And let 50 million of them die of famine and disease?
Wait - let me guess - you call yourself a "humanitarian", right?
You do know that there was a faction in the Japanese army that attempted to overthrow the Emperor after they found out that he had decided to surrender, right?
> And let 50 million of them die of famine and disease?
It is extremely unlikely anything that severe would have happened. In a blockade, there would likely have been fewer deaths than resulted from the atomic bombs. Food and medicine would have been provided, but industrial capacity would have continued being destroyed.
> Wait - let me guess - you call yourself a “humanitarian”, right?
Not at all.
I’m a Christian. I endeavor to make my focus Christ, not humanity, though compassion for fellow human beings is part of what Jesus taught.
And I’m not the only one who believes the atomic bombs were not as necessary as is commonly thought, as moonshot925 posted here.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2915320/posts?page=16#16
The second bomb was dropped on Nagasaki just three days after the first, even before the Japanese government had fully understood what had happened in Hiroshima.
Don’t know what I would’ve done in Truman’s shoes, though.
The U.S. had suffered a LOT of casualties, and the Japs were particularly maniacal. That did not work in their favor in the end.
Hindsight is almost always 20-20.
Had relatives and older friends who served in both theaters. They didn’t talk about it much.
Did watch the “Victory at Sea” series more than a few times, though. That was when most American journalists were still Americans first.
HelenInTheHeartland:
> Sheesh; shouldn’t have someone post that on a
> conservative website.
Being pro-life is conservative, and AFAIK, my post follows all the rules of this forum.