I find it really amusing how "younger" Americans who have never endured real hardship, never been in a third world country, and never served their country believe themselves qualified to judge decisions made in WWII.
By comparison, the damage and death from the Fatman and Little Boy are mild in compared to the extensive fire bombing in Japan or Germany. In fact Nagasaki and Hiroshima were selected specifically because they were among the few undamaged cities in Japan. The military planners wanted to assess the damage caused by the nucs and that would have been impossible in most places which were already extensively damaged. Construction practices in Japan were particularly conducive to fires but the fire storms in Germany (like Dresden) were a new phenomenon. Oh, and my dad (who lived in a tent in China for three years) would never ride in a Japanese car either. He also wasn't fond of camping when we were kids. Scott -----Original Message----- From: Mercedes [mailto:mercedes-boun...@okiebenz.com] On Behalf Of Mitch Haley Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 11:01 AM ...On the subject of nuking Japanese cities, isn't it still commonly accepted that taking Japan and Okinawa inch by inch like giant versions of Iwo Jima would have been far bloodier than dropping a couple of low yield nukes? Mitch. _______________________________________ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
