I thought the proportion of civilian deaths to combatants was still going up even since WWII.

Nick

>It was also common to target civilian facilities at that time. War was even worse than it is today (difficult to imagine). Remember the London Blitz?
>
>This is very interesting:
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bomb#Bombing_of_civilian_targets
>
>
>>>>>Would you rather have the NAZIs and the Japanese won?
>>>>>We already know that war is horrible, but that war had to be faught, and I'm glad the good guys won.
>>>>
>>>>OK for Nazi's but, we don't know what'll be done if Japans won.
>>>>
>>>>"Good guys" ? Who're good guys? Some guys killed thousands of civillian with two bombs? Some guys bombed civillians in the Berlin?
>>>>Everytime who won the war they're being good guys. Because the others cannot talk after war...
>>>
>>>Metin. Please don't give me any of your twisted morals. You don't know what your talking about.
>>>
>>>You know what happened in China, Korea and the S. Posific under Japnese occupation? Go read!
>>
>>
>>There were plenty of atrocities to go around. "The Rape of Nanking" is one of the most disturbing books I ever read. That Japan is still so distrusted throughout Asia more than 60 years later says a lot. Just say "comfort women" and people still know exactly what you're talking about. And in a sense they were the lucky ones -- well, maybe not really - compared to the men, citizens as well as soldiers, who were summarily shot or decapitated by the Japanese army.
>>
>>Should we have dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? That remains an open question, and one Americans remain ambivalent about to the point of being uncomfortable discussing. FWIW I think, given the circumstances, Truman made the right decision, even though it's something I hope the world never sees again. The Japanese seemed determined to never surrender, to fight on to the last soldier, so lives were saved as well as extinguished.