"Iran now ready to double its Uranium enrichment." - U.N.

[Deleted]

Great job cherry-picking.

Here's your very own Winston Churchill:

Great job keeping an open mind...... Not like they would have reason to lie, right?

[chadwix]

Here's a quote for you:
In one more month of war with the Japanese, more would have been killed than the atomic bombs killed.

Of those 250k, how many actually died from the something that never occurred? Sensationalized speculation, nothing more.

[Deleted]

Here's your very own Winston Churchill:

Churchill was a warmongering bully. Hardly a statesmen to view with any sort of good will. He was elected as PM in WW2 because he was the PM we needed for a war, after that he was just detestable, as he proved with the Iranian 1953 coup.

[Deleted]

1) Use of the nuke save more lives than it killed.
2) It demonstrated the power of the weapon, to discourage such use in the future.

LOL, then Iran can use it on USA, so:

1.) USA won't interfere with other countries' problems anymore and bomb whenever they have a chance, killing many many many innocent people.
2.) It would demonstrate the power of all the bombing weapons America uses on other countries, to discourage them from such use in the future.

There you go.

[Rukentuts]

Of those 250k, how many actually died from the something that never occurred? Sensationalized speculation, nothing more.

Yeah, because experts in their field know less than you do.

[Deleted]

Great job cherry-picking.

Here's your very own Winston Churchill:

Oh, but what did he know about the war?

Churchill could predict the future and tell us how many lives would be lost? There was a reason he was fired before the end of WW2, he was a very bad leader, he just knew how to bind the nation and keep them motivated.

[Deleted]

Guess what, there hasn't been harmful levels of radiation there for years.

---------- Post added 2012-11-16 at 01:48 PM ----------

And Japanese.

Seriously people, this is like 9th grade History here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_...ar_saved_lives

Read this and get back to me. All of you.

Wow, are you even serious? There are still Japnese suffering from the long-term effects of that bomb 60 YEARS LATER.

Oh how convenient that the majority of US scholars and officials as well as those affected by Japan's war on their country argue in that way. I don't know what to say.

Just to clariy: Reconstructing the TRUTH, whatever that is, won't be possible. Nevertheless, when reading on such a debatable topic, take a look on who is saying what.

[Masqerader]

Israel scares me the most, if they are over run they may just use the nukes and take the enemy with them.

and? i would too. if you know your going to be wiped out...

[Rukentuts]

Churchill could predict the future and tell us how many lives would be lost?

Here's another one:

In a study done by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in April 1945, the figures of 7.45 casualties per 1,000 man-days and 1.78 fatalities per 1,000 man-days were developed. This implied the two planned campaigns to conquer Japan would cost 1.6 million U.S. casualties, including 380,000 dead.[14]

-

From this, a low figure of somewhat more than 200,000 Japanese deaths can be calculated for a short invasion of two weeks, and almost 3 million Japanese deaths if the fighting lasted four months.[17]

[Deleted]

Yes, that's why even the Japanese acknowledge it.

Because after having their cities firebombed and having MacArthur rule their country and impose a new constitution, they actually had a choice?

Your view of the world is a very naivé one. Keep watching G.I. Joe and ignoring how the world REALLY works.

[Beavis]

It isn't the only reason thought, Hamas and Hezbollah are two other reasons why Israel wants Iran off the game. Taking off the supplier is easier in this case then taking them off.

Sorry, I don't buy that. Hezbollah and Hamas have been funded by the Iranian and Syrian governments for over 25 years, but Israel has only been talking about strikes on Iran since the public admission of the nuclear program. Further, the only way anybody could stop the Iranians from funneling guns and money into Lebanon and Gaza is total regime change and I have yet to hear any public figure in Israel, let alone the prime minster, advocate the overthrow of the Iranian government by outside forces.

[Rukentuts]

Because after having their cities firebombed and having MacArthur rule their country and impose a new constitution, they actually had a choice?

Your view of the world is a very naivé one. Keep watching G.I. Joe and ignoring how the world REALLY works.

Yes, clearly I don't know a fucking thing.

A widely cited estimate of 5 to 10 million Japanese deaths came from a study by William Shockley and Quincy Wright; the upper figure was used by Assistant Secretary of War John J. McCloy who characterized it as conservative.[18] Some 400,000 additional Japanese deaths might have been suffered in the expected Soviet invasion of Hokkaido, the northernmost of Japan's main islands.[19]

Clearly those people don't know a fucking thing either.

[Deleted]

Here's another one:

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/10/29/op...ry-393488.html

[Symphonic]

Because after having their cities firebombed and having MacArthur rule their country and impose a new constitution, they actually had a choice?

Your view of the world is a very naivé one. Keep watching G.I. Joe and ignoring how the world REALLY works.

Hey! I like the G.I.Joes cartoon. Especially the "knowing is half the battle" PSAs

[Rukentuts]

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/10/29/op...ry-393488.html

It's an "opinion" article.

[Deleted]

Here's another one:

Okay, just for YOU:
In a study done by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in April 1945

[Deleted]

Yes, clearly I don't know a fucking thing.
Clearly those people don't know a fucking thing either.

Estimates are not proof of anything, why do you believe everything you are told? Keep an open mind and do your own research.

[Rukentuts]

Okay, just for YOU:
In a study done by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in April 1945

Yes, because the military isn't capable of estimating military casualties. Are you daft?

[Slummish]

Many other dangerous countries have nukes, why not Iran?

I don't know where you get "many," but you're wrong. China, France, India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom and United States are nuclear powers. Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey are backed by U.S.-made nuclear weaponry under the supervision of NATO. Of those nations mentioned, only North Korea and Pakistan can be considered dangerous and politically-unstable.

Aside from being politically-unstable, North Korea and Pakistan are inhabited by people of a certain philosophical ilk wherein pyrrhic victories are viewed with some level of respectability. Suicide and martyrdom do not mesh well with nuclear capability. It's best to keep weapons of mass destruction in the hands of those people with a respect for life.

So, why not Iran? I won't disparage any religious background since you're prone to tattling, but I'm sure you're intelligent enough to discern the differences between responsible nuclear powers and irresponsible owners.

[Deleted]

It's an "opinion" article.

Yours wasnt opinions too?