SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    The Atomic Bomb Saved Millions—Including Japanese
Page 1 2 3 4 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
The Atomic Bomb Saved Millions—Including Japanese Login/Join 
Peace through
superior firepower
Picture of parabellum
posted Hide Post
It's far worse than that. In Tennozan, author George Feifer notes that after the United States invaded Okinawa, Japanese school children were training/drilling in schoolyards with wooden spears, and every knife shop in Tokyo was sharpening every knife they had in their shops.

If the United States had been forced to invade the mainland of Japan, American soldiers would have been killed by children and would have been forced to kill children, old women, you name it. American soldiers would have had to regard every single Japanese citizen they met as an enemy combatant. To call what would have ensued a "bloodbath" doesn't even begin to cover it. It would have been utter madness.

Two atomic bombs prevented all of that, and I have nothing but contempt for those who think we shouldn't have dropped those bombs.


____________________________________________________

"I am your retribution." - Donald Trump, speech at CPAC, March 4, 2023
 
Posts: 107651 | Registered: January 20, 2000Reply With QuoteReport This Post
No double standards
posted Hide Post
Considering the likely devastation to life and property from continued firebombing, from a literal invasion of Japan, and considering Russia's intentions and the US rebuilding Japan; seems quite contradictory with political correctness today, I would say the atomic bombs were a blessing to Japan.




"Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women. When it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it....While it lies there, it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it"
- Judge Learned Hand, May 1944
 
Posts: 30668 | Location: UT | Registered: November 11, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Peace through
superior firepower
Picture of parabellum
posted Hide Post
Andrew Dice Clay once wondered out loud- given Japan's economic success after the war- if there was fertilizer in those bombs.
 
Posts: 107651 | Registered: January 20, 2000Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of SevenPlusOne
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by parabellum:
Andrew Dice Clay once wondered out loud- given Japan's economic success after the war- if there was fertilizer in those bombs.

It definitely lit a fire under their ass.


Do the people who say this also contest the bombing of Dresden?



"Ninja kick the damn rabbit"
 
Posts: 4620 | Location: Oklahoma | Registered: October 11, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
They probably never heard of Dresden.
 
Posts: 17251 | Location: Stuck at home | Registered: January 02, 2015Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Peace through
superior firepower
Picture of parabellum
posted Hide Post
Ah, yes. Dresden. I always think of Bomber Harris and Kurt Vonnegut when Dresden is mentioned.

No, the uneducated people whining about Hiroshima and Nagasaki seem never to mention Dresden, or even the firebombing of Tokyo. No, that would require a knowledge of historical events and a reasonable, objective perspective of the major events of WWII. All they know is "atomic bomb bad, America bad."

IIRC, the raids on Dresden were- after WWII- deemed by some as strategically unnecessary, and I happen to agree. Nothing was gained by roasting all those German civilians that late in the war. Whereas the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was demonstrably absolutely necessary to force Japan to surrender.
 
Posts: 107651 | Registered: January 20, 2000Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Author,
cowboy,
friend to all
posted Hide Post
We had let it be known that civilians would be safe from bombs in Dresden and folks went there believing they were safe. There was no military advantage to the bombing. Too bad someone did not have the balls to say no!!!
 
Posts: 2401 | Location: Riverton Wyoming | Registered: June 05, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
SIGforum's Berlin
Correspondent
Picture of BansheeOne
posted Hide Post
Dresden is pretty much the same case as Hiroshima if you debate just the rationale rather than the weapons used. First of all, you don't get to complain about your cities being bombed in a war of aggression you started and in which you already did the same, even if your own technical means didn't permit the same scale. Particulary not if you just answered the question whether you wanted total war with enthusiastic cheers the previous year. Now we can debate how representative propaganda events are in dictatorships where voicing dissent means mortal danger, but the basic moral equation holds true.

Second, both cities were transport hubs, housed war industries and military units. Again, we can debate the contemporary morals of designating the housing of workers in those industries as military targets themselves (this is different from Arthur Harris' concept of "moral bombing" to erode the resolve of the civilian population for supporting the war effort, which in my opinion failed; it has been suggested it actually hardened the resolve to stand up to those using such means of "air terror"). However, with the technical means of the day, there was hardly any way of discrimination between hitting factories on one block, and residential housing on the next, despite the American preference of daylight rights for "precision" attacks. "Precision" in this case meant hitting the right end of a city while trying to get home alive; I always get a chuckle out of "Memphis Belle" when they make a second run on their target through heavy flak to make sure they hit the airctaft plants, but not the schools next door.

It speaks of the collective conscience of democracies that uneasiness about the bombings was felt in the US and UK, particularly post-war. Truman seems to have thought, or maybe rather convinced himself, that Hiroshima was exclusively a military base when he okayed the target, and after Nagasaki spoke out against further nuclear attacks because he didn't want to "kill all those kids", probably under the impression of first reports of the effects coming in. In the UK, Arthur Harris and Bomber Command were the one service branch not really honored after the war, despite all the losses they had suffered. The erection of a statue in Harris' memory was still controversial in 1992, and to this day it has to be guarded against vandalism. Which whatever your take on him I'd argue is an inappropriate expression of overcompensation for wartime actions against a totalitarian aggressor country.

Both Hiroshima and Dresden have been used to relativate the national guilt of Japan and Germany versus the winners of the war. More unequivocally so in Japan; the West German attitude was tempered by communist East Germany fully embracing the war crime narrative against the Western Allies, and in the ideological confrontation of the Cold War the FRG couldn't very well support that. Still, both left- and rightwingers have always stuck to it, and as late as ca. 1980, I read in a thoroughly respectable West German history book about "the criminal air raid on Dresden for which there was no military justification", which being a kid I accepted as fact without question.

OTOH there is a recent trend of chearleaderdom among younger radical leftist in response to the radical right's attempts at appropriation. Around the 70th anniversary "(Bomber Harris) Do it again!" was a fashionable phrase among them, including by two ladies of the Pirate Party who garnered considerable public attention by displaying it on their bare chests (they got investigated for public incitement, slander and denigration of the memory of deceased, but eventually not charged on grounds of free speech). After the 75th annivcersary the wreaths laid at the memorial ceremony were set on fire overnight by unknown vandals who also left a grafitto saying "perpetrators are no victims".

quote:
Dresden's Destruction

The Misappropriation of a Tragedy


For years, the right wing in Germany has been trying to instrumentalize the World War II destruction of Dresden. With the 75th anniversary of the bombing now here, many in the city are fed up with the debate.

By Susanne Beyer, Katja Iken, Dirk Kurbjuweit, Ann-Katrin Müller, Klaus Wiegrefe und Steffen Winter

12.02.2020, 17:38 Uhr

Rubble. Everywhere. And the remnants of bombed-out buildings, as far as the eye can see. Only the corner towers remain of the once-majestic cathedral known as the Frauenkirche. Smoke, both black and white, is rising from the destruction, with a few fires still burning here and there. There’s a destroyed streetcar and, if you look closely enough, you can see people wandering through the rubble, most with their shoulders slumped. A mother dragging her two sons behind her passes a bench on which a dead couple is slumped. Two swastika flags hang from a building.

The music is atmospheric and the sound of the wind can be heard. Night falls, before then once again giving way to daylight - a blood-red sun, as though mortally wounded.

The images are from an overpowering representation of Dresden following the bombing raids on the city that took place on Feb. 13-15, 1945. It is a trip back in time on 3,000 square meters of polyester, created by the artist Yadegar Asisi. The circular, dark panorama is 107 meters long, 27 meters high and can be seen in the old Dresden gasometer.

According to the artist, the panorama shows a city "at its nadir, at a moment of paralysis, the zero hour." Asisi assembled his depiction of destroyed Dresden using old photos and film clips after having sent out an appeal to the population to send him material.

The panorama was inaugurated five years ago, on the 70th anniversary of Dresden’s annihilation. It was, from today’s perspective, a different era.

The fight for the city's memory is not over yet.

