>>1374488
>you
My country was on the loser side of WW2, so we wouldn't have nuked anybody.
But to answer your question, yes without Pearl Harbor they would have gotten nuked anyway, because Pearl Harbor wasn't the only thing that started the war. The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was just part of said war, not some direct retaliation for Pearl Harbor and Pearl Harbor only.
If you want a direct retaliation for Pearl, look at the Doolittle Raid, which was targeted at military installation.
>Not because it made less sense than military targets?
Look up Operation Cherry Blossoms at Night, they planned to Bomb the US mainland with biological weapons in hopes to spread disease. And it's not like they were shy about committing war crimes in places they did have access to like China and the Philippines.
>to do that as the first move
What? Strategic bombing of Japan didn't begin in any significant capacity until mid 1944. So I'm not sure why you're implying that it was the "fist move" for the US

Also the nukes being singled out like this just because they're more "spectacular" is also kinda stupid if you think about it. The firebombing of Tokyo prior had a much higher death toll for instance.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/news/

Thread:

FOXTV Says Wildfires Look Like A-Bombs