nakedemperor
Senior Member
Zhukov said:Well, you did say more or less that it was unjustified, and compared it to Japanese and German war crimes by saying the rationale behind it was 'they did this' therefore 'we did that'.
Were we or were we not at war? Did they surrender after Hiroshima?
I think it is a tragedy that today so many Americans are quick to question the legitimacy of acts committed during our 'total war' against the Japanese and Germans 60 years after the fact.
It leads me to believe that criticizing America has gained primacy over learning about what was actually going on during World War II and the stakes that were involved.
About 51 million people died during that war.
The four events you listed, Dresden (40,000), Nagasaki (92,000), Hiroshima (45,000), and Tokio (84,000), constitute collectively about one half of one percent of the total deaths.
It's about perspective and concentrating on what's really important.
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm
I find it rather odd to use numbers to indicated that the death of 92,000 people was statistically irrelevent. Like freeandfun said, a strong case could be made that Japanese surrender was inevitable after the dropping of the first bomb on Hiroshima.
This isn't ignoring the fact that 'total war' belies the death, even the intentional killing of civilians. I'm just saying these THESE 92,000 civilian deaths could (arguably) have been avoided at minimal cost to the United States. If we responded to total war with equal retaliation and fought tactics with like tactics ALL the time we would be relinquishing the moral standards that keep us from participating in immoral wars of aggression.