>>While I don't doubt Japan or Germany would have used nuclear weapons if available I have never read anything putting them near completing a viable bomb.
>
>I saw it on the history channel. Don't have a link handy, but I'm sure one of us could find a source.

While I definately won't argue for the 3rd reich, I have doubts that the atom bomb would have been used.
In WW1 gas was used on the battle field.
In WW2 the germans refrained from using chemical *bombs* both when they seemed to have the upper hand
(during and after Dünkirchen, when they bombed London with conventional bombs)
and when it was clear that they would loose (when V1 and V2 delivered still conventional payloads).
It was discussed, but was decided against - at least to some sources I read, but cannot link to.

Just to be perfectly clear - I am not doubting the use of gas or the Holocaust itself. That is another topic.

Germany was researching atom power - but nowhere near the US budget and they were not close
- which is meant only as a historical fact, not a hindsight argument.

It also is my personal opinion,
that war from the greco/roman times on became more a matter of figthing between soldiers,
as armies more and more fought against other armies. Towns still were sacked -
while in pre-medieval times most inhabitants were amongst the defenders on the walls or supporting those,
with the advent of long range weapons coupled with explosives making chain mail and walls obsolete
there came a time when civilian losses were the least when measured/calculated as *percentages*.

That trend shifted massively in WW2 and afterwards.
One of the side effects of this reversal *coupled* with the gigantic military imbalance we have today
IMHO is the trend of the weaker opponents to resort to guerilla warfare and terrorist attack.

Again, clearly not condoning things like 9/11, but in my eyes there is a correlation bordering on cause.

Similar to a kid or small untrained females seldom to have a chance without weapons
against adversaries of similar age with twice their mass when figthing "fairly"/weaponless.

@John:
citing the relatively small mass and dimensions of those bombs clearly is not relevant -
the imbalance of destruction caused by single digit flight groups compared to large groups with conventional bombs was.

regards

thomas