Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-1824272-20140606055204/@comment-1584932-20140804183406

Krescentwolf wrote: 200.185.219.102 wrote: Meh, what is this? Do you guys realize that there is no difference between conventional bombs to nuclear bombs, right? To be honest, even in size, its cheaper just make 9999 napalm bombs that will make more damage than a nuke instead making a single nuke. In the second war a single raid on Tokyo killed more people than the two nukes, burned about 40% of the city and didnt required years of research and development to do.

"b-but radiation" yeh well, fun fact: normal bombs are made of radioactive material too; it was largely used in iraq.

Stop living in a bubble. The Belkan war was a far more modern war than our WW2, as evidenced by the planes and tech used. A modern nuke is 10s of times more powerful than the Hiroshima nuke... with hundreds of kilotons of payload... depending on the bomb.

The Tokyo Fire Raids were so overwhelmingly damaging because A) Napalm is nasty stuff, and B) over 80% of Tokyo was made from wooden buildings at the time.

The effect of of seven (yes 7) nuclear bombs is damaging enough to the landscape, but the nuclear bomb has an even greater ability to terrorize people's minds...

Just seeing ONE nuclear explosion caused one of the members of the Enola Gay to go 'Oh my god what have we done?' Now imagine seeing SEVEN go off.

C) Large portion of Tokyo is poorly organzied (even after reconstructed), too dense for any valid fire protection measures (I used to visit Tokyo so I can comfirm this).

D) It was windy when Grand Naplam Purge took place.

From perspective of a Chinese, it served Japs right (as Scorching Valentine's Day of Dresden served those Huns right from perspective of a Soviet). But from perspective of homo sapiens...well, it's never something to be proud of.