Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: sidthekid on August 12, 2002, 11:29:37 AM
-
1. which country was the first flying jet made.( not first engine) bonus question which year did it fly?
2.which country had a ACE pilot 33 kills and was a Woman. Bonus what was squad
3. Which country would attach old unairworthy bombers to the bottom of their fighters and drop entire bomber loaded with bombs as 1 large bomb? bonus question Plane types
4. Which country flew a bomber with a 70FT magnet attached to bottom. bonus why?
5. Which country built the first Flying aircraft carrier. this was a plane you could fly to hook onto refuel re arm and fly away...
6. Which country had a Submarine aircraft carrier.
7. Name the LAST plane type Eric Hartman flew for the German Airforce. Caution trick question
8. Which USA plane type had most kills over Japanese........
9. Which plane was nicnamed the Porcupine? This plane was attacked by 8 german planes. and was all alone it killed 3 of the attackers other 5 were badly damage and were sent limping home.
10. Why were Nagasaki and Hiroshima, Spare bombings during war until august 1945?
-
9. i think the porcupine was the b17 that they loaded with monster amounts of ammo and extra M2 .50 cals.. and no bombs, as a gunship.
-
I'll make an attempt, a weak one, but an attempt:
1. which country was the first flying jet made.( not first engine) bonus question which year did it fly?
I believe that Britain made the first engine, but Germany made the first flying Jet.
2.which country had a ACE pilot 33 kills and was a Woman. Bonus what was squad
Russia
3. Which country would attach old unairworthy bombers to the bottom of their fighters and drop entire bomber loaded with bombs as 1 large bomb? bonus question Plane types
Germany. FW190 with JU88 beneath (Mistletoe?)
4. Which country flew a bomber with a 70FT magnet attached to bottom. bonus why?
Britain? (To attempt to disrupt German radar?)
5. Which country built the first Flying aircraft carrier. this was a plane you could fly to hook onto refuel re arm and fly away...
US with a dirigible I believe?
6. Which country had a Submarine aircraft carrier.
Japan.
7. Name the LAST plane type Eric Hartman flew for the German Airforce. Caution trick question
F104 (or was it the 106?) Starfighter anyways...
8. Which USA plane type had most kills over Japanese........
Hellcat had a 19 to 1 K/D ratio..I'll pick Hellcat.
9. Which plane was nicnamed the Porcupine? This plane was attacked by 8 german planes. and was all alone it killed 3 of the attackers other 5 were badly damage and were sent limping home.
No idea. No guess even...
10. Why were Nagasaki and Hiroshima, Spare(d) bombings during war until august 1945?
No idea.
-
2...USSR
3...Germany
4..forget counry, it was to explode magnitic ship mines
5....USA ( it was a dirigible)
6...Japan
9... Short/Sunderland flying boat
-
6. 2 countries
1.) Japan - I-400
2.) Brit. - M-2
7. I thought it was the F-86, I could be wrong though
9. F6F
This is all from memory
Masher
-
1.
-
2. Top Russian Female Aces:
Olga Jamciková 17
Lidia Litvjaková 15
Jekaterina Budanová 11
Klavdija Fomicevova 11
Numbers vary, but no one with 33?
-
2. Lilia (Lidia) Litvak "The White Rose of Stalingrad"
-
You can argue the Italians were first with jet propulsion; they had a design that was a ducted fan, and if memory serves, it constricted airflow out the back. If so, this constitutes jet propulsion.
-
It ain't Lilya... most sources give her 12- 13, depending on who's counting.
I actually doubt it's Russia... most likely another country (Germany?).
-SW
-
3. Which country would attach old unairworthy bombers to the bottom of their fighters and drop entire bomber loaded with bombs as 1 large bomb? bonus question Plane types
The Mistel -
-
Originally posted by Kieran
You can argue the Italians were first with jet propulsion; they had a design that was a ducted fan, and if memory serves, it constricted airflow out the back. If so, this constitutes jet propulsion.