Back then, it seemed as though the vast majority of Germans had found a way to remember the Nazi era and the vast carnage of World War II their ancestors had triggered. It looked like they had managed to internalize the pain of Germany’s guilt and to recognize that Dresden’s destruction was a consequence of that culpability. The logical conclusion born from that approach to the city’s World War II history was clear: Never again. No Nazis. No war.

Even then, though, the anniversary of the bombing of Dresden, was consistently misappropriated by right-wing extremists to portray the residents of Dresden as the victims of Anglo-American "terror,” just as the Nazi propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels, did in the final months of the war. After the initial waves of British bombers, the Americans then showed up on Feb. 14 and 15. Around the turn of the millennium, a right-wing group called for a march on behalf of the victims, a protest that became something of an annual tradition. Indeed, according to German domestic security officials, the demonstrations developed into "one of the most important right-wing extremist events in Germany." In 2009, there were 6,500 participants, making it one of the largest gatherings of Nazis in all of Europe.

But a self-assured Dresden populace pushed back and made sure that the whole story was told on the day of commemoration – namely that Dresden wasn’t quite as innocent as the right-wing extremists wanted to believe.

Historian Mike Schmeitzner points out that the city was a stronghold for National Socialism in the state of Saxony, with 20,000 political functionaries working in Dresden by 1935. Moreover, "racial hygiene” had already been introduced as an academic field in Dresden by 1920, says Schmeitzner.

Without the crimes of the Nazis, there would have been no bombs and Dresden would not have been destroyed. Which means that the two significant anniversaries in the first weeks of this year – the Jan. 27 anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz and the commemoration of the bombing of Dresden – are intimately linked.

As he did for the Auschwitz anniversary, German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier is planning a speech to mark the Dresden commemoration. The challenge, just as it has been for presidents before him, will be that of finding the right tone – of recognizing the suffering of the victims while also acknowledging Germany’s guilt. No matter what, though, his speech will be just the next round in the ongoing battle for the historical interpretation of what happened in Dresden.

[...]

Thousands of civilians died in the hail of bombs, that is undeniable. And it also makes remembrance so challenging legitimate pain combined with deep culpability. The result is an equally complex approach to mourning.

That complexity can be illustrated using two examples: That of a politician from the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party and that of a poet.

For AfD co-leader Tino Chrupalla, 44, Feb. 13 is an important day. "I dont need to put it in my calendar. The appointment is inside me," he says, briefly pressing his right hand to his heart. Both his grandmother and father experienced the bombardment in person and spoke of it frequently, he says. Chrupalla says his family had fled to Dresden from Silesia, which is today part of Poland, and they spent the night of the bombardment cowering under a bridge. And they survived. His father was just five years old at the time, but still had memories of that night.

Chrupalla would like more to be done to remember the destruction of Dresden. "A special place of remembrance in Dresden is needed to commemorate the victims," he says. Thus far, there is merely a plaque in the ground. "I dont think thats enough, Chrupalla says, adding that he isnt planning on going to the event at which Steinmeier is speaking. He suspects the German president will use the ceremony to attack the AfD. "I would like to be allowed to speak so I could present our view of things."

Chrupalla says he's surprised that the number of victims has been adjusted downward in the past decades, with experts now believing that 25,000 people died in the bombings. He thinks that number is way off. "I believe there were around 100,000 victims," he says. The Red Cross wrote of 278,000 dead in 1948, he says. "My grandmother, my father and other witnesses told me that the streets were full before the attack and that there were mountains of corpses after that night," Chrupalla says. None of them believe the newer number of 25,000 dead, he says, which is why he has his doubts as well.

[...]

But how many people actually died in the bombing raids? Arriving at a number in Dresden is just as difficult as agreeing on the proper form of commemoration. The numbers are subject to manipulation just as they have been from the very beginning.

