Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: A question for those who are against the use of atomics bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki: [View all]Aristus
(66,294 posts)45. How come nobody ever says "Do you know how many Americans would have been killed
if we had invaded Hitler's Fortress Europe in 1944"?
Why were American casualties an acceptable result of fighting the white European Nazis, but not fighting the Japanese? Why were we so eager to nuke non-Europeans?
And BTW, MacArthur wanted to use nukes in Korea. Curtis Lemay wanted to use nukes in Vietnam. Why are nukes only an imperative resource when the adversaries are not white Europeans?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
89 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
A question for those who are against the use of atomics bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki: [View all]
Dial H For Hero
Aug 2020
OP
If you don't choosse any of the options listed, how would you have defeated Japan?
Dial H For Hero
Aug 2020
#2
Exactly. Any other realistic option, from an invasion of the Home Islands to simply blockading them
Dial H For Hero
Aug 2020
#38
I cant's fly there. Please answer the question. What would you do to defeat Japan in 1945?
Dial H For Hero
Aug 2020
#7
They didn't surrender after we nuked one of their cities. Why would a single demonstration bomb
Dial H For Hero
Aug 2020
#10
They were surrounded, beaten, and starving. What the heck were they going to do to us?
Hoyt
Aug 2020
#20
They were no threat to the USA in March 1945. But they still had to be defeated.
Dial H For Hero
Aug 2020
#33
Yes, the Nagasaki A-bomb killed 180 POWs. And our bombers killed 68,000 French citizens over the
Dial H For Hero
Aug 2020
#47
Points for being brief, I suppose...but would you care to answer the question?
Dial H For Hero
Aug 2020
#13
The Japanese were barbaric from Korea to the Philippines. Pearl Harbor was uncivilized.
Karadeniz
Aug 2020
#12
Wording of the leaflets dropped on Hiroshima Nagasaki and 33 other Japanese cities on 1 August 1945
EX500rider
Aug 2020
#56
Was the question of what to do inauthentic for Harry Truman? What should he have done in 1945?
Dial H For Hero
Aug 2020
#36
I was conceived immediately after the bombing of Nagasaki, born in May 1946.
Silver Swan
Aug 2020
#31
It is the 75th Anniversary. Tell you what: I won't start another thread about it until 2044.
Dial H For Hero
Aug 2020
#54
possibly nothing? iirc, the Japanese were already considering surrender at the time
0rganism
Aug 2020
#40
Japan wanted conditions for an end to hostilities that were intolerable to the allies
Ex Lurker
Aug 2020
#53
How come nobody ever says "Do you know how many Americans would have been killed
Aristus
Aug 2020
#45
We didn't have nuclear weapons until after Germany was defeated. They weren't an option in 1944 or
Dial H For Hero
Aug 2020
#52
The nature of the war in the European Theater of Operations was completely different.
Dial H For Hero
Aug 2020
#58
It is actually a myth that Japan surrendered because of the atomic bombs.
Trumpocalypse
Aug 2020
#46
Good ? for Death Count Donnie, he should consult with Hara Kiri *cough* Charlie ASAP?
Brainfodder
Aug 2020
#48
But had Japan not surrendered, we surely would have ramped up production. As evidence:
Dial H For Hero
Aug 2020
#66
Your original point is correct; it would have been another two weeks before a third A-bomb could be
Dial H For Hero
Aug 2020
#71
This thread was intitally removed for kooky, extremist, or hate content I appealed, pointing out
Dial H For Hero
Aug 2020
#75