Sn1p3r187
Carolinian Shaolin Monk
No apologies. He didn't do it therefor no apologies. It shouldn't be done unless it was an accident.
Japanese nuclear bomb survivors want Obama to apologize
- Thread starter MutantScalper
- Start date
Okay? I thought the Germans did not have a plane capable of crossing the Atlantic Oceans and that that was one of the reasons why their engineers tried to find a way to have a submarine drag a missile behind it like V2 and why research was done on combining rockets and plane technology to create a rocket plane that could reach the US.
I will try to answer it that way.
Was it necessary, like to win the war? No. Obviously not. The war was won in Europe without droping the bomb. So there was at no point really a necessity to drop one on Germany. And most probably not on Japan either. So much for the history.
Have there been considerations for droping nuclear weapons on Germany? Maybe. It depends about what year we are talking about. 1940? 43? 45? Just like the war, tactical and strategical considerations changed. The Nuclear weapon development, was at first the idea to have them, just in case someone else was working on it as well. Like a deterence. You have to consider this, almost all nations had access to chemical weapons, and they knew their effects from WW1. Yet, none saw use in WW2. Simply beacause everyone knew, that as soon one side would use them, the other one would too. But no one really knew how far the Nazis have been with their development of atomic bombs. The general idea was that the Germans might have been slightly ahead of the US. And a couple of months, could have been devastating here. That was with 1941/42. However, with the incredible size of the Manhattan project, and the changing situation in WW2, particularly after 1943 and 44. It became realtively clear that it was unlikely that Germany or Japan would get the Bomb before the Amercians did. But, still better to have it and not need it. And it was a billion dollar project, so to cancel it at that point must have been seen like a waste. The Manhattan Project and the decision for droping the bomb, shows more than any other situation in WW2, how much the cold war and post WW2 considerations started already to influence the politics and decision making. It seems, that considering the secrecy and highly theoretical nature of the nuclear bomb, they had no real tactical concepts right up before the test of Trinity.
Target Committee, Los Alamos, May 10-11, 1945
There have been, a lot of question that couldn't be solved without a test and which made it difficult to chose a target - see the describtion in the link. In may 1945, when they got close to chosing a target, Germany was already completely out of the picture. With Janurary 1945, the western Allies already started to push very deep in Germany teritory, capturing the heart of the Reich. And the Russians closed in on Berlin as well. It was over at that point, there was no more a target to chose here. And I guess they never seriously considered to drop it on the Germans after 1944. If the Germans for some reason, would have managed to keep the war going till the end of 45 or even 46? Like if they won in the Ardenes trough some miracle, or stoping the Soviets and western Allies at entering the Reich? Probably. They might have droped it on Dresden, Hamburg, or some other large German city, but most probably one of the cities in the Ruhrgebiet, the industrial center of Germany.
In theory, yeah. It is fascinating to think about the what-ifs and possibilities. But the reality of it, its's all more or less fantasy at this point, since Germany lacked both, the resources, the economy and the expertise to make any of that happen. Not even the US, with their incredible advantage in economics and personell, managed to engineer a bomber during wartime, that had the capacity to carry a payload as large like the A-Bomb over the whole atlantic. In theory, there have been concepts for that. On paper. But to make them work in real live, is a whole different story. And while the Germans have been advanced in some areas, they have not been so far ahead of the others, that they could make miracles happen. Infact, historical studies show, that if the Germans had advantages, it was usually just an advantage of 3 to 6 months of engineering, and only in a few areas, like jet engines and gun development, like anti tank guns. What people often do, is to look at German prototypes and paper projects, which sound sometimes very fancy, but don't consider to look at the requirements of those projects. Or what the Germans actually really achieved on the battlefield with the weapons they already had in use.
As a small example, while the Panther was on paper, a very impressive design, the combat reports by the Germans, tell a different story. And the highest number of destroyed tanks, came from 1941, where the Germans managed to destroy more than 20 000 Soviet tanks in less than 6 months, of which aprox. 2 300 have been the new T34. And the Germans, managed all of this, with basically the Panzer II, Panzer III, Panzer IV and the Stug assault gun. And from those weapons, only the Stug was a relatively new design. The Impact of new designs and prototypes on WW2, was grossly exagerated after WW2. The largerst part of the fighting was done with rather ordinary weapons and concepts that have proven them self. Hence why the most used tank inthe German army have been the Panzer IV and the Stug, with upgraded weapons and armor. Where as the Americans used the Sherman, the Brits the Cromwell and lend lease Shermans and the Soviets the T34 as the main weapons for their tank forces. All of those vehicles, have been realtively reliable and proven concepts, based on designs and prototypes that have been finished before WW2 started. Just like most other projects, jet engines have been in development since the late 1930s for example.
