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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jagfan who wrote (107437)	8/14/2005 10:31:25 PM
From: Jagfan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Rather than risk an estimated 200,000-300,000 American lives in a Japanese invasion, American officials therefore decided the atomic bomb was the most effective means through which to make the futility of continuing hostilities absolutely clear. And, using the atomic bomb against Japan had other advantages. It meant the United States had an ultimate, and at least temporary, guarantee of security if the Soviet Union decided to be as aggressive as many at the time were beginning to believe. Whether or not the ends justified the means, therefore, is a legitimate question for legitimate debate, and one that will no doubt continue to polarise opinion in the years to come. But to base such opinion on a deeply prejudiced anti-militarist, anti-American world-view that excludes crucial evidence, means that those towards the middle of the road are the ones that have the most credibility. Was the decision to drop the atomic bomb a complicated one? Certainly. Was Truman a terrorist or a war criminal for doing so? Certainly not. For the full article : onlineopinion.com.au