Dropping the Atomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki:

The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was

  • The ultimate crime against humanity

    Votes: 12 30.8%
  • A serious war crime because US had other options

    Votes: 10 25.6%
  • An unethical act of war although US needed to check USSR

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • An inferior choice although US had few other options

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Justified because it saved many US & Japanese lives

    Votes: 8 20.5%
  • Entirely justified because Japan would not surrender without it

    Votes: 9 23.1%

  • Total voters
    39
bossel said:
Personal? If you say that the GMD government was illegitimate because it may have been recognized by "everyone else, but not to the us", then that sounds pretty much like Bushite talk: Either agree with us or you're irrelevant.

But I'd say bossel that what you are describing is not being a bushite, but is something that is deeply intrenched into the deep psychology of the US. Something that Robert Lifton would call "superpower syndrome", a beleif in the omnipotence and untouchability of the nation.
 
Domo Arigato lexico

I think the bombs were horrible. So was firebombing Japanese cities. Both should be war crimes. But that's my opinion now, in hind sight, out of context, from the comfort of my safe office. I hope weapons of this sort are never used again.

IN context, it is difficult to think that Truman would or could make any other decision. From the American 1945 perspective, aerial bombing of civillian targets was already the norm. A terrible war, in which all the rules of conduct had been rewritten, was raging unabated and seemingly without end. The US military had seen the resolve of the Japanese over and over again, to fight past the point of any reasonable chance of success, to fight in any way possible, to the death, and to inflict the maximum number of casualties. The invasion of Japan was planned and large numbers of deaths on both sides were predicted. Truman had to drop the bombs.

In the last thread I mentioned that I hated this sort of reasoning- That the end of the war justifies this type of carnage and this selection of target.

We were angry after 3000 innocents were slaughtered on 9/11. But nothing is said about the 9000 or so Iraqi civillians that were killed and continue to die. Even if the war is justifiable, even with the most accurate weapons and most careful planning "collateral damage" is unavoidable. Can we justify this loss of life?
 
Last edited:
Checked "serious war crime", but even without other options I'd still hold that view. Targeting civilians is IMO always a war crime.
 
Interesting experiments.

Interesting experiments. (It should be added to the list)

Not that everyone like interesting experiments though.


It should be noted that the fire bombing of Tokyo is much more devastating and more torturing than both the atomic bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The effect on the events in Nagasaki and Hiroshima is shock (to the ones who survived), while the effects for the events in Tokyo is terror (to the ones who are about to die and the ones who currently experienced the bombing).


The atomic bombings weren't done for a speedy war resolution, it was done to make people angry and fight each other (both in the present at that time and the future like now), and also for experiments.

Even before the atomic bombings, the Japanese government already offered to surrender... twice.

Though it should be noted that both governments (the Japanese government and the U.S.A. governments) are nothing more but puppets controlled by the same puppet master.

Just think, the Japanese government has no gain at all for attacking Pearl Harbour. Even if it have a grouch against the U.S.A., it can kick its butt later when it already captured South East Asia / East Indies.

And also the U.S.A. government has no gain at all at participating at the Pacific war, and also the European war.

The reasons these two governments go into wars was because they weren't acting on their own.

The same goes for the current wars.



Nevertheless, what has already happened has already happened. Past is past. Just leave it that way. No fuss. Nothing.

Besides, it was around 60 years ago! Most of the people who survived it are already grandparents (or great grandparents) or dead. The last thing they want to do is dig up old painful memories.

Man... Sometimes I wish many more people would be ignorant of history, since history can be used to make people fight each other. "War crimes", "War criminals", "War crime trials", and so on, those are nothing but a ploy to make people fight each other, can all of you people see that?


I remember a World War II story. Two people meet each other, long after World War II. After some talking with each other, they later found out that they both experienced the same event, one is bombing the city where the other one lives, while the other one was attacking the airplane that was bombing his city.

They become close friends though.

The moral of the story? Who cares!




Now... If you want to do a war, here are some tips;.

The best war is fought by making your enemies gave away their country to you without any battle. War is done through deception. Know your enemy and yourself. Divide and conquer is an effective strategy.

With my computation, I deduced that humankind's common enemy isn't human, as in, NOT a homo sapien.
 
digicross said:
Even before the atomic bombings, the Japanese government already offered to surrender... twice.

Hmmm. I was under the impression that the first offer didn't come until August 12, after both bombs. Do you have a source?

Hey Digicross, I noticed you fly an Indonesian flag. How are things with you? Is there anything we can do?

Bossel-- I agree with your sentiment. People playing war should be required to stay away from houses and children.
 
Brooker said:
Targeting civilians to achieve a military/political goal is just NOT OK. The ends DON'T justify the means.

I wish I could agree with you. I want both my boys to live in a world where you are right and I am wrong about this.

I don't see another way (and I include the bombing campaigns in Germany and the firebombing of Japan in this) that the allies could have won the war. To have in your hands the means to end the death and destruction and not use it might also be called criminal.
 
Only ten responses? (Seven replies?)... I thought this would be a much more controversial and interesting topic on this forum.

We are talking about the only use of a nuclear weapon against a civillian population ever. Talk about WMD's. The US has them, has used them and uses the rumor of their presence to invade another sovereign nation.
 
sabro said:
Only ten responses? (Seven replies?)... I thought this would be a much more controversial and interesting topic on this forum.

We are talking about the only use of a nuclear weapon against a civillian population ever. Talk about WMD's. The US has them, has used them and uses the rumor of their presence to invade another sovereign nation.
I understand your indignation about the lack of response. I try to find a reason for it such as wanting to avoid conflict or the fact that these incidents belong to the remote past. But I can only speak for myself. Because I am both ignorant about the subject, and inhibited by it.

The only thing I am sure of is that I had more than once applauded the dropping out of vengence. And I am ashamed to admit it. The more I think about it, I feel there is something inherently wrong about the whole thing.

When Albert Einstein suggested the bombing, he probably did not realize the true extent of the consequences. Fifty-five years later, when he was voted the most influential figure of the 20th century in the New York Times poll (was it Newsweek? I forgot.), it really burned me. People only think about the magnitude of the TNT equivalent of the bomb invented by this scientist. And that makes him important? I feel sorry for him for his involvement in such a horrendous act of human anhilation. He is probably the most guilt-torn man ever known. May he rest in peace, if that is permitted. May I rest in peace when I'm gone.

The only practical reconciliation or healing I've found was in art pieces that dealt with the subject; having at least some people trying to see nuclear warfare without prejudice is the only comfort I can get on a conscious plane.

But this is far from enough. I don't think I know enough to say any more. I hope to though.
 
Einstein had very little to do with the development of the bomb. The letters he wrote in the thirties were basically warning that Germany would develop a bomb in time, and the US should also look into it. To take the idea of an atomic bomb from theoretical physics to practical application took room fulls of geniuses like J. Robert Oppenheimer, and lots and lots of cash.

I used to be appalled by the inhumanity of dropping such a horrendous weapon- especially on the targets that were chosen, and I still am. But I was born twenty years after the event, and the context of WWII has to be taken into consideration.

I think this is important because people tend to forget how nasty an implement this was. I think when people see that 9000 Iraqi civillians were killed in the invasion, they shrug those lives off. When the US continues to spend more money on better nuclear technology even without the Soviet threat, when military spending far outstrips humanitarian aid, when the former Soviet Union can't even account for half of its bombs and material, that this is an important issue.

So someone should chime in and set me straight. American imperialists like me that justify the incineration of a hundred thousand civillians in the name of peace deserve to be taken to task- especially by those who were targeted by this atrocious act.
 
sabro said:
Only ten responses? (Seven replies?)... I thought this would be a much more controversial and interesting topic on this forum.

We are talking about the only use of a nuclear weapon against a civillian population ever. Talk about WMD's. The US has them, has used them and uses the rumor of their presence to invade another sovereign nation.

I keep trying to respond but these attempts are by nature lengthy. Each time I start, my 'puter pukes on me or the 'Net pukes, or something goes "ka-blooey" and all my cogent prose goes down the toilet.

I will try again.
 
Shooter452 said:
I keep trying to respond but these attempts are by nature lengthy. Each time I start, my 'puter pukes on me or the 'Net pukes, or something goes "ka-blooey" and all my cogent prose goes down the toilet.

I will try again.
lol... nuclear gremlins.

I'm watching The Final Battle on DTMS- it asks the question: Was the dropping of the atomic bombs necessary? Hmmmm. Comment to follow.
 
Shooter452 said:
I keep trying to respond but these attempts are by nature lengthy. Each time I start, my 'puter pukes on me or the 'Net pukes, or something goes "ka-blooey" and all my cogent prose goes down the toilet.
I will try again.
I've experienced that myself. I have lost hours of work; when I say "preview," my explorer loses the connection, and my unsaved text in the reply window is gone forever. That is if I forget to make a back up right before clicking "preview." It must be the way local carriers are trimming seemingly loose clients after a certain period; maybe 30 mins or 1 hr. Save, save, save, as vigillence is the price of liberty. :wave:
 
sabro said:
I used to be appalled by the inhumanity of dropping such a horrendous weapon- especially on the targets that were chosen, and I still am. But I was born twenty years after the event, and the context of WWII has to be taken into consideration.
I am interested that your views had shifted from one to another; well so have mine, although in opposite directions. I wonder what might have been the turning point for you. Well, to speak for myself, getting to know a couple of Japanese persons came first. I would say that was a positive thing for me because they were really nice people. Then watching Japanese film/anime like Akira and Gojira gave me a sense of what might be working in the minds of these Japanese artists. Not that anybody said anything, but I began to see the inhumanity of the bombing. But that's only me.
I think this is important because people tend to forget how nasty an implement this was. I think when people see that 9000 Iraqi civillians were killed in the invasion, they shrug those lives off. When the US continues to spend more money on better nuclear technology even without the Soviet threat, when military spending far outstrips humanitarian aid, when the former Soviet Union can't even account for half of its bombs and material, that this is an important issue.
To "forget" and to "shrug those lives off" is probably not an act of free will. I suspect, well again speaking for myself, firstly "ignorance," and secondly, the inability to process any decision because it is beyond my scope and too overwhelming. You do understand that "ignorance" and "being overwhelmed" are not contradictory, btw. Important yes, but that's a formal decision only, a kind of passive admission that it "should be important," not necessarily that I realize the magnitude of its true significance. It probably will take me time and other things for that to happen. I don't know about others, though....
sabro said:
So someone should chime in and set me straight. American imperialists like me that justify the incineration of a hundred thousand civillians in the name of peace deserve to be taken to task- especially by those who were targeted by this atrocious act.
Why do you wish to be criticized? I'm sure it's not because you enjoy the excitement of heated debates or winning an argument. Curiosity, of course we are all curious beings, but that also counts out as the primary reason. So why?

As a matter of fact, you raised an important point that I tend to agree to.
Why are there no Japanese flags in this thread, or the previous one?
Is it a language thing? Do you think if we posted a Japanese version of the poll somewhere, it will get some reasonable number of responses from Japanese individuals? But I thought we had many Japanese members already. Should we try the Japanese subforum? Or even somewhere else? Or is it too remote, timewise, or taboo for our Japanese members to talk about these things?
 
Wow, I just realized that there are no Japanese flags here. I would be definitely interested in those particular thoughts. There are many nihonjin that post in English. I need to hear from them.

I'm definitely torn between an idealism of what "should be" and the reality of what "was". Truman had in his posession a device of nearly inconceivable destructive power that would inflict maximum casualties on enemy civillians with little or no risk to American lives. I could, in all probability, end the war. This was the reality sixty years ago.

The documentary I watched the other night argued that millions would have died if the war continued. Russia would have entered the war and taken Asian territories. The Japanese would have murdered tens of thousands of POW's and hundreds of thousands of civillian prisoners. A million Japanese civillians and soldiers would have been stranded in China. The destruction in Japan would have been far more complete. Japan would have probably ceased to be a nation. And so the bombing was justified because of the outcome.

It is far too easy, having benefitted from that outcome (My uncles and father would have been involved in the invasion of Japan) with sixty years behind me to point the finger and say "bad." I have to look at the decision in context and realize that it was the only reasonable one the President could make.

And this is the source of my conflict: The ends justifies the means. Bad historical precedence in my opinion. I don't believe civillians should ever be targeted. Aerial indiscriminate bombing nuclear or otherwise-- should be a war crime. But that is what we did-- in the last "good" war.
 
sabro said:
Only ten responses? (Seven replies?)... I thought this would be a much more controversial and interesting topic on this forum.

Well, in my case (and probably the case with several other people also) I've had lengthy, heated debates about this in the past that were very draining and, although I'm very passionate about the issue, I just don't want to get into it again.

Anything I would say, would just be expanding on what I've already said.

Targeting civilians to achieve a military/political goal is just NOT OK. The ends DON'T justify the means.

That statement really sums up my feelings on the issue.
 
Only ten responses? (Seven replies?)... I thought this would be a much more controversial and interesting topic on this forum.

I thought the same thing. I've actually been pondering what to write but I always end up with a huge essay I think is crap. So, here it is in one sentence:

It wasn't necessary, but it was inevitable.

Seriously, there are lots of good sources out there supporting that 1) Japan was ready to surrender, and 2) that it wasn't. I've been to Hiroshima, and even talked to a survivor. (Thanks to Kansai Gaidai's Prof. Scott.)
 
I would definitely like to visit Hiroshima one day.

I am unaware of sources that indicate that Japan was willing to surrender before August 1945. The Potsdam declaration remained unaswered and the war continued unabated. The military continued to prepare for Japan's invasion, and to develop new weaponry.

The day before the surrender there was an attempted coup by jr. army officers at the palace to prevent the surender. Even after the bombs, there were those in Japan that were unwilling to accept defeat.
 
Sabro,

If you're really interested I'd be happy to go dig them up for you. When I was at Kansai Gaidai, we were given the following essay question: "Would you have dropped the bomb?" Suffice to say, it sparked alot of debate, especially when the whole class went to Hiroshima and listened to Mrs. Yamaoka speak. (The survivor.) Alot of good material was brought up by both sides of the argument.
 
A trip might do good...

You know what, I think we could all benefit from a trip to Hiroshima or Nagasaki someday.
Without the real link, I have a feeling that I might get drained like Brooker said earlier. What did you feel about the lady, mad pierrot?
 

This thread has been viewed 77024 times.

Back
Top