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="Thomas More" data-source="post: 1545484" data-attributes="member: 8402"><p>I'm not aware that this is true. Western people in the 21st century think it would have made sense to surrender under the circumstances, with the benefit of hindsight.</p><p></p><p>Hindsight is notoriously difficult to obtain in the moment. I would say that the people holding power did not realize that it would make sense to surrender, and were planning to make Okinawa look like a cakewalk. They really were planning this, and put all their chips into this strategy. There's no evidence otherwise. You have to project modernist thinking onto the situation to think otherwise.</p><p></p><p>Even after the first atomic bomb, these people were not instantly defeated. It's almost an accident of history that they didn't manage to hold on a little bit longer. I think a third or fourth atom bomb would have sufficiently undermined their position eventually, but they were not defeated after the first atom bomb. You can tell by the delay in surrendering under the certain knowledge that a second atom bomb was coming. It didn't take long for them to surrender once things finally went against them strongly enough.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Thomas More, post: 1545484, member: 8402"] I'm not aware that this is true. Western people in the 21st century think it would have made sense to surrender under the circumstances, with the benefit of hindsight. Hindsight is notoriously difficult to obtain in the moment. I would say that the people holding power did not realize that it would make sense to surrender, and were planning to make Okinawa look like a cakewalk. They really were planning this, and put all their chips into this strategy. There's no evidence otherwise. You have to project modernist thinking onto the situation to think otherwise. Even after the first atomic bomb, these people were not instantly defeated. It's almost an accident of history that they didn't manage to hold on a little bit longer. I think a third or fourth atom bomb would have sufficiently undermined their position eventually, but they were not defeated after the first atom bomb. You can tell by the delay in surrendering under the certain knowledge that a second atom bomb was coming. It didn't take long for them to surrender once things finally went against them strongly enough. [/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