From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Sun Nov 25 2001 - 14:24:55 MST
On Sun, 25 Nov 2001 CurtAdams@aol.com wrote:
> For that reason Tokyo and Hamburg are iffy - there was some military
> value to those bombing, although creating terror was an explicit part
> of the goals of both bombings. But Hiroshima and Nagasaki were "saved"
> for A-bomb demonstrations and the US military sensibly chose
> militarily irrelevant targets.
One should not forget that the German Buzz-bombing of London
was intended for civilians. I'd view the British bombing of
Hamburg as tit-for-tat. (Whether it was in violation of the
Geneva convention remains an open question).
I think I've also read that there were 4 "industrial" cities
that were potentially targeted for atomic bombs. Anyone know
which they were? We did of course fire bomb Tokyo, but I
don't think it was damaged to the degree Hamburg was.
It would seem that using A-bombs on the capitol is the
best way to end a war -- the problem is you make an enemy
for a *very* long time.
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:12:11 MST