[QUOTE=sltungle;26476357]Yeah but at least you're not killing multiple tens of thousands instantly and giving them the chance to relocate away from the fallout. I mean... 80000 people dead... that's is a HUGE number of civilians, like... that is really, really unacceptable.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo[/url]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Starvation[/url]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan[/url]
What you are suggesting is pure gambling, hoping that the Japanese Military may just be able to get a message. Trying to spoon feed them intelligence is also very improbable. "Bomb of new type" "Atomic Bomb" they won't even understand.
The United States has been systematically bombing [b]every city[/b] in Japan ever since they had acquired Iwo Jima/air bases from China/Luzon. Trying to convey a War Cabinet that has been divided by two sides that are trying to surrender, and to a group that does not have surrender in their mental dictionaries is going to take time. The same time that the same number of Japanese civilians, even more would be killed by ongoing operations being carried out by the Allied Navy and Air force.
[QUOTE=sltungle;26476357]Yeah but at least you're not killing multiple tens of thousands instantly and giving them the chance to relocate away from the fallout. I mean... 80000 people dead... that's is a HUGE number of civilians, like... that is really, really unacceptable.[/QUOTE]
The Japs were hardcore motherfuckers. Losing shit loads of civilians sucks, but it's probably one of the only things that would have got them to surrender.
[QUOTE=I Broke The Sun!;26476901]The Japs were hardcore motherfuckers. Losing shit loads of civilians sucks, but it's probably one of the only things that would have got them to surrender.[/QUOTE]
This. Their people were even more hardened than the North Koreans today, maybe twice as.
Anyone got the link to that video that shows all the nukes ever set off?
Op I don't care about your science report.
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Why reply" - JohnnyMo1))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Mvwill;26477625]Op I don't care about your science report.[/QUOTE]
Ok.
[QUOTE=Mvwill;26477625]Op I don't care about your science report.[/QUOTE]
Then why would you bother to reply?
[QUOTE=Cornelisjuh;26469390]My history teacher says all he knows about WWIII, is that the war after WWIII wil be fought with sticks again.
I think the atomicbomb has some way of peace in it. We've all seen the destruction and wel all know a nuclear war would most likely be our last war. So I doubt an country would use it cause it will also mean self destruction. But there only has to be 1 crazy leader with nuclear weapons to start a nuclear war :ohdear:[/QUOTE]
"I Know Not with What Weapons WWIII Will Be Fought, but WWIV Will Be Fought with Sticks and Stones" - Albert Einstien 1947
You teacher probably saw it while he was dieing over and over during Call of Duty 4.
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;26477663]Ok.[/QUOTE]
Don't worry, I care.
Check who rated me zing
:wtc:
[QUOTE=Mvwill;26477803]Check who rated me zing
:wtc:[/QUOTE]
So?
usually you'd be angry but you're cool with the fact that i told you i don't care about science or atom
Cut the jibber-jabber
If you think the preparations to use the civil populace as defensive forces during the invasion of Japan was purely to try and attain military victory of the Allies, that's incorrect. For so long, and even still today, the Japanese mindset had been strictly focused on honour, at whatever cost. This is seen in a historical context, with seppuku, etc. Thus, it is likely that when the Japanese said they would fight to the last, they meant it. Thank God Emperor Hirohito realised the folly of trying to fight nuclear weapons.
[highlight]ATTENTION PEOPLE AGAINST THE NUKING OF HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI[/highlight]
What would you prefer, destroying two cities full of innocents, or invading a country, losing soldiers, destroying it's infrastructure and killing way more innocents than the two nukes did?
The only reason why the emperor chose to surrender at all was because he realized that the entire nation would be wiped out in a matter of weeks. A continued blockade, as some people have mentioned, would cause much more civilian harm as more food would be directed to the military and less to the general populace as supplies became more scarce and fortifications were prepared. Massive starvation would have probably wiped out a quarter of the population in a matter of months. Added to this is the fact that because these civilian deaths would occur slowly and over time, the "shock" effect of a massive incineration would be lost, and nothing would be accomplished except the pointless death of civilians and the strengthening of defenses, which would mean even more deaths if an invasion had commenced.
While the idea of dropping bombs near cities sounds plausible, it would be far too risky to attempt. As previously stated by an above poster, only two bombs were in existence at the time, with a third being developed. The U.S. had already bluffed in telling the emperor that there were five of these weapons and that they would all be used. Think what would happen when the reports came in about a bomb exploding in the middle of a grassy field. It would make the Americans seem weak, and might only fuel tensions.
[QUOTE=Explosions;26478599]The only reason why the emperor chose to surrender at all was because he realized that the entire nation would be wiped out in a matter of weeks. A continued blockade, as some people have mentioned, would cause much more civilian harm as more food would be directed to the military and less to the general populace as supplies became more scarce and fortifications were prepared. Massive starvation would have probably wiped out a quarter of the population in a matter of months. Added to this is the fact that because these civilian deaths would occur slowly and over time, the "shock" effect of a massive incineration would be lost, and nothing would be accomplished except the pointless death of civilians and the strengthening of defenses, which would mean even more deaths if an invasion had commenced.
While the idea of dropping bombs near cities sounds plausible, it would be far too risky to attempt. As previously stated by an above poster, only two bombs were in existence at the time, with a third being developed. The U.S. had already bluffed in telling the emperor that there were five of these weapons and that they would all be used. Think what would happen when the reports came in about a bomb exploding in the middle of a grassy field. It would make the Americans seem weak, and might only fuel tensions.[/QUOTE]
your name is fitting to the thread
wow our motto is if we dont like it BLOW THE SHIT UP
Right so I've been looking into how a nuclear bomb is made.
Uranium ore is enriched to increase the concentration of Uranium 235, then what? How is does that explode?
[QUOTE=joe588;26482032]Right so I've been looking into how a nuclear bomb is made.
Uranium ore is enriched to increase the concentration of Uranium 235, then what? How is does that explode?[/QUOTE]
you need to understand how a nuclear bomb works on the atomic level.
when an heavy atom like uranium "splits" you get a release of energy, various forms of EM radiation and neutrons. now this neutron can either just escape away or strike another nucleus, causing that to split as well. if there's enough nuclear fuel assembled in one place and all the neutrons that are released start striking other nuclei, you get a chain reaction - a self sustaining nuclear reaction. when you have enough nuclear fuel assembled in one place to do this, you call it the critical mass.
in a nuclear reactor, you use control rods - made of elements that have the ability to absorb neutrons. by taking these in and out of the reactor core you can control the rate of the nuclear reaction.
i'm sure there's a wikipedia article on nuclear fission that explains it better than that.
in your nuclear weapon, you don't want it to be undergoing a nuclear reaction all the time, giving out heat. so you assemble your weapon using either pieces of material that are just below the critical mass.
in the case of the uranium weapon dropped on hiroshima, there were two sub critical pieces that were brought together using an explosive. once brought together, you achieve criticality and get a runaway chain reaction, releasing loads of energy in your nuclear explosion.
it was done slightly differently for the plutonium weapon used on nagasaki, instead a sub critical sphere of fuel was surrounded by explosive lenses. once they were detonated, they compressed the fuel, causing it to go critical.
if you're interested in how they constructed the weapons - read Atomic by Jim Baggott, it's a really interesting pop sciencey type book.
Hey cheers mike, that's brilliant.
They dropped two bombs in quick succession so the japanese thought they had an ample supply of the weapons.
In the end, I believe it was the right choice. The Japanese soldiers were told to fight America no matter what the cost. This was a quick, albeit terrifying end to what may have been a long, drawn-out war.
I spotted some grammar errors in the OP but otherwise good read.
[QUOTE=joe588;26482032]How is does that explode?[/QUOTE]
what?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
