The Nuking of Nagasaki: Even More Immoral and Unnecessary than Hiroshima

[RetiredGySgt]

That is called a starting place. Not the end of negotriations

Nope retard it is all they offered. They wanted a ceasefire.

 

[Vegasgiants]

Nope retard it is all they offered. They wanted a ceasefire.

Then we should have counter offered you moronic shot in the head VA headcase

 

[ding]

Nuclear bombs were going to be reality whether or not the US nuked Japan to end the war.

 

[Unkotare]

You are as uneducated as gripper. Japan is a country, not a race.

Hiroshima: Military Voices of Dissent | Origins

Almost six decades after the fact, the 1945 unleashing of an atomic bomb on Hiroshima continues to be the subject of impassioned debate. Every year the bombing anniversary â which falls on August 6 â occasions heated exchanges between those who question the atomic bombing and those who...

origins.osu.edu

^^^

 

[gipper]

No you have not and your lying about it isnt the solution to that lack of a link. For one thing you couldnt have linked to any offers since the only 2 that exist one was in Sweden and the Government of Japan sent a cease and desist telegram to them to stop since the Government intended to fight to the end and the other was an attempt to get the Soviets to broker a ceasefire which the US would never have accepted.

I did it multiple times years ago. What makes you think you’d get it this time?

 

[Open Bolt]

Good thing they surrendered after two.

We had a lot more atomic bombs on the way. Japan was only days away from being nuked a third time when they gave up and surrendered.

Kokura Arsenal and Niigata were still on the official atomic target list.

I personally think Yokosuka Arsenal could have used a good atomic bombing as well. That would have given the Emperor a nice view of a live mushroom cloud.

At some point we were going to start saving up atomic bombs so we could use a barrage of them to clear the way ahead of our invasion.

 

[DudleySmith]

You have to realize OB, Unkatore is a piece of shit who defends vicious, oppressive, totalitarian states. He defends China's CCP all the time. And 80 fuck'n years later, he's still crying that his beloved Japanese totalitarian state got exactly what they deserved.

His Dad blew the family's reparations check on Enron stock. Unk is trying to weasel some more out of Uncle Sammy for non-existent trauma.

 

[Vegasgiants]

We had a lot more atomic bombs on the way. Japan was only days away from being nuked a third time when they gave up and surrendered.

Kokura Arsenal and Niigata were still on the official atomic target list.

I personally think Yokosuka Arsenal could have used a good atomic bombing as well. That would have given the Emperor a nice view of a live mushroom cloud.

At some point we were going to start saving up atomic bombs so we could use a barrage of them to clear the way ahead of our invasion.

Wow. You would have killed every man woman and child in Japan if given the chance

 

[Stryder50]

We had a lot more atomic bombs on the way. Japan was only days away from being nuked a third time when they gave up and surrendered.

Kokura Arsenal and Niigata were still on the official atomic target list.

I personally think Yokosuka Arsenal could have used a good atomic bombing as well. That would have given the Emperor a nice view of a live mushroom cloud.

At some point we were going to start saving up atomic bombs so we could use a barrage of them to clear the way ahead of our invasion.

Not really!
USA atomic/nuclear bomb production rates in 1945 were about 1-2 per month and would remain such for several months to a couple of years after.

In essence, the USA might have had another bomb or two to use later in August of 1945, and one or two bombs per month thereafter for several next months.

The following linked chart gives details on USA nuclear bomb production and those used against Japan are the Mark-I and Mark-III types. Mark-IV types begin appearing in 1949.

