Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!caip!cbmvax!vu-vlsi!williams
From: williams@vu-vlsi.UUCP (Thomas Williams)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.misc
Subject: Re: Lives saved by nuking Japan?!? (was Re: The Presidents...)
Message-ID: <335@vu-vlsi.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 4-Jun-86 14:05:49 EDT
Article-I.D.: vu-vlsi.335
Posted: Wed Jun  4 14:05:49 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Jun-86 04:17:05 EDT
References: <133@petrus.UUCP> <513@mit-trillian.MIT.EDU> <709@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <478@cad.BERKELEY.EDU>
Distribution: net
Organization: Villanova Univ. EE Dept.
Lines: 22
Xref: watmath net.politics:16626 net.misc:9762

In article <478@cad.BERKELEY.EDU>, hijab@cad.UUCP writes:
> In article <2928@jhunix.UUCP>, ins_apmj@jhunix.UUCP (Patrick M Juola) writes:
> > 	The defense of the Japanese islands was/would have been the
> > defense equivalent of a jihad, a holy war. 
> 
> Why was it so imperative to conquer the Japanese islands?

    Usually when a nation has been unjustifiably attacked the people of 
the victim country think, logically enough, that the agressors should be
permanently disabled.  Under most circumsatnces this entails the 
re-organization of the opposing nation's government.  The Japanese refused
this even after the first atomic-bomb had been detonated!
    Also, a warring nation is rarely concerned with the losses of the 
enemy.  The dropping of the atomic-bomb  certainly did save American lives.
    The bomb targets, however, are debatable.  Perhaps the disfigurment 
of Mt. Fuji would have had a bigger and less expensive (in civilian lives)
affect of the Japanese.  Then again the weapons were in short supply and
I suppose the American officials wanted to "make the most of them".

                                           -thomas williams

BTW - what about Dresden?