 Hiroshima calls for nuke-free world on atomic bomb anniversary HIROSHIMA, Japan - Japan marked 64 years Thursday since Hiroshima was hit in the world's first atomic bomb attack with a call for a nuclear-weapons-free world, a goal backed by U.S. President Barack Obama.Commentsview comments in forum You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
Share
|
Mobile
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
Pandora's box has been opened and there ain't no closing it now.
Not that it wouldn't be nice to live in a nuke free world.
Really there is nothing more wrong with nukes then any other weapon. In the end all they are is a bigger bomb. If you are gonna get rid of them you might aswell call for the disposal of everything that can b used as a weapon.
The Radioactivity element of nuclear weapons makes it different from just being a simple bigger bomb.
A bigger bomb would be this:
Russia tests giant fuel-air bomb
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6990815.stm
Really there is nothing more wrong with nukes then any other weapon. In the end all they are is a bigger bomb. If you are gonna get rid of them you might aswell call for the disposal of everything that can b used as a weapon.
Really? I drop a 2 thousand pounder and obliterate a block of a city, damage done, people killed. I drop a nuke, a helluva lot more than just a block goes boom AND, no one's gonna live or rebuild there for a while and anyone that does is gonna die of radiation sickness. Never mind the wider ranging fallout.
The Japanese are really throwing stones in glass houses on this one. This was total war, something the Japanese had no problem with inflicting on Nanking, Hong Kong, Singapore and a thousand other cities that were brutalised by them until we stopped them.
And as for getting rid of nukes while democratic stalwarts such as Iran, North Korea and Pakistan have them or are getting them. Not such a good idea.
About as good as getting a bit of paper in Munich in 1938.
As for the 2000 pound bomb, it has it's niche, where the tactical nuke has it's niche, just like every other weapon has their own specific niche and use. I'd rather drop a single bomb or artillery shell to destroy a 100+ vehicle hide and convoy then a mass attack of several smaller bombs. Less chance of mission failure.
And an assault on mainland Japan would have caused millions of casualties. Every Japanese civilian was training to be a weapon should the allies invade.
News flash, you can't uninvent something, there for they will never go away until something comes along that beats them.
Dock one week's pay for stupid resolution.
The bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki stopped thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands Allied troops from dying in an assault on mainland Japan.
That�s undoubtedly true, however the value to the world of America dropping those two bombs was simply the fact that the world got to see the results.
If they hadn�t been used at that particular time, it�s very likely that a much bigger version would have been used in the 50�s or 60�s killing many more.
Seeing the horror of the aftermath has probably prevented their use many times over.
Unfortunately though, the genie is (as they say) out of the bottle. With so many unstable states obtaining them, they aren�t (and shouldn�t) go away anytime soon.
Once again, some numbnuts, likely a politcian, makes a completely stupid and pointless plea for something.
News flash, you can't uninvent something, there for they will never go away until something comes along that beats them.
Dock one week's pay for stupid resolution.
C&C Ion cannons in space would be wicked. Precision mass-destruction.
To bad so much effort go's into killing our selves .
Its the driving force of the world
Dock one week's pay for stupid resolution.
Agreed, not gonna happen.
The bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki stopped thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands Allied troops from dying in an assault on mainland Japan.
The Japanese are really throwing stones in glass houses on this one. This was total war, something the Japanese had no problem with inflicting on Nanking, Hong Kong, Singapore and a thousand other cities that were brutalised by them until we stopped them.
And as for getting rid of nukes while democratic stalwarts such as Iran, North Korea and Pakistan have them or are getting them. Not such a good idea.
About as good as getting a bit of paper in Munich in 1938.
Total war is one thing, but using WMDs is a whole other ball of wax. Yes, the Japanese bombed cities and killed plenty of civilians, but nothing they did was on the same scale as those nuke attacks. They would have been justified had the Japanese attacked Los Angeles or Seattle with chemical/biological weapons, but they never did.
An attack on Japan might have killed thousands of Allied soldiers, but that hardly justifies using WMDs on civilian targets. The USN had proposed a naval blockade of Japan which likely would have forced them to capitulate by the end of the year.
Those bombs were dropped to intimidate Stalin, nothing more.