On March 15, 1945, the SS in Dresden reported to Berlin that 18,375 victims had been counted up to that point and that the final number was likely to rise to 25,000. A short time later, though, the Propaganda Ministry released new numbers to back up the idea of a "monstrous terror attack on civilians", as the Nazi newspaper Völkischer Beobachter would have it. Correspondents from neutral countries were not allowed to visit Dresden, but just days after the air raids, fantastical numbers, likely from Goebbels' team, began making the rounds.

Citing trusted sources in Berlin, the Svenska Morgonbladet in Stockholm reported 100,000 deaths on Feb. 17, with the Svenska Dagbladet reporting eight days later that the number was "closer to 200,000 than 100,000", citing official "Third Reich" sources.

The success of the propaganda campaign was astounding, as historian Matthias Neutzner has determined. By summer 1945, a significant share of both the German and Western public believed that there had been "several hundred thousand victims." That would have meant that more people were killed in Dresden than in the detonation of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima, where 80,000 lost their lives in the initial blast.

A falsified document was even in circulation, Daily Order No. 47 from the SS in Dresden, issued on March 22, 1945. It stated that there had been 202,040 victims, with the final total expected to rise to 250,000. Later, though, it was found that someone had added an extra zero to both numbers.

But the debate continued nonetheless. A number of theories were offered up to explain how so many people could have died in a city with a population of less than 600,000. Dresden was full of refugees from the east; the fire was so hot that many people were incinerated without a trace; in the chaos following the firestorm, huge numbers of bodies were secretly buried or interned in the ruins.

Dresden, though, was misappropriated by both the left and the right. Those seeking to criticize the U.S. for its reliance on air power, whether in Vietnam in the late 1960s or in Iraq in 2003, were more than happy to refer to Dresden as an example. The peace movement was likewise fond of citing the Dresden inferno in their Cold War protests against the nuclear arms race.

To others, meanwhile, Dresden seemed perfectly suited to counter Allied efforts at passing judgment on the crimes committed by Germany in postwar courtrooms. Others saw it as a way of relativizing German guilt for the Holocaust. The firestorm could be cited to show that the victors of World War II were no better than the losers. In 1964, the influential German weekly Die Zeit wrote that the attack on Dresden was "probably the largest mass murder in the history of humanity".

A Monument to the Future

DER SPIEGEL also jumped into the Dresden debate and in 1963, promoted the ideas of historical revisionist David Irving, who was later revealed to be a Holocaust denier. He called the bombing of Dresden a "senseless act of terror" and DER SPIEGEL also printed the inaccurate numbers he provided. Such absurd statistics found their way into the newsmagazine on several occasions, with the victim total of 200,000 still being printed as late as 2003. Other media outlets did the same.

By 2004, the mayor of Dresden, Ingolf Roßberg, had had enough of the debate over the victim numbers and the way the right-wing was increasingly using the uncertainty for its own purposes. He put together a commission of historians under the leadership of Rolf-Dieter Müller, with the groups final report being issued six years later. The academics had followed every possible lead in their effort to find the truth and had even tracked down the names of most of the victims. Their verdict: Up to 25,000 people had died in the Dresden air raids from Feb. 13-15, 1945. It is that number that the AfD politician Chrupalla contests.

[...]


https://www.spiegel.de/interna...8b-ba1c-5349832f75b9
 
Posts: 2419 | Location: Berlin, Germany | Registered: April 12, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Hound Dog:

Well, the Nagasaki bomb was the last atomic bomb on Tinian, ready to drop. Another would have been available later in the month. Then, more and more as production increased...


Hound Dog, please contact me at the address in my profile.
 
Posts: 15909 | Location: Eastern Iowa | Registered: May 21, 2000Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Author,
cowboy,
friend to all
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by parabellum:
Ah, yes. Dresden. I always think of Bomber Harris and Kurt Vonnegut when Dresden is mentioned.

No, the uneducated people whining about Hiroshima and Nagasaki seem never to mention Dresden, or even the firebombing of Tokyo. No, that would require a knowledge of historical events and a reasonable, objective perspective of the major events of WWII. All they know is "atomic bomb bad, America bad."

