sapphi_snake said:
Kasz216 said:
Come up with something that you think would of caused less casualties... though yeah... their foodlines would of been cut. Any idea how many people starve when they can't access any food for months?
Heck, look at the death tolls that happened after the war due to starvation. It would of been thousands of times worse... because even the amount people received weekly wouldn't be able to arrive... heck the very first thing the allies did when they took over japan was to greatly enhance the Japanese food distribution network... cause the people had already been starving for 2 years and refused to surrender. This isn't even counting the inevitable deaths by bombing.
10 Million people were estimated to die AFTER they surrendered due to starvation... an estimate made by Japanese historians.
So... yeah... 70 million not as unheard of as you'd think. Except it wouldn't of been 70 million since that was about the population of japan at the time. So more like 52 million.
1/5th that was already in severe risk of starvation.
Though lets just stick with this 10 million number. Which would of been worse? 10 million starving? Or the two nuclear bombs?
Of course... this is getting off the topic that you were wrong and made half cocked allegations based on an article.
|
No one, no one has ever made such a ludicrous claim that 3/4 of Japan's population would've died in the case of an invasion. It's just impossible, unless the US army deliberately started killing civilians. And I honestly don't think that either solution was good. The negative side effects of the bombs, plus their symbolic meaning were certainly not good.
I also don't see how I made any wrong allegations. The Vatican helped Nazis escape. That's what the book says.
|
That isn't what the book says. The book says people IN the vatican helped nazis escape.
If Lebron James shoots your mother... the Miami heat did not shoot your mother. Lebron James did.
As for the population statement. Again... look at their situation. They had very little food, and would of had no way of transporting it.... 10 million people would of died or 14% of their population within months.... and as the blockade stretched on things would of gotten worse.
As for "No solutions were good." Seems hypocritical to complain when you can't even think of a more preferable option.
Give the options avaible, it was the best opiton... you can't fault someone for taking the best option for all involved because it was a shitty option.
All other options were shittier.