Actually it was Romanian Kieran: "One 50Hp Clerget four-cylinder in-line engine driving a centrifugal air compressor in the nose to produce 220 kg (485 lb) thrust"
-
5. Which country built the first Flying aircraft carrier. this was a plane you could fly to hook onto refuel re arm and fly away...
United States
The Macon (http://users.chariot.net.au/~theburfs/unrealimg/macon.jpg)
Hooking on: (http://users.chariot.net.au/~theburfs/unrealimg/voughtuo1_1.jpg)
-
Been doing googles searches all morning Tahgut? ;)
My answers were all from memory too, Masherbrum.
-
4. Which country flew a bomber with a 70FT magnet attached to bottom. bonus why?
Well, Ju52 carried a magnet underneath.. although it isn't a bomber. I think He111s did too, and it was used as a minesweeper.
-SW
-
Snort! Yeah, I thought about doing it, but the brain sufficed. I went back to post the Starfighter (second guessing myself!) and you beat em too it. Aah. Most guys will forget about the British M-2 though. I racked my brain trying to rememeber the M-2 portion, I knew both coutries and the I-400 right away, but finally got it.
I heard you a got a stone chip on that beemer's hood! Kidding :p
Karaya2
-
2. Since someone has already mentioned Russia, I'll take a wild guess and say Finland.
3. Germany
4. Britain...to set off magnetic mines.
6. Japan
7. Last plane as a pilot of the Luftwaffe - Me-109K-14
As a member of the German Air Force - someone else said F-104...I'll guess Phantom.
8. Hellcat
9. Sunderland Flying Boat...Fought an engagement against 8 JU-88's off the coast of Spain. If memory serves, only two of the attackers survived the engagement.
10. Considered to be non-industrial targets...mainly known for their culture and architectural beauty.
Shuckins
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
I heard you a got a stone chip on that beemer's hood! Kidding :p
Karaya2
Er, several! :eek: Fixed them right up though. Got Bra. Hate Bra. Bra good to prevent stone chips (Shrugs)
-
I second Lidija Litvjak - She is the highest scored female ace of the world and was a member of the 586th Fighter Regiment )All Female).
Karaya2
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Been doing googles searches all morning Tahgut? ;)
My answers were all from memory too, Masherbrum.
Yep. Was actually looking for pics on all the answers.
From memory
A
C
C
B
A
D
E - All of the above
A
those are the 1st 8 answers to the SAT. :p
-
6. Which country had a Submarine aircraft carrier.
Add Austrailia to the list http://www.skyhawk.org/2C/aus_sub.htm:
-
"This is HM Submarine E22, carrying two Sopwith Schneider floatplanes. The submarine was outfitted as an "aircraft carrier" at Harwich, early in 1916. The intent was to intercept German airships over the North Sea, although the advantage of a submarine for this work is unknown, since the sub could not submerge with the aircraft aboard."
-
There is more: "E22 ballasts down to launch her aircraft. In the first launching trial the fragile seaplanes were destroyed by choppy seas before they floated free. One successful trial was carried out, but the scheme was abandoned as impractical. The submarine was soon sunk, taking her logbooks to the bottom with her, so little more is known about this experiment."
-
And the United States: "This is the submarine USS S1 (SS 105) with a MS-1 seaplane on deck. The date is 24 October 1923. The seaplane was to be stowed, disassembled, in the cylinder on deck while the submarine was submerged. Trials were carried out in 1926, but the concept appears to have been deemed unsuccessful. One problem was that the aircraft barely fit into the cylinder, and could only carry enough fuel for 15 minutes in the air! The photo was probably taken at New York"
-
ahh , thats why they used a sub , launch and retrieval from partialy submerged boat, clever dem englanders
-
7. Name the LAST plane type Eric Hartman flew for the German Airforce. Caution trick question
Here is a pic of Hartmann and Douglas (Duke) Warren of Royal CAF.