IIRC, the raids on Dresden were- after WWII- deemed by some as strategically unnecessary, and I happen to agree. Nothing was gained by roasting all those German civilians that late in the war. Whereas the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was demonstrably absolutely necessary to force Japan to surrender.


After the Japanese had surrendered 821 superfortresses left the Marianas to bomb the Tokyo area, General Spaatz wanted "as big a finale as posssible". Somehow that is forgotten in our history books.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Ed Fowler,
 
Posts: 2401 | Location: Riverton Wyoming | Registered: June 05, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
A few days ago, a fellow posted a pretty scholarly article on Facebook arguing that the bombings were necessary. He was heavily attacked and I jumped in to lend him a hand. I don't normally get into FB arguments to that extent, but this went on for days. My initial comment was:

The current generation of SJWs and their uninformed comments are horrifying. They actually believe that an aggressor nation that is stymied in its attempts to expand its ravenous empire through warfare - marked by incredible horrors visited on the civilian populations of its victims, as well as captured combatants - and which instituted warfare against its victors through treacherous sneak attacks - an aggressor which has murdered, raped, and pillaged through every one of the nations it conquered, when faced with the consequences of those misdeeds, has the right to expect that its defeat will be accomplished in the least destructive and most conciliatory manner possible.


__________________________
"Sooner or later, wherever people go, there's the law. And sooner or later, they find out that God's already been there." -- John Wayne as Chisum
 
Posts: 632 | Location: Kentucky | Registered: September 20, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of bigdeal
posted Hide Post
It's simply a lack of attachment to reality. People who argue the two atomic bombs should never have been dropped don't have a grip of the reality that Japan was prepared to fight to the last person alive if the US had to invade their mainland. And as mentioned above, the firebombing raids that would have had to precede such an invasion would have killed or maimed 10's if not 100's of thousands of Japanese. The war needed to be brought to a swift end, and those two bombs accomplished just that.

It's unfortunate in today's world that no one has any fear of the use of atomic bombs anymore making their use as a deterrent to war far less effective. I fear at some point, some group somewhere in the world is going to need to be reminded again of the destructive power of these weapons.


-----------------------------
Guns are awesome because they shoot solid lead freedom. Every man should have several guns. And several dogs, because a man with a cat is a woman. Kurt Schlichter
 
Posts: 33845 | Location: Orlando, FL | Registered: April 30, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Glorious SPAM!
Picture of mbinky
posted Hide Post




Less flash.




Iwo flag and the deaths...from the USMC museum. yea, we needed it.
 
Posts: 10635 | Registered: June 13, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Freethinker
Picture of sigfreund
posted Hide Post
As for winding down military efforts in anticipation that the war is going to end soon, I’m currently rereading the book Out of Nowhere: “A History of the Military Sniper” by Martin Pegler. In it he has a photograph of the grave marker of British Private George Price who was the last Allied soldier killed in World War I at 10:55 A.M., 11 November 1918—five minutes before the start of the armistice that ended the war. One of my great uncles was killed on 9 November, two days before the end.

There are many accounts of individual soldiers’ hunkering down and trying to avoid being the last one killed in conflicts when the end is rumored, but the overall operations don’t stop lest the enemy uses any breathers given them to renew their own efforts. That is usually a simple fact of military conflict.

Throughout history: You want the bombing, shooting, and fighting to stop? Well, then stop. It only takes one side to do it.




6.4/93.6

“Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.”
— Plato
 
Posts: 47410 | Location: 10,150 Feet Above Sea Level in Colorado | Registered: April 04, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
When you fall, I will be there to catch you -With love, the floor
posted Hide Post
While some complain the use was unnecessary, that's mainly because we the the first to develop a successful weapon. Germany was attempting to do the same but due to political issues under Hitler it never came to be. Any doubt they would have used them if they had the ability?


Richard Scalzo
Epping, NH

http://www.bigeastakitarescue.net
 
Posts: 5803 | Location: Epping, NH | Registered: October 16, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of SevenPlusOne
posted Hide Post



"Ninja kick the damn rabbit"
 
Posts: 4620 | Location: Oklahoma | Registered: October 11, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of SOTAR
posted Hide Post
I visited the National Air and Space Museum’s Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center where the Enola Gay is on display.

