This! nukes are not a serious weapon of war, their only use is deterrence because they completely rape any place where they're used so that that area is altogether off limits for the remaining life of humanity.
> "But it's not quite that bad. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki seem alright now."
This is literally the most callous justification for nuking someone I have ever seen.
"It's not that bad guys. It's habitable now, 70 years later! If you didn't know better you would swear 80,000 didn't get instantly incinerated in nuclear fire, with over 125,000 more who died in slow agony over a few weeks of burns and radiation poisoning!"
I know Stalin said that a million deaths is just a statistic - but you weren't supposed to take Stalin to heart. Just sayin'.
I wasn't at all, but I was unclear. I was pointing out that nuclear weapons don't cause places to be uninhabitable for eternity. It is quite clearly incorrect. This is not a reason to use them however. The atomic raids ands the firebombing of Japan are most definitely up there as war crimes.
