"History will judge me" - Bush.....Looks like it already has!

[T-Bor]

So how come we don't just drop one now?

Oh japan was amassing armies to defend themselves. Those Bastards !!!!! NUKE EM !!!!!!

Even after Hirohito decided to surrender, AGAINST the wishes of the Military ( which actually ran the country) those same Generals tried to prevent the Emperor from announcing his intention.

Prior to the nukes the Japanese Military not only did not intend to surrender, they ordered those peaceful civilians to arm themselves with bamboo stakes and spears and to charge any enemy troops that landed anywhere in Japan.

Revisionist history would try and convince you otherwise but they haven't a leg to stand on.

As for the targets BOTH were legit MILITARY targets, both were command and control centers with ARMY headquarters and martialing facilities, both were being used to create armies to resist any invasion and the command staff were there as well as large troops concentrations. Not to mention production facilities for war materials and ports.

 

[Superlative]

Oh japan was amassing armies to defend themselves. Those Bastards !!!!! NUKE EM !!!!!!

Not just armies, Civilians with "bamboo stakes and spears"

We dropped a Nuke on people with weapons that could not be countered, like bamboo stakes and spears.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Japan started a war. Japan murdered millions. Japan refused to surrender. Hardly the same as the World trade Center, but then any 6 year old is capable of reasoning that out.

If we had invaded Japan it is possible that the Japanese race would have been nearly annihilated. Saipan and Okinawa showed us what lengths the citizenry would go to. They committed mass suicide, by choice.

In the case of an invasion they would have charged armed troops with tanks and machine guns and been killed in FAR greater numbers than the two cities that were bombed. Further, you are aware more Japanese and Germans died in fire bombing then the two nukes put together?

On top of that, no one understood the lingering problems caused by atomic bombs. For them it was just a MUCH bigger bomb.

Not only would possible a million allied troops been killed or wounded but millions of Japanese would have died if we invaded. There is no credible evidence that A) the Japanese would surrender before the invasion and B) the Allies suspected the Japanese were on the verge of Surrender.

 

[Superlative]

There is no credible evidence that A) the Japanese would surrender before the invasion and B) the Allies suspected the Japanese were on the verge of Surrender.

June 18, 1945 the President's Chief of Staff, Admiral Leahy--the man who presided over meetings of both the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Combined U.S.-U.K.Chiefs-- recorded his own judgment in his diary (seven weeks prior to the bombing of Hiroshima):

It is my opinion at the present time that a surrender of Japan can be arranged with terms that can be accepted by Japan and that will make fully satisfactory provisions for America's defense against future trans-Pacific aggression. [THE DECISION, p. 324.]

http://www.doug-long.com/ga3.htm

The U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey, of course, concluded that "in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated." [THE DECISION, p. 645.]

Although recent studies have criticized the way the Survey reached this conclusion, note carefully that the two central points of concern were not even involved in its assessment. The Survey's judgment clearly would have been reinforced (or, rather, far stronger) if one allowed for (1) a clarification of the surrender terms; and (2) the Red Army attack--and stronger still if the option of an EARLY clarification were included and an EARLY indication that the Soviet Union was about to enter the war had been specified.

* As noted above, an internal 1946 War Department study discovered a few years ago asked what would have happened had there been no atomic bomb. It concluded that:

The Japanese leaders had decided to surrender and were merely looking for sufficient pretext to convince the die-hard Army Group that Japan had lost the war and must capitulate to the Allies.

This official document judged that Russia's early August entry into the war

. . . would almost certainly have furnished this pretext, and would have been sufficient to convince all responsible leaders that surrender was unavoidable.

http://www.doug-long.com/ga3.htm

 

[Superlative]

As for the targets BOTH were legit MILITARY targets, both were command and control centers with ARMY headquarters and martialing facilities, both were being used to create armies to resist any invasion and the command staff were there as well as large troops concentrations. Not to mention production facilities for war materials and ports.

Truman Speech, August 9, 1945 (excerpt)

"In a radio speech to the nation on August 9, 1945, President Truman called Hiroshima "a military base." It seems likely, considering his July 25 diary entry, that he was not aware that Hiroshima was a city. Otherwise, he was being untruthful about the nature of the target."

"The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians. But that attack is only a warning of things to come. If Japan does not surrender, bombs will have to be dropped on her war industries and, unfortunately, thousands of civilian lives will be lost. I urge Japanese civilians to leave industrial cities immediately, and save themselves from destruction."

http://www.dannen.com/decision/hst-ag09.html

I concede that there are many documentations that Hiroshima was in fact a military city.

