The Single Greatest Acts of Terrorism in Human History


On 6th August, 1945, the Japanese city of Hiroshima devastated by the act of terror of biblical proportion which as a result 90 percent of the city non combatant civilians immediately boiled, evaporated, carbonized or otherwise  disappeared into black smoke or became chunks of charcoal.  80,000 people; tens of thousands more would later die of radiation exposure. Three days later, a second act of terror was committed against another city  Nagasaki, an estimated 40,000 people ended the same fate. This was the Atomic Bombings.


  1. the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

Ironically this greatest act of terror were committed by all-Christian bomber crew by the order of Christian President[1] of the most Christian nation in the world[2].


  1. Theodore[*] Franklin D. Roosevelt  and Harry S. Truman were all Christian and religious men, Roosevelt is even considered by US christians as the most Christian and the most religious of all presidents.
  2. Before 1948 more than 90% of US population were affiliated as Christians. (Wiki)

[*] Correction: I have mixed Theodore Roosevelt with Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR), the World War II President of the USA, but still  FDR was religious christian, once, when joining those soldiers aboard a warship with Winston Churchill, FDR asked the crew and prime minister to join him in singing the hymn ‘Onward Christian Soldiers.’ In his final inaugural address, FDR affirmed, “So we pray to Him for the vision to see our way clearly … to achievement of His will. [God and George W. Bush (New York: Regan Books, 2004), p. 176]

Categories: History, Terrorism

Tags: , , , ,

29 replies

  1. It was divine judgment according to James White.


  2. quote :
    Do not lose faith by a delay of 2500 years that no one has come, or, according to the NT 2000 years or more. Rev 22:6-7… And he said to me, “These words are trustworthy and true. And the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, has sent his angel to show his servants what must soon take place.” “And behold, I am coming soon….”


  3. You surely take liberties with the truth. Your anti American and anti Christian bias is illuminating who you are…


  4. The thing that makes me sick about WWII is that the allies committed huge amounts of war crimes and never paid for them. Germans paid for their war crimes and rightfully so. They were put on trial, many were executed or sent to prison, their country was divided up by allied powers, etc.

    What about the massive Allied bombing of Hamburg, Berlin, Pforzheim, Dresden, etc? How about the expulsion of millions of ethnic Germans from Eastern Europe who had nothing to do with Hitler of the Third Reich by the Soviet Union after the war. What about the firebombing of Tokyo? As mentioned above, Hiroshima and Nagasaki!

    Many allied leaders should have been executed or put in jail after the war if the allies had any decency.

    Liked by 2 people

    • The architect of much of the brutality in Japan was Curtis LeMay (not only were the atomic bombs dropped under his command, but prior to that he also oversaw the firebombing of cities which resulted in huge swaths of the civilian populations being burned to death [by the way, LeMay also oversaw the astonishing amount of killing from the air in the Korean conflict]). I mentioned that because, in the documentary Fog of War, Robert McNamara (who was under LeMay’s command at the time) said that LeMay had remarked that if they lost, they would have been tried as war criminals.

      Liked by 1 person

    • They are not gonna escape on the Day of Judgment. Allaah(sw) is all knowing and all seeing.

      Liked by 1 person

    • “History is written by the victors” – which is why those criminals were never tried.

      Maybe that also explains why American and western History books say next to nothing about the vast and important Islamic contributions to world civilization.


    • Unfortunately, it seems that some have learned nothing from past mistakes……..

      Trump on North Korea: Maybe ‘fire and fury’ comment ‘wasn’t tough enough’


  5. The attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki always create difficult dilemmas – had the attacks not been carried out, it is often thought of as being highly likely that the Allies would have been forced to invade mainland Japan – an act that would have ultimately seen the death toll rise considerably, on both sides. War often produces these difficult and challenging moral problems – and I do not envy anyone who has to make these decisions.


    • We are told that the U.S. would have been FORCED to invade mainland Japan. Really?

      I don’t think such a lie can ever justify mass murder on a scale that no other power on earth has ever even come close to.


    • How would you have ended the war? What would have been the best of a bad set of options to bring hostilities to a close and stop the bloodshed? Like I said, I don’t envy the people who had to make that sort of decision.


    • Read ModWestMuse’s comment below….


    • I’ve read it, and it’s unsubstantiated. Multiple sources suggest Japan was prepared to resist for some time, and that the war was set to continue for some time, with a far greater cost.

      Some sources suggest ambiguity but equally don’t regard Japan’s surrender as a certainty, prior to the bombs.


    • I am amazed that you still some justification on this attacks, you dont burn the bush to kill mice. Even in war we have to be ‘just’. Killing must be against those in combat, aside from those combatants no-one else is to be harmed.

      By using a weapon of indiscriminate killing in such magnitude is morally unjustifiable. The Qur’an is unambiguous: Muslims are prohibited from aggressive violence, inflicting disproportionate or indiscriminate brutality and are compelled, should war prove unavoidable, always to act within a code of ethical behavior.


    • Who says I seek to justify it? I merely acknowledge it was a very difficult decision, and I will ask again – what would you have done?

      An invasion of mainline Japan would have been more costly in terms of lives lost. Is that the better course of action? What ends up being more ‘moral’? It’s not an easy question and there are no easy answers to it.


    • An invasion was far more heroic and justified, even if lives lost higher numbers (which I doubt) because those lives were fighting age combat soldiers.

      Even ISIS with all its brutality is meek compared to the bombing which did not leave alive “anything that breathed”.


    • Do you honestly believe civilian casualties would be less under a full-scale invasion, with soldiers fighting in city streets and across countryside?


    • Yes, take for instance the battle of Normandy the biggest invasion in history, the civilian casualties accounted to about 3-4% of total casualties (this mainly as a result of Allied bombing not street combat). While in Hiroshima 90% of innocent non combatants annihilated instantly and tens of thousands more would later die of radiation exposure, Nagasaki civilian casualties amounted to 20% of population..

      In a head to head battle , civilian will have a chance to flee the area..and what more devilish was this Nuke attacks against innocent people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were without specific warnings


    • The invasion of Japan and the invasion of Normandy were too very different things, in terms of planning and operations. The behaviour of the people in the invaded territory must also be considered. To the French the Allies were liberators – to the Japanese, the Allies would have been hostile invaders. Plus, the Japanese were known to conscript people (including the Okinawans, who suffered greatly as a result), and their kamikaze tactics are well-known.

      The Japanese were already enforcing conscription of their own population as early as 1943 – had an invasion proceeded, this would have also certainly accelerated.


  6. I’ve heard the US knew Japan was on the way to surrendering anyway, but needed an excuse to test the weapons out for real (or perhaps to show the world who’s boss) – i.e. there was no need to drop those bombs. See Oliver Stone’s ‘Secret HIstory of America’ [online], for instance. But I’ve heard this referenced elsewhere too (need to find the source).

    Liked by 3 people

    • We are conditioned to look at these events from political or ethical perspectives … don’t forget war is business.


  7. Having said all that – do we judge a religion by its adherents (i.e. the pracice of the people) or by its tenets of faith (i.e. the theory or principles of the religion)?


    • When it comes to morality and questions around that, the bottom line is people of any faith, or indeed of no faith, are capable of acts of great evil, but also great good too.


  8. What does Theodore Roosevelt have to do with World War 2 or atomic bombs dropping?

    He was President from 1901-1909.

    Are you mixing him up with Franklin Delano Roosevelt ? (President during most of WW 2, died in office, Harry Truman succeeded him and ended the war)

    Harry Truman was President who ordered the Atomic bomb dropping. But why put Theadore Roosevelt into the mix?

    Liked by 1 person

Please leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: