Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : America Under Siege: The End of Innocence -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (532)	9/12/2001 1:46:04 PM
From: speedbot	Respond to of 27684

I didn't see the pbs special but i was taught that the bombing saved at least a year in an already protracted campaign in the pacific. I agree that we should not resort to terrorism. But ask yourself who the aggressor was here. If someone were to brutally stab you in an act of "terrorism" and you retaliate in self defense would your subsequent actions be considered "terrorist"? I don't think so.

To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (532)	9/12/2001 1:46:08 PM
From: speedbot	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27684

I didn't see the pbs special but i was taught that the bombing saved at least a year in an already protracted campaign in the pacific. I agree that we should not resort to terrorism. But ask yourself who the aggressor was here. If someone were to brutally stab you in an act of "terrorism" and you retaliate in self defense would your subsequent actions be considered "terrorist"? I don't think so.

To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (532)	9/12/2001 1:57:59 PM
From: joseph krinsky	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27684

You can't be serious. How would they know what the bomb could do unless they saw the result? You mean a fanatical japanese enemy, one that threw themselves off the cliffs rather than surrender, was going to suddenly change, and just give up because Truman called them and said "hey look guys, the last few years was a real gas, but everyone's a little tired of it all, and btw we have this new bomb, and it's really, really a pistol". So, take my advice and just lay down your arms, now"? For some strange reason, I have this little birdie on my shoulder saying "Nah, that doesn't make any sense to me, does it make sense to you"?

To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (532)	9/12/2001 2:53:32 PM
From: thestockrider	Respond to of 27684

In 1945 the US army estimated that 1,000,000 US casualties for a conventional attack on the Japanese homeland. The atomic bombs saved a few US lives and ended the war significantly earlier. As for showing terrorists what the bomb could do, we showed Saddam Hussein a few years ago what we could do. I believe that Iraqi casualties were something horrific like >500,000. Showing, threatening is not the same as doing. Threatening does not show that you have the resolve to actually carry through with the action. Allowing Japan a conditional surrender without the really fearing the horrifying effects of atomic weapons may have allowed factions within Japan to do what Iraq has tried to do: rearm. Japan skirted and violated numerous arms control treaties in effect before World War II. Japan committed numerous atrocities during the war particularly against South Korean and Chinese women, American servicemen, and other POWs. Japan gave up the fight because it was brought to its knees by overwhelming might of US and other armed forces. Japan stopped its way of governing, its atrocities because of the atomic weapons and because it knew we would use them to obliterate as much of Japanese civilization as was necessary, not because we said please stop. May I remind you that like today's Islamic fundamentalists, many Japanese were willing to die for their cause -- and did. The Japanese were the most difficult opponents the US faced on land and sea. They consistently outfought US units until late in the war when US training and discipline + technology finally caught up. Please don't tell me that the United States should not "become a terrorist nation to deal with terrorists." Extreme measures may be necessary until minds are changed. Thank US technological leadership and nuclear missiles for the freedoms you enjoy today.

To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (532)	9/12/2001 3:02:03 PM
From: JSwanson	Respond to of 27684

I saw a PBS or History Channel special that proved* dropping the bomb was unnecessary after all* Is that a joke? Seriously though, I saw an episode of Friends that proved single Twenty-somethings prefer coffee over beer and wine.

To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (532)	9/12/2001 4:27:49 PM
From: Mike M2	Respond to of 27684

Karen, the bomb was the right choice because everyday the war dragged on people died. Read about the Japanese war crimes, The Rape of Nanking, biological weapons experiments at Unit 731, Bataan Death march. When a nation is at war I feel it has an obligation to use almost every means necessary to achieve victory if it can spare the lives of its soldiers . If you read about the fanatical defense put up the Japanese at Iwo Jima and Okinowa - you would realize that tens of thousands of US soldiers would have died invading Japan. Think of it this way would you want your father or husband to be at war another 6- 12 months in order to spare enemy civilians or get them home asap with the bomb?. Mike