Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Dropping The Atomic Bomb

Discussion in 'The Pub' started by grange, Aug 12, 2010.

  1. That's the problem I have with Uncle Sam telling the world who can and cannot develop nuclear technologies. The only country to have ever used nuclear weapons against another country..twice... is dictating who can and who cannot..just in case they follow suit. The sad thing is that too many people think that the solution to troubles overseas (pick a country ending in Stan) can be solved with the use of these weapons.
  2. Somewhere on the web is a site with a timeline of when and where for every nuclear explosion. So far there have been over 2050 nuclear tests in the world :eek:

    To think that in a previous job I was qualified and able to drop the buckets of instant sunshine :-$

    Edit: the site is Japanese Artist: Nuclear Weapons
  3. It is amazing how little some value life and the life of others.
    While the bombings did allow an end to war, it wiped out thousands and made areas of Japan uninhabitable for generations to come.
    There is no justification for war at times, and I can only see it become worse in the future as the grab for resources escalates.
  4. I think this link says why all nuke weapons should be destroyed and never considered for use again.
    Clumsy buggers...and that's just what has been reported from the U.S., probably best not to think about it.
  5. Our standard response to any enquiry about the 600lb bomb was "It is the policy of the Royal Navy neither to confirm nor deny the carriage of nuclear weapons on this ship".

    Fairly useless when we were alongside in Ft Lauderdale, Florida with a mass of local VIP's on board for a Cocktail Party. The tannoy made a broadcast (in a broad Geordie accent) for everyone to hear along the lines of:

    "Would the rating holding the key to the nuclear bomb store, please return the same immediately" :LOL:
  6. ...Very sobering indeed.
  7. Still seemed unnecessary in my mind. Yes it scared the shit out of them enough for a surrender to end the war (potentially saving hundreds of thousands of serviceman's lives in the planned landing attacks), but 60,000+ lives where the majority were civilians seems more like genocide.

    Another interesting tidbit, the Bomb that hit Hiroshima had only about 1.5% of it's payload fission. These days I'd imagine efficiency of the bombs would be closer to 90%, so a modern bomb of the same size would likely be nearly 100x as destructive, if not more factoring in technological advances.
  8. So what's the number then? How many of the enemy equal I Allied Soldier???

    Hiroshima and Nagasaki aren't exactly the high point of Human Civilization, But I don't see it in the depths that some people do.

    I don't think it's cut and dried and needs to be seen in context.

    Put yourself in their shoes you've been fighting for years, and millions have died, then you see a way to end the war quickly, what would you do???

    Is it really worse that the fire bombing of Tokyo that killed 100,000 a few months before???
  9. Agreed, that it's questionable whether the dropping of the atom bombs was any worse, ethically, than the conventional large scale strategic bombing of cities that was practiced by all sides with the capability to do so in WW2. I was going to refer to Tokyo myself but you beat me to it.

    That said, there is a school of thought that the first bomb (Hiroshima) could be justified, whereas the second (Nagasaki) was basically an act of bastardry, performed as a research project into the effects of detonation at different altitudes (IIRC Hiroshima was an air-burst and Nagasaki a ground-burst but I may be wrong), when Japan was on the brink of surrender anyway.

    When it comes right down to it, ethical warfare is a bit of an oxymoron isn't it?
  10. I think your last line sums it up...

    That said I think its wrong to second guess someone many years ago that was responsible for their own soldiers and civilians...
  11. Don't worry, MAD keeps you safe...
  12. It's only repugnant if you do it and then want to feel correctly guilty afterwards....
  13. What about genuinely guilty?

    One bomb was sufficient, they could have threatened with the second. Nagasaki was overkill imho.
  14. The first was overkill... the excuse that dropping the bomb was needed to end the war is just that... War isn't meant to be nice, if we are going to judge the Axis for their practices during this period, I think its justified in doing the same for the allies.

    Japan was well on its way to losing the war when these two experiments went off. It is what it is but I won't be sitting here justifying something that never really needed to happen.
  15. at a distance of over 60 years and with only what people said about it at the time for you to go on, your last phrase is meaningless....
  16. Yes because we aren't sure if the holocaust happened right?

    Retrospect is entirely useless :roll:
  17. I'm not so sure about that, Battle of Okinawa cost the Allies 50,000 casualties and the Japanese were promising more of the same on the mainland.

    In hindsight it probably/possibly was wrong but at the time??? I'm not sure any of us has the right to second guess...

    As I said before what is the number of your own you save before you make that descision??? The Japs were losing the war but in no way were they ready to surrender...

    6 days after Nagasaki it was over.
  18. what sort of stupid logic is this?

    I was not saying that the bombing didn't happen, I was questioning your authoratitive statement that it didn't need to happen. You weren't there and you don't know that, neither does anyone else......

    I'm the one who should be rolling my eyes......