Complete List of All U.S. Nuclear Weapons​

List of All U.S. Nuclear Weapons

nuclearweaponarchive.org

~~~~~~~~~~~~
One might consider using facts and data rather than conjecture and "wishing" when dealing with a subject such as this.

 

[ding]

Wow. You would have killed every man woman and child in Japan if given the chance

You were arguing dropping the bombs didn't do anything to end the war. Now you are arguing they could have killed every man, woman and child in Japan. Make up your mind.

 

[Open Bolt]

Not really!

"The next bomb of the implosion type had been scheduled to be ready for delivery on the target on the first good weather after 24 August 1945. We have gained 4 days in manufacture and expect to ship from New Mexico on 12 or 13 August the final components. Providing there are no unforeseen difficulties in manufacture, in transportation to the theatre or after arrival in the theatre, the bomb should be ready for delivery on the first suitable weather after 17 or 18 August."

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/67.pdf

USA atomic/nuclear bomb production rates in 1945 were about 1-2 per month and would remain such for several months to a couple of years after.
In essence, the USA might have had another bomb or two to use later in August of 1945, and one or two bombs per month thereafter for several next months.

"4. The final components of the first gun type bomb have arrived at Tinian, those of the first implosion type should leave San Francisco by airplane early on 30 July. I see no reason to change our previous readiness predictions on the first three bombs. In September, we should have three or four bombs. One of those will be made from 235 material and will have a smaller effectiveness, about two-thirds that of the test type, but by November, we should be able to bring that up to full power. There should be either four or three bombs in October, one of the lesser size. In November there should be at least five bombs and the rate will rise to seven in December and increase decidedly in early 1946. By some time in November, we should have the effectiveness of the 235 implosion type bomb equal to that of the tested plutonium implosion type."

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/45.pdf

The following linked chart gives details on USA nuclear bomb production and those used against Japan are the Mark-I and Mark-III types. Mark-IV types begin appearing in 1949.

Complete List of All U.S. Nuclear Weapons​

List of All U.S. Nuclear Weapons

nuclearweaponarchive.org

Section 8.0 The First Nuclear Weapons

nuclearweaponarchive.org

One might consider using facts and data rather than conjecture and "wishing" when dealing with a subject such as this.

One might.

 

[Vegasgiants]

You were arguing dropping the bombs didn't do anything to end the war. Now you are arguing they could have killed every man, woman and child in Japan. Make up your mind.

No you are just lying now. Nuclear bombs can end every war


You are arguing they should be dropped on the first day of battle

 

[Stryder50]

"The next bomb of the implosion type had been scheduled to be ready for delivery on the target on the first good weather after 24 August 1945. We have gained 4 days in manufacture and expect to ship from New Mexico on 12 or 13 August the final components. Providing there are no unforeseen difficulties in manufacture, in transportation to the theatre or after arrival in the theatre, the bomb should be ready for delivery on the first suitable weather after 17 or 18 August."

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/67.pdf

"4. The final components of the first gun type bomb have arrived at Tinian, those of the first implosion type should leave San Francisco by airplane early on 30 July. I see no reason to change our previous readiness predictions on the first three bombs. In September, we should have three or four bombs. One of those will be made from 235 material and will have a smaller effectiveness, about two-thirds that of the test type, but by November, we should be able to bring that up to full power. There should be either four or three bombs in October, one of the lesser size. In November there should be at least five bombs and the rate will rise to seven in December and increase decidedly in early 1946. By some time in November, we should have the effectiveness of the 235 implosion type bomb equal to that of the tested plutonium implosion type."

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/45.pdf

Section 8.0 The First Nuclear Weapons

nuclearweaponarchive.org

One might.

Well, ... thanks.
Had Japan not surrendered, those production rates would have continued. Note that it's a slow incremental increase over the span of the next few months. The USA did not have a huge stockpile to bomb several Japanese cities with in August, or even September of 1945.*

As it was, the production rates were slowed a bit, but would increase once it was known Russia had acquired nuclear bomb tech.

See the chart I linked.

* Note also that only a handful of Japanese cities were spared from the massive fire-bombing campaign targeting so that real effects of use of nuclear bombs could be measured. Also note that many of the fire-bombings resulted in greater damage and loss of life than either of the nuclear bombings did.

 

[ding]

No you are just lying now. Nuclear bombs can end every war


You are arguing they should be dropped on the first day of battle

Aren't you the dude that believed that after 4 years of war with US and the US destroying the Japanese navy, controlling the seas around Japan with their navy and controlling the air over Japan with their carriers and dropping not one nuke but two nukes which completely destroyed two cities, Japan surrendered unconditionally because Russia joined the war?

 

[Vegasgiants]

Aren't you the dude that believed that after 4 years of war with US and the US destroying the Japanese navy, controlling the seas around Japan with their navy and controlling the air over Japan with their carriers and dropping not one nuke but two nukes which completely destroyed two cities, Japan surrendered unconditionally because Russia joined the war?

Arent you the dude who wanted to kill every man woman and child in Japan?

 

[AZrailwhale]

This whole post is about me.


You have completely abandoned the debate


Now it's all just personal attacks

Well, to be fair, you are an obnoxious jerk who doesn’t understand either history or international law, but continues to argue and insult other posters.

 

[Vegasgiants]

Well, to be fair, you are an obnoxious jerk who doesn’t understand either history or international law, but continues to argue and insult other posters.

I accept your concession

 

[ding]

Arent you the dude who wanted to kill every man woman and child in Japan?

Only if that's what it took to make them unconditionally surrender to end the war that they started.

 

[Vegasgiants]

Only if that's what it took to make them unconditionally surrender to end the war that they started.

Holy cow. That is absolutely disgusting

 

[ding]

Holy cow. That is absolutely disgusting

Why? That's exactly what would happened. Of course no one expected it would have to come to that. And it didn't because they surrendered after we dropped the second nuclear bomb.

But that was the will of the people. Japan started the war. America ended the war.