and by most accounts those numbers are considered "low" estimates, most think Russia and China lost at least 20 million each on top of the rest of the pacific and European theatres.

I'm pretty big into war history but for most the numbers China suffered go unmentioned in war history

so civilians deserved to be incinerated and have birth defects because of what their government did onto others?

really?

BUT DEY NEVA SAY SOLLY!!

Anyone saying nuclear bombs on non-military targets was a necessity has never been to Hiroshima.

Callous response, shrug off entire generations of families because of a necessity! Wow, easy to say when you’re just flipping pages of text books and making a casual armchair analysis of what you’ve been told happened before you were even born right? There’s ALWAYS another way besides mass genocide. Definitely other targets.

Just dropping in to say hi. In the midst of all this. :fullofwin:

^ Well played sir

Did you miss the part about what the Japanese were doing to the chinese? That is almost never discussed in any text book and is one of the worst cases of genocide in human history.

What would American Japanese and chinese future generations look like after another 5 years of the war? Probably alot more horrifying than how things played out. What if if the nuclear arms race went on 2 or 3 years longer and Germany and Japan developed a nuke? Instead of 2 cities getting a nuke and the war ending, maybe they fire some back and maybe 50 cities get nuked all over the globe with casualties in the hundreds of millions before someone gives up


The nukes were horrendous yes. But they are really a fairly small drop in the bucket to the casualties actually sustained during the war, and potentially insignificant compared to what the potential was if the war didnt end.

200,000 give or take civilian casualties to end a war that killed 50 million or more.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oper...ssoms_at_Night

not only genocide, but women and under aged children were gang raped by soldiers before being slaughtered. At least the Americans didn't rape the japanese children before bombing them...

Personally, I agree with the use of the atomic bombs on Japan at the end of WW2. Without a doubt, that devastating one-two punch caused Japan to surrender much earlier than it would have otherwise. More importantly, based on my rudimentary understanding of Japanese culture and in particular, Japanese pride, I think a complete, utter defeat like that is the only thing that can effectively annihilate the Imperial Army's wrongful ambitions to invade other countries. (But more on this later.)

Anyone familiar with Japan's demise in WW2 would know that by 1944 / 45, Japan was fast running out of its capability and capacity to sustain the war. They do not have enough soldiers, trained or otherwise. They do not have enough supplies. They do not have enough resources. An Allied invasion became imminent. USSR was selling them out. etc.

So had the atomic bombs not been dropped, how much longer would Japan have been able to kept up the fight? It couldn't possibly have been too long.

But this goes back to the point that I raised about Japanese culture and pride. The Japanese people -- esp the older generation from that era -- have tremendous pride of themselves and their country. In the event of an utter and complete defeat, they will recognize the superiority of the winner and accept their defeat. Had it been a longer, more drawn out, and wear-the-enemy-down type of warfare been used to force a surrender out of Japan, I think Japan will be far less likely to accept that as a defeat. And then who knows when their stubborn military ambitions would resurface to wreck some havoc again?

Any single women over was abducted as "comfort women" for the soldiers. Literally the soldiers would run a train on the women. This pretty much happened in all of the countries that Japan traversed in during WWII.

North Korea nuclear test site to close in May, South Korea says - BBC News

They are disarming SeemsGood

Putting my speculation hat on:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ers-footsteps/

How much influence did President for life President Xi have with NK's decision ?

Especially with Trump's $100 billion tariff scare to China....

People in the US were questioning that they could be nuked by North Korea... this is why the west will probably open up trade and banking transactions with NK.

As for Japan... but who were the Jesuits and the Anglo Zionist empire?
https://i.imgur.com/PkJH1yA.jpg

full read here... I havent read it myself but cliffs would be appreciated.
https://geopolitics.co/2012/02/02/th...senseless-war/

Every fucking thing has to be a fucking zionist conspiracy with you... for fucks sake man

To put into perspective, the bombing of Tokyo (which used conventional bombs) killed roughly 100,000 civilians. Fewer people were killed in the Fat Man attack. The Berlin bombings killed roughly 50,000, the bombing of London killed roughly 43,000, and Hamburg suffered nearly the same amount of civilian losses as London.

I'm not saying one way or another if the Nagasaki and Hiroshima attacks were justified; it's just interesting to see the civilian losses when comparing conventional bombing raids to a single atomic drop.