That is a German F-86 in the background
-
8. Which USA plane type had most kills over Japanese........
I would guess F6F also...."12,000+ Hellcats produced accounted for three-fourths of all U.S. Navy air-to-air kills."
-
10. probably because they figured why waste bombs on them when there just going to nuke em and take em out in one big BANG.
thats sounds about right anyway
-
10. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were spared bombing raids because the powers that be in the US wanted to test the destructive power of the atomic bomb on undamaged targets.
Disturbing, but all info I read on the matter seems to confirm this.
Daniel
-
9. Which plane was nicnamed the Porcupine? This plane was attacked by 8 german planes. and was all alone it killed 3 of the attackers other 5 were badly damage and were sent limping home.
The real story: On 3 April 1940, a Sunderland operating off Norway was attacked by six German Junkers Ju-88 fighters, and managed to shoot one down, damage another enough to send it off to a forced landing, and drive off the rest. The Germans would eventually name the Sunderland the "Fliegende Stachelsweine (Flying Porcupine)".
-
1. which country was the first flying jet made.( not first engine) bonus question which year did it fly?
Romania is right or country Midnightand I'm sure you will find date for this too.
2.which country had a ACE pilot 33 kills and was a Woman. Bonus what was squad
This was kinda of trick question Olga Yamschikova was most kills in air. But when allies went to counting kills on ground as air combat kills Nataalya Meklin had 14 air and 19 confirmed kills of aircraft either on taxiway or parked.
3. Which country would attach old unairworthy bombers to the bottom of their fighters and drop entire bomber loaded with bombs as 1 large bomb? bonus question Plane types
Very good midnight target you may need to reevalute your free time:) 190 with a ju88 was answer
4. Which country flew a bomber with a 70FT magnet attached to bottom. bonus why?
Right it was great britian Wellington bomber to exploded magnetic mines
One of you thought to disrupt radar. This was done by a new produt that most credit saving thousands of bomber crews and it was Aluminum foil.
5. Which country built the first Flying aircraft carrier. this was a plane you could fly to hook onto refuel re arm and fly away...
Well this couldv'e been misleading , I was looking for airplane used as a aircraft carrier my answer was Russia and it was the TB-3 called the Vakhmistrov's bouquet
6. Which country had a Submarine aircraft carrier.
WW2 in was Japan
7. Name the LAST plane type Eric Hartman flew for the German Airforce. Caution trick question
Wow great thought this would stump but YES it was the F-106 the Jagdgeshwader 71
8. Which USA plane type had most kills over Japanese........
P-38
9. Which plane was nicnamed the Porcupine? This plane was attacked by 8 german planes. and was all alone it killed 3 of the attackers other 5 were badly damage and were sent limping home.
wow another I thought would be tough.. Sunderland was called the tachelschwein- the porcupine..
10. Why were Nagasaki and Hiroshima, Spare bombings during war until august 1945?
Another tough one and you got it right. Both were spared conventional bombing,Because United States want to see the effect of a nuclear bomb. These two were picked at the start of US nuclear program. Incase war was not over before bombs were ready. These two cites were not of much military importance.
Results of this survey is Midnight Target needs to reevaluate his free time.
Okay midnight What was only squadron that the marines flew P51's..........
-
Another tough one and you got it right. Both were spared conventional bombing,Because United States want to see the effect of a nuclear bomb. These two were picked at the start of US nuclear program. Incase war was not over before bombs were ready. These two cites were not of much military importance.
erk, being not so important to be bombed, but important enough to be nuked....lovely
Tronsky
-
tronski
sorry but I think spareing Nagashi and hiroshima maybe why USA has never used nukes again since.Probally could be why no other has either.
There are 2 sides to the use of Nuke 's in ww2. USA position is more people died in 1 night of conventional bombing of tokyo than died in both nuclear bombed cities combined. As matter of fact it was about 10 to 1 for conventional bombs than death by nuclear.