"On August 6 1945, one atomic bomb instantly destroyed almost all of the houses and buildings in Hiroshima. They caught fire immediately and were reduced to ashes. In the case of wooden houses, those which were within one kilometer of the hypocenter were smashed at the moment of the explopsion. Those in the area between one kilometer and two kilometers from the hypocenter were completely destroyed. Those in the area two to three kilometers away were severely damaged. Even houses three to four kilometers from the center of the explosion were"

"Hiroshima Prefectural Government Hall, which was a wooden building 900 meters from the hypocenter, was flattened and burned. Hiroshima City Hall (1.2 kilometers from the center) also caught fire and the entire building was gutted, although the main shell of the hall which was reinforced concrete, was left standing."

"Army troops deployed around Hiroshima Castle, which was the center of Hiroshima as a military city, were nearly annihilated."

http://www.city.hiroshima.jp/kikaku/joho/toukei/History-E/c03.html

 

[Hamiltonian]

Eisenhower, a top general at the time, also opposed the nuclear strike and deemed in unnecessary. It's in his book, The Whitehouse Years.

This is not to say that Japan is completely innocent. They certainly committed their fair share of atrocities. However, if there is some principle or standard we're applying to our antagonists we must apply the same principle or standard to ourselves. If we do not, then we lack the integrity to be able to speak of what is good and evil or right and wrong.

 

[Vintij]

Japan started a war. Japan murdered millions. Japan refused to surrender. Hardly the same as the World trade Center, but then any 6 year old is capable of reasoning that out.

If we had invaded Japan it is possible that the Japanese race would have been nearly annihilated. Saipan and Okinawa showed us what lengths the citizenry would go to. They committed mass suicide, by choice.

In the case of an invasion they would have charged armed troops with tanks and machine guns and been killed in FAR greater numbers than the two cities that were bombed. Further, you are aware more Japanese and Germans died in fire bombing then the two nukes put together?

On top of that, no one understood the lingering problems caused by atomic bombs. For them it was just a MUCH bigger bomb.

Not only would possible a million allied troops been killed or wounded but millions of Japanese would have died if we invaded. There is no credible evidence that A) the Japanese would surrender before the invasion and B) the Allies suspected the Japanese were on the verge of Surrender.

"If we had invaded Japan it is possible that the Japanese race would have been nearly annihilated"

That I dissagree with. How can more japanese die from invasion, when our troops dont kill unarmed civilians. THe A-bombs killed half a million unarmed civilians. Please tell me how we saved lives by dropping the bombs?

Not only that, but we didnt even have to invade. We could have just continued the barrage of fire missles on every city until they gave up. The A-Bomb killed half a million people instantly. And over time more died but it was the Instant part that was the worst.

Secondly, you dont need credible evidence to know a country is going to surrender when literally 65% of that country was in flames. That tells me they are about to surrender.

"Further, you are aware more Japanese and Germans died in fire bombing then the two nukes put together?"

Really? How long did it take? One month, one year?

How about instantly? I bet it wasnt instantly. Should there not be a law in the human rule book that says dont kill half a million people instantly? Wow, I cant believe there are actually people who supported the dropping of the bomb.

I have no respect for people who enjoy killing half a million people instantly. If we are in a prolonged war, that is different......people die in wars. But seriously, half a million people dont die over night. Thats murder, not war.
I thought you were conservative?

 

[Truthmatters]

The world at the time completely accepted Trumans decision to drop the bomb.

It is sometimes hard to see throught the haze of time what was really thought at the time of an incident.

I really think Harry had made what he thought was the best decision at the time to save lives.

Horrible choice ,in hindsight may have not been the best.

Harry Truman was a good man and at the time the world overwhelmingly though hw had done the right thing.

 

[Superlative]

But there is also alot of information to the contrary.


"It is true that there was a Japanese army base on the outskirts of Hiroshima--it was a major staging area for the invasion and occupation of Southeast Asia. But historians have questioned the claim that the existence of the military base made Hiroshima a "military target." The only text I have on the bombing handy is Lifton and Mitchell, _Hiroshima in America: Fifty Years of Denial_--not the most objective source--but the two most prominent historians who have written on the development and use of atomic weapons, Richard Rhoades and Gar Alperovitz, agree on many of the basic facts.

On the military nature of the bombing: It is doubtful that the bomb dropped on Hiroshima was intended for any of the military bases. The bomb was dropped in the center of the city, miles from either the army or navy base. Given that the destructive capability of the bomb was not fully known, it is doubtful that the air force would have targeted the center of town if the bases were the intended targets. But few historians have ever argued that the bombing of Hiroshima was intended as a strategic, tactical strike on a particular target. "

http://www3.iath.virginia.edu/lists_archive/sixties-l/1213.html

 

[CSM]

The world at the time completely accepted Trumans decision to drop the bomb.

It is sometimes hard to see throught the haze of time what was really thought at the time of an incident.

I really think Harry had made what he thought was the best decision at the time to save lives.

Horrible choice ,in hindsight may have not been the best.

Harry Truman was a good man and at the time the world overwhelmingly though hw had done the right thing.

Seems to me that he should be tried for crimes against humanity.

 

[Truthmatters]

Did he start an illegal war based on lies?

 

[CSM]

Did he start an illegal war based on lies?

Actually there are some who adhere to the theory that the governement knew the attack on Pearl Harbor was imminent. Some also believe that Japan was ready to surrender and the nukes were unnecessary....seems like a crime against humanity that should be investigated, brought to trial and convicted ...even if the guy is dead....is it ever too late for justice?

 

[Shogun]

D'OH!


evidence and everything!


looks like the ability to rationalize killing civilians for the sake of the team isnt just a muslim extremist characteristic afterall....

 

[Truthmatters]

Actually there are some who adhere to the theory that the governement knew the attack on Pearl Harbor was imminent. Some also believe that Japan was ready to surrender and the nukes were unnecessary....seems like a crime against humanity that should be investigated, brought to trial and convicted ...even if the guy is dead....is it ever too late for justice?

That wasnt Harry fault either way.

 

[onedomino]

So how come we don't just drop one now?

Give us your address.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

That wasnt Harry fault either way.

You are aware that Truman authorized the use of the Atomic Bombs? Roosevelt was dead months before that.

 

[CSM]

That wasnt Harry fault either way.

Didn't say it was...I said "the government".

And Harry was in charge when Pearl Harbor was attacked. If he had intelligence that such an attack would occur and did nothing to prevent it, would he still be blameless?

 

[Gunny]

Im going to dissagree with you right there. Maybe if the nukes were dropped before we engulfed all major japanese cities with fire bombs, it would be ok. THe thing is though, we literally slaughterd half a million japanese civilians in one night. If there is any rule of war, that should be at the top of the great U.S rules of war......

Rule # 1. Dont slaughter half a million japanese civilians in one night, after you already burned down every major city in Japan. They were ready to surrender, and the A-bomb was not needed.

Dont ever justify half a million people of ANY nation dying in one night. You cant, even if you are from the god-loving U.S of A.

And also, dont blame Truman, he was conviced by his top general that they should drop the bomb. He was following orders like Presidents do.

I disagree. It was estimated that it would have cost 1M US casualties to invade Japan, and more than half a million Japanese would have been killed, that's for sure.

Japan refused to surrender. We were at war. I don't blame the President for authorizing the use of a weapon that would inflict the most casualties on the enemy while keeping our casualties to a minimum. That's a basic part of the strategy of waging war.

But advised by his generals or not, Truman was the Commander in Chief, and ultimately responsible since HE is the one who authorized the use of the A-bomb, not "his generals."

 

[Gunny]

Not just armies, Civilians with "bamboo stakes and spears"

We dropped a Nuke on people with weapons that could not be countered, like bamboo stakes and spears.

How would like to have been one of those Marines, Saliors or airmen that had fought through all the Pacific campaigns, and/or Army personnel reassigned from Europe, being told you will now invade mainland Japan and we estimate 1 million of you will die? Or we can drop this bomb, kill the enemy, and keep all of you alive.

Portraying the Japanese as victims is a joke. Obviously you know nothing of the Japanese from that period of time. They were to the person fanatically loyal to their emperor and would throw sand at you. Their concept of death was totally alien to ours. They considered it an honor and one's duty to charge hell with a bucket of water to protect their emperor and we would have been engaged in a partisan insurgency for a decade at least.

People who think as you are going to be the downfall of Western society. You're so busy trying to identify with ruthless enemies you can't seem to come up with any justification to kill them. And waiting for them to get to your door and acting in personal self-defense is TOO DAMNED LATE.

 

[Gunny]

Kathianne is pure scum for saying that right call at the right time BS.. Gee, Kath, guess you didnt have family there did ya. What about 9/11 for the people that did that too us. Right call at the right time right? So easy to say since it wasnt your country that got a nuclear bomb dropped on them. The US Govt even apologized for doing it years later I thought.

People like you dont give a damn about other people. You only care about your country and that is it. Everyone else can die a slow miserable death as far as you are concerened. And you are a teacher aren't you? What a shame someone like YOU can be allowed in the public school system. Thank god you are not teaching my kid. YOU SUCK !!!!!

Attack the opinion, not the poster please. This is a little over the top.