The low-level firebombings over Japan were far more deadly than either of the A-bombs

Discussion in 'Military' started by ginscpy, Mar 16, 2011.

  1. ginscpy
    Offline

    ginscpy Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Messages:
    7,950
    Thanks Received:
    213
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +216
    war is hell..............................
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. whitehall
    Online

    whitehall Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    27,716
    Thanks Received:
    4,319
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Western Va.
    Ratings:
    +10,635
    To put it a different way you could say that two bombs killed as many people as 3,500 bombing sorties.
     
  3. ginscpy
    Offline

    ginscpy Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Messages:
    7,950
    Thanks Received:
    213
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +216
    One low-level raid in Toyko killed more than 100,000
     
  4. whitehall
    Online

    whitehall Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    27,716
    Thanks Received:
    4,319
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Western Va.
    Ratings:
    +10,635
    Life was pretty cheap in 1945. Japan's navy was finished after the battle of the Philippine Sea and it's air defenses were limited to kids who could barely fly steering their planes into American ships. The country was still led by Bushido fools but they knew they lost the war. The eggheads who devoloped the Bomb were just itching to try it out on real people and the US military was ready to kill civilians wholesale to teach the Japanese military a lesson. Meanwhile the Japanese were trying to negotiate terms of surrender but Truman refused to talk. The stage was set for the only nuclear attack in history.
     
  5. Mad Scientist
    Offline

    Mad Scientist Deplorable Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    23,936
    Thanks Received:
    5,211
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Ratings:
    +7,676
    My wifes' Grandfather was at Hiroshima. He said Japan wasn't going to surrender unless America dropped the bomb.

    But the heck with that, you wanna' see my NCAA Tournament picks?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  6. whitehall
    Online

    whitehall Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    27,716
    Thanks Received:
    4,319
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Western Va.
    Ratings:
    +10,635
    Japan was a defeated country. It had no navy left and no air defenses. We were bombing the country in daylight raids 24/7. We wouldn't even consider it under any circumstances today but for the sake of argument let's say the A-Bomb was a legitimate last resort when negotiation failed. The problem with the legend is that Truman never tried to negotiate with the Japanese holdouts. Japan was trying to negotiate with Stalin when 180,000 civilians were killed in a single blast and another 40,000 were incinerated a couple of days later. The most important issue according to the Japanese was preventing the emperor from being tried and executed and ironically that issue was conceded after the bombs were dropped.
     
  7. Baruch Menachem
    Offline

    Baruch Menachem '

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    14,204
    Thanks Received:
    3,235
    Trophy Points:
    185
    Ratings:
    +3,305
    Truman was constrained by the agreements made at Yalta. NO separate peace, all axis powers surrender unconditionally.

    He also had the casualty reports from Saipan, Iwo and Okinawa.

    The Japanese were not going to give in without being convinced.

    The japanese proposals were not acceptable, they were just making noise.

    I personally would have preferred a peace on some other terms that meant that Russia never got involved. As it was, Russia got Manchuria and Northern Korea.
     
  8. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    I think the point still stands----civilian deaths from US firebombing far surpassed those of the nukes.
     
  9. whitehall
    Online

    whitehall Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    27,716
    Thanks Received:
    4,319
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Western Va.
    Ratings:
    +10,635
    The point is offensive. Trivializing a nuclear attack by comparing it to civilian deaths in thousands of firebomb raids is insane.
     
  10. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    Offensive to whom ? Civilian deaths are horrifying whether it be by firebombing, nukes or sticks. There were more --way more that came from US firebombing. Are you trying to disguise that ?
     

Share This Page