Defending the Truth

Originally Posted by Katczinsky

Well the US fire bombed 67 cities; destroying large percentages of the cities. Just the firebombing of Tokyo destroyed half of the city. That's 17 square miles. The atomic bomb at Hiroshima destroyed an area of about 1 mile radius, with fires across about 4.4 square miles. Just the fire bombing of Tokyo (that's just 1 out of 67 cities) killed about 100,000 people and injured a further 100,000. Little Boy killed about 70,000–80,000 people from the initial blast. Although killed more people years afterward. The blast at Nagasaki killed 70,000. But what I meant was the initial death tolls, not people that died many years later from after effects, because we're talking about the impact it had on the Japanese government and why they surrendered.

And again, I don't entirely disagree with that. I think the atom bombs really did make them realize that, but according to the evidence, and according to many historians on the Pacific front, like John Toland, the Japanese saw that the damage and the deaths and injured from the firing bombings were just as and even more damaging than Hiroshima; so they weren't all impressed that much by the atom bomb. So I think its really a matter of both...but in the end the prospect of them losing their Emperor and their land to foreign occupiers was much more frightening than dying from the atom bomb (because many welcomed death to sacrafice themselves for their country and Emperor).

So really, what I'm basically arguing against is the idea that the bombs were the deciding factor for the Japanese. Basically, they were going to surrender with atom bombs or without them. But the atom bombs were still a factor, albeit small.

Originally Posted by Katczinsky

Just because A happened, and then B happened, doesn't mean A caused B. The Soviets also just initiated Operation August Storm, -a massive invasion of Japanese territory- a month before they surrendered. I believe the Japanese surrender had more to do with this than the atomic bombs.

Originally Posted by alias

That is how you win a war. You pound your enemy and pound him until he surrenders. The terrorists started this war and it will end when they surrender. How ever long that takes is up to them, but the rest of the world is going to fight them because we do not wish to live under their religion.

Originally Posted by alias

We are not 2 sides of the same coin. The civilized world believes in human rights and freedom. The terrorist side believes in submission to them and their religion or they will kill. Not the same coin at all.

Originally Posted by hkbajwa

Again since ur a dumbass i must repeat that i think violent terrorists are just as stupid as you are.. i jsut find it laughable that you can condemn those so easily, whose values resemble yours the most. You may be a white english speaking devout christian.. but you are still one who believes death violence and destruction will solve the pr0oblem.. just like who?? yeah that's right.. the TERRORISTS