Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Dilbert San Diego
For good or ill? Is this someone who exercises “revisionist history”, and thinks we should not have dropped the atomic bombs on Japan????

Keep in mind that we didn't drop the atomic bomb on "Japan." We dropped it on a specific target in Japan. It has nothing to do with "revisionist history" to argue that we made a bad choice of targets, or that a better choice was possible. If we don't learn from history, we risk repeating our mistakes over and over.

It's worth noting that there was a major Naval base adjacent to Hiroshima. The same aircraft that dropped the bomb on Hiroshima could equally well have dropped it on that Naval base.

Remember, it was the Japanese military that wanted to keep fighting, and worked against any "peace-mongers" in the Japanese government. A direct attack on a military installation would have provided just as much "shock" as did the bombing of a city, and would have brought the message home directly to the military.

30 posted on 07/22/2017 8:56:30 AM PDT by JoeFromSidney
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: JoeFromSidney

Thanks for reply. I’m sorry to say, I’m not quite sure what exactly you are trying to say.

You are right, we dropped the atomic bombs on specific targets in Japan, as opposed to “Japan” in general. Was my word choice really so improper? Is that really an important point? If so, what exactly is the point of making that distinction?

You can argue that we made a bad choice of targets. You made a case for that.

I think we have learned something from history, in that, nuclear weapons have never again been used in warfare. I think we learned how powerful and destructive they are, which perhaps has kept others from using them in anger.

Given the mass destruction caused by the bomb, I don’t see the significance of targeting the Naval base adjacent to Hiroshima. I’m sure that base suffered significant damage in the bombing. And Hiroshima itself would have suffered great damage if the bomb were dropped on said base rather than being at ground zero.

So I’m sorry, I’m probably missing your overall point. Should we have done conventional bombing of the Japanese naval base, rather than drop an atomic bomb? Do you think that would have brought about a swift conclusion to the war, as the atomic bombings did?

Didn’t we bomb many other military installations in Japan, prior to the atomic bombs?


32 posted on 07/22/2017 9:12:58 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson