Atomic bomb

[Unkotare]

I have to agree with those who say the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved more lives than they killed. The firebombing of Tokyo killed more than the bombings of hamburg and Dresden together. Many more than the atomic bomb. If the atom bomb had not been used what was the alternative? More fire bombings? Starve Japan with the navy blockade. Invasion of Japan would have been much more bloody than invasion of Germany was.
Also American soldiers and Navy were still fighting the Japanese in Philipines and other battles as well as fighting kamikazes. American lives were being lost and more would be lost if not for the atom bomb. If the bomb had not been used and later the people discovered the war could have been ended fast with it and it was not used would political careers not be ruined?

the japanese were completely beaten...why not just go home

For one thing, because they still had extensive holding all over Asia. Holdings that would have to be cleared without a formal cessation of hostilities. Extending the need for humongous military expenses and loss of life for probably another year.

the japanese knew they couldnt win the war...and they learned that was the truth...only idiots like tojo thought the war was a good idea....nuking civiians is just wrong...totally

Actually, a lot of people didn't know that. And for most who did the idea of death was preferable to surrender. There's a clear documented reason for so few Japanese POW's

There is another reason as well.

 

[forkup]

I have to agree with those who say the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved more lives than they killed. The firebombing of Tokyo killed more than the bombings of hamburg and Dresden together. Many more than the atomic bomb. If the atom bomb had not been used what was the alternative? More fire bombings? Starve Japan with the navy blockade. Invasion of Japan would have been much more bloody than invasion of Germany was.
Also American soldiers and Navy were still fighting the Japanese in Philipines and other battles as well as fighting kamikazes. American lives were being lost and more would be lost if not for the atom bomb. If the bomb had not been used and later the people discovered the war could have been ended fast with it and it was not used would political careers not be ruined?

the japanese were completely beaten...why not just go home

For one thing, because they still had extensive holding all over Asia. Holdings that would have to be cleared without a formal cessation of hostilities. Extending the need for humongous military expenses and loss of life for probably another year.

the japanese knew they couldnt win the war...and they learned that was the truth...only idiots like tojo thought the war was a good idea....nuking civiians is just wrong...totally

Actually, a lot of people didn't know that. And for most who did the idea of death was preferable to surrender. There's a clear documented reason for so few Japanese POW's

There is another reason as well.

I'm guessing you mean the allies shooting them outright? The only thing I can say is that war is nasty and dirty. And if you have seen people surrendering only to turn themselves into human bombs a moment later a few times you will start to err on the side of caution. It might not be right but it is human.

 

[forkup]

cooking alive babies and little children may be ok with some but I would pass...truman was the greastest asshole that ever lived and a damned good democrat

There is nothing "OK" about war. The only thing you can do is try to end it as quickly and painlessly as possible. Japan attacked the US. They also attacked other countries, a lot of other countries killing millions. The atom bomb is a very efficient weapon of war more deadly than most but death is death. The allies felt that using it would shorten the war. I think it did. trying to assert morality in a war is a contradiction in terms.

 

[Unkotare]

I have to agree with those who say the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved more lives than they killed. The firebombing of Tokyo killed more than the bombings of hamburg and Dresden together. Many more than the atomic bomb. If the atom bomb had not been used what was the alternative? More fire bombings? Starve Japan with the navy blockade. Invasion of Japan would have been much more bloody than invasion of Germany was.
Also American soldiers and Navy were still fighting the Japanese in Philipines and other battles as well as fighting kamikazes. American lives were being lost and more would be lost if not for the atom bomb. If the bomb had not been used and later the people discovered the war could have been ended fast with it and it was not used would political careers not be ruined?

the japanese were completely beaten...why not just go home

For one thing, because they still had extensive holding all over Asia. Holdings that would have to be cleared without a formal cessation of hostilities. Extending the need for humongous military expenses and loss of life for probably another year.

the japanese knew they couldnt win the war...and they learned that was the truth...only idiots like tojo thought the war was a good idea....nuking civiians is just wrong...totally

Actually, a lot of people didn't know that. And for most who did the idea of death was preferable to surrender. There's a clear documented reason for so few Japanese POW's

There is another reason as well.

I'm guessing you mean the allies shooting them outright? ....

It was not uncommon. In fact, so many US servicemen had taken to sending the ears or even entire skulls of dead POWs home to their sweethearts as souvenirs that the US Navy had to issue a directive about it specifically.

But there were other reasons as well. Militarists in the government made sure every soldier, sailor, and civilian in harm's way got the propaganda message that Americans would rape, torture, and mutilate any prisoner they caught. It was effective propaganda and only made things worse for American POWs.

Skulls, Ears, Noses, And Other Morbid "Trophies" Americans Took From Dead Japanese In WWII

After Pearl Harbor, Americans began to view the Japanese as inherently evil and less than human.

allthatsinteresting.com

" The gathering of Japanese combatants’ body parts by American soldiers was common enough practice that the U.S. Army issued a directive in January 1944 to prevent such acts. Yet the practice continued. "

 

[Unkotare]

... The only thing you can do is try to end it as quickly and painlessly as possible. ......

Wouldn't that approach suggest that any possible surrender of your enemy earlier in the war at least be explored thoroughly?

 

[Unkotare]

Skull Trophies of the Pacific War: Transgressive Objects of Remembrance
Simon Harrison

The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute
Vol. 12, No. 4 (Dec., 2006), pp. 817-836 (20 pages)

 

[forkup]

I have to agree with those who say the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved more lives than they killed. The firebombing of Tokyo killed more than the bombings of hamburg and Dresden together. Many more than the atomic bomb. If the atom bomb had not been used what was the alternative? More fire bombings? Starve Japan with the navy blockade. Invasion of Japan would have been much more bloody than invasion of Germany was.
Also American soldiers and Navy were still fighting the Japanese in Philipines and other battles as well as fighting kamikazes. American lives were being lost and more would be lost if not for the atom bomb. If the bomb had not been used and later the people discovered the war could have been ended fast with it and it was not used would political careers not be ruined?

the japanese were completely beaten...why not just go home

For one thing, because they still had extensive holding all over Asia. Holdings that would have to be cleared without a formal cessation of hostilities. Extending the need for humongous military expenses and loss of life for probably another year.

the japanese knew they couldnt win the war...and they learned that was the truth...only idiots like tojo thought the war was a good idea....nuking civiians is just wrong...totally

Actually, a lot of people didn't know that. And for most who did the idea of death was preferable to surrender. There's a clear documented reason for so few Japanese POW's

There is another reason as well.

I'm guessing you mean the allies shooting them outright? ....

It was not uncommon. In fact, so many US servicemen had taken to sending the ears or even entire skulls of dead POWs home to their sweethearts as souvenirs that the US Navy had to issue a directive about it specifically.

But there were other reasons as well. Militarists in the government made sure every soldier, sailor, and civilian in harm's way got the propaganda message that Americans would rape, torture, and mutilate any prisoner they caught. It was effective propaganda and only made things worse for American POWs.

Skulls, Ears, Noses, And Other Morbid "Trophies" Americans Took From Dead Japanese In WWII

After Pearl Harbor, Americans began to view the Japanese as inherently evil and less than human.

allthatsinteresting.com

That's my point. That's why it's so difficult and I'd argue even impossible to apply hindsight on what happened let alone morality. How do you judge whether or not it was kindness or evil to drop the bomb? We only know what happened in the scenario where they did drop it. We don't know what would have happened if they didn't. I consider myself pretty knowledgeable about the time period and I can say that I have no idea considering all the variables and unknowns.

 

[forkup]

... The only thing you can do is try to end it as quickly and painlessly as possible. ......

Wouldn't that approach suggest that any possible surrender of your enemy earlier in the war at least be explored thoroughly?

Yes. Who said they didn't? And again we are talking about a situation that has more implications than the simple floating of surrender terms.

 

[Unkotare]

... How do you judge whether or not it was kindness or evil to drop the bomb? .......

You look at who it was aimed at; the military force we were combating, or helpless civilians. The war began with an attack on our military by an enemy military (a legitimate reason to declare war), and ended with the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of the starving civilians of an already defeated nation in a horrifyingly novel manner.

 

[Unkotare]

... The only thing you can do is try to end it as quickly and painlessly as possible. ......

Wouldn't that approach suggest that any possible surrender of your enemy earlier in the war at least be explored thoroughly?

Yes, who said they didn't? ...

fdr

 

[forkup]

... How do you judge whether or not it was kindness or evil to drop the bomb? .......

You look at who it was aimed at; the military force we were combating, or helpless civilians. The war began with an attack on our military by an enemy military (a legitimate reason to declare war), and ended with the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of starving civilians in a horrifyingly novel manner.

Yes, and it caused the Emperor to force the military to accept unconditional surrender, something that quite literally went against everything they held dear, for most more important than life. I highly doubt it would have had the same impact on the Emperor if they would have targeted a purely military target after all they felt themselves to be Samurai and as such dying was not considered a punishment but a favor.

 

[Unkotare]

... We only know what happened in the scenario where they did drop it. We don't know what would have happened if they didn't......

Ah, but one of the chief excuses of those who would defend the decision is "it saved millions of lives!" This is proclaimed with great certainty by those who find the questioning of a comfortable narrative unsettling.

 

[forkup]

... The only thing you can do is try to end it as quickly and painlessly as possible. ......

Wouldn't that approach suggest that any possible surrender of your enemy earlier in the war at least be explored thoroughly?

Yes, who said they didn't? ...

fdr

Sure he said that. But was that what happened? In my experience presidents are not against lying when national security is concerned. Let's say they did consider it and ended up making the determination to reject it for the reasons I described. What makes you think FDR would have admitted to considering it when that would cast doubt on the allies' resolve?

 

[forkup]

... We only know what happened in the scenario where they did drop it. We don't know what would have happened if they didn't......

Ah, but one of the chief excuses of those who would defend the decision is "it saved millions of lives!" This is proclaimed with great certainty by those who find the questioning of a comfortable narrative unsettling.

Anybody who proclaims great certainty dealing with hypotheticals is a fool or a liar. Since I'm neither I don't feel I need to answer for them.

 

[rightwinger]

I have to agree with those who say the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved more lives than they killed. The firebombing of Tokyo killed more than the bombings of hamburg and Dresden together. Many more than the atomic bomb. If the atom bomb had not been used what was the alternative? More fire bombings? Starve Japan with the navy blockade. Invasion of Japan would have been much more bloody than invasion of Germany was.
Also American soldiers and Navy were still fighting the Japanese in Philipines and other battles as well as fighting kamikazes. American lives were being lost and more would be lost if not for the atom bomb. If the bomb had not been used and later the people discovered the war could have been ended fast with it and it was not used would political careers not be ruined?

Once we had an atomic bomb and nobody else did, the war was over. We were never going to have to invade.

The bomb on Hiroshima may have been justified, but a strictly military target would have been more justifiable in history.

Nagasaki three days later was never necessary. One bomb, threaten dozens more and negotiate from there

 

[Unkotare]

.... quite literally went against everything they held dear, for most more important than life. dying was not considered a punishment but a favor .....

You read too many comic books.

 

[Unkotare]

.... I highly doubt it would have had the same impact on the Emperor if they would have targeted a purely military target ....

You contradict yourself.

 

[Unkotare]

... The only thing you can do is try to end it as quickly and painlessly as possible. ......

Wouldn't that approach suggest that any possible surrender of your enemy earlier in the war at least be explored thoroughly?

Yes, who said they didn't? ...

fdr

Sure he said that. But was that what happened? .....

Yes, that's what happened. Prior to departing for the Yalta Conference, fdr received a 40-page communique from MacArthur outlining no fewer than five separate overtures to surrender that he had received through various channels. fdr rejected the very notion out of hand, proclaiming MacArthur "our greatest general, but our worst politician." The war was serving fdr's political interests just fine, and he had no intention of stopping until he had a chance to try out his new toy by slaughtering hundreds of thousands of civilians. If tens of thousands more American servicemen died in the meantime, he was evidently willing to accept that.

 

[The Irish Ram]

.... If the atom bomb had not been used what was the alternative?....

Maybe pursue some of the overtures to surrender that were being floated by Japan long before the bombings? It's possible the war could have been ended well before Okinawa.

Japan would not agree to unconditional surrender.

The terms being floated were the exact ones that we eventually accepted after incinerating hundreds of thousands of civilians in atomic hellfire. There are several very long threads on this here. Go take a look.

It was the timeframe between the terms being floated and their eventual acceptance that caused the problems...

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I have to agree with those who say the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved more lives than they killed. The firebombing of Tokyo killed more than the bombings of hamburg and Dresden together. Many more than the atomic bomb. If the atom bomb had not been used what was the alternative? More fire bombings? Starve Japan with the navy blockade. Invasion of Japan would have been much more bloody than invasion of Germany was.
Also American soldiers and Navy were still fighting the Japanese in Philipines and other battles as well as fighting kamikazes. American lives were being lost and more would be lost if not for the atom bomb. If the bomb had not been used and later the people discovered the war could have been ended fast with it and it was not used would political careers not be ruined?

You just admitted being uninformed. The bombs were unnecessary and a war crime. Japan was done. They were staving and incapable of any offensive action. They were also totally defenseless to aerial bombing.

Dirty Harry Truman should have been executed for this terrible war crime.

The American people deserve better leaders.

You hadn't made your colossal dumbass post for the day until now. Congrats!