Simviation Forums

The scale of this bloodbath would have been mindboggling.

All I can say is it was merciful that the atomic bombs were dropped.

http://www.combinedfleet.com/Japan.htm

Nice find; I've never seen details of that before.

But I've met more than one WWII Pacific Theater vet who was damned thankful that those weapons were used... they knew all too well what they would have been sent into.

Nice find; I've never seen details of that before.

But I've met more than one WWII Pacific Theater vet who was damned thankful that those weapons were used... they knew all too well what they would have been sent into.

Those guys at that website are amazing.  They've enbarked on a project to research and record TROMS (tabularture record of movement) of every Japanese ship during the WWII years.  That is a staggering enterprise, and they've listed TROMs of hundereds of ships on that site, so far.

And no one thinks of the other side, huh?

Soldiers exist to die, civilians don't.


You guys are disgusting.

And no one thinks of the other side, huh?

Soldiers exist to die, civilians don't.


You guys are disgusting.

Huh??????

Most of the books I have been buying about the Pacific War as of late have been from the perspective of "the other side".

In fact, I've become so interested in things Japanese (the other side), I've begun teaching myself the language and hope to visit Japan some day.

Killing thousands of civilians with two nukes is simply wrong, even if it was meant to spare the lives of the invading and defending soldiers.

War is a thing that should be fought out in the battlezones and not by eraicationg cities.

Killing thousands of civilians with two nukes is simply wrong, even if it was meant to spare the lives of the invading and defending soldiers.

War is a thing that should be fought out in the battlezones and not by eraicationg cities.

You're welcome you your opinion.

Killing thousands of civilians with two nukes is simply wrong, even if it was meant to spare the lives of the invading and defending soldiers.
War is a thing that should be fought out in the battlezones and not by eradicating cities.

[color=#003300]In this case, Bj

H, Thanks for posting that.  After he said I was disgusting, I had to make sure to be careful how to respond to him in order to not evoke the wrath of the admins.  All he had to do was to ask, and I would be very willing to explain the 18th century warfare he advocated was just not possible in the mid 20th century Japan.

It's actually a fascinating study of how Japan saw itself and how the world saw Japan after the Meji restoration and especially how it morphed into national militerism in the Showa period.

[quote][color=#003300]as your commander, do you think I would want to send Bj

[quote][quote][color=#003300]as your commander, do you think I would want to send Bj

So you're justifying killing civillians with the assumption that they *may* be future enemys?

And even if the enemy kills civilians, it doesn't mean that you're allowed to do so, too!




I wasn't talking about modern warfare in the first place, I was just slapping the bombings of japanies cites with the images and consequences of the bombings of european cities in the back of my head.

Bringing war to civilians was, is and will always be wrong. No matter how "good" the arguments may be.
Bombing the crap out of german, english, belgian, polish, spanish and japanese cities has achieved nothing. It has neither broken the morale of the civilian population nor has it driven the leaders into surrendering.

And I'm sure that even the japanese "government" would have admitted defeat if there had been a clean allied invasion.

So you're justifying killing civillians with the assumption that they *may* be future enemys?

I purposed to tone down my statements.

It is what it is.  As long as there are evil people doing evil things, like the Nazi's starting wars, exterminating Jews, brutalizing Slavic people (recall the sad tale of the Czech villiage of Lidice), we have the unfortunate consequences, such as the bombing of Dresden or Hamburg.

There is no, absolutely no connection between the bomb war and the Holocaust, so it can't be seen as a "consequence".

I'd put the bomb war right into line with the Holocaust and other crimes to humanity.

I'm willing to hear your realistic solutions to solve this.

Don't shoot at civilians. Period.

If they have a gun pointing at you, you can shoot them.

Well with respect to WWII, the bombings did serve to help end those wars.  And it had nothing to do with "breaking morale"  it had to do with destroying the enemy's ability to supply it's war-making ability.

When the bombings were so effective, how come the german industry punched out more weapons, airplanes, tanks, etc...than ever out of their factories in the years 44/45?

After having studied this over the years, I am sure you are definately, 100%  wrong!

Still no argument to see the nuclear attacks as an act of "mercy".