Home
Forums
New posts
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Culture
Deep forum
Discussion on the necessity of the Atomic Bombs(And general Strategic Bombing) on Hiroshima and Nagasaki
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Helmsman" data-source="post: 1545454" data-attributes="member: 14018"><p>There were 3 bombers over Nagasaki and Hiroshima each. It takes a bomber stream of hundreds to firebomb a city and create that level of destruction. Rotterdam was never firebombed, there was an accidental bombing during the German invasion which created a small fire compared to the power of a true firestorm. London was never firebombed. The Blitz was conventional explosives, not incindiaries. The Germans never fielded a true strategic bomber so due to the limitations of their tactical bombers were not able to carry the needed ordnance weight to England to firebomb a city.</p><p></p><p>He wasn't prosecuted for political reasons. He was made a figurehead with no power.</p><p></p><p>No argument.</p><p></p><p>Nuclear energy "explodes" when the reaction is uncontrolled. Like in a nuclear bomb. A reactor has an absolutely insane control system to prevent this from happening. Just because the Jewish scientists played a major role in developing the bomb does not mean it doesn't exist. Physics is physics, a manner of explaining God's created order. And splitting atoms is a part of that.</p><p></p><p>Rubbish. We were allies of convenience. Khrushchev was not joking when he said "we will bury you". See the new book "Stalin's War" for a really good insight on how Stalin played both sides in WWII.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Helmsman, post: 1545454, member: 14018"] There were 3 bombers over Nagasaki and Hiroshima each. It takes a bomber stream of hundreds to firebomb a city and create that level of destruction. Rotterdam was never firebombed, there was an accidental bombing during the German invasion which created a small fire compared to the power of a true firestorm. London was never firebombed. The Blitz was conventional explosives, not incindiaries. The Germans never fielded a true strategic bomber so due to the limitations of their tactical bombers were not able to carry the needed ordnance weight to England to firebomb a city. He wasn't prosecuted for political reasons. He was made a figurehead with no power. No argument. Nuclear energy "explodes" when the reaction is uncontrolled. Like in a nuclear bomb. A reactor has an absolutely insane control system to prevent this from happening. Just because the Jewish scientists played a major role in developing the bomb does not mean it doesn't exist. Physics is physics, a manner of explaining God's created order. And splitting atoms is a part of that. Rubbish. We were allies of convenience. Khrushchev was not joking when he said "we will bury you". See the new book "Stalin's War" for a really good insight on how Stalin played both sides in WWII. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Culture
Deep forum
Discussion on the necessity of the Atomic Bombs(And general Strategic Bombing) on Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Top