/jp/ - Otaku Culture

[Anonymous No.]

Hiroshima?

[Anonymous No.]

op is buttowned and hurtangery

[Anonymous No.]

onwed buttangry, look, I'm too bored to do this, I went all out on the guy earlier, we can try this again tomorrow, aight?

[Anonymous No.]

ITT: mad japs

[Anonymous No.]

Yeah sorry my friend, after the earlier ordeal you need to cross troll on at least two other boards to get a rise out of us.

[Anonymous No.]

25 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE "ATOMIC BOMB"

1. Is there any evidence that a thermonuclear device exploded over Hiroshima in 1945?

No, absolutely none. According to leading historians and physicists, the thermonuclear bomb was not invented until years after the supposed detonation over Japanese territory.

2. Is there any evidence that a uranium-based "atom bomb" was ever dropped onto Nagasaki, Japan?

Absolutely not. While many historians and journalists made this claim in the late 40's and early 50's, everyone now agrees that no such bomb ever exploded over Nagasaki. Yet there are some who still stubbornly cling to this supposed "fact."

3. What are the materials needed to make an "atom bomb?"

Uranium-238 and plutonium-239.

4. Aren't these materials radioactive?

Highly so. Anybody who attempts to use these materials is endangering his/her life.

5. Is it likely that nuclear scientists in the 40's would be handling uranium and plutonium?

This would be highly unlikely. Very few people felt so threatened by the Japanese to be willing to risk their lives on a theoretical chance of a superbomb that could end a far-away war a little sooner.

[Anonymous No.]

AMERICAN'S

pearl harbor?

[Anonymous No.]

6. Aren't there witnesses to the atomic bomb in Hiroshima?

The only "witnesses" that could possibly survived this supposed explosion would have been blinded by the intense flash of light, so their testimony is quite unreliable and contradictory.

7. According to conventional historians, was the uranium bomb tested before supposedly being dropped over Hiroshima?

No. There was no testing whatsoever of a uranium bomb in Alamogordo or anywhere else before Hiroshima.

8. Isn't that strange?

Yes. Typical weapons are tested for months and years before deployment; there is no other weapon that according to the accepted "facts" deployed before any testing whatsoever.

9. How many witnesses are there for all of the atomic tests allegedly occuring during the fifties and sixties?

Very few, perhaps a few hundred, who claimed to have seen them.

10. What did the General Advisory Committee of the Atomic Energy Commission say in their report of October 30, 1949?

They recommended strongly against the development of what they called the "Super Bomb," which is simply a thermonuclear bomb. They said that "A super bomb might become a weapon of genocide."

[Anonymous No.]

itt, ryan still can't get over his butthurt

[Anonymous No.]

>>6809210

GERMANSS

Dresden?

[Anonymous No.]

11. Isn't this four years after Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Yes. Obviously development of nuclear weapons occurred well after their supposed implementation in 1945.

12. Is radioactivity dangerous?

Everything is radioactive to some extent.

13. What was the triggering method of the bomb that supposedly was dropped on Hiroshima?

According to the standard historical accounts, it used a gun-assembly trigger.

14. Wasn't the gun-assembly method of triggering abandoned in the design stage?

Yes; according to these same sources the gun method would not work with uranium-derived plutonium-239 because some of the plutonium-239 absorbs a neutron to become plutonium-240, which undergoes spontaneous fission, all before supercriticality, causing a premature and very small explosion that is unusable for the very purpose that it was supposedly designed for!

15. How do conventional historians rectify these two "facts?"

They don't even attempt to.

[Anonymous No.]

16. How many books have been written about the atomic bomb?

Many hundreds, as well as thousands of articles in magazines and newspapers.

17. Why was Hiroshima "targeted," and not Tokyo?

Perhaps because no one had heard of Hiroshima, and no one knew anyone from there. It would be far more difficult to claim that Tokyo was bombed than Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In fact, most world maps from before "World War Two" do not even mention these cities at all.

18. How does Japan benefit from the "atom bomb" story?

As a direct result of the "war," Japan has received billions of dollars worth of US aid for its defense. Japan has essentially no defense budget, so it can pour resources through MITI into defeating the US economically, all while playing on the emotions of anti-"nuke" activists about the "horrors" of nuclear weapons.

19. Wow, I never thought of that. How else do the Japanese benefit from this story?

The Japanese now own major Hollywood studios, from which many war movies are produced. Also, they play upon our sympathy for the supposed "atom bomb" to blind us to the fact that this foreign nation had taken over our semiconductor industry, many California banks and practically the entire state of Hawaii.

This is all a part of the Japanese plot to take over the world. According to the "Protocols of the Elders of the Orient," this is a Japanese conspiracy all foretold by their ancient texts that very few Anglo-Saxons have the ability to read.

19. How many people are supposed to have died in the explosions?

It is hard to say. Some sources say 60,000 in Hiroshima, others say 140,000. No attempt has been made to rectify the various numbers.

20. How many people die annually from car accidents in the US?

Over 55,000.