Wow...you have no concept of events or world history.
Nagasaki and Hiroshima were acts of war. Japan attacked Pearl Harbor 7 December 1941. Look it up you might actually learn something. To end the war with Japan the U.S. had the option of dropping a couple of bombs on Japan or conducting a full scale invasion that would have cost countless American lives. Some estimates are upwards of a million men. The only logical option was to drop a couple little bombs on Japan. Big deal. Japan was warned of the bombings and given a chance to surrender. They refused both times. Again...people died...big deal. War does that you know.
And I could not care less. We owe them nothing as a result of that.
Now on to the events of 11 September 2001. Muslim vermin attacked America in a cowardly manner. Said attack was not an act of war...it was an act of terrorism. Innocent people died as a result.
9/11 and the A bombs over the two Japanese cities are in different time frames and are completely different.
It would have been so much better if Japan at that time had not wanted to rule most of that region.
Their cruelty to prisoners of war and civilians is well known and documented.
It would have cost a million allied lives and perhaps that many in Japanese troops and civilians for the allies to invade the Japanese home islands.
While we are sorry for the civilian casualties of the A bomb it really was the only option.
Japan is of course today a good and moral country.
9/11 was carried out by terrorists who hated America and the western way of life. The victims were civilians utterly innocent of anything.
Its obvious a great city that had suffered such terrible carnage and loss of life would remember them from time to time ?
Terrible analogy. Try again.
Why do you single out Hiroshima and Nagasaki anyway? Two raids in a declared war the United States did not even start? Those were not even close to the deadliest air raids of World War 2. If you add them together they still aren't. They weren't the deadliest battles either. A million people were killed at Stalingrad alone. So why single out Hiroshima and Nagasaki? That just seems laughable to me.
Why do you find it so hard to understand; Americans blow everything out of proportion.
Over here in the UK we dealt with decades of Irish terrorism, repeated bombings by the IRA resulting in many innocent deaths. American citizens raised cash to support this terrorist organisation, yet we carried on our way of life without making a major drama out of it. You can imagine the British bemusement to the American OTT reaction - it was as if no country had ever suffered a terrorist attack before. Ridiculous, but so American. Just look at the appalling way your police and fbi mis-handled the Boston bombing. Laughable.
Your relative youth and lack of historical perspective makes it very important that you read and re-read the answers your question has elicited.
Not entirely your fault-so much time has passed and people are different.
It doesn't.
"Not to seem insulting to 9/11."
Of course you are. Since you are a conservative, you marginalize the tragedy and terror, you joke about the bloodshed, and you make light of the chaos and deaths.
I understand its sad. People died.
But it just seems like America is so dramatic about it. How do you think Hiroshima and Nagasaki felt when we killed 100,000 of their population and left the others to suffer from radiation sickness.
The death toll from 9/11 was around 3000 and 6000 non fatal injuries (according to Wikipedia)
That's 9000 people compared to 100,000.
That just seems laughable to me.
Not to seem insulting to 9/11. I know people who died that day so I'm not trying to condescend their death in any way.
I just don't understand how we can completely blow that out of proportion compared to 100,000 deaths.
