sweetnpetite
Intellectual snob
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2003
- Posts
- 9,135
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
SnoopDog said:For anyone who tries to defend Nuclear weapons or Nuclear Power there are two answers...
Hiroshima and Tschernobyl
Snoopy
Well, given the Japanese nature I think that would have been a lot better than what actually happened. Honestly, Colly, sometimes your too objective statement of facts just upsets me.Colleen Thomas said:... the japanese generals were prepared to have the nation commit national sucicide. Training civilians to use bill hooks, bows & other archaic weapons along with glass & wood grandes.
Colleen Thomas said:Hiroshima & Nagasaki brought a war to a close, where an invasion was invisioned to cost at least a million casualties for the u.S. and the japanese generals were prepared to have the nation commit national sucicide. Training civilians to use bill hooks, bows & other archaic weapons along with glass & wood grandes.
Revisionist historians have argued recently that the dropping of the bombs was unnessessary and that Japan was looking for a way to surrender. Tell it to the casualties at Okinowa & Iwo Jima. Until the dropping of the atomic bomb there was no reason to believe the civilian part of the government that did want peace was in any position to over rule the military clique who had been in control since the mancuria incident started Japan on the road to war.
Radioactivity can and does kill. If treated carelessly it can be outrageously dangerous. And when built into weapons it threatens the world with destruction. But it has the power to do good, to produce electricity and power, to move vehicles without burning fossil fuels. Like all technology, it myst be treated with respect.
-Colly
SnoopDog said:For anyone who tries to defend Nuclear weapons or Nuclear Power there are two answers...
Hiroshima and Tschernobyl
Snoopy
perdita said:Well, given the Japanese nature I think that would have been a lot better than what actually happened. Honestly, Colly, sometimes your too objective statement of facts just upsets me.
Perdita
Colleen Thomas said:Hiroshima & Nagasaki brought a war to a close, where an invasion was invisioned to cost at least a million casualties for the u.S. and the japanese generals were prepared to have the nation commit national sucicide. Training civilians to use bill hooks, bows & other archaic weapons along with glass & wood grandes.
-Colly
I think I said this in a different thread, but what the heck:SnoopDog said:For anyone who tries to defend Nuclear weapons or Nuclear Power there are two answers...
Hiroshima and Tschernobyl
Snoopy
gauchecritic said:Hmm. Those two sentences don't seem to jibe.
The Japanese say they'll fight to the death and then when they start dying they say ok, we'll stop now.
As for revisionist historians, they seem to me to be no worse than those who write the history in the first place.
The thing that I find most galling about the use of atomic weapons on Japan was the fact that at least one of the targets was a late 'plan B' target because of the weather.
As well as getting to write the history the winners also get to be the judges at war crimes trials rather than the accused.
Whenever I hear about Hiroshima and Nagasaki the words 'Geneva' and 'Convention' always spring to mind.
Gauche
Svenskaflicka said:I didn't know that, Liar!![]()
I'm against nuclear power, no matter how well-kept the plants are.
The whole concept of using something that is so GODDAM toxic that it will still be lethal 10 generations from now... there's just no excuse for using it. Not ONE.
For the record: I never thought a nuclear plant might blow up. What I meant by obliterating a coutry is that the environment wouyld be so fucked for so many generations to come that to avoid having a whole generation of flourecent kids, the entire Latvia and close neighbours would have to be evacuated if something like Tjernobyl happened there.dr_mabeuse said:One thing: a nuclear plant can’t blow up like a nuclear weapon. There’s just not enough fissionable material there to achieve critical mass. The real danger lies in what they might emit into the environment in a catastrophic failure.
This is what hapopened in Chernobyl. There was never any danger of Chernobyl turning into an atomic bomb, but what did happen was the release of a lot of nasty stuff into the air and water. Every place downwind was in danger, and some of it got into the upper atmosphere and was circling there for days.