firebombing had existed for years

and the US killed more people firebombing tokyo then they did nuking nagasaki

and every country was firebombing eachother

The devastation of nukes and isoptope can last hundreds of years

eh

i mean

what do yo umean eh

Its fucking science

they both flattened and leveled cities

the difference between firebombing and nukes is fucking magnificent

not in numbers lol

what the fuck

what

you think that firebombing isnt any different from nukes

i mean of course its different its just that those 2 nukes compared to everything else wasn't that like special

i mean japan killed as many chinese citizens in the rape of nanking as they lost in hiroshima and nagasaki

so you don't need a nuke even

you just need some japanese soldiers

youd have to consider how many planes and pilots and the amounts of firebomb dropped per plane to create signifcant damange to a cit

a nuke

is just 1 plane and one bomb

yeah thats the biggest difference

but still

i mean

now imagine 500 planes dropping 500 nukes

why

cause the catastophies gonna be pretty fucking signficant

i mean

by a massive margin lmao

thats a hypothetical

how is it hypothetical

lol

of course if you drop 500 nukes its going to do damage

itll destory all of japan

and even worse

it will destory anything

why would i need to imagine that though

were talking about why japan fucking deserved it

they deserved it because they wouldnt have stopped even if they were being firebombed. The nuke is what really opened there gook eyes

im not saying we should have firebombed them im saying the nukes weren't really "devastating" compared to other things in ww2

well you were talking about firebonbs