View Full Version : Another 'What If' Scenario

08-05-2005, 02:14 PM
Tomorrow is 60 years since we dropped the big one on Hiroshima... We know the outcome of that decision.

Do you think it would have been morally right for the Allies to drop the bomb, on say Berlin, if the push to east had taken longer‚‚ā¨¬¶

How do you imagine it would effect Europe, or it's knock-on effect on the Pacific War...

Being that the Allies only had enought fissionable material for a total of 3 bombs in the alloted historic time scale.

08-05-2005, 02:58 PM
We'd have dropped an A-bomb right on top of the Reichstag in a New York minute. After all, Roosevelt, Truman and the USAAF lacked the added morally superior perspective of the last 60 years...



08-05-2005, 04:03 PM
Well look at this way. It was sixty years ago, there were very horrible and evil things happening and I guess there was just no time for moral reflections, as decisive decisions had to be made. In times of war, you just don't what your enemy has over the other side of the hill. At the time, the Germans were deploying all sorts of new high technology and gadgets. The Allies wouldn't have known what else was coming around the corner. Do you think the Axis powers would have refrained from using atomic weaponry? As for the one on Hiroshima, to the USA it was that or the slated Operation Olympic invasion of 1946. What would your opinion be if you were among the marines that were first to hit the beaches? For me, it was well before my time, I wasn't there, but of course, have the advantages of hindsight and knowledge after the events. I'd guess that back then, the bad people were balanced by decent individuals. No different from today. Rightly or wrongly, it must have an incredibly hard decision to make and I for one, am glad that I never had to make it. So I'll sit on the fence for this one mate.

08-05-2005, 04:24 PM
At the moment this subject is been discussed on the Pravda forums. One person has put that the allies should of just had a total naval blockade. Sounds good until you think about how many more Japanese people would of died from starvation because of lack of food. The A-bomb was in the end the most humane course of action.

Some people say that because the Soviets would of invaded Japan then they would of soon surrendered. I think that they would of lasted to the very last man in keeping the Red army out of Japan.

As for Germany and the A-Bomb, I still think that at least one of the A-bombs used was captured from the Germans. One of the greatest secrets of WW2 was that Dresden was bombed because of the research of the German A-Bomb was based in that city, and to stop the Red Army from capturing the information the city was levelled. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

08-05-2005, 04:44 PM
It would be good if the US army had more A-bombs (besides those two) at the time so they could spare one to show Japanese what they could expect if they do not surrender. Unconditionally.

Just one more idealistic thought.

08-05-2005, 05:32 PM
When the Allies learned of Germany's first ballistic missile (V-2) and atom bomb facilities they bombed them. The first German atom bomb, concealed as a prototype twin engine fighter program, was nearing completion at a Messerschmidt facility, but was discovered by Allied intelligence and destroyed in a bombing raiid. However, only the bombing of the V-2 at Penemunde was made public. The victorious Allies created the story that Germany never came near finishing an A-bomb, and widely made public the original German deception, and that only a prototype twin engined Messerschmidt fighter was destroyed in the bombing. This aircraft never existed, although many believe this story, even today.

08-05-2005, 05:34 PM

08-05-2005, 06:07 PM
*oops* sorry Megile. I wasn't satisfied with my first version, and I remade it but before I saw your http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif . I hope the new version makes you just as Happy.

08-05-2005, 06:12 PM
You go, Lexx. And Capt.England, love to see your proof about Dresden. My understanding is that it was bombed because there were no other major cities left in Germany to bomb, and for not much more than that.

As to the A-bomb, keep in mind that a big reason for the Manhattan Project was because we were convinced Germany was building a bomb. And that was because of a misunderstanding in a conversation. Hans Bethe met Werner Heisenberg, the number one German nuclear physicist (by default--the Jewish nuclear physicists had all left the country) at a conference cocktail party in Copenhagen in 1942. Bethe tried to worm out of Heisenberg if he was building a bomb for Hitler or not; Heisenberg was cadgy, didn't say yes, didn't say no. In fact, the German atomic program was in shambles, with a very low priority; they might have made a bomb if the war had lasted until 1952. But Bethe reported to the Brits and the Amis his coversation, and the Allies took it at its worst-case possibility, that the Germans were building a bomb. A lot of the rush of the Manhattan Project was to get there first.

Would we have dropped one on Berlin? My .02--no. We never dehumanized the Germans like we did the Japanese during the war. Germans surrendured when they were trapped or cut off; Japanese charged, or killed themselves. We didn't understand the Japanese mind at all, and I think that allowed us (us Allies) to make the moral choice to drop it.

Don't ask me if it was right or not. I'm not that good.


08-05-2005, 06:18 PM
The Germans were not crashing planes into our ships and sharpening 30 million bamboo stakes to meet our forces.

08-05-2005, 07:46 PM
I foresee this thread being locked and soon......