Thread: Nuklear bomb
View Single Post
  #3  
Old 09-02-2010, 12:40 AM
Madfish Madfish is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 423
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dozer_EAF19 View Post
Madfish, I think you misunderstand. No-one is asking for nuclear bombs in Il-2 or SoW. I think everyone who's posted in this thread has been very clear how pointless it would be to have that! I never wanted nuclear bombs either, but you seem to think I did.
Hey, the opening post clearly says that along with numerous people biting the bait and actually defending the use of atomic weapons. Further down the thread (I read all of it but forgot some parts) the request was repeated again with people repeating the almost same statements.
Sorry for mis-understanding if you actually argumented against the use and implementations of such weapons. I interpreted it differently.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Splitter View Post
Does anyone care why the ship was carrying mustard gas? Or is it just more convenient to believe that the US was planning on using it offensively.
Sadly I don't have much information on it and my browser is suffocating in tabs (over 35x open at the moment). Do you have any links? What I found is that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ha...#Bari_incident . It does kind of hint to an offensive use, especially given the nasty bombings later. So it might have been a good thing that the ship was destroyed there - or what makes you think that shipping the freight over there was meant to dismantle them in Italy, a very risky territory which had been occupied a little earlier?

Quote:
If you want to check out a really interesting/weird/far fetched weapon, google the "bat bomb" (hint: it has nothing to do with sexually ambiguous men in tights ).
Tabs issue again... I know that the bat bomb was supposed to be a glider bomb with a radar head. Was it real? I never read too much about it. I'd appreciate a good link on it and by the way, there are other good search engines than goo** ;P


Quote:
Tokyo was never a target for the nukes, btw. The US did not want to kill the emperor. If the Emperor had died, Japan would never have surrendered.
I basically said that, didn't I? Sorry if it was written in a confusing way, English is not my native language.
I didn't want to mention the emperor though because that might lead to another debate if it would have brought down the country completely, throwing it into chaos, or if it would have led to a series of relentless attacks until the last man instead. Guessing that they saw the kamikaze I'd say they assumed the later. But we don't know, or wouldn't know. So I was just sticking to the weather and industry ;P

Last edited by Madfish; 09-02-2010 at 12:55 AM. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote