Do you think a nuclear weapon will be used in war or terrorism in our time?

by free2beme 55 Replies latest jw friends

  • SixofNine
    SixofNine
    As to the bombs in Japan do a bit of research before you blast off! The atomic bombs killed lots of people but some of the bombing raids on Tokyo killed more! If the bombs hadn't been dropped MANY MANY MANY more civilians would have died in a 'conventional' war! Read about the fire storms as the paper houses burned generating HURRICANE force winds actually picking people up and hurling them into the flames as they tried to run! Children actually pulled out of there mothers arms! Horrible horrible things so if you kill 100,000 in 'conventional war' and it's ignored you kill 100,000 in a GIGANTIC mushroom cloud to get their attention! Guess what though it almost didn't work! The japanese generals were refusing to surrender after the first atomic bomb! If you need proof of that all you have to ask is why drop a second bomb? Why didn't japan surrender immediatly? The answer is they weren't going too! They were flat not going to give up! Hell I've even read that after the second bomb many generals were refusing to surrender!

    It is you who needs to do a bit of research before "blast(ing) off". This is not just my opinion, or even Eisenhower's opinion, this is fact: Japan was looking to surrender before the bombs were used. Saving face, and preserving the Emperor were of extreme (religious even) importance to the Japanese, and so they would only surrender under terms that allowed them to do so. And in fact, even after the two bombs, MacArthur made provisions to allow the Emperor to continue to act as a powerful figurehead to the Japanese state. A wise move, imo; guess how many American servicemen died at the hands of insurgents in occupied Japan after "mission accomplished"? Zero.

    You are correct about the fact that the firebombings of Japanese cities killed even more civilians, more horrifically, than the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima combined.

  • stillajwexelder
    stillajwexelder

    I think that it will be Israel that strikes first.

    I remember an Israeli cabinet minister saying, " Israel will not be the first to use nuclear weapons - it will not be the last either"

  • stillajwexelder
    stillajwexelder

    The US has already used radioactive weapons in Iraq in the early 90's.

    By this I assume you mean depleted uranium shells

  • Dave_T
    Dave_T

    Were the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki acts of terrorism? Let's see... terrorism: The calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear - Wordweb The civilians who died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki had nothing to do with Japan's attacks. If one reckoned the the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as righteous, then maybe they should also regard the WTC attacks as righteous. I'm really amazed the "us=good/them=evil" talk still works. But it does, especially in the USA. Wake up, people. No nation is innocent.

  • mouthy
    mouthy

    I remember when I was 11 the CRISES was in London England where I lived -then when I was 12 the Germans started bombing. What is going on today in the news sounds JUST like it did back then.... Yes I do believe we will expereince a nuclear war....Men have to show their power.... & will stop at nothing methinks....

  • sinis
    sinis

    Nukes may be used in the future, they barely were avoided by Isreal in the Gulf War against Saddam. The weapon of choice in the future will be scalar weapons. The Soviets are 15-20 years ahead of us in this technology, thanks to Chinese funding. Scalar weapons make nukes pall in comparison.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit