Hiroshima and Nagasaki
- Thread starter MapleOne
- Start date
Exactly! If the invasion of Japan happened they would have fought to the last breath sacrificing every woman, man and child..
I guess they should have stayed away from Pearl Harbour, eh?
And the Philipines, and Hong Kong, and Korea, and China............etc etc etc.
Some historians mark Japan's invasion of China as the start of World War Two........
Are you saying Japanese atrocities justify killing tens of thousands of Japanese civilians (men, women and children).
I think atomic bombs makes killing people far too easy. Its cowardly. Instead of imagining a city vaporizing, try to imagine lining up tens of thousands of people and forcing them into an big incinerator one a time. First, do a short interview to find out who they are, what they do and who they are related to. Make a little small talk and then push them into the incinerator. Next!....
Killing 80,000 people wouldn't be so easy. It might even start to weigh on your conscience...
I think atomic bombs makes killing people far too easy. Its cowardly. Instead of imagining a city vaporizing, try to imagine lining up tens of thousands of people and forcing them into an big incinerator one a time. First, do a short interview to find out who they are, what they do and who they are related to. Make a little small talk and then push them into the incinerator. Next!....
Killing 80,000 people wouldn't be so easy. It might even start to weigh on your conscience...
I don't think anyone has justified killing anyone as revenge. The atomic bomb was a scale of devine wind Japan could understand.
Reality check:
One of the major causes of the German agression of 1939 is that Germany itself was left undamaged in the Great War............thus they were fertile ground in which to plant the infamous "stab in the back" idea.........the German people did not realize either the true cost of their aggression nor did they recognize how thoroughly they were beaten.
That cost 50 million lives.
The Japanese people were being prepared to resist an invasion with every means....up to and including spears for the population. Anyone that tells you they were about to surrender understands nothing of the political situation in that nation at the time. The invasion could easily have cost a million Allied lives.........and several million Japanese lives.
The bombs, in the cold, hard light of unemotional calculation, probably saved millions of lives.
The Japanese murdered 350,000 civilians in Nanking in a few weeks. This was not the work of a single monster, nor an anomaly....it happened to a lesser degree in EVERY place taken by the Japanese....it was the result of a culture of brutality towards one's enemies, born of a belief in extreme physical, moral, and intellectual superiority......a lesson needed to be applied.
If you read my previous posts on this subject, you'll see that I believe the decision to drop the bomb was based on ending the war as quickly and decisively as possible and that most US war planners considered the A-Bomb to be just a big bomb, not a new class of weapon.
I agree that those responsible for committing atrocities should be held accountable for their actions. I reject arguments that one atrocity justifies another. Japanese civilians did not rape Nanking.
I agree that those responsible for committing atrocities should be held accountable for their actions. I reject arguments that one atrocity justifies another. Japanese civilians did not rape Nanking.
Wait for it... wait for it... here comes... the caveat...
And there it is...
It doesn't matter that the "civilian" Japanese populace was arming itself as best it could, to protect an Emperor that they believes was a God.
It doesn't matter that whenever Allied forces met Japanese military or civilian forces, they were met with stiff, unrelenting and deadly force.
It doesn't matter that you view history with a contemporary eye.
All that matters is, you think it was retribution, full stop.
innocent civilians are caught in the middle of 'all' wars, the dropping of those bombs just brought
the attention to 'that' particular event, the hundreds and thousands of civilians who have died in
wars, over the years, have just dissapeared from the earth, without much headline exposure, and are
quickly forgotton.
Most Germans can describe what happened at the end of WW II in Dresden. Tokyo was also turned into a firestorm at least once. London was deliberately bombed for years. I can give many examples...
I think Hiroshima and Nagasaki are important because its a threshold that hasn't been crossed since. Even though many countries have the ability to vaporize significant portions of the planet, none have resorted to nukes since. I think as long as we keep producing nukes, developing new ones and so on, that sooner or later sooner they will be used.
Nuclear weapons are just another weapons technology. They're scary in the amount of devastation they can cause, especially if abused but then so are many of our weapons. Look at the destructive power of gunpowder and TNT what they were able to destroy in numerous conflicts or even simple machines could do in antiquity. You can look back into ancient history of many countries and see evidence of vanished cities, whether its Carthage, the cities of Empires like the Sumerians and Hittites, or cities the Mongols razed... massive destruction (and its toll on civilians)is nothing new.
Most Germans can describe what happened at the end of WW II in Dresden. Tokyo was also turned into a firestorm at least once. London was deliberately bombed for years. I can give many examples...
I think Hiroshima and Nagasaki are important because its a threshold that hasn't been crossed since. Even though many countries have the ability to vaporize significant portions of the planet, none have resorted to nukes since. I think as long as we keep producing nukes, developing new ones and so on, that sooner or later sooner they will be used.
The only two Picasso paintings that ever made sense to me, especially Guernica, the top one.......painted as an illustration of the mass bombing of that city in Spain. The city was bombed by the fascists in the Spanish Civil War.
But, back on topic........it is fine to be critical...........would you have prefered that the allies invade Japan.........and kill millions?
What would YOUR actions have been, were you Mr. Truman in the summer of 1945??
Some don't realize that as the British were to be involved in the invasions of the Japanese home islands so would have Canadians. So you could have added an additional 10K plus to your final death toll.
This ought to be interesting.
The US wanted the war to end quickly. Before they dropped the bombs they were calling on the Japanese to surrender as the Japanese were beaten. The A-Bombs were just another reason to show the hoplessness of Japans situation and how they were unable to defend themselves from a single B-29.
As you were saying...
A leaflet dropped on Japan after the bombing of Hiroshima. The leaflet says, in part: The Japanese people are facing an extremely important autumn. Your military leaders were presented with thirteen articles for surrender by our three-country alliance to put an end to this unprofitable war. This proposal was ignored by your army leaders... [T]he United States has developed an atom bomb, which had not been done by any nation before. It has been determined to employ this frightening bomb. One atom bomb has the destructive power of 2000 B-29s.
...the USA knew quite well what they had.
I know I'll probably get railed for asking this, but it's simply for curiousity's sake.
Do you guys think it would have been possible for the U.S. to end the war without releasing the nukes and having much fewer casualties in the process?
Do you guys think it would have been possible for the U.S. to end the war without releasing the nukes and having much fewer casualties in the process?
Why would you get railed?
The only stupid questions are the ones not asked, or the ones asked mhz.
My honest opinion? Yes.
It would have required a huge amount of resources though. The Allies would have had to literally carpet bomb the bulk of Japan into the stone age though.
As it is, the dropping of two atomic bombs, was far more efficient, sent a clear message and set a huge precedent.
I went searching and found one link I am putting up (short as it is).
I have no idea if it is factual or not:
Why Did the U.S. Decide to Drop the Bomb on Japan?
This link has other links to pursue within it.
Apparently it was not only an decision made by the U.S. alone but perhaps they were the only ones with capability.
I have a question hoping someone with knowledge about that particular time in history:
Was Roosevelt of healthy mind with only a physical illness?
I am not looking for negatives here, only that nobody has ever answered the question for me. I know he
was very ill during much of his extended presidency.
I have no idea if it is factual or not:
Why Did the U.S. Decide to Drop the Bomb on Japan?
This link has other links to pursue within it.
Apparently it was not only an decision made by the U.S. alone but perhaps they were the only ones with capability.
I have a question hoping someone with knowledge about that particular time in history:
Was Roosevelt of healthy mind with only a physical illness?
I am not looking for negatives here, only that nobody has ever answered the question for me. I know he
was very ill during much of his extended presidency.