[1stFreedom]

>You sit fat, dumb and safe in your comfortable little seat, separated by 60 years from the worst war in history, and make such a sactimonious and mindless pronouncement!

And you sit fat, dumb, and safe in your comfortable seat, separated by 60 years from the worst war in history, and are willing to condemn the citizens of two cities. Easy to say someone should die from your chair, isn't it?

[A Jovial Cad]

You make decent people everywhere sick to their stomachs.

Get lost, loser.

[Redleg Duke]

Is that the best comeback your liberal little mind can come up with?

Pathetic. Haven't you ever heard that it is better to remain silent and be thought the fool, than to speak and remove all doubt?

Apparently not.

[chris1]

You are a fool. A total delusional fool. Do you realize how many people were not killed because we dropped the two A-Bombs?

The Japanese were going to fight to the death. Based on our experience fighting in the South Pacific, we realized these people would fight till the end and that the only way we would win is if we showed them we would kill every last one if that is what they wanted.

After we dropped the first one, they thought we shot our load. After we dropped the second one, they thought we might have an endless supply. It was only then they quit.

So, it would have been better for us to lose hundreds of thousands of more of our own soldiers?

[EternalHope]

Ahem...

You're missing two essential points.

1. Absolutely NO ONE disputes that the war was shortened by nuking Japan.

2. Absolutely NO ONE disputes that people would have kept on dying as long as the war went on.

If your belief is that fewer people would have died under some other alternative, then say so. That's a point that can be discussed. But if your belief is simply that people dying was bad, hence a crime against humanity, then you have overlooked the facts I just pointed out. If that is the case, then you have allowed a commendable desire to avoid human suffering to cloud your ability to see the big picture.

Yes, people died. But that is not relevant. The odds are very high that fewer people died, overall, because we shortened the war.

I would like to point out that this was a war, and lots of people die in a war. I should also like to point out that it is better to win a war than to lose it. Finally, it seems to me that it is better if the people who die are on the other side.

Don't you agree?

[TomasUSMC]

And you sit fat, dumb, and safe in your comfortable seat, separated by 60 years from the worst war in history, and are willing to condemn at least 5 million citizens of Japan and tens or hundreds of thousands of Americans. Easy to say someone should die from your chair, isn't it?

[M. Espinola]

You are aware the Japs sneak attacked US first at Pearl Harbor?

Who were the beast like perpetrator's of the Bataan Death March?

Allied POWs with hands tied behind their backs pause during the Bataan Death March. About 76,000 prisoners including 12,000 Americans were forced on the 60 mile march under a blazing sun without food or water toward a new POW camp in the Philippines in April 1942 Over 5,000 Americans and thousands of British troops died & were murdered in cold blood on that death march which began April 10th and lasted six days for some and up to twelve days for others captured by the Japs.

Have you forgotten the horrific treatment American and Allied servicemen and female civilians received at the hand of the invading Jap forces?

Recall the vicious slaughter & rape of Nanking and other cities in China & across Asia?

In your eyes would the military option to ending the war be for American & Allied troops to launch invasions of each & every island making up Japan, until the enemy finally surrendered, even though the loss of life to the Allies would have been very costly?

Dropping the Bomb ended the war in the Pacific theater which would have dragged on longer.