Last edited:
MutantScalper
Dogmeat
I think they pretty much had a way for a one way trip to the east coast of US. They could have dropped the bombs and then ditched the plane in the sea where they could have been picked up by a u-boat. They didn't get to do this but Hitler was very interested in the idea of bombing New York.
But yes, they were also planning those flying bombs fired from u-boats. Didn't get those ready either.
Last edited:
Indeed, one documentary I saw also told that next to a true nuclear weapon the Germans were also trying to develop a 'dirty bomb', basically spreading radioactive sand across New York through a regular explosive, and this was one of the reasons that the Germans tried to develop the means to reach the US East Coast fast or undetected.
The problem with many of those documentaries is, that they ignore reality. Germany had a ton of projects, ideas and concepts from 1938 and later in the war. They even followed some concepts as late as 1945 a few months before the war ended, when 2-3 engineers continued to work on the E-100 a 100-120 ton super heavy tank as alternative to the 180 ton Maus tank ...
What you have to ask you self is, how realistic are those projects. Speer canceled almost all of those in 1943, knowing that there was no chance to get those done before the war ended. One way or another.
I am as fascinated by those crazy Nazi projects like everyone ... but reading about all those, it is very easy to forget, which of those have been realistic and which not.
Which makes it even more astonishing when you consider, how many potentially great projects saw almost no attention. Like the infrared night vision equipment, while not so usefull for the infantry, it proved very effective for vehicles!
What you have to ask you self is, how realistic are those projects. Speer canceled almost all of those in 1943, knowing that there was no chance to get those done before the war ended. One way or another.
I am as fascinated by those crazy Nazi projects like everyone ... but reading about all those, it is very easy to forget, which of those have been realistic and which not.
Which makes it even more astonishing when you consider, how many potentially great projects saw almost no attention. Like the infrared night vision equipment, while not so usefull for the infantry, it proved very effective for vehicles!
There was the America project and the America Bomber program. But it never really moved further than the concept phase. When they started to think about it in 1942, the German industry was already to occupied with the production of their already in use aviation programms and weapons.
Last edited:
IndignantHedgehog
It Wandered In From the Wastes
I honestly can't tell if this is serious or not.
DirtyOldShoe
Some kind of lucky
Napalm on civilians is something they should be apologize for imo
Home of the brave? If bravery is using Napalm I would choose to be a coward.
Edit: I was misinformed. This comment is invalid.
Last edited:
Ragemage
Wept for Zion
I didn't actually know about the napalm thing until people started bringing it up. It's not exactly something that's highlighted in history classes. So yeah, apologize for that, don't apologize for the atom bomb.
Was it really napalm though? I always thought napalm didn't really saw use before Vietnam. Not that the fire bombing over Japan wasn't devastating, but still.
*Edit,
How, they used it as early like 1944. Well. The more you know!
*Edit,
How, they used it as early like 1944. Well. The more you know!
IndignantHedgehog
It Wandered In From the Wastes
It's sort of amazing what isn't taught in American history classes. Now most of the stuff can be taught by a good teacher, but with the push toward teaching for the test and nothing else it's getting harder to do. Our textbooks teach a sanitized version of history, that don't cover any of the negatives.
Well, you won't get to that before you actually study history. And even then, you will have a hard time to get classes about subjects that are either not popular or seen as ... questionable. For example, the teachings and theories about economy in socialist states. Obviously, from the 1960s up to the 1990s, this was a topic that got largely ignored on universities. For obvious reasons. Or historical research about NATO military operations after the Cold War? Another very unpopular topic. Google Operation Gladio and the Secret armies of the NATO, if you're interested in that topic. It's one of the reasons why I hate to look at one side as the cleary good one and the other as the obvious evil one.
MutantScalper
Dogmeat
I think napalm was used in WW 2 but not against Japan, it was used in the European theatre of war. Against Japan US used conventional incendiary bombs trying to get the fire storm going. Japanese used to build their houses from wood and paper-like material that would burn nicely.
So there was napalm in those incendiary bombs so yes, napalm was used against Japan.
Atomic Postman
Vault Archives Overseer
The moment Japan starts being honest about it's own history in the war, that is the moment Obama should apologize.
Cimmerian Nights
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
If everyone started apologizing and making amends for the past, who would the nationalists blame all their problems on and scapegoat for everything?
vitekc45c
First time out of the vault
Everyone. Other countries for admiting and commiting the crimes, and their own goverment for being weak and also admiting the crimes.
I think it is really about time that we finally discover some other, maybe sentient, forms of live. That way we can all hate on someone, or something else than humans. Those poor bacterias on Mars and possible(?) molluscs on Jupiter Moon Europa though. Because, they sure will not send their best ones, not you, not you and certainly not YOU, to earth. They will send rapists, murderes, and I suppose some, are good bacterias. We have to make earth great again.