And at least america Told japanese we were about to drop such a bomb and they didn't believe us.( now i guess most wouldn't) then after first we asked for surrender or we will drop another. Again they didn't think there could be 2 of these bombs. so we dropped again. Estimation is by dropping nuclear bombs we save 7-9 million lives with killing only less than 200 thousand. I for one think it was right mission. But wish it never had to come to this....
-
So where are the correct answers?
Hartmanns last wing he was in command of was not the F-86. It was the F104 Starfighter, I'm pretty sure....correct me.
-
Tronsky,
I'm afraid you're wrong about the P-38 my friend. It did shoot down more Japanese aircraft than any other U.S. Army Air Force fighter.
Credited with some 5,200 victories, carrier- and land-based F6Fs destroyed as many Japanese aircraft as the P-38, P-40, P-47, P-51 and P-61 combined, including those in the landlocked China/Burma/India theater. (Barrett Tillman; Most Influential Fighters, WW II Fighters, special edition of Flight Journal, winter 2000.)
Regards, Shuckins
-
if those "ju88 fighters" are like the ones we have in AH then the short sunderland flying boat would take care of them easy
-
Originally posted by sidthekid
There are 2 sides to the use of Nuke 's in ww2. USA position is more people died in 1 night of conventional bombing of tokyo than died in both nuclear bombed cities combined. As matter of fact it was about 10 to 1 for conventional bombs than death by nuclear.
But wish it never had to come to this....
Yes, but problems with USA position:
1- Nukes after-affects (radiation) continue to kill and make
area uninhabitable for a long time afterwards.
2- With nukes, only one plane would have to get through
defenses of country being attacked and then decimate a whole city by itself.
3- Tokyo was a bigger and more densely populated city.
4- Conventional bombing was done on military targets and
civilian; Nukes dropped on only civilians :( Sad and scary
-
Yes, but problems with USA position:
1- Nukes after-affects (radiation) continue to kill and make
area uninhabitable for a long time afterwards.
2- With nukes, only one plane would have to get through
defenses of country being attacked and then decimate a whole city by itself.
3- Tokyo was a bigger and more densely populated city.
4- Conventional bombing was done on military targets and
civilian; Nukes dropped on only civilians Sad and scary
well to be honest Radiation at nagaski and hiroshima Are below level of radition in most USA Cities. It cleared faster than anyone thought it would.
Your number 4 the USA bombed tokyo with incendiary bombs and of the 1million plus dead were civilians.
-
Originally posted by sidthekid
3. Which country would attach old unairworthy bombers to the bottom of their fighters and drop entire bomber loaded with bombs as 1 large bomb? bonus question Plane types
Very good midnight target you may need to reevalute your free time:) 190 with a ju88 was answer
Actually, 109 with ju88 is also acceptable
(http://www.kg200.com/images/mistelpic1.jpg)
(http://www.kg200.com/images/mistelpic2.jpg)
(http://www.kg200.com/images/mistels1up.jpg)
And the first Jet - the Coanda-1910 - flew (surprisingly enough, given it's name) in 1910. :eek:
-
Sad and Scary ? I beg to differ. If those bombs HAD NOT been dropped the catastrophic amount of casualties would be "America's Fault", huh? My grandfather was given the preemptive of orders (Operation Olympic) of landing at Yokohama Bay in Nov. of 1945. He survived, Guam, Okinawa and the Occupation of China (was worse than the other two he said). He wouldn't have made it home, HE even said it.
Your convententional bomb statement is so far from the truth. Any part of Tokyo was a "miltary target". Are forgetting that the "Tokyo Fire Raids" bombs were dropped on a "military target", but 70mph + winds took care of the rest? So was the "miltiary target" even a factor? NO.
He lived it and experienced it, and had regret his whole life of throwing phospherous grenades into the caves of Oki. and hearing the screaming of the Japanese dying.
Karaya2
-
Originally posted by sidthekid
Your number 4 the USA bombed tokyo with incendiary bombs and of the 1million plus dead were civilians.
Someone needs to check his sources...
