke.

WW2 was a real war, the kind that afffected the civilain population of the whole world and Japan was taking no prisoners. Look at the bright side, after looking at the horrific destruction and suffering such a weapon causes any sane person can see that the world can never let itself be put into such a position again. At the time, it was the only rational choice. It wasn't the moral choice, but war isn't moral and they WERE in a war for all the marbles.

So what part of that do you disagree with??

 

[bluemax]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Yes I do. Nuclear warfare just isn't and can't be an option anymore. That's a given, but 60 years ago was an entirely different situation. WE werer the only ones with nukes, but Japan was trying to get them and I believe they even had some radioactive materisl that Germany sent them to make dirty bombs with. Not only did the decession to drop those bombs saved tens of thousands of American lives (and probably more Japanese lives then would have been lost in an American invasion) AND it prevented the possibility of the Japanese dropping dirty bombs on us and Japan had proved it wasn't above dropping dirty bombs.

WW2 was a real war, the kind that afffected the civilain population of the whole world and Japan was taking no prisoners. Look at the bright side, after looking at the horrific destruction and suffering such a weapon causes any sane person can see that the world can never let itself be put into such a position again.

So what part of that do you disagree with??

That's a sensible argument.

Really, this isn't supposed to be a justification of using the bomb. Seems like whenever anyone says "Nukes" or "Hiroshima" the Americans collectively start chanting the justification "IT SAVED LIVES. IT ENDED THE WAR. IT SAVED LIVES. IT ENDED THE WAR."

There is no justification, but the point remains that it cannot happen again - by any country, by any means. The thing that scares me is madmen like the leaders of Iraq/Iran and N.Korea, rushing to build nuclear bombs (dirty or otherwise) because they hold no value for human life.... more like the Cobra Commander screeching, "DIE DIE DIE DIE!!!!"