dropping the bomb on japan? yes or no?

[CitySquirrel]

well yeah that didn't have youtube back then.How else could they do it?

I'll leave you to figure that out.

Anyway, if they had to do it to a live target, why civilian?

 

[the clockmaker]

Your sarcasm amuses me. Also, are you saying that the Japanese are allowed to have a large standing army? The Germans are allowed Main Battle Tanks, a Navy, and an Air Force. The Japanese military consists of a few battalions of men, light tanks, maybe a main battle tank from the Vietnam era, and decrepit old fighters the U.S. gave them. The only reason Japan isn't under either Chinese or North Korean rule right now is because of the protection the U.S. is providing. They can't even make metal airsoft guns because of a ban the U.S. put on them. From what I know, Germany's military is not closely monitored and they can build whatever they want to. The next time you try to counter argue something, know the facts and try and read the last comment, where did I ever say that what was given to the Jews after WWII was worth anything? I merely stated that it had been recognized and that there was at least some effort put towards making up for it whereas the injustices dealt towards the Japanese were simply written out of the history books.

I really, really, really don't think the two situations are compareable, to my knowledge, 110,000 japanese were interred in the United States between 41 and 46. Of those, 38% were Japanese nationals and another 5000 were repatriated to Japan after renouncing their citizenship. In times of war, that rates as dickish, but you can see the idea behind it. Now, six million Jews were killed, most of the survivours were dispossed and for those on the wrong side of the iron curtian, the persuction and deportations continued well after the war ended. But going back to the pacific, during the rape of Nanjing 100,000-300,000 Chinese were killed, not imprissoned, not dispossesed, but killed, often under the most horrifying of circumstances. between twenty and eighty thousand women were raped, or forced to have sex with their sons or fathers under the threat of death. That rates beyond the end of the horrific act scale because the english language is not built to deal with evil of that magnitude. You demand to know when the Japanese will be treated as the victims of the second world war, and I'm sure that the world will get right round to it, as soon as ammends are made to China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Taiwan, Korea, Australia, Holland, New Zealand, Brittan and yes, the US.

After the war, people demanded to know why germany had been allowed to build up again, and as such, The united States is going to ensure that Japan is never in a position to threaten the other nations of the pacific again. I don't blame the currant generation of Japanese and Japanese decendent people for what happened during the war, but I do blame them for the flippant attitude they take to the crimes of the past.

 

[bl4ckh4wk64]

The Japanese were monsters, war criminals; they deserved complete annihilation. Pity America only had two bombs ready.

Fuck you. I had relatives in Japan during WWII.

I'm sure the Chinese and Americans feel just as outraged about what Japan did. But he's right. If you ignore the precious Geneva Convention the poeple who say the Bombs werent necessary wave around (whihc has no meaning unless you make it have meaning) you are a war criminal. And I'd say what they did in China qualifies it.

And the Americans were super sweet? Jesus Fucking Christ, they wouldn't let their own citizens drink from the same water fountain.

It's comments like these when I feel proud of owing no allegiance to any state, religion, or political ideology.

Yeah. I'll admit, it was a dark time. But hey, least they were free. Least we were killing them. Least we made strides. Besides, that was the home policy. Military service brings down all racial barriers. And we werent breaking the Geneva Convention with Segregation, so that arguement is invalid.

Disclaimer: I do not support segregation and am an avid supporter that everyone has equal rights. which is why I'm campaigning to have the mosque be built at ground zero. but thats a completely different thread and discusion entirely.

"We weren't killing them." Comments like this show how completely wrong the American education system is. If they don't like it, let's not teach it! The concentration camps were surrounded by barbed wire. If anybody that even looked Asian walked within 3 feet of that barbed wire, they were shot. They were forced to live in horse stables, not just a single person to a stable either. I'm talking multiple families in a stable meant for one horse. They were treated like barbarians. You want to talk about war crimes, talk about how people could do this to their OWN PEOPLE. Don't even say they were compensated. They were given 10,000$ if they were lucky, and this was only once about 3/4 of them had died. Also, if you were born in a camp, or you were a minor when you were forced in, you weren't part of the list to be compensated. Thus reducing the money paid to them. America just wiped this out of the history books because it doesn't suit their opinion of themselves.

Marshall law went into effect, I'm not saying wat America did was right or wrong. But I'll tell you one thing. At least you were given something. Jewish people lost everyhting when they went to that camp. The had nothing coming out. They were rsuhed into furnaces and given toxic gas showers to kill them off. America NEVER took that drastic of a step with its people. Hell, a Jew could be shot in the camp for shits and giggles. Plus, you were experimented on. So dont ever compare yourselves to the plight of MY people. you wont win. You are insignificant in comparison to 6 million+ people killed with no hope. You still had rights at the least.

No, they didn't have rights. The Japanese in these concentration camps were treated like animals as well. Also, there's multiple books and movies about the Holocaust. Germany officially apologized, and Israel was created. I'm not saying that's any kind of repayment, but at least it's something. How many stories have you read about the injustices done to the Japanese during WWII? Maybe one. The only people speaking out about this are the people who either lived through it or their relatives. Did you know that on Oahu they lynched people merely for looking Japanese? These are people that everyone else had known for years, and they up and lynched them for fear of them being spies or "those damned Japs." The Japanese also had everything taken away from them. The ones that owned stores had their stores sold or taken by other people, and their houses were all sold. Also, what were the Japanese given? The measly amount of money given to them does nothing for the injustices. If a Japanese person enlisted in the American military, they were sent off and if they made it back, they were thrown straight back into the camps. Nowadays, America does not choose to recognize this, they prefer to live without the knowledge of their crimes. But hey, ignorance is bliss right?

Thats not the point. There was the never the merciless death and eradication there was in Germany. And they were given a Country, without limits in the common day. So far as I know, Germany still cant have a standing army of over 100K soldiers, and its closely monitored. And my, what a great gift Isreal was. You sent jews from one slaughter to another. Here, let my people get on their knees and cry to the good gods above about the blessings we received. The blessing where children are born into war, where they have to know how to hold a gun and kill someone when they're nine. When they have to worry every day, every minute, every second that there way of life might be taken away, and once again they will be homeless. Thank you, just, THANK YOU! You moved them, sayin it was a better land and lying. However can the Jewish people repay you and your generosity?

Your sarcasm amuses me. Also, are you saying that the Japanese are allowed to have a large standing army? The Germans are allowed Main Battle Tanks, a Navy, and an Air Force. The Japanese military consists of a few battalions of men, light tanks, maybe a main battle tank from the Vietnam era, and decrepit old fighters the U.S. gave them. The only reason Japan isn't under either Chinese or North Korean rule right now is because of the protection the U.S. is providing. They can't even make metal airsoft guns because of a ban the U.S. put on them. From what I know, Germany's military is not closely monitored and they can build whatever they want to. The next time you try to counter argue something, know the facts and try and read the last comment, where did I ever say that what was given to the Jews after WWII was worth anything? I merely stated that it had been recognized and that there was at least some effort put towards making up for it whereas the injustices dealt towards the Japanese were simply written out of the history books.

Then tell your teacher. Make a case. But dont sit and say the jews are better off cause they get recognition. I could recognize a woman who was raped and say about injustices, bu that wont make her feel better. Besides that, EVERY country rights over its dark past. Do you think Germany teaches about all the ins and outs and WW2 and the Holocaust? You think Britain teaches is people about the loss they took in the Revolutionary War, and the thousands of Native people's deaths they cuased? Fun Fact, Britain (during the French and Indian war/Seven years war, depending what its called in your country) was the first to actively use PLANNED chemical warfare by giving Native People Smallpox infested blankets so they could stop the seige at Fort Pitt. But you dont read about that.

Besides, we're off topic now.

Actually, I have. I read about all of that in school. Probably the benefits of going to a private school, but that's beside the point. Also, what used to be WEST Germany did teach their students about the Holocaust. But going back on topic, I refer to my first statement in this thread.

 

[Mafoobula]

Fact: Conventional warfare against the Japanese, in lieu of nuclear warfare, would have meant more lives lost in that one battle than the lives lost in the bombings. That's before we consider that conventional warfare would have almost certainly meant the war dragging on for years longer, meaning millions more lost.

It suddenly occurs to me that, even had we won that extended war, we wouldn't be in the exact position we're in now. Hell, I'd wager that 99% of us wouldn't even be alive. Recall the story "A Sound of Thunder" by Ray Bradbury. In it, a man travels through time into pre-history and accidentally steps on a butterfly; somehow, this causes the English language to be different from the English we know and love today. The point of the story is that it doesn't take much for history as we know it to change.
Now take that principle, and apply it to the circumstances of your or your parents' conception. If your father had impregnated your mother just a day or two earlier or later than he did, you wouldn't be here. If your grandfather had done similar, your father wouldn't have existed at all, meaning, again, your non-existance.
FURTHERMORE, there's something to be said for the economic, cultural, technological and social stagnation that goes on during a major, MAJOR war like World War II. If it weren't for the bomb, we'd be just a little more backward than we are.

 

[StarCecil]

All is fair in love and war, they would have killed twice as many if we didn't.

this is just an excuse

I don't understand. The question is whether or not we should have dropped the bombs, when only 150,000 - 250,000 japanese died, compared to the possible millions that would have otherwise? That's not even a question. 25 million Soviets died in the war. Britain was bombed for months on end. Berlin was burned to the ground. Yet stopping the deaths of millions is questionable?

Japan wasn't going to surrender, that's fact. They were training civilians to fight with pikes and children to act as suicide bombers against tanks. They were already out of supplies, and still planning on fighting. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were valid military targets, due to major munitions stores and the headquarters of a major portion of the Japanese military.

