Compare: Hiroshima to Terrorism

[budullewraagh]

My intention was to illustrate that the Japanese were worlds away from being able to build nuclear weapons, however since you mention it I seriously doubt there could have been millions of casualties in a mainland invasion at that time.

well, i'm not so sure of that. it's not so hard to make a nuke, especially if you have a government's support. in fact, you and i could do it, although it would be a bit illegal and perhaps a bit difficult because of big brother watching, but reactors have been built by amatures.

 

as for millions of casualties, the united states' military was large enough, but it would have taken awhile. the invasion would be normandy except with civilian casualties everywhere and an infinate number of japanese reinforcements

[Thales]

well' date=' i'm not so sure of that. it's not so hard to make a nuke, especially if you have a government's support. in fact, you and i could do it, although it would be a bit illegal and perhaps a bit difficult because of big brother watching, but reactors have been built by amatures.

 

as for millions of casualties, the united states' military was large enough, but it would have taken awhile. the invasion would be normandy except with civilian casualties everywhere and an infinate number of japanese reinforcements[/quote']

 

Thankfully building a nuclear device is not easy. Its principles are relatively simple, yes, but getting the uranium/plutonium, enriching it to weapons grade, as well as physically assembling the detonation devices in such a way as to trigger a chain reaction, is not.

 

I don't think the united states military ran into the millions, nor do I see why the Japanese would have infinite reinforcements. IMO the US dropped the bomb for two reasons, one was to end the war. The second was to prove to the world, beyond doubt, that they not only possessed the bomb but would use it, a principle which layed the foundation of the 'nuclear deterent' which plays a central role to US foreign policy to this day.

 

Speaking of Big Brother, I wonder if we have any vistors from the pentagon...if so, hello Mr/Mrs Spy

[Sayonara]

well, i'm not so sure of that. it's not so hard to make a nuke, especially if you have a government's support. in fact, you and i could do it, although it would be a bit illegal and perhaps a bit difficult because of big brother watching, but reactors have been built by amatures.

No, we really really couldn't.

Japan didn't have time to flick through catalogues and wait for the parts to arrive, and they certainly did not have the required facilities. I'm not sure they even have them now, although if they never bothered to develop them it's understandable why.

 

 

as for millions of casualties, the united states' military was large enough, but it would have taken awhile. the invasion would be normandy except with civilian casualties everywhere and an infinate number of japanese reinforcements

By this time in the war the Japanese were virtually defenseless. Allied planes were able to fly right over the mainland, bombing with impunity. Given the willingness of the US forces to kill Japanese soldiers in the most grotesque ways imaginable on the islands, whatever reinforcements Japan had left on the mainland would have been demoralised and short-lived.

[budullewraagh]

No, we really really couldn't.

radium, beryllium and uranium are not difficult to obtain. the former two are used in the neutron gun, while the latter of course is the fissionable stuff. of course, we would need to isolate the 233 and 235 isotopes, but if we had a government supporting us, we could. also, one could go the david hahn way with neutron bombardment of thorium 232, then getting 233, then protactinium 233, then uranium 233.

 

By this time in the war the Japanese were virtually defenseless.

remember that oath most japanese took to protect the emperor?

[Sayonara]

radium, beryllium and uranium are not difficult to obtain. the former two are used in the neutron gun, while the latter of course is the fissionable stuff. of course, we would need to isolate the 233 and 235 isotopes, but if we had a government supporting us, we could. also, one could go the david hahn way with neutron bombardment of thorium 232, then getting 233, then protactinium 233, then uranium 233.

Firstly, "you and I could", which is what you originally said, is not the same as "we and government sponsorship could". It's also barely relevant when you consider that the technology and infrastructure of most countries has moved on considerably since the 1940s, as has the availability of information on such subjects as the construction of nuclear weapons and the preparations required for such a task.

 

Secondly, it's the quantities required that makes it difficult to obtain the materials you need. A country that has expended most of its viable resources in a war, is hemmed in by hostile forces, and has virtually no active allies left is not going to be able to suddenly produce these quantities out of a magic hat. And definitely not enough to wage nuclear war.

 

Thirdly, again, the expertise and equipment were simply not there. You can't thow up a working nuclear bomb factory overnight, especially if you have enemy forces blowing the crap out of anything that looks like a piece of your war engine.

 

 

remember that oath most japanese took to protect the emperor?

Even assuming that all the Japanese took that oath and intended to see it through, women, elders, children and all, what does that have to do with Japan's inability to defend its skies?

[budullewraagh]

Firstly, "you and I could", which is what you originally said

it is completely possible, but we would need to spend a bit on the equipment required to isolate certain isotopes.

 

Secondly, it's the quantities required that makes it difficult to obtain the materials you need.

pitchblende, anyone?

 

You can't thow up a working nuclear bomb factory overnight

but you can throw together a bomb in about a half hour. the only possible problem is seperating isotopes.

 

Even assuming that all the Japanese took that oath and intended to see it through, women, elders, children and all, what does that have to do with Japan's inability to defend its skies?

nothing to do with japan's inability to defend its skies (although it had plenty of anti-aircraft weapons). it's the prospect of millions of japanese fighting and dying for their emperor.

[Sayonara]

it is completely possible, but we would need to spend a bit on the equipment required to isolate certain isotopes.

I really don't think that's the only problem we'd come across to be honest. The whole prospect of being hunted down by the NSA or what have you isn't terribly appealing.

I think you are attempting to use the word "possible" in place of "feasible". Considering the number of people who would have a vested interest in deploying such devices, the distinct lack of rogue nuclear weapons blowing parts of the world up over the past 60 years is a pretty good indicator that it is not practical to try and take the "home made" route.

 

 

pitchblende, anyone?

That's not really the ideal solution if you're intending to turn an already-raging war around, is it? You need to locate sufficient quantities, hold that location, transport it to wherever you need it to go, and perform the requisite refinement processes.

This is - remember - for a country that is under attack from the air, and has expended most of its trade and diplomacy options, critical resources, military personnel and vehicles, and funds.

 

 

but you can throw together a bomb in about a half hour. the only possible problem is seperating isotopes.

No, those are not the only possible problems. Some others are:

- Not having the people with the requisite skills and/or knowledge available,

- Lacking the machining finesse required to make a device that will actually go off,

- Lacking the funds and trade routes required to get hold of parts or tools that your country simply is not capable of fabricating,

- Not having sufficient safety procedures to avoid detonating it ahead of time, or protecting staff from the dangerous materials involved,

- Having the work subverted or sabotaged by enemy agents,

- Having your facility pounded to dust by an enemy air raid,

 

...and so on.

 

 

nothing to do with japan's inability to defend its skies (although it had plenty of anti-aircraft weapons). it's the prospect of millions of japanese fighting and dying for their emperor.

You really need to clarify that. I originally asked you why there would be millions of casualties, and you've moved from "infinite reinforcements" to vague allusions about oaths that are - in the face of war - going to be of little practical value since most Japanese citizens would regard them as they do any other part of their formal societal tradition.

[budullewraagh]

you know, the government didn't know what david hahn was doing, and he was doing it in his back yard in a suburban neighborhood.

 

it is possible to obtain significant quantities of pitchblende, but i won't argue.

 

has anybody heard of that lost german submarine that was bringing uranium-235 to japan? it was lost somewhere between india and indonesia, but that would have changed the war, now wouldn't it have? all it takes is a bullet of U-235 and some explosives to shoot it at a U-235 sphere, or a beryllium/polonium sphere with some plutonium 239 and uranium 235. the latter would be much more difficult, but the former would be quite easy.

 

Lacking the machining finesse required to make a device that will actually go off,

it's very simple. see above.

 

Lacking the funds and trade routes required to get hold of parts or tools that your country simply is not capable of fabricating,

think german sub.

Not having sufficient safety procedures to avoid detonating it ahead of time, or protecting staff from the dangerous materials involved,

just try not to blow up the explosive that triggers the U235 bullet to shoot down the shaft and you're set.

 

You really need to clarify that.

i thought i did. most japanese swore to defend their emperor.

