Jump to content

forget manicheism

Yeah because NO innocents died in the pearl harbor bombing, right? Because practically instantly ending a war is bad? A war that would have continued, practically non-stop.

70.62.49.12 (talk)19:22, 9 August 2010

Still killing 150.000 civilians was bad thing to do, not comparable to pearl harbor though they didn't open war but attacked cowardly, well u were both gay.

83.7.133.229 (talk)15:39, 10 August 2010
 

The war could have ended sooner. The reason they were a beaten country, they wanted to surrender but the US said no because in their surrender agreement the Japanese Emperor would stay in power(1). And 68 civilian died (most of which were friendly fire)(2)

(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan#Divisions_within_the_Japanese_leadership (2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor#Sunday_December_7.2C_1941 (2) http://ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=17 (2) http://www.taphilo.com/history/war-deaths.shtml (2) http://www.angelfire.com/ia/totalwar/PearlHarbor.html

69.126.35.22 (talk)10:26, 18 August 2010

Killing civilians is just wrong!

154.122.128.157 (talk)19:06, 31 May 2016

Especially using a nuclear bomb, however capable we are, is the biggest evil in history. Taking credit to ending the war that way is way overridden by the evil.

154.122.128.157 (talk)19:11, 31 May 2016