Seven million died in the 'forgotten' holocaust
#21
Yep. And naa wasn't bombed either sueronthe emperor being there. Of course invove this 5 posts before he revisionists Get here. Regardless if the stom bombs were an attemp at genocide the states shire as confused during he occupation. And the rebukeing of hebjap economy. Funny way to genocide a people I reckon.
 
Reply
#22
(09-11-2011, 08:36 PM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(09-11-2011, 08:29 PM)mikemac Wrote: Although with Christianity legalized and the Kakure Kirishitan coming out of hiding, Nagasaki regained its earlier role as a center for Roman Catholicism in Japan.

One of the major reasons that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were  chosen as targets is that they were virtually the only cities in Japan still left standing. The US wanted the effect of the bomb to be very clear. They waited 3 days to bomb Nagasaki in the hopes the Japanese would surrender in the face of such terror (of course, the Japanese didn't know the US had only two bombs at that point). The reason that these two cities were relatively unscathed? The US had deliberately not bombed the two centres of Christianity in the Home Islands.

Nagasaki was actually not the first choice for the second bomb; the city of Kokura was the intended target and the bomber made three passes over Kokura before being directed to the secondary target of Nagasaki due to heavy cloud cover at the primary site. Nagasaki was a major Imperial Japanese Navy port and, though it had been bombed previously, had not suffered extensive damage.  One of the considerations in choosing the site was that the target should not have been a previous target of conventional bombs.  But it's obvious that Nagasaki was not chosen because it was a center for Roman Catholicism in Japan like some have tried to say.
Reply
#23
True.
Reply
#24

The brits did not nuke Berlin. They bombed it. but not nuke it.
The yanks dropped a nuke on two cities.
VERY DIFFERENT situation.
And this argument came out as I expected.  A lot of you guys try to justify the dropping of atom bombs on the japs.
Call it what you want.Genocide, mass murder, ground zero testing site (with live humans this time). It was shameful. Truth hurts.
And No, not because they were not the center of Catholic culture, justifies the dropping of atomic bombs a "necessity" to end a war.

(I can go on and on about the bombings on german soil..poor people, Dresden et al...Damned brits. But that is for another thread.)
(BTW, dont start now with the germans bombed london. THE BRITS BOMBED GERMANY FIRST)
But I digress, let's stick to the subject at hand.

Reply
#25
(09-11-2011, 11:47 PM)GottmitunsAlex Wrote: (BTW, dont start now with the germans bombed london. THE BRITS BOMBED GERMANY FIRST)

Actually, the bombing of Germany was in retaliation for the bombing of Coventry, tho' I admit that the bombing of Coventry was a mistake on the part of a Luftwaffe pilot who went off course and dropped his bombs to lighten his load so he'd have enough fuel to make it home.
Reply
#26
More Germans were killed bbthe allie bombing raids then he nukes in japan.
Csre to let us know  why got a by up your ass over The nukes yet conventional indiscrimste boming raids killed more?
Reply
#27
(09-12-2011, 12:00 AM)devotedknuckles Wrote: More Germans were killed bbthe allie bombing raids then he nukes in japan.
Csre to let us know  why got a by up your ass over The nukes yet conventional indiscrimste boming raids killed more?

Yeah! The A-bombs at least shortened the war and saved thousands and thousands of lives. The fire bombing of Dresden had virtually no military impact. It was pure terror bombing, similar to the terror bombing of Serbian civilians under Clinton. It is a crime for which, I  am sure, Bomber Harris had to answer for when he stood before the judgement seat!
Reply
#28
(09-12-2011, 12:22 AM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(09-12-2011, 12:00 AM)devotedknuckles Wrote: More Germans were killed bbthe allie bombing raids then he nukes in japan.
Csre to let us know  why got a by up your ass over The nukes yet conventional indiscrimste boming raids killed more?

Yeah! The A-bombs at least shortened the war and saved thousands and thousands of lives. The fire bombing of Dresden had virtually no military impact. It was pure terror bombing, similar to the terror bombing of Serbian civilians under Clinton. It is a crime for which, I  am sure, Bomber Harris had to answer for when he stood before the judgement seat!
Both were wrong. It isn't okay for anyone to target civilians. That being said, what's done is done. What we need to do is use every means available to help Jesus Christ regain his Kingship over all, only then will such atrocities be prevented.
Reply
#29
(09-11-2011, 11:47 PM)GottmitunsAlex Wrote:
The brits did not nuke Berlin. They bombed it. but not nuke it.
The yanks dropped a nuke on two cities.
VERY DIFFERENT situation.
And this argument came out as I expected.  A lot of you guys try to justify the dropping of atom bombs on the japs.
Call it what you want.Genocide, mass murder, ground zero testing site (with live humans this time). It was shameful. Truth hurts.
And No, not because they were not the center of Catholic culture, justifies the dropping of atomic bombs a "necessity" to end a war.

(I can go on and on about the bombings on german soil..poor people, Dresden et al...Damned brits. But that is for another thread.)
(BTW, dont start now with the germans bombed london. THE BRITS BOMBED GERMANY FIRST)
But I digress, let's stick to the subject at hand.

More people died in the firebombing of Tokyo than in the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  

World War II was a very bloody conflict that brought out the worst in all it's participants. I am glad I wasn't around.  

People really had some tough moral choices to make back then. 
Reply
#30
Lets all just agree that the socialist (or for that matter, liberal catholic) solution of "no violence on the part of Americans or Christians is ok" is bunk.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)