2 ms·
So? We talk WW2, military casualties were to be expected, weren't they? Just look at Soviet and Russian casualties on the Eastern front. Also, as an alternative
by hef19898 3y ago
So? We talk WW2, military casualties were to be expected, weren't they? Just look at Soviet and Russian casualties on the Eastern front. Also, as an alternative to an invasion mainland Japan, cut them of by sea, bomb their cities to dust (still a war crime, but Tokyo was already fire bombed anyway), so basically what happened, atomic bombs or not.
And yes, tze end of WW2 was predictable in mid 1944, no doubt about that in any shape or form. The details were up for grabs, sure, the overall outcome was not.
- 542354234235 3y ago>military casualties were to be expected, weren't they? First, convenient to ignore the 100,000 civilian deaths. Second, what you are saying is the war was basically won* *After hundreds of thousands of additional military deaths fighting to completely dismantle Japan. >The details were up for grabs Again, these "details" are hundreds of thousands to millions of deaths. You are acting like death from atomic bombs are the only deaths that matter, so people that die during battle or millions of deaths from starvation from a blockade[1] are fine. This is just so divorced from reality I don't even understand what you are trying to say. Yeah, we could have just killed millions Japanese people with a blockade or kill 100,000 Americans and a million Japanese during an invasion. Atomic weapons were totally unneeded. [1]https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/victory-in-japan-army-navy-1945 https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/victory-in-ja...