Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site utai.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsri!utai!seshadr
From: seshadr@utai.UUCP (Ven Seshadri)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: America-bashing (use of atomic bomb)
Message-ID: <655@utai.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 12-Aug-85 14:46:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: utai.655
Posted: Mon Aug 12 14:46:15 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 12-Aug-85 15:48:24 EDT
References: <3268@drutx.UUCP> <10615@rochester.UUCP> <1733@mnetor.UUCP> <2326@watcgl.UUCP>
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Lines: 19

>  1. apparently the US joint chiefs estimated US deaths at 50,000 if
>     the war was fought to a close with conventional weapons.  Depending
>     on who you are saving 50,000 american lives in return for killing
>     200,000 japanese lives might seem like a good trade but it is not
>     true that more lives would have been lost without the bomb.

	Just a point: General MacArthur estimated that a conventional assault
on the Japanese islands would result in the deaths of 1,000,000 American
soldiers (my source is the TV series "American Caesar"). Note that this 
count includes ONLY American servicemen. Remember that there would also be
approximately 500,000 British troops involved in the invasion (source:
"Triumph and Tragedy" by Winston Churchill) as well as a large number of
troops from the Soviet Union. Thus I think that your claim of trading
50,000 American lives for 200,000 Japanese lives is somewhat incorrect.


Ven Seshadri
University of Toronto
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory