|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:24 PM |
Would you rather have a long and tiring war end suddenly with the deaths of around 200,000 people...
or
Would you rather have the war go on for much longer time, and have millions more soldiers and civilians die? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
StanAdam
|
  |
| Joined: 20 Nov 2011 |
| Total Posts: 9698 |
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:25 PM |
| who exactly are you directing that to i dont get it |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Scootrbro
|
  |
| Joined: 12 Apr 2008 |
| Total Posts: 11145 |
|
| |
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:25 PM |
"who exactly are you directing that to i dont get it"
Two anonymous people I saw on a thread before. They will post on this sooner or later, just wait. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Flunken
|
  |
| Joined: 25 Jul 2011 |
| Total Posts: 28580 |
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:25 PM |
hey can you stop posting threads that are aimed at trying to make yourself seem smart and edgy
creation |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:26 PM |
oh no japan is killing millions of jewz
*drops nukes*
you monsters! those were innocent people! |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:26 PM |
"hey can you stop posting threads that are aimed at trying to make yourself seem smart and edgy"
no i just like pointing misunderstandings out
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Kotawl
|
  |
| Joined: 22 Jun 2013 |
| Total Posts: 23595 |
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:26 PM |
| having war would help the americans lose weight |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:27 PM |
| I'd rather see soldiers die than civilians. They didn't want to be a part of it, and they lost their lives anyways. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:27 PM |
"having war would help the americans lose weight"
America wasn't fat back in the 40's man
But a war now with a draft would whip some people with no respect into shape... |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:27 PM |
| some of those people from the nukes died a slow and painful death to radiation poisoning |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:28 PM |
"I'd rather see soldiers die than civilians. They didn't want to be a part of it, and they lost their lives anyways."
Civilians always die in war, unfortunately. End of story. If we invaded, many more civilians would die. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:29 PM |
"some of those people from the nukes died a slow and painful death to radiation poisoning"
Most died instantly.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Kotawl
|
  |
| Joined: 22 Jun 2013 |
| Total Posts: 23595 |
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:29 PM |
| it wod help with population control and no fat kids in the future |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:29 PM |
the japanese were much different back then
_/Siggy.txt__Missing file or directory. Removed by: LOGIC.exe\_ |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
LegoNut09
|
  |
| Joined: 11 Dec 2009 |
| Total Posts: 6231 |
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:30 PM |
Russia and Japan were talking about surrendering. America dropped a nuke because Russia was close, and they wanted to scare Russia, and they were already at war with Japan, so two birds with one stone.
Because, you know. Politics. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:30 PM |
@Richie
That's bull and you know it. A ground invasion would've had nowhere near the same amount of civilian casualties, environmental destruction, or long-lasting impact the nuclear warheads did. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:30 PM |
but in all honesty, the axis was evil and needed to be dealt with
they did more evil than we did at the time
what the US did wasnt exactly justified though, but where else would they drop the nukes?
also its a sad thing how governments can decide these things for people who dont even want a war
but if you dont like it, then you could always just leave the country |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:31 PM |
| Actually, Russia and Japan were just going to war. Japan did not want to surrender. Even if the Russians AND the Americans were marching into Tokyo, the remaining Japanese would fight to the death. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
LegoNut09
|
  |
| Joined: 11 Dec 2009 |
| Total Posts: 6231 |
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:33 PM |
| You just repeated what you said. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:33 PM |
"That's bull and you know it. A ground invasion would've had nowhere near the same amount of civilian casualties, environmental destruction, or long-lasting impact the nuclear warheads did."
I'm sorry I'm not a far left wing hippy such as you, but I call bull on your statement.
The nuclear warheads were rather small. Only two cities were impacted, and they are still somewhat destroyed.
Ground invasion would be much more destructive. Just look at the end of the war in Europe: we bombed the crap out of it, making way for troops, destroyed citizens, burned down forests, land mines everywhere, corpses everywhere.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:34 PM |
"You just repeated what you said."
You mean what YOU said?
The Japanese weren't going to surrender just because Russia took over Manchuria. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:34 PM |
@Richie
You've /seen/ pictures of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, right? They're nothing more than piles of rubble! |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 15 Aug 2014 03:35 PM |
| Didn't a lot of Japan have some mad 'Fight to the last man' idea of dying? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|