Message from @Mozalbete ⳩

Discord ID: 563497468051062794


2019-04-04 22:53:47 UTC  

I don't think so

2019-04-04 22:53:53 UTC  

The military just didn't care about civilians

2019-04-04 22:54:04 UTC  

Dude, firebombing would have killed more people

2019-04-04 22:54:10 UTC  

And decided to drop big bombs on the ebil antisemites

2019-04-04 22:54:27 UTC  

Have you seen the results of napalm bombs on cities?

2019-04-04 22:54:47 UTC  

We would have destroyes the same cities

2019-04-04 22:54:51 UTC  

Well, I would see the results of nukes, but there is no city to look at

2019-04-04 22:54:53 UTC  

Plus more

2019-04-04 22:55:00 UTC  

No, you don't get it

2019-04-04 22:55:22 UTC  

Nagasaki and Hiroshima would have been absolutely wiped out by the firebombing too!

2019-04-04 22:55:23 UTC  

Why do you think people and military talk constantly about the threat of nukes and not the threat of "firebombing"?

2019-04-04 22:55:35 UTC  

Sure thing

2019-04-04 22:56:08 UTC  

I'm sorry, but that just looks like the cheapest excuse one could ever make

2019-04-04 22:56:17 UTC  

Because nukes are fast and, in the present day, too many countries have them with too much tension, so one nuke could set off many countries nuking

2019-04-04 22:56:30 UTC  

"Sure, I have pretty much erased your city form Earth, but it was for the best, believe me!"

2019-04-04 22:56:49 UTC  

Firebombing would have killed the citizens too, and the citizens of Tokyo and other cities likely

2019-04-04 22:57:01 UTC  

Would you rather have 2 cities dead or 5 cities dead?

2019-04-04 22:57:02 UTC  

I'm going to offer a more plausible alternative:

2019-04-04 22:57:17 UTC  

The people in charge, like they do to this day, couldn't care less about civilians

2019-04-04 22:57:32 UTC  

One method was slow, typical, far less destructive.

2019-04-04 22:57:45 UTC  

The other was "big bomb on da chinks"

2019-04-04 22:58:06 UTC  

So "why not?"

2019-04-04 22:58:46 UTC  

9/10 would nuke again

2019-04-04 22:58:48 UTC  

Perhaps, but that doesn't change the fact that firebombing was devastating Japan too and massive numbers were already dying at the hands of fire bombing

2019-04-04 22:58:55 UTC  

One method was much more effective than the other

2019-04-04 22:59:12 UTC  

And I'm 99% sure that no bombing would have caused even a fraction of the damage nor consequences

2019-04-04 22:59:32 UTC  

You can keep thinking that

2019-04-04 22:59:42 UTC  

Neither of us has a PhD in WW2 history

2019-04-04 22:59:54 UTC  

So our opinions are likely useless

2019-04-04 22:59:54 UTC  

I can keep thinking that because everyone can see what a nuke does

2019-04-04 23:00:15 UTC  

They dropped the bomb because it was more efficient

2019-04-04 23:00:18 UTC  

Everyone can see what firebombing does too and look at death tolls...

2019-04-04 23:00:34 UTC  

Plus we nuked nips, not chinks.

2019-04-04 23:00:41 UTC  

They didn't surrender because of firebombing

2019-04-04 23:00:55 UTC  

They would have if we continued for long enough

2019-04-04 23:01:06 UTC  

I don't see any obliterated japanese city because of firebombing

2019-04-04 23:01:12 UTC  

We had already destroyed tons of their military production facilities

2019-04-04 23:01:20 UTC  

They knew they were going to lose already essentially

2019-04-04 23:01:38 UTC  

It was a matter of when

2019-04-04 23:01:39 UTC  

Destroying some facilities is nothign compared to what a nuke on a city of civvilians does

2019-04-04 23:01:55 UTC  

We firebombed the citizens too FYI