4 ms·
What scale shall we use to compare the results of, say, Hirasima/Nagasaki nuclear bombing with what, say, Mongolians did? Or is it all about being able to manag
by alexro 15y ago
What scale shall we use to compare the results of, say, Hirasima/Nagasaki nuclear bombing with what, say, Mongolians did? Or is it all about being able to manage the public image?
- jbattle 15y agoI'll answer the question narrowly (and out of ignorance on the state of scholarly opinion on the bombings) - the Mongolians practiced depopulation as a regular (normal/frequent) form of policy. The pair of nuclear bombings were a one time policy decision intended as a knockout punch. To counter my own argument, I'd like to say that if ww2 continued, nuclear bombing would NOT have become standard US war policy. However, seen in continuity with the fire bombings of Tokyo, Dresden & etc - I might be over-optimistic.
- Symmetry 15y agoI think the more crucial difference is that despite how long and bloody WWII was and how it began with a Japanese surprise attack, the US conspicuously failed to kill large numbers of Japanese people after winning - in contrast with the Mongol's [1] practice of slaughtering the inhabitants of cities that refused to open their doors when asked. [1] The Mongol's, and many, many other armies at various points in time including many historical European forces.
- neilk 15y agoAnd it wasn't just Tokyo - the USA's firebombing campaign incinerated 50-90% of the population of 67 Japanese cities. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S21tC-JxWXA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S21tC-JxWXA The debate over this is almost endless, though, and I doubt we can settle it.