While there I talked with a docent. He related a story: A elderly Japanese man was visiting and when get to to the Enola Gay he got down on his knees and was crying. A docent had approached him the man said something close to: "I'm crying because I am so happy to see this plane, it saved me life, I was a Kamakazi pilot, had this plane not stopped the war I would have died a few days later"

Members of his kamikaze squadron where being sent out each day, his number handed been selected yet so it was just a matter of time before he was called.

-----------
I read a detailed book regarding the war in the pacific, how many soldiers died both US and Japanese on every island we captured. 30k, 40k, 60k etc... on each island. I have no doubt had we invaded Japan that would have been millions of more deaths.


__________________________
My door is always open to Sigforum members, and I'm always willing to help if I can.
 
Posts: 1037 | Location: portland, OR | Registered: October 29, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of SOTAR
posted Hide Post
The Japanese People are very strong, hard-working intelligent people. The folks that rebuilt their country after WW2 represent all of those traits. They have a good and strong culture, of doing the right thing right.

After WW2 they went back to work putting the efforts they made toward the war back into rebuilding their country.

One has to respect what they have done since then.

This from a boy who grew up in "metro" Detroit. Where all of my family, friends, and neighbors were UAW auto workers. Japanese was a 3 letter word. If a person bought a car, not from the big 3 they were traitors. If a person did they could expect it to be keyed.


------
The Korean War also helped Japan.


__________________________
My door is always open to Sigforum members, and I'm always willing to help if I can.
 
Posts: 1037 | Location: portland, OR | Registered: October 29, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Neel
posted Hide Post
My dad survived Pelilu, and Iwo Jima, I remember him telling me had it gone on to the mainland he knew he wouldn't have survived.


_________________________
NRA Patron Life Member
 
Posts: 559 | Location: Idaho Panhandle | Registered: May 26, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Moving cash
for money
posted Hide Post
The Atomic weapons were used. I learned a new term last year, counter factual history, used by an author to describe alternative history. I think there is a better argument to be made that Nagasaki was unneeded, but once more that is not reality. Nagasaki in any case was not the primary target, Kokura was. Check the history for details, there were multiple factors involved in Nagasaki being bombed, but it was designated the secondary target. And was a major port and munitions production hub.

Hiroshima was also a valid Military target. It was the Headquarters of the 2nd General Army tasked with the defense of Southern Japan. As well it was a Headquarters for the 59th Field Army and two Divisions. It was also a major port, with an industrial base. So a large civilian population would be present.

Except for the USA and USSR no country had the space to separate military bases from civilian populations. And it was impossible for anyone to have industrial production or port facilities divorced from population centers.

So what about a blockade? This was in fact the USN’s proposal. But the US Army felt it would take too long and support for such lengthy operation would force its termination. The Army advocated landings and a ground campaign, which the Navy thought would generate so many casualties that would cause a loss of support forcing termination of that campaign.

Interesting if amphibious landings had occurred that might not have prevent the atomic attacks. There were plans to use the atomic bombs as part of pre-amphibious assault bombardment.

Additionally there was the reality of the USSR breaking their treaty with Japan and attacking on 9 August. The casualty count of an invasion on Hokkaido by the USSR would have been catastrophic for all involved. So even if the Western Allies did not invade Southern Japan the toll would have been bloodier than the atomic bombings.

So yes the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed fewer people than the alternatives.




"When in danger or in doubt, run in circles scream and shout" R.I.P. R.A.H.
Ooga Chakka Hooga Hooga Ooga Chakka Hooga Hooga
NRA Basic Rifle Instructor
Red Cross First Aid/CPR/AED Adult/Child/Infant Instructor
Red Cross Wilderness First Aid Instructor
 
Posts: 9912 | Location: Jawjah | Registered: December 30, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3 4  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    The Atomic Bomb Saved Millions—Including Japanese

© SIGforum 2024