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