Hiroshima/Nagasaki, Justifiable?

[Xcommunicated]

I was watching a documentary a few nights ago about the atomic bombings of Japan at the end of WW2. It got me thinking, were the bombings justifiable? Let's look at the circumstances.

The Japanese were slaughtering China, their methods of execution and torture were terrible. Millions were dying in South East Asia and China at the hands of the Japanese. Then Japan surprised attacked Pearl Harbour, crippling it's navy and killing thousands of innocent people.

So America fought back, they fought the guerilla warfare on the islands of Japan. Thousands of soldiers were killed by the merciless army as they tried to overrun their air bases and ports. So eventually, they made an estimation about the potential military losses in an invasion force on the Japanese mainland. Operation Downfall had been estimated at up to four million American casualties with up to 800,000 dead:

A study done for Secretary of War Henry Stimson's staff by William Shockley estimated that conquering Japan would cost 1.7 to 4 million American casualties, including 400,000 to 800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese fatalities. The key assumption was large-scale participation by civilians in the defence of Japan.

So really, were the atomic bombings saving more lives than they were ending? Do you think it's better to end hundreds of thousands of lives instantly or have millions of lives ended over a period of years?

Maybe the use of an atomic bomb in general is a bit giddy.

 

[Resonator]

Yes, it is.

EDIT: Sorry, stupid post. Allow me to elaborate; I don't think me or you have the right to fully justify it. In all honesty, neither me nor you have fully equated every single outcome that this action becomes.

 

[Fenrisúlfr]

No, no justification.

Japan was trying to surrender and the USA was trying to show off its new toys to the Russians. Fuck USA.

 

[Resonator]

Strangely enough, I was under the impression the US was not really against Russia in WWII. Where'd you get that from?

 

[razoredge]

Strange stuff said there. Japan had no intentions of ever surrendering until the last boy and girl was dead.

I believe General MacArthur was against it as he felt he could win that war the conventional way.

I used to think the scariest thing about nuclear weapons was that we, the US used them.

Then I learned more about the Pacific theater and how the "Japs" treated their own people, war prisoners, conquered peoples and how hell bent they were on world domination regardless the cost. They never would have heard squat from US if they didnt attack Pearl Harbor without a declaration of war. They brought it... a knife to a gun fight. We were decimating them in the Pacific and they still would not give it up. Totally justified, in fact I wish they didnt surrender then we would have hit Toyko.

They still got the best of the deal... through guilt we rebuilt their country, through guilt we made trade agreements that benefited them and spelled disaster for our own industries. I dont know how it stands today but during the 80's and 90's they were buying up America like it was on sale... because it was. They got the electronic industry, they control the largest share of the N.American auto industry. I'd say in the end they got what they wanted and won the war anyhow.

I have no feelings for the people of Hiroshima or Nagasaki, had the Japanese been able to make it to our shores our people would have been slaughtered like pigs. Something we did not do to them when the war was over.

Anyone doubting any of this needs to learn more about their culture.

 

[hexwind]

No, no justification.

the USA was trying to show off its new toys .

or maybe they wanted to "experiment" their new stuff?!

 

[BloodSword]

Strange stuff said there. Japan had no intentions of ever surrendering until the last boy and girl was dead.

I believe General MacArthur was against it as he felt he could win that war the conventional way.

I used to think the scariest thing about nuclear weapons was that we, the US used them.

Then I learned more about the Pacific theater and how the "Japs" treated their own people, war prisoners, conquered peoples and how hell bent they were on world domination regardless the cost. They never would have heard squat from US if they didnt attack Pearl Harbor without a declaration of war. They brought it... a knife to a gun fight. We were decimating them in the Pacific and they still would not give it up. Totally justified, in fact I wish they didnt surrender then we would have hit Toyko.

They still got the best of the deal... through guilt we rebuilt their country, through guilt we made trade agreements that benefited them and spelled disaster for our own industries. I dont know how it stands today but during the 80's and 90's they were buying up America like it was on sale... because it was. They got the electronic industry, they control the largest share of the N.American auto industry. I'd say in the end they got what they wanted and won the war anyhow.

I have no feelings for the people of Hiroshima or Nagasaki, had the Japanese been able to make it to our shores our people would have been slaughtered like pigs. Something we did not do to them when the war was over.

Anyone doubting any of this needs to learn more about their culture.

Dam Razor, finally I found something I agree with you on. Across the board Japan, China and most all people who were part of the Pacific Rim were being inhumane to each other. Japanese soldiers would have NEVER surrendered. In their culture it was not the "honorable" thing to do. They and their families would have lived in "dishonor" if surrender ocurred. The U.S. bombed these Japanese towns, and yes it was a example of our power, and the only way to get the Japanese Emperor to surrender in a timely fashion. The japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, and used "kamakaze" pilots to inflict death. Imagine, flying a plane into ships docked in a harbor and to certain death. How do you deal with people such as that? Well, you punch back harder. None of us were present when the US Military made the final desicion to bomb. We simply don't know all the mitigating factors that went into it. We, are entitled to our opinion. But, to me, it's too easy to be critical. Ask yourselves what kind of world we would have had then and now, if these bombings had not taken place. Japan woke a "sleeping giant" and had to pay. Period.

 

[razoredge]

Im not as fucked up as most people want to presume

The Japanese were killing themselves when we made land fall on Japan. Woman throwing children from cliffs, buildings and then jumping ect. Probably a few reasons for this: THey were most likely brainwashed into thinking we were evil and would wreak havic with them.... 2. others may have had their "no honour" thing going on.

Sadly none of it did much to curb the world population

Since I have been aware of what the US did for Japan post war as well as many of the other troublesome countries since, I have realized the smartest thing any country can do is start crap with the US. First they screw up our economy and force us to assume massive debt. Then after we kick thier asses into submission we go further in debt and do further damaging things to our own economy rebuilding these countries and making favorable trade agreements on their behalf.

 

[BloodSword]

Fuck me,man. 2 in a row for agreement!! The last paragraph you wrote is basically spot-on. And a perfect present day example of this is Iraq. How many more dollars will the U.S. sink into their economy? Granted, this invasion by Bush and his cronies predicated all of this. And now we have to assume responsibility. Going into Afganistan was necessary after 9/11. But, Iraq was George Bush's personal vendetta, and across the board, many mistakes were made in that process. However, this if off-topic from the original thread.

 

[razoredge]

Yes but we are still talking various war tactics.

I dont feel Iraq was totally vendetta, nor all about the oil. We have to keep reminding ourselves that Sadam was running a big weapons bluff and would not cooperate with UN inspections. This only led to great suspicions and more than enough reasonable time was given. I read a write up on this somewhere where it is believed Sadam bluffed the weapons fiasco so his own people would not realize how weakened the country really was, so all the people of Iraq would still think he was this great powerful leader and they a powerful country.

Then judgeing by the extremists still causing problems in Iraq, whos to say there was not "terrorist" support from Iraq ?

Dont get me wrong, Im not making excuses, I felt we should have left after he was executed... but then the can of worms was opened. In theory it would not have been right for us to leave the relatively sane people of Iraq on their own to deal with the extremists pissed off because we removed Sadam (justified due to guilt of many inhumanities).

Had they dealt with the situation as Japan did they could very well at least be out of chaos by now and we would be out of there. I say "at least" because given the current economic situation of the world it would be silly to say they would be sitting pretty as Japan was post WWII.

 

[Ocelot2010]

From what I've read about Japan and the whole Atomic Bomb thing, Japan didn't even want to surrender after the first bomb was dropped.

 

[The Poona of Peshwa]

An aspect of the atomic bombings of Japan that's often overlooked is the fact that Germany had fallen and so Stalin was prepared to take action in the pacific as per the agreement at the Yalta conference. Here was a way to both keep the Soviets out of Japan, resulting in a north/south divide like in Vietnam and Korea, and to demonstrate a powerful weapon to the only other superpower in the world.

In terms of the bombing itself, civilians had been explicitly targeted across Japan for months in repeated firebombings and hundreds of thousands had died, so the destruction of those cities was a part of a total war plan to destroy the nation of Japan. The nuclear bombings and firebombings would certainly have been prosecuted as war crimes had we lost, but as you folks have said, thank god that didn't happen.

 

[razoredge]

Yeah, thats it. we just wanted to show off... had nothing to do with Japans relentless method of continuing the war....

 

[The Poona of Peshwa]

I didn't say that at all, prick.

HARRY S TRUMAN - LETTER TO PROFESSOR JAMES L. CATE JAN 12, 1953

"Dropping the bombs ended the war, saved lives, and gave the free nations a chance to face the facts. When it looked as if Japan would quit, Russia hurried into the fray less than a week before the surrender, so as to be in at the settlement. No military contribution was made by the Russians toward victory over Japan. Prisoners were surrendered and Manchuria occupied by the Soviets, as was Korea, North of the 38th parallel."

 

[razoredge]

That could also be coincident of timing as well. I dont think there was much time between the final developing of "the bomb" and when we used it was there ?

Anyhow in retrospect given the post war effects of splitting Germany, future Korea issues and many other problems cause by Russia, if what you say was the motive it probably was a good thing.... No ?

Thanks for calling me prick, all my friends do and it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.

 

[The Poona of Peshwa]

I suppose you're jumping to the conclusion that I'm opposed to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki because I pointed out that they were war crimes (and they were), but I'm not. Limiting the Soviet sphere of influence in the Pacific was a good thing, and no doubt the number of dead that would have piled up in a land invasion of Japan would have been five or ten times larger than what resulted from the bombings. The bombing of Dresden for example was also a war crime, but that was total war and countervalue assaults on civilian populations both brought the war to an end and (so far) kept it from happening again.

 

[razoredge]

No, in fact I just asked you a few questions ??

War crimes ? Yep, not pretty that war thing. Ours were not conquerors quests, ours were to put down a few quests of rageing bullshit. I can deal with our responsibility, the more peaceful part of the world bordors remain pretty much as they were 100 years ago. This doesnt seem like a bad thing considering the alternate consequences.

 

[La Rocque]

Remember Pearl Harbor aka paybacks can be a bitch -

 

[anatarsisphagist]

The US had no better option. Of course we didn't know enough about the radiation and how it would kill hundreds of thousands more with cancer for generations after the bomb was dropped, but it is true about how they would not give up so what were we supposed to do? Lose a million of our own for them? I don't think so.

 

[razoredge]

Give yourself a decade or two of enlightenment and better understanding of the world theater at that time. It will all become clear.

Amusing to feel sorry for those who "brought it", further encored by the fact that they were willing to turn their best pilots and after they were all dead.... their remaining youth into suicide pilots.... FOR WHAT FUCKING REASON AGAIN ? They got what they brought, they recieved the antidote to the no holds barred game they were playing. In the end we enabled them to become a global financial super power........ END OF STORY !