-
"1- Nukes after-affects (radiation) continue to kill and make
area uninhabitable for a long time afterwards."
Total and utter roadkill! Both Hiroshima (1,130,000) and Nagasaki (430,000) have been huge thiriving cities since the war.
But I suppose you hate the Japanese people so much that you would have rather had a likely year plus long invasion battle over all of Japanese home islands and all the resulting casualties. Remember the Japanese took near 100% military casualties in Iwo Jima, Saipan and Okinawa- the civilans died in even greater numbers. So I suppose you would like millions of them dead insted of 200,000 to end the war. And there were some 73,000,000 ready to die Japanese during WW2.
-
Oh sidthekid the total Japanese WW2 casualties were 1,076,967
1940: 73,075,071
1945: 71,998,104
Difference: 1,076,967
And these are from Japanese sources.
http://www9.ocn.ne.jp/~aslan/pfe/jpeak.htm
-
GRUNHERZ
.
Karaya2
-
I think the issue here is not if it was right to drop the bombs or not (arguable, but a strategic decision, it's war), but if it was right to drop it on two cities with no strategic value, no military targets whatsoever, and with people that had lived there without even thinking about being a target for the entirety of the war.
Then suddenly, two cities are wiped out.
In my opinion, the japanese high command would have got the message simply by dropping the bomb on a military target... heck, even CLOSE to one.
Just drop one say 10 Km from a military target and say "see what we did? We can wipe out Tokyo with just one of those".
Anyway what it's done it's done, I just think they could've dropped them somewhere else with the same strategic results.
Daniel
-
Nuke'em till they glow then shoot'em in the dark.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Oh sidthekid the total Japanese WW2 casualties were 1,076,967
1940: 73,075,071
1945: 71,998,104
Difference: 1,076,967
And these are from Japanese sources.
http://www9.ocn.ne.jp/~aslan/pfe/jpeak.htm
LOL!! :D
So if I've understood your numbers correct, not a single child was born between 1940-1945 in Japan?
-
sid uses the same casualty counter that Hortlund uses for Dresden.
-
Originally posted by fdiron
Nuke'em till they glow then shoot'em in the dark.
It's fortunate that AH doesn't have any japanese players... but wait, it does!
It's fortunate that they don't usually read the O'Club then... :(
Daniel
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
sid uses the same casualty counter that Hortlund uses for Dresden.
Lets compare statements shall we?
Hortlund:
We will never know how many died in Dresden.
sid:
In the firebombings of Tokyo, 1 million plus died
Midnight target:
Im a dumb diddly who doesnt know what Im talking about.
-
information is from...Library of Congress Worldwar 1939-1945 Aerial Operations,Americans and United States ,Army air corps-history-world war.
ISBN 0 -8094-3343-5 aacr2
isbn o-80943342-7 by Robert C. Mikesh Curator of the National Air and space museum.
Exact words from investigators or the Tokyo raids were." for the Japanese this first fire raid was a Catasrophe. The fires quickly raged out of control. The heat rose to 1,800degrees f. As reported by bombers hitting city it caused updrafts that bonced planes like leaves in a gail storm" (according to US pilots) 267,000 builds were destoryed the official death toll was 83,793 but it seems certain that the number of dead was actually much higher. Many thousands were drowned in the sumida river trying to escape the fierce heat, and many bodies were never recovered. Others were burned to ash" Tokyo's population went from Five million to 2 1/3 million. We conclude that most civilians were instantly cremated in their homes as at 1000 degrees it would take 3 seconds to turn humans to ash"... this report was signed by...Wibo van de Linde phd (Amsterdam) Dr john dunn( Melbourne) Dag Chistensen PHD (oslo) and Dr.Traudl Lessing (Vienna)
-
Official death toll: 83 793
Your claim: "over 1 million"
That is quite a leap.
As for the Tokyo population, what dates are those two population figures from? I seriously doubt that the first one is from the day before the attack and the second is from the day after. If you were to say that the first figure is from 1940 and the second one is from 1946 (or something like that) I'd believe you (but them of cource, those figures would not prove a thing about the casualties from the bombings).
-
Actually there a was "military target" in Hiroshima. A Mitsubishi factory that churned out LVT's for them.
Karaya2
-
After Fire bombing of tokyo a group of doctors and professors visited toyko at the request of the Japanese goverment. There report was confirmed by US Goverment. and by Japanese goverment. Go to Libary of congress Report ISBN 0-8094-3343-5 AACR2 Here is last paragraph from report made by. Dr. Wibo Van De Linde (Amsterdam),Dr. John Dunn (melbourne), Dag Christensen Phd (Oslo) Traudl Lessing phd (Vienna)
" For the Japanese this first fire raid was a major Catastrophe. The fires Quickly raged out of control. The heat rose to 1800Degrees f. Violent updrafts even bounced US bombers thru air like falling leaves in a violent storm.16 square miles of tokyo were burning.267,000 structures, went up in flames. The official Japanese death toll was stated to be 83,793 based on remains found.But it seems certain the number of dead was actually much high. Many thousands were drowned in the Sumida rivertrying to escape the fierce heat, and many bodies were never recovered. Others were burned to ash in a instant. 2100 tons of incendiary bombs were dropped on tokyo. Its population before bombing was 5 million after raid it was 2 1/3 million. Many could never be traced down or bodie recovered. Japanese death figures are based on only remains that were intact. this leads us to figure death toll could be as high as 1.4 million people who simply turned to ashes. the human body will turn to ash in 10 seconds in a oven of 1000 degrees and this was at least as hot as 1800 degrees based on melting of some metals and other stress testing by Dr. Linde"
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Lets compare statements shall we?
Hortlund:
We will never know how many died in Dresden.
sid:
In the firebombings of Tokyo, 1 million plus died
Midnight target:
Im a dumb diddly who doesnt know what Im talking about.
I'd like a ruling here!
-
I think the issue here is not if it was right to drop the bombs or not (arguable, but a strategic decision, it's war), but if it was right to drop it on two cities with no strategic value, no military targets whatsoever, and with people that had lived there without even thinking about being a target for the entirety of the war.
I'm sorry, but that's a myth. I've stood at ground zero at Nagasaki... there were military production factories there. At least that's what the Japanese museum says. I have a tendancy to believe them.
AKDejaVu
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Oh sidthekid the total Japanese WW2 casualties were 1,076,967
1940: 73,075,071
1945: 71,998,104
Difference: 1,076,967
Obvious maths flaw #1:
1940? Try 1937 (if you want to be generous about it and ignore the 1932 stuff).
Obvious maths flaw #2:
So during those 5 years no children were born at all :rolleyes:
Unlike [using the same source]
1935-1940 (perhaps most telling seeing as Japan was at war during most of these 5 years too)
1935: 69,254,148
1940: 73,075,071
Difference: +3,820,923
or
1945: 71,998,104
1950: 83,199,637
Difference: +11,201,533
-
Midnight wouldn't call u dumb i've seen you invest alot of time and effort to answer questions. I stated where my facts came from. Didn't say true without doubt. but go to Yokamagi's book Myths of Japan during war. Even he believes deaths were reported low on purpose to protect japanese pride. They the japanese admit they only counted the bodies they found. and figures on population was from Japanese not US numbers. I 'll trust independant survey for opposing gov.'s well before i'll accept USA or japanese figures. Library of congrees has web site go there lots of information there including how we Kidnaped Dr. Coanda from romania in 1944. ( inventer of jet and many other patents on aero space techs. pLEASE DON'T LUMP ME IN WITH HORTLAND. I don't need to use Vulgarity to express my ideas or try to changes others idea's.
-
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/marerror.htm
1.5 million Japanese military died in ww2.
400,000 cilivilians died in japan in 1941 alone so maybe we need to look closer before we accuse others their numbers are off.:(
-
400,000 cilivilians died in japan in 1941 alone so maybe we need to look closer before we accuse others their numbers are off.
????????? Who killed those 400,000 civilians?
War between America and Japan didn't officially happen until Dec 7th, 1941.
-SW
-
http://www.nasm.si.edu/nasm/aero/aircraft/lockheed_p38.htm
here is air and space museum;s web page. P-38 was indeed credited with most kills over japanese.
-
Originally posted by fdiron
Nuke'em till they glow then shoot'em in the dark.
Why would you make such a stuipid statement?:confused:
Are you trying to look like an prettythanghole?
-
Originally posted by sidthekid
Midnight wouldn't call u dumb i've seen you invest alot of time and effort to answer questions. I stated where my facts came from. Didn't say true without doubt. but go to Yokamagi's book Myths of Japan during war. Even he believes deaths were reported low on purpose to protect japanese pride. They the japanese admit they only counted the bodies they found. and figures on population was from Japanese not US numbers. I 'll trust independant survey for opposing gov.'s well before i'll accept USA or japanese figures. Library of congrees has web site go there lots of information there including how we Kidnaped Dr. Coanda from romania in 1944. ( inventer of jet and many other patents on aero space techs. pLEASE DON'T LUMP ME IN WITH HORTLAND. I don't need to use Vulgarity to express my ideas or try to changes others idea's.
LOL, not what I meant at all, but thanks just the same. My question was directed more at the arbiters of the catch... (sandman, Elfenwolf or Sikboy)
On a side note, I wasn't attempting to answer all the questions, just looking for pictures to go along with the questions. I thought it was a hoot. Some folks here seem to think that I was cheating or some such nonsense. I would challenge any one-eyed tattooed conservative crackerbarrel here to an even-up live trivia contest... from memory. :p
-
What a bummer! Great and interesting questions (plz post them in the general forum next time) and what happens ...
Why can't u guys take ur accusations to a new thread and leave this thread for none emotional discussions of the facts?
-
Originally posted by sidthekid
Marauder said: Yes, but problems with USA position:
1- Nukes after-affects (radiation) continue to kill and make
area uninhabitable for a long time afterwards.
4- Conventional bombing was done on military targets and
civilian; Nukes dropped on only civilians Sad and scary
Sid said: well to be honest Radiation at nagaski and hiroshima Are below level of radition in most USA Cities. It cleared faster than anyone thought it would.
Your number 4 the USA bombed tokyo with incendiary bombs and of the 1million plus dead were civilians.
Well Sidthekid, I know after the clean up those two cities were
repopulated and probably sooner than Nuke experts thought would be possible. I simply was stating that after a nuke is used that area will be uninhabitable for a period of time. I never stated a certain number of years. Because I don't know how long it would be irradiated for. (and I'm not goin' to Google search to find out)
Also as you can see above in my "number 4" I stated conv. bombing was done on military AND civilian targets. I know that most killed in Tokyo were civilians (who would'nt). I'm not
getting into the numbers argument either.
I saw your earlier post in this thread that ended with "but wish it never had to come to this" and agreed with you. And just wanted to say that "the US position" comments could be debated.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
"1- Nukes after-affects (radiation) continue to kill and make
area uninhabitable for a long time afterwards."
Total and utter roadkill! Both Hiroshima (1,130,000) and Nagasaki (430,000) have been huge thiriving cities since the war.
But I suppose you hate the Japanese people so much that you would have rather had a likely year plus long invasion battle over all of Japanese home islands and all the resulting casualties. Remember the Japanese took near 100% military casualties in Iwo Jima, Saipan and Okinawa- the civilans died in even greater numbers. So I suppose you would like millions of them dead insted of 200,000 to end the war. And there were some 73,000,000 ready to die Japanese during WW2.
Do you see any mention of any city in my comment? NO. Do you see any mention that those cities have not been repopulated?
NO. I said RADIATION continues to kill and make AN AREA uninhabitable FOR A LONG TIME I did not get into specifics because my point was to say that what Sid posted about the "US position" (here we go again {deja vu}) was debatable.
