The post that was quoted here has been removedOh God....yes, that was the jist of the question, thick-wit.....at the start of the US involvement, if they had developed the bomb, where and how should they have used it? What part of that did you not get before you interjected your pointless observation about the war not really starting then? What is it you are not comprehending? Are you challenged in some way?
1 edit
The post that was quoted here has been removedGee, I dunno........because it would do the most damage to their military/political/financial structure? If you had one bomb to drop on the US, you would be better off with either New York or Washington DC. Or would you choose Bugtussle, Arkansas?
Originally posted by Sam The ShamBad analogy. The potential of more bombs was key in getting Japan to surrender. Why would you kill more civilians when you could get them to surrender by bombing less?
If you had one bomb to drop on the US, you would be better off with either New York or Washington DC. Or would you choose Bugtussle, Arkansas?
Originally posted by PalynkaThey needed to be shocked into sanity. These were people who believed enslaving women to be gang raped by abusive soldiers is the way to wage war. They needed brutality. That's what they understood at the time.
Bad analogy. The potential of more bombs was key in getting Japan to surrender. Why would you kill more civilians when you could get them to surrender by bombing less?