Also, they only had the two bombs. To make more would take months of
refining the ore and building the bombs. To use one in an ineffective way
would have been a waste of precious resources that could finish the war
quickly and with fewer casualties.
Gerald/gary Smith gszion1 @juno.com http://www
"No one is as hopelessly enslaved as the person who thinks he's free." -
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
At 05:33 AM 11/9/2002 -0700, Steven wrote:
>Perhaps you're right, but I still fail to see how the United States
>maintained the moral high ground by bombing civilians. I think a
>"demonstration" about 5 miles offshore might have accomplished the same
This is an excellent question. The rationale at the time was that a
"demonstration" of nuclear power would also demonstrate an unwillingness
use that power against people - thus negating its effectiveness. It was
obviously a difficult decision either way. I find it hard to support
second quessing the men who had to make it without our 50 years of
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
This email was sent to: email@example.com
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!