Also about your "hate the japanese people" rant I get your point. Your saying that if nukes hadn't been used the war would have
went on longer and more would have died. (than in the 2 nuke attacks in Japan). But like Cyranno was suggesting: was it necessary to hit the (MAINLY) civilian populated Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Many people would agree with you Grunherz- that the Nuke drops were probably necessary to end the war quickly- but you put words into my mouth (post?). Because I was simply sayin' that it was sad that civilians had to die. I hope you don't disagree with that!
Btw-Don't suggest I hate a certain race of people please- if you knew me you would never do that.... peace.
-
Sorry probally my fault for putting number 10 in my list of questions.
I agree with you killing civilians should be very last resort to end a war. That is why i'm not sure we shuld go after Saddam hussain. He is 1 man and we the USA have condemn Entire country because of 1 man. We saw Iraqies give up to Reporters they don't want to die for him.
But if we go for him this time alot of woman and children are going to Die. He is such a coward he will hide behind them until the very end. Remember this man put comunication bunkers under schools and shelters in last war with us. This time he knows only end to war is his death. That concerns be more than any weapon he has.
He will not deploy his loyal troops out of bagdad which would make us fight like in Mogodisue (forgive spelling). It will be costly to civilians more than either army...
I for 1 would not regret passing law to take out a leader of any Nation as long as congress votes on It. this way we could just take out those ywho need it and spare many lives on both sides.
-
Marauder you said: "AN AREA uninhabitable FOR A LONG TIME".
This is clearly incorrect. Define LONG TIME?
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Marauder you said: "AN AREA uninhabitable FOR A LONG TIME".
This is clearly incorrect. Define LONG TIME?
No, its not incorrect its just not defined. Like I said two posts ago I don't know how long an area that had been nuked would be radioactive. I purposely said "a long time" only because everyone knows that you would not be able to move back into a radioactive area for some time after a nuclear attack. How long?:
I'm not going to define long time because One: it wasn't my point Two: getting into the amount of time would just make people post arguements against it and links to Google found "evidence"(just look at all the people who disagreed with your numbers;)
-whew!they just come out of the woodwork don't they?:))- Three: searches for an answer to "how long" on the internet would probably get conflicting numbers and lots of "expert" opinions that some here would find conflicts with what they know (leads back to point "Two" above) Four: i'm just too damned lazy to look it up!:D
Mmmussst get some sleeeeep, work tomorrow; M. out
-
Originally posted by CyranoAH
I think the issue here is not if it was right to drop the bombs or not (arguable, but a strategic decision, it's war), but if it was right to drop it on two cities with no strategic value, no military targets whatsoever, and with people that had lived there without even thinking about being a target for the entirety of the war.
Then suddenly, two cities are wiped out.
In my opinion, the japanese high command would have got the message simply by dropping the bomb on a military target... heck, even CLOSE to one.
Just drop one say 10 Km from a military target and say "see what we did? We can wipe out Tokyo with just one of those".
Anyway what it's done it's done, I just think they could've dropped them somewhere else with the same strategic results.
Daniel
Obviously I'll be corrected to the detriment of my fragile little mind, HOWEVER....
I've read that the Japanese seriously considered surrendering only AFTER the Russians declared war.
(NO I am Not discounting the effects of the atomic bombs)
Tronsky
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Tronsky,
I'm afraid you're wrong about the P-38 my friend. It did shoot down more Japanese aircraft than any other U.S. Army Air Force fighter.
Credited with some 5,200 victories, carrier- and land-based F6Fs destroyed as many Japanese aircraft as the P-38, P-40, P-47, P-51 and P-61 combined, including those in the landlocked China/Burma/India theater. (Barrett Tillman; Most Influential Fighters, WW II Fighters, special edition of Flight Journal, winter 2000.)
Regards, Shuckins
errrrrr ok, My guess was going to be the F4U Corsair, but I think this is probably mean't for sidthekid
-tron-