lol...we just have to stop attack each others' backgrounds and avoid flaming language


U.S's major threat is that terriosts get nukes...
personally, i dont think terriosts are capable of developing nukes by themselves...(i doubt they even have those equipments to purify uranium)

the problem is taht some nations (North korea and Iran) may pass those dangerous weapons to terriosts someday....and U.S not only has to build an anti-missile system, but also try to eliminate the possibility of letting those nations pass nuke tech to terriosts (i dont care wut way to do that, but U.S must stop them, if U.S got nuked, world economy will suffer a serious set-back, a great depression probably)

majority of nations which have nukes seem to be not interested in using nukes or threaten otehrs...many of them have No first use as their nuclear doctrine.so U.S dont have to worry much about them in next 20 years maybe

Well develop it all you want.
Just remember the sh1t might really hit the fan right after you use it.
Using it in Hiroshima and Nagasaki already make it difficult for the Americans to say anything about proliferation of nukes. Another use of it and by god we'll be seeing tactical nukes be used the world over.

personally, i thank americans to use nukes on Japan in WW2 since a much larger number of Korean, Chinese and other asian nations' innocent civilians were murdered brutally by Japanese army.


but hope that won't happen again

The estimated dead in an invasion of Japan were 3 - 8 million Japanese and 500,000 to 1 million US and allies. I suppose you think that would have been better? The bomb was dropped to save lives, but you go believe what you will.

Originally Posted by Sexybeast

personally, i thank americans to use nukes on Japan in WW2 since a much larger number of Korean, Chinese and other asian nations' innocent civilians were murdered brutally by Japanese army.


but hope that won't happen again

no way, japanese have killed much more civilians than the atom bomb did to the japs. i think US is justify in bombing japan using its nukes. it is used to save lifes. because japanese soldiers have dug underground tunnels, similar defences like the vietnamese did. if u think what the vietnamese did to US, u can think what japanese soldiers could do...... japan will eneventually lose, but its going to cost both side ALOT.

If America didn't nuke Japan a major nuke strike would have went off somewhere else. I believe it needed to happen to show us how devastating it truly was. I don't think any country will use a nuke any time soon.

Originally Posted by Sexybeast

personally, i thank americans to use nukes on Japan in WW2 since a much larger number of Korean, Chinese and other asian nations' innocent civilians were murdered brutally by Japanese army.


but hope that won't happen again

That is a blatant lie.

Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck

That is a blatant lie.

really? why is it a lie?
any source to oppose it? like saying Japan didn't kill any chinese or korean, and actually helping them by invading them?

any source to say that they dont' deserve two nukes?

Originally Posted by Sexybeast

really? why is it a lie?
any source to oppose it? like saying Japan didn't kill any chinese or korean, and actually helping them by invading them?

any source to say that they dont' deserve two nukes?

i agree with u. the japanese have caused great suffering to east asian nations. there are millions being killed by japanese in china. also korea. these countries are mostly effected. also comfort women too. alot of them are infertile after the repeated rapes and alot fo them didnt marry due to psycological effect. it is estimated 80,000 korean women were shipped to china, and the other 20,000 are mixture of chinese, thai, philipines or malay etc.....

i think dropping the atom bomb have just saved all that happeneing any longer. i dun think the two atom bomb killed over 1 million. japan have killed probably more than 8 million. but we can never know the true figure cos its so much.

I probably got the words mixed up. So my apologies here.
But no, I don't think that's the justification for the atom bomb. The justification is that it was a limited nuclear strike, without the danger of MAD, and it ended the war quickly and more people could have died on both sides had that bomb not gone off.
However, that's something most people will try not to agree with. And therefore, already those two nuclear strikes set a bad precedence.