 

i will substantiate my claims:

http://tigger.cc.uic.edu/~rjensen/invade.htm

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/giangrec.htm

[Sayonara]

you know, the government didn't know what david hahn was doing, and he was doing it in his back yard in a suburban neighborhood.

True, but then he wasn't trying to wage atomic war.

 

 

it is possible to obtain significant quantities of pitchblende, but i won't argue.

Again, possible != feasible. Especially in the case of Japan in the final days of WWII, which is what we are discussing.

 

 

has anybody heard of that lost german submarine that was bringing uranium-235 to japan? it was lost somewhere between india and indonesia, but that would have changed the war, now wouldn't it have?

But it didn't. The submarine was lost. Even if it had reached Japan, it would not have supplied them with the resources required to wage nuclear war.

Remember the original comment that sparked this off was "If the war between America and Japan had dragged on eventually the Japanese might have developed atomic weapons of their own", the inference being that this would have evened the odds - which is simply not true.

Even with an arsenal of nuclear weapons that came from nowhere, by that time the Japanese would have had no way to deploy them in a tactically useful fashion.

 

 

i thought i did. most japanese swore to defend their emperor.

i will substantiate my claims:

http://tigger.cc.uic.edu/~rjensen/invade.htm

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/giangrec.htm

The issue I have is that you are taking the oath to protect the emperor a lot more literally than the Japanese themselves, in order to create the impression that millions of combatants would have appeared from nowhere.

The projected Japanese losses are not so much a reflection of the number of Japanese combatants that would be intentionally countering the US invasion, but rather an approximation of how much human damage the invasion would have to do in order to succeed.

[budullewraagh]

Even if it had reached Japan, it would not have supplied them with the resources required to wage nuclear war.

you ready for this sequence of events?

here they are:

-sub arrives in japan.

-on the bloody DOCK, nuclear physicists take the U235, make a ball out of it and a bullet. some soldiers cart over a crate of trinitrotoluene, a shell and a shaft. they assemble it there.

[Sayonara]

And then they take on the world?

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

With a nuclear bomb you can scare a lot of people out of their pants, can't you?

If they buried it on the beach all of our soldiers would have been vaporized. It would be a disaster. We might be able to still take them, but we'd have to nuke them back. We couldn't tell if they had more of them and where they would have them, so we couldn't risk invading onto a nuclear minefield.

[LucidDreamer]

Speaking of Big Brother' date=' I wonder if we have any vistors from the pentagon...if so, hello Mr/Mrs Spy [/quote']

 

I bet we do now.

[Sayonara]

With a nuclear bomb you can scare a lot of people out of their pants' date=' can't you?

If they buried it on the beach all of our soldiers would have been vaporized. It would be a disaster. We might be able to still take them, but we'd have to nuke them back. We couldn't tell if they had more of them and where they would have them, so we couldn't risk invading onto a nuclear minefield.[/quote']

They didn't have a nuclear bomb.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Apparently you have forgotten what was posted before that. budellerwagh says they might just have gotten a bomb from the nuclear sub. You say "And then they take on the world?" like you think one bomb wouldn't save them. Then I tell you that you sure could defend yourself with it.

We're talking what MIGHT HAVE happened.

[Sayonara]

Apparently you have forgotten what was posted before that. budellerwagh says they might just have gotten a bomb from the nuclear sub. You say "And then they take on the world?" like you think one bomb wouldn't save them. Then I tell you that you sure could defend yourself with it.

We're talking what MIGHT HAVE happened.

What's this "we"?

You clearly have no clue what budullewraagh and I have been talking about, and just scanned the last couple of replies.

[atinymonkey]

has anybody heard of that lost german submarine that was bringing uranium-235 to japan? it was lost somewhere between india and indonesia' date=' but that would have changed the war, now wouldn't it have? [/quote']

 

You are talking about U-234, which was Germanys largest U-boat. It's destination was Japan and the cargo included some form of Uranium as well as some scientists. It also included two fighter planes, in storage. It could be postulated that the Uranium and scientists were going to Japan to continue research on nuclear technology, but they were not going to get very far with a small batch of Uranium Oxide. I think it attacts attention due to the number of the boat and the Uranium number. It's an odd coincidence.

 

The u-boat is not lost, it surrendered in 1945 and was used by the Americans for testing. It was sunk during testing in 1947.

 

http://uboat.net/boats/u234.htm

 

The folk tales of a lost Nazi sub are apocryphal. Quite a few were missing due to the nature of a Sub at war, but few now remain unaccounted for. The ones from the end of the war have all been found.

 

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1178290/posts

 

All of which has nothing to do with the fact neither Germany nor it's allies were anywere near developing an atomic bomb. The jet engine, advanced rocketry, unmanned guidence systems, advanced submarines and all number of other side projects but no good results from the nuclear programme.

[Sayonara]

And it's not like they could just download a copy of the Nuker's Handbook and place an order for parts with bigbooms.net.

[budullewraagh]

i dont know if you were implying this, but it's easy to replace the cation in uranium oxide.

[Sayonara]

I suspect he was referring to the number of weapons they could produce from their cargo.

[Misodoctakleidi]

Well' date=' I have some reading to do. I base my statement on Marx on his life.

He wanted war[/quote']

No, he didn't.

and revolution

Wanting the liberation of opressed people makes him a loser?

He was a racist

No, he wasn't.

and anti-Semite (even though he had Jewish heritage)

No, he wasn't.

 

His ideas sound good and I know that Capitalism has major drawbacks. But, capitalism will never die because it is in the nature of man. People work for themselves and their family first. No revolution or war needed.

I preume, then, you can explain why capitalism has only existed for around the last 400 years or so.

 

Speaking of communism, Stalin committed the worst atrocities of WWII. The reason I picked Hiroshima is the similarity with terrorist events (very sudden, no warning) and is looked upon very differently between Americans and Japanese.

Why did that spring to mind when "speaking of communism?"

[budullewraagh]

Speaking of communism, Stalin

 

stalin didn't represent communism accurately.

 

His ideas sound good and I know that Capitalism has major drawbacks. But, capitalism will never die because it is in the nature of man. People work for themselves and their family first. No revolution or war needed.

 

unrestricted free market capitalism is always doomed to fail. see my challenge in the debate forum. i would be pleased to debate this with you.

[john5746]

No' date=' he didn't.

 

Wanting the liberation of opressed people makes him a loser?

 

No, he wasn't.

 

No, he wasn't.

 

 

I preume, then, you can explain why capitalism has only existed for around the last 400 years or so.

 

 

Why did that spring to mind when "speaking of communism?"[/quote']

 

Yes he did, Yes he was, Yes he was

 

He was a loser because of his life.

His philosophy isn't working anywhere, except China, and they are utilizing capitalism to reform their economy.

 

Capitalism:

An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.

 

This word may not be very old, but people have owned their own property and worked for themselves since the dawn of civilization. This is why it works, people work primarily to improve their lives, secondarily(maybe) to improve society.

 

"Speaking of communism" I was trying to get back on the subject.

[budullewraagh]

socialism worked in native american societies, you know.

 

if you support capitalism, i challenge you to a debate that has already been posted. check the debates forum.

[Misodoctakleidi]

Yes he did, Yes he was, Yes he was

I don't know where you get that impression from but take the word of someone who has read alot more Marx than you, you're wrong.

 

He was a loser because of his life.

His philosophy isn't working anywhere, except China, and they are utilizing capitalism to reform their economy.

I don't think you know what his "philosophy" was, do you? His philosophy was Dialectical Materialism so I don't know how you could describe it as "working" or "not working."

 

Capitalism:

An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.

Which is only true of the last 400 years or so.

 

This word may not be very old, but people have owned their own property and worked for themselves since the dawn of civilization.

No, in the first societies property was communaly owned. You seem to have introduced a new "concept" here which wasn't in your definition, this wishy-washy "working for themselves" rhetoric.

 

This is why it works, people work primarily to improve their lives, secondarily(maybe) to improve society.

well aren't you quite the philosopher, I think you'll find that socio-economic systems a little more complex than that.

 

"Speaking of communism" I was trying to get back on the subject.

You didn't though.