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.

K'aya K'ama,
Gerald/gary  Smith    gszion1    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
Rick Mathis

Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!

///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///      ///

This email was sent to:

Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!

Reply via email to