Dropping the bombs isn't even a question.

ONLY!? ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS! THERE IS ALWAYS ANOTHER WAY! The japanese offered their surrender as long as they were allowed to keep the emperor.

The Japanese refused to surrender. We had the choice of nuking them to do what amounted to a drop in the bucket, or invade and throw away MILLIONS of live.

 

[TeeBs]

I think we should nuke every losing country every once in a while, keeps them in line.

do you have any idea what a nuke can do? You really are a fuckwit if you think they should be dropped and have innocent people die just so your country can be dicks. Just remember that you aren't the only country with nukes.

It was a joke?

 

[Nouw]

Japan was going to fight to the death. DEATH. Death is an honor and so until the last man stands, America will have to kill everyone. Even the children! They are called 'sherman carpets' and jump under tanks. President Truman predicted 4 million or 400,000 American deaths and more for Japan if they invaded. Dropping the bomb was the 'smart' choice.

As harsh as it sounds, it's the lesser of two evils.

The Japanese weren't gonna stop. We gave them a warning, they refused, we dropped the bomb. We let them look at what just happened, we asked them again and they did not listen. So we dropped another one.

You can't say we didn't give the Japanese ample warning to surrender and while I don't condone mass killings like in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I can see how it saved countless lives on both sides of the fighting.

Both sides? You make it sound like the Americans did something noble lol. Were they takin a shortcut to end the war faster,yes. While genocide is never the right thing to do, i'd say this is a morally dark grey zone tbh. Its right in one way but so horribly fucking wrong at the same time.

Well, more than a quarter of a million Japanese would have died if the Home Islands were invaded. I'd also say that Hiroshima/Nagasaki were not genocide, because the deaths themselves weren't the objective of the attacks, they were a means to the end of forcing a surrender and ending the war (not a nice means by any stretch of the imagination).

Awesome name.

 

[the clockmaker]

ONLY!? ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS! THERE IS ALWAYS ANOTHER WAY! The japanese offered their surrender as long as they were allowed to keep the emperor.

To my recollection, they offered their surrender on the basis that they could keep the emperor and that they would not be occupied. Imagine if Germany tried to do the same, they surrender, but Hitler stays in power and no allied soldiers are to be based in their counrty, because I vaguely remember something similar happening before...

 

[Th37thTrump3t]

We were originally going to drop 7... One being in Tokyo. So it could have been a lot worse. Plus I don't think Japan would have given up if we hadn't dropped them. They were too damn proud to. They would have kept fighting to the very last man. So really they saved more lives. The ends justify the means in this case.

 

[StarCecil]

All is fair in love and war, they would have killed twice as many if we didn't.

this is just an excuse

I don't understand. The question is whether or not we should have dropped the bombs, when only 150,000 - 250,000 japanese died, compared to the possible millions that would have otherwise? That's not even a question. 25 million Soviets died in the war. Britain was bombed for months on end. Berlin was burned to the ground. Yet stopping the deaths of millions is questionable?

Japan wasn't going to surrender, that's fact. They were training civilians to fight with pikes and children to act as suicide bombers against tanks. They were already out of supplies, and still planning on fighting. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were valid military targets, due to major munitions stores and the headquarters of a major portion of the Japanese military.

Dropping the bombs isn't even a question.

ONLY!? ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS! THERE IS ALWAYS ANOTHER WAY! The japanese offered their surrender as long as they were allowed to keep the emperor.

The Japanese refused to surrender. We had the choice of nuking them to do what amounted to a drop in the bucket, or invade and throw away MILLIONS of live.

America could have accepted japan's offer and they might not be seen as the absolute assholes they are seen as today.

Absolutely unacceptable. The Emperor that mobilized his nation for war? Who had allowed his forces to kill millions in China? Who had instigated a surprise attack on American assets? No. He was not going to stay in power. The only choice was complete and unconditional surrender.

And that you think America is perceived as being "assholes" speaks highly of you.

 

[JeanLuc761]

We were originally going to drop 7... One being in Tokyo. So it could have been a lot worse. Plus I don't think Japan would have given up if we hadn't dropped them. They were too damn proud to. They would have kept fighting to the very last man. So really they saved more lives. The ends justify the means in this case.

excuse

After reading all 7 pages of this thread, you really aren't willing to see the logic behind the decision are you?

If you have the opportunity to save millions of lives by murdering a couple hundred thousand, as horrible as the decision is, you HAVE to save the greater good.

 

[StarCecil]

We were originally going to drop 7... One being in Tokyo. So it could have been a lot worse. Plus I don't think Japan would have given up if we hadn't dropped them. They were too damn proud to. They would have kept fighting to the very last man. So really they saved more lives. The ends justify the means in this case.

excuse

So you'd rather the millions die?