QuoteReplyTopic: Atomic Japan Posted: 29-Mar-2007 at 02:02
Originally posted by DukeC
It's easy to sit back 60 years after the event and decide what you would have done.
I am only criticising the usage of the atomic bombs, I never decided what I would have done.
You dismiss my opinions by saying that ''it is easy to decide after 60 years'', but look what you yourself are doing.
Originally posted by DukeC
Whatever the motivation, whether it was to frighten the Soviets or end resistance in Japan, the bombs did end the war.
Originally posted by DukeC
The atomic bombs put an end to this.
Whether the bombs ended the war or not is disputed, but yet you are deciding that they did. Let me throw back the exact same thing to you.
It is very easy by hindsight to claim that the bombs ended the war and fixed every thing.
Originally posted by DukeC
It was time to end the war.
Originally posted by DukeC
Saving lives were a priority
You yourself write ''it was time to end the war'' or ''saving lives were a priority'' , this perfectly fits in the category of ''sitting back and deciding things 60 years after the event''. Perhaps you should not pick on what other people do when you are doing the exact same thing.
If we are not allowed to discuss and criticise what has happened in the past, If whatever we say is dismissed by ''it is easy to sit back and decide -years after the event'' , What is the point of discussing/studying history? What is the point of this forum? Countries and nations still destroy one another, horrible things still keep happening. History is there to learn from, rather than to be dismissed by the excuse of ''it happened -years go'' and then to be repeated.
Originally posted by DukeC
. At the time, an inexperienced President who had the heavy weight of winning the war against fascism thrust on him mere months before, did the best he could.
It is very interesting that you show so much understanding to one person while dismissing the criticism against atomic bombs which instantly killed so many people and made generations of people suffer. Using your logic, we can easily justify any action. For example If we consider the upbringing of Hitler and the climate of Germany at the time of his youth, what Hitler did must have been a natural choice for him, but that definitely does not mean what he did was right, does it? There are universal right and wrong things that do not change whatever the situation or the time. Being ''inexperienced and having a heavy weight of winning the war'' can definitely not be an excuse.
Originally posted by DukeC
Saving lives were a priority, first and foremost the lives of the service people who were being asked(or told) to defeat an enemy that had brought total war to Americas' doorstep.domination. It was time to end the war.
You seem to think that the atomic bombs were an alternative to the invasion plan. That it was either the bombs or the invasion and America chose the bombs (because it wanted to save people). No, the bombs were not an alternative at all, but an addition/prelude to the invasion. America was planning to invade Japan at the same time as dropping 9 atomic bombs between August~November 1945. This fact shows very well that saving lives was not a priority at all for America, whether it be the lives of the service people or not. It shows very well that America's priorities or the ulterior motives were
1, to scare the Soviets and to stop losing half of Japan to the Soviet Invasion,
2, to win the war and show its power to the world.
3, to test the newly developed nuclear weapons.
Originally posted by DukeC
They also ended the genocide that was going on in China. The Japanese still held large area of the Chinese mainland in 1945 and were extremely harsh on it's population. They used chemical and biological agents against civilians there and treated any form of resitance with brutality. Something like 50,000 Chinese were thought to have lost their lives for aid given to the Dolittle raid flyers alone. Over 30,000,000 million Chinese lost their lives during WW II most of them at the hands of the Japanese. The atomic bombs put an end to this.
Yes what Japan did to Asian people was evil and should never be forgotten, however whether the bombs ended the war or not is disputed. The fact that Japan did not surrender after the first atomic bomb but surrendered immediately after the start of the Soviet Invasion from the north (which happens to coincide with the timing of the second bomb), shows that there is every possibility that the Soviet invasion was the reason behind Japan's surrender.
Even if The bombs did end the war, Japan was already on the verge of losing the war. The war would have only lasted few weeks or a month at the most even if the bombs were not dropped.
Since you are bringing the Asian victims of Japan up, Let me point out to you that (as I wrote before) saving them was not an issue at all in America's motives to drop the bombs. Even if as a result the bombs did happen to save some people, it does not mean that it was the only or the best way to save them. If the issue was how to save those people, then I am sure that there would have been many other ways to achieve it without dropping Atomic bombs and killing that amount of people.
The point is, you can not use Asian victims of Japan as an excuse to justify the usage of atomic bombs or prove their neccesity.
Originally posted by DukeC
It's possible that many of the same people who are so critical of the use of the atomic bombs would be equally critical if they hadn't been dropped. If the Allies had invaded Japan and huge military and civilian casualties occured many would have condemned Truman for not dropping the bombs.
I really don't think so. Just think about it, so many countries have developed nuclear weapons since WW2 and so many wars have happened since then, but nobody has ever used nuclear weapons. Do you see any body being critical of not having used nuclear weapons in all those years and wars? I don't.
Originally posted by DukeC
For those that say Japan was seeking peace, I think that's unrealistic.
Who do you mean by those? I did not see any body saying that Japan was seeking peace. Since you wrote my name on top of your post I will take it that you are meaning me. For your information I never wrote such a thing.
Originally posted by DukeC
Anyone who thinks the Japanese were helpless victims of the Americans needs to do a little research.
Again, I did not notice any body claiming generally that Japan was a helpless victim of America. However regarding the atomic bombs, the victims WERE helpless weren't they? Any body would be helpless against nuclear weapons.
I don't see why this debate is still going on. The bombs ended, or quickened the end of the war. Japan got what it deserved after Pearl Harbor, the Bataan death march, Nanking, and so many more atrocities.
Concrete is heavy; iron is hard--but the grass will prevail.
Edward Abbey
im just the opinion after only read a few comments that you guys in america got the feeling,to have the whole world under control.
we dont forget now that china in a few years probably the same idea gonna have, i just hope america gonna be on the same page,otherwise we gonna have a little problem,cause china gonna kick ass,this for sure.
im wondering if americans already feel their defiet against super-china...
(thanks to nike)
if japan has nukes or not wont matter...if you got 200 mio.solders ready.
and this i write, as someone whos against chinas politics....
Are you asking if we (Americans) think we'll be defeated by China? Not a chance in hell. There's no way they can make to the US mainland. Their boats would be sunk hundred of miles before they even got to Hawaii!
Concrete is heavy; iron is hard--but the grass will prevail.
Edward Abbey
what do u talkin about, the war is already over man... and china won...
boats full off chinese came already years ago and settelt in sanfranciscos china town...
even you buyin now all possible products off china...
i dont say they gonna come and shoot all americans down (not yet)
its an economical war,and china made last year more money than the us!
after they buy into the american stockmarket, what do you think gonna rule?
i hope for the best, i like washington more than bejing.
(dont forget that the americans close heaps of factories and re open them in china.thats tons of money and jobs america losing every day...and one day china just gonna be as rich&powerful as america then we see wich boat u guys gonna sink...)
lol You got some twisted logic going on there, but atleast it's good for humor as thats about what it's worth. Chinese immigrants come here to be American, not Chinese. And the US government is in the process of making trade with China on fair grounds since China likes to post their currency at 40% less value then it really is. As soon as it becomes more fair, it's going to allow American companies to compete once again, atleast thats the idea.
i dont say they gonna come and shoot all americans down (not yet)
Not yet? Try never, they would be able to make here. We spend an estimated 360 billion on military alone, they just raised their spending on military to 60 billion I believe. They have a long ways to go before htye hope to reach our level.
About the bombs being dropped in Japan, they were necessary. Why? Because every month a estimated 200,000 Asian non-combatants were dying because of the conflict. Does the country who causes this deserve it, yes. They didn't want to stop, and when the Emperor finally decided it was enough after the first bomb, the Japanese military still wanted to continue and find and destroy the Emperor's Surrender recording.
On top of that, the whole population was one willing to fight. I believe Tobodai brought this up in a previous debate when his Grandmother told him stories on how they were even readying Children to fight the Allied soldiers. They were told that the Americans were going to kill the men, rape the women, and BBQ the children, not lying about this. The Japanese made the society believe they were superior and the Americans were barbaric people.
And even if the population was going to fight, you can't deny the fact that 200,000 people were dying in Asia because of this War. From the single bomb at Nagasaki, 80,000 are estimated to have died from the drop to a few months afterwards. Even with the months combined, that doesn't match up to the single months of death with the war going on.
And 9 bombs were supposed to be dropped from August to November? Where does this info come from? They had two bombs made that were ready to be dropped. It took two to finally get an official surrender. There were no intentions for anymore then there had to be. I'm not even sure if they made more then two that were ready for use, or even if more would have been ready for November.
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey
My view on this subject isn't just intellectual, I've got a very good idea of what the American mindset was at the time. I spent a lot of my youth listening to the experiences and opinions of people who were there. From relatives who served on the ground against the Japanese and at sea. When you're talking to a 70 year old relative who starts crying and yelling as he relates what it was like to be attacked by kamakazies because the emotions are still fresh and raw after 50 years, it brings it home. Or hearing stories of what ground combat was like with Japanese forces(totally brutal). It was total war, and after the assumption of power by the Japanese armed forces, there was no seperation of the civilian and military. All Japanese were doing their duty for the Emperor.
I don't think you understand Americans very well. While global politics after the war were one consideration, ending the war as quickly as possible was the driving motivation.
@omshanti
My view on this subject isn't just intellectual,
My view on this subject or wars in general isn't intellectual either. I have experienced a 9year war in which I lost two family memebers.
Originally posted by DukeC
I've got a very good idea of what the American mindset was at the time.
The mindset of the general American people is not the same as the decision of the leaders. This can be said about Japan at the time as well. Also Just because you know what the American mindset was at that time, it does not mean that only you have the right to comment on the matter or that others' opinions should be dismissed .
Originally posted by DukeC
I spent a lot of my youth listening to the experiences and opinions of people who were there. From relatives who served on the ground against the Japanese and at sea. When you're talking to a 70 year old relative who starts crying and yelling as he relates what it was like to be attacked by kamakazies because the emotions are still fresh and raw after 50 years, it brings it home. Or hearing stories of what ground combat was like with Japanese forces(totally brutal).
This is indeed one-sided. No wonderr why you only write things from the ''American mindset'' point of view and dismiss other opinions.
Originally posted by DukeC
It was total war, and after the assumption of power by the Japanese armed forces,there was no seperation of the civilian and military. All Japanese were doing their duty for theEmperor.
This is a very subjective way of seeing things. Some people can separate civilians from militaries/nations, some people can not. When people can not, situations like 9/11 happen.
Originally posted by DukeC
I don't think you understand Americans very well.
Believe me, thanks to this forum I understand really well how onesided and subjective some Americans can be.
Originally posted by DukeC
While global politics after the war were one consideration, ending the war as quickly as possible was the drivingmotivation.
Perhaps you can say that the former applies more to the leaders and the latter more to the general population. Also I am sure that the general Japanese population was really hoping for the war to end as well.
Originally posted by DukeC
ending the war as quickly as possible was the drivingmotivation.
Yes, and it did not matter with what price the war ended as long as it was not American.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
]And 9 bombs were supposed to be dropped from August to November? Where does this info come from? They had two bombs made that were ready to be dropped. It took two to finally get an official surrender. There were no intentions for anymore then there had to be. I'm not even sure if they made more then two that were ready for use, or even if more would have been ready for November.
About the bombs being dropped in Japan, they were necessary. Why? Because every month a estimated 200,000 Asian non-combatants were dying because of the conflict.
First of all you are basing your argument on the assumption that the war ended because of the bombs , when this fact is disputed (just read the whole thread).
Second of all (as I have been saying many times) saving Asian people was not an issue in America's motives to drop the bombs. Even if as a result it did happen to save some people, it does not mean that it was the only or the best way to save them.
Third of all, with this logic we can easily say that it is necessary to drop nuclear bombs in America to save the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran ...etc,. or to drop nuclear bombs in Israel to save the Palestinian people.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
Does the country who causes this deserve it, yes.
Perhaps America DESERVES to be sanctioned like Iran, invaded and destroyed like Iraq and Afgahnistan, to be divided in to many states, to have puppet governments built in it and to have all its natural resources stolen. Perhaps America DESERVES to be made in to a hell just like it has done to so many countries in the world. Is this what you are saying? Well, your logic says so.
With your logic, the whole world will be destroyed very easily because one way or another every single nation/country in the world will either deserve or necessitate to have nuclear bombs dropped on them.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
On top of that, the whole population was one willing to fight.
How do you know that? Were you in Japan at that time? I am sure that (as it is the norm in any country in the world) there were many people witthin Japan who were against the war .
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
I believe Tobodai brought this up in a previous debate when his Grandmother told him stories on how they were even readying Children to fight the Allied soldiers.
Perhaps that is because there were no young men or proper army left in the country any more. But even so, as far as I know many people evacuated in to the country side or in the mountain villages in order to hide , rather than preparing to fight.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
And even if the population was going to fight, you can't deny the fact that 200,000 people were dying in Asia because of this War. From the single bomb at Nagasaki, 80,000 are estimated to have died from the drop to a few months afterwards. Even with the months combined, that doesn't match up to the single months of death with the war going on.
It would be fair enough to say what you say if America had dropped the bombs bacause it cared for and wanted to save the Asian people thinking that the atomic bombs are the only way to acheve this. That is not the case, is it? America dropped the bombs for its own interests and did not give a damn about saving people in Asia. Even if as a result the bombs happened to save some people, from the fact that they were not dropped for this reason we can easily conclude that it does not mean they were the best or the only way to save those people. I am sure that if America or the world had cared for the Asian people and had wanted to save them, there would have been other ways to achieve this without using atomic bombs. In short you can not claim that the bombs were necessary to save the Asian people whatever the result, because they were not used for that reason at all.
As a whole, I see a a very clear tendency in nations and people to only memorialize their own victimhood while forgetting or trying to justify what they have done (or are doing) to others.
Japan is being hypocritical
1, by only commemorating the atomic bombs dropped on themselves while not giving a damn about what they have done to the Asian people.
2, by saying ''world peace'' or ''no more fighting'' every time they remmember the atomic bombs, while supporting and helping America in the war in Iraq or the so called ''war on terrorism''.
America is being exactly the same when it keeps saying ''remember Pearl harbour'' or ''Remember 9/11'' while justifying/ignoring what it has done or is doing to so many countries in the world.
In my opinion people/countries will really learn from history when they remember what they have done to others. In this respect both Japan and America have not really learnt anything.
In short neither Japan nor America (nor any other country) is innocent as a nation, but this has nothing to do with pointing out and criticising a violent and inhuman action/crime (in the case of this thread the atomic bombs) in order to stop them from happening again. Regardless of who is the victim and who is the aggressor, a crime is a crime and it should be remembered as such rather than a necessity or a just action. Otherwise history will keep repeating itself and violence will never end.
The mindset of the general American people is not the same as the decision of the leaders. This can be said about Japan at the time as well. Also Just because you know what the American mindset was at that time, it does not mean that only you have the right to comment on the matter or that others' opinions should be dismissed .
The mindset of the American people determines it's leadership. America was led by a leader selected by it's people and he spoke with their voice. Japan was controlled by a small group of fanatics, including the Emperor who saw conquest as the only option available to Japan. I don't claim to have the right to comment, I'm just asserting my opinion.
This is indeed one-sided. No wonderr why you only write things from the ''American mindset'' point of view and dismiss other opinions.
I'm not going to apologize for the sacrifice made by people I care about or many others I never knew. So many gave their lives so we had a chance to live in freedom. However things have turned out, it's a world better than what would have happened if the Japanese and Germans had achieved their dreams of domination. I get the feeling that you and many others don't like the fact that the Allies did win the war. Just what kind of world do you think we'd have if the leaders of the time didn't use every means at their disposal to defeat the fascists.
The Japanese cause was evil, I don't care what you or anyone says about the subject. They brutally murdered millions throughout the east for over a decade. In the Rape of Nanjing alone they killed over 300,000, most of them bayoneted to save on bullets. They did use WMDs in WW II, chemical and biological, they also commited cannibalism in China, New Guinea and in a notorious case against U.S. flyers shot down over the Bonin Islands.
The Japanese had proved they could not be reasoned with and the end result was the use of the atomic weapons. Don't blame the U.S. for fighting a war with every means at their disposal. That's what I mean about you not understanding Americans.
In short neither Japan nor America (nor any other country) is innocent as a nation, but this has nothing to do with pointing out and criticising a violent and inhuman action/crime (in the case of this thread the atomic bombs) in order to stop them from happening again. Regardless of who is the victim and who is the aggressor, a crime is a crime and it should be remembered as such rather than a necessity or a just action. Otherwise history will keep repeating itself and violence will never end.
It was total war, there were no rules in WW II. It saw the Nazis use industrial murder in Europe as a state policy and the Japanese throw off the restrictions of civilization in a pursuit of pure power. I don't hear you saying anything at all for the many people who were saved by the actions of the Allies in WW II, just condemnation of it's actions in stopping the slaughter of innocents.
The dropping of the bombs did have a horrible effect, one that finally brought a regime that had been filled with bloodlust for over a decade back to its' senses. Seen in context, the use of the atomic bombs was justified because despite what you claim, they did end the war.
China is growing much more faster than the US does. In 2005 your military budget was about 500 billion dollars - Chinas was 70. In 2006 China had it 150 - US 500. In 2007 they plan to have 360 billion seperated for military - remember they do not pay soldiers as u do.
Go to globalsecurity and globalfirepower and see those new projects of China's military sustems. Remember just a week ago China tested intercosmic missle that shot down a fake sputnik.
I agree with Duce, since I know who are Japanese and I lived among them - It would end with total destruction of whole Japan and the death of 3 million US soldiers.
History is a farm. Nations are farmers. What they planted before will show what is going to grow tomorrow!
The mindset of the American people determines it's leadership. America was led by a leader selected by it's people and he spoke with their voice.
Yes, the mindset of the American people does determine its leadership, but not every single decision the leaders make. Any way according to what you say the president of America is the representative of the American mind-set, isn't it? I can see really well what kind of intellectual level the American mindset has from looking at the current president of America.
Originally posted by DukeC
Japan was controlled by a small group of fanatics
Doesn't this remind you of another country? America now?
Originally posted by DukeC
the Emperor who saw conquest as the only option available to Japan.
Yes you are right, its just like George Bush now, isn't it.
Originally posted by DukeC
I don't claim to have the right to comment, I'm just asserting my opinion.
By writing this (read the quote below)
Originally posted by DukeC
It's easy to sit back 60 years after the event and decide what you would have done.
and this
Originally posted by DukeC
I've got a very good idea of what the American mindset was at the time.
you are clearly implying that your opinion has more credibility than other members' opinions.
Originally posted by DukeC
I'm not going to apologize for the sacrifice made by people I care about or many others I never knew.
What are you talking about. Who asked you to apologize? You seem to take the discussions about nations too personally.
Also just because they are the people you cared for, it does not mean what they did was right, does it? According to what you say, whether they are the people you care for or not is the standard to say who was right and wrong. Very subjective point of view indeed.
Originally posted by DukeC
So many gave their lives so we had a chance to live in freedom. However things have turned out, it's a world better than what would have happened if the Japanese and Germans had achieved their dreams of domination.
What are you talking about again? The topic is about the atomic bombs. The Germans had already lost the war and the Japanese were losing the war regardless of the bombs.
Originally posted by DukeC
I get the feeling that you and many others don't like the fact that the Allies did win the war. Just what kind of world do you think we'd have if the leaders of the time didn't use every means at their disposal to defeat the fascists.
Wow, you are so sensitive about any criticism against America that it is either all or nothing for you, isn't it? So if we criticise the atomic bombs , we are not feeling well that the Americans and the allies won the war and we are automatically siding with Japan and Germany? For your information, I absolutely do not care who won the war. I am simply criticising the atomic bombs (in this topic).
Originally posted by DukeC
Just what kind of world do you think we'd have if the leaders of the time didn't use every means at their disposal to defeat the fascists.
Oh come on, you know very well that Japan had no chance to win regardless of the atomic bombs.
Originally posted by DukeC
I don't care what you or anyone says about the subject.
You obviously care, that is why you post and write back emotionally.
Originally posted by DukeC
The Japanese cause was evil, They brutally murdered millions throughout the east for over a decade. In the Rape of Nanjing alone they killed over 300,000, most of them bayoneted to save on bullets. They did use WMDs in WW II, chemical and biological, they also commited cannibalism in China, New Guinea and in a notorious case against U.S. flyers shot down over the Bonin Islands.
Yes you are absolutely right. Japan was evil and its crimes should never be forgotten, in fact in my opinion it is not fair to the Asian people that the crimes of Japan are not known througout the world as much as the Holocaust. However you can not use the deaths of Asian people to justify America's crimes, especially when America did not give a damn about saving those people and only acted for its own benefit.
Originally posted by DukeC
Don't blame the U.S. for fighting a war with every means at their disposal. That's what I mean about you not understanding Americans.
Very interesting, you complain when I criticise America for using atomic bombs, but you blame the Japanese here (read the quote below)
Originally posted by DukeC
They did use WMDs in WW II, chemical and biological,
when they were doing exactly the same thing, ''fighting a war with every means at their disposal''.
Originally posted by DukeC
It was total war, there were no rules in WW II.
Yes you are right, there were no rules. But then if there were no rules, how can you complain about what the Germans or the Japanese did? So whenever it is about America ''there were no rules'' but when it is about other countries there were rules and what they did was a crime? Just like what the Germans and the Japanese did were crimes in that ''rule-less'' war, America's usage of the atomic bombs was a crime too.
Originally posted by DukeC
It saw the Nazis use industrial murder in Europe as a state policy and the Japanese throw off the restrictions of civilization in a pursuit of pure power.
Yes most countries in that war including America and the Soviet union were fighting for their own interests and in a pursuit of pure power.
Originally posted by DukeC
I don't hear you saying anything at all for the many people who were saved by the actions of the Allies in WW II, just condemnation of it's actions in stopping the slaughter of innocents.
Yes ,yes, yes. America is always the ''saviour'' or the ''liberator'' isn't it? Frist of all we are discussing the atomic bombs here not the actions of the allies. so don't mix things up. Second of all, America dropped the bombs for its own interests, not to save Asian people. so stop that slogan of ''we saved the world''.
Originally posted by DukeC
just condemnation of it's actions in stopping the slaughter of innocents.[
Remember? The atomic bombs were a slaughter of innocents.
Guess we should be happy that it took TWO bombs to finally get a surrender. I mean, just below you said today Japan was losing already, just shows how much they didn't want to give up. Can't imagine how long it'd take if the bombs weren't dropped...
First of all you are basing your argument on the assumption that the war ended because of the bombs , when this fact is disputed (just read the whole thread).
Disputed, in otherwords what other people think? It took two to get Japan to the table, unless the Japanese were seriously considering letting the chance of another one to be dropped.
Second of all (as I have been saying many times) saving Asian people was not an issue in America's motives to drop the bombs.
Why we were helping the Chinese before we even went to war with the Japanese. Sure it was in our interest, but that means those people were in our interest too. There were many reasons for it, one of them I believe was to stop all the massecres. If we did a landing invasion in Japan, it would be just a constant blood bath both there and mainland Asia.
Even if as a result it did happen to save some people, it does not mean that it was the only or the best way to save them.
Do you have a better way of ending the killing of hundreds on the allied side? To win a war, you try to win it by taking the least casualites, and Japan wasn't anywhere near ready to give up.
Third of all, with this logic we can easily say that it is necessary to drop nuclear bombs in America to save the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran ...etc,. or to drop nuclear bombs in Israel to save the Palestinian people.
So we should've of nuked the M.East and parts of Africa for the attacks on our Embassies bombing, the first trade center bombing, the bombing of the Cole, and 9/11? And those terrorist are still a constant threat to us, atleast they say they are.
And if you feel it's justified, you can always try nuking us.
Perhaps America DESERVES to be sanctioned like Iran, invaded and destroyed like Iraq and Afgahnistan, to be divided in to many states, to have puppet governments built in it and to have all its natural resources stolen.
I think i missed the headline about us dividing them into states, because I remember our government saying they want to be kept as one country. If you have the news please share. And besides, the US is already a bunch of states, about 50 of us!
And puppet governments? Don't they usually listen to the government thats incharge of them and not insult them sometimes like Iraq's has? Maybe we have a differing definition?
And sanctions on us for what? The country is happy with our government, not the current adminstration. But from what I understand, not to many Iranian are happy about their current regime.
It took alot of pushes and shoves before the US went to war, it took 3000 deaths on 9/11 to finally say we had enough. Before that we tried to hit Al Qaeda alone, but it obviously didn't work, so we went to Afghanistan. With Iraq I never agreed on.
Perhaps America DESERVES to be made in to a hell just like it has done to so many countries in the world. Is this what you are saying? Well, your logic says so.
The japanese started with the bombing in Pearl Harbor, Islamic fanatics started with multiple attacks on us. With Iraq maybe we do deserve it, the idiot in Office put us there and it was wrong.
With your logic, the whole world will be destroyed very easily because one way or another every single nation/country in the world will either deserve or necessitate to have nuclear bombs dropped on them.
Why do nukes have to be used with all problems? I didn't say that, I just said Japan needed to be stopped as quickly as possible. They were the solution in doing so.
How do you know that? Were you in Japan at that time? I am sure that (as it is the norm in any country in the world) there were many people witthin Japan who were against the war .
Besides the documents and Japanese videos showing it, there is also the example I gave below. Which you answer to.
Perhaps that is because there were no young men or proper army left in the country any more.
It started before the war, they were taught that they should give their life for the Emporer if the time needed. Even children.
It would be fair enough to say what you say if America had dropped the bombs bacause it cared for and wanted to save the Asian people thinking that the atomic bombs are the only way to acheve this.
Seeing as your a military expert, how would you do it differently? With the evidence now a days and the intelligence the US had back then, it seems liked the quickest way to get a people willing to fight to the end to stop.
hat is not the case, is it? America dropped the bombs for its own interests and did not give a damn about saving people in Asia.
What were those interests? So it didn't have to lose more men then need be? So a war that was long and faught hard could finally end?
Even if as a result the bombs happened to save some people, from the fact that they were not dropped for this reason we can easily conclude that it does not mean they were the best or the only way to save those people.
Like I said, share what you'd have in mind because Dimpolmacy didn't work. It took TWO of those bombs to bring them to the table, not one.
I am sure that if America or the world had cared for the Asian people and had wanted to save them, there would have been other ways to achieve this without using atomic bombs.
What alternatives?
In short you can not claim that the bombs were necessary to save the Asian people whatever the result, because they were not used for that reason at all.
They saved more lives in the end, they weren't going to give up and an invasion of Japan wasn't going to be a walk in the park like you seem to think. It would have been alot more bombings and who knows how long it'd take to get a foot in Japan.
Not to mention theres still a fight in mainland Asia.
What are you talking about again? The topic is about the atomic bombs. The Germans had already lost the war and the Japanese were losing the war regardless of the bombs.
Yeah, so whats all that above about the current times?
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey
Guess we should be happy that it took TWO bombs to finally get a surrender. I mean, just below you said today Japan was losing already, just shows how much they didn't want to give up. Can't imagine how long it'd take if the bombs weren't dropped...
Yes, I did say that Japan was losing the war. I wrote ''losing the war'' on purpose instead of ''surrendering''. Note the difference. It was a matter of weeks before Japan lost the war.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
Disputed, in otherwords what other people think? It took two to get Japan to the table, unless the Japanese were seriously considering letting the chance of another one to be dropped.
As I wrote before there is every possibility that the Soviet invasion was a big reason in Japan's surrender. Just read the whole thread.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
There were many reasons for it, one of them I believe was to stop all the massecres. If we did a landing invasion in Japan, it would be just a constant blood bath both there and mainland Asia.
To stop massacres with massacres? That is very convincing. This fact alone shows that stopping massacres, saving lives and avoiding blood shed was not an issue for ''you'' (since you keep referring to America as we). And don't forget that ''you '' were going to do the land invasion any way, regardless of the bombs. As I wrote before, the 9 atomic bombs were only an addition/prelude to the invasion, not an alternative.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
Like I said, share what you'd have in mind because Dimpolmacy didn't work.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
What alternatives?
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
Seeing as your a military expert, how would you do it differently?
No, I am not a military expert. In fact I hate any thing to do with military and have absolutely no interest in it. However it is easy to see even for me that when the bombs were not dropped for the purpose of saving Asian people but rather for other motives, it means that even if they happened to save some people as a result, that they were not the best or the only way to achieve this. The point is that the bombs were not a reasult of wanting to save the Asian people and that they were not a decision made out of concentrating on the issue of saving them. It is easy to see that If America and the world had really concentrated on saving them, there would have been other ways. Japan would have been easily outnumbered if America and the world had really united for the sole purpose of helping the Asian people. You don't need to be a military expert to see this. As I wrote many times the point is , saving them was not an issue in America's motives to drop the bombs.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
They saved more lives in the end,
How do you know that? that is a total speculation isn't it?
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
they weren't going to give up and an invasion of Japan wasn't going to be a walk in the park like you seem to think.
As I wrote before the bombs were not an alternative to the invasion but only an addtion/prelude. The invasion was planned to take place regardless of the bombs.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
What were those interests? So it didn't have to lose more men then need be? So a war that was long and faught hard could finally end?
Perhaps You should read the whole thread before posting. Let me quote my own post for you.
Originally posted by omshanti
1, to scare the Soviets and to stop losing half of Japan to the Soviet Invasion,
2, to win the war and show its power to the world.
3, to test the newly developed nuclear weapons.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
Besides the documents and Japanese videos showing it, there is also the example I gave below. Which you answer to.
Your example only mentions about some children, it hardly shows that the whole country was ''one''. As I wrote before, Just like it is the norm in any country there must have been many people who were against fighting. Also as I wrote, many people went in to hiding rather than preparing to fight.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
Yeah, so whats all that above about the current times?
DukeC was writing about Germany and Japan winning the war which had nothing to do with the bombs. I was bringing the current times because
1. they were good examples
2. to point out the hypocrisy
Stop taking sentences out of their contexts just for the sake of twisting and distracting the argument.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
So we should've of nuked theM.East and parts of Africafor the attacks on our Embassies bombing, the first trade center bombing, the bombing of the Cole,and 9/11?And those terrorist are still a constant threat to us, atleast they say they are.
the word ''terrorist'' is a very subjective word. One man's ''terrorist'' is another's ''freedom fighter''. Since you seem to have absolutely no idea what America has been doing to so many countries and why it is hated by so many people, I recommend you to read ''Heagemony or Survival'' by Noam Chomsky to start with.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
And if you feel it's justified, you can always try nuking us.
This is indeed very childish, isn't it?
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
I think i missed the headline about us dividing them into states, because I remember our government saying they want to be kept as one country. If you have the news please share. And besides, the US is already a bunch of states, about 50 of us
You know very well what I mean, so stop playing with words on a superficial level.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
And sanctions on us for what? The country is happy with our government, not the current adminstration. But from what I understand, not to many Iranian are happy about their current regime.
Just because they are not happy with their government, it does not mean that they are happy with being sanctioned or being invaded. It is completely different, don't mix things up.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
It took alot of pushes and shoves before the US went to war,
That changes absolutely nothing.
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
it took 3000 deaths on 9/11 to finally say we had enough.
It took 3000 deaths to invade and destroy whole nations.
You seem to equate America today with America of 1941, they were very different. You also seem to want to put America on the same level as Japan.
America was an isolationist nation militarily at the time, one whose leadership was chosen in a more or less democratic manner. Japan was a highly militaristic nation led by officers and aristocrats that murdered anyone that opposed their agenda. The Japanese populace followed their leaders blindly and were led into an escalating cycle of violence that ended with the near destruction of the nation. In the process they directly contibuted to the violent and horrible death of millions of innocent people throughout the region. They used chemical and bioligical weapons on civilain populations and showed no concern at all for the lives of anyone else. Whether it was the thousands of Korean comfort women who had lives of almost unbelievable misery or the over 90,000 Burmese that were worked to death to build a railway. I could go on and on but what's the point, you've made your mind up and nothing I or anyone else says is going to change that.
The fact is the whole world was consumed by insanity during both world wars, picking the act that ended that war and condemning it as criminal is just stupid.
Yes ,yes, yes. America is always the ''saviour'' or the ''liberator'' isn't it? Frist of all we are discussing the atomic bombs here not the actions of the allies. so don't mix things up. Second of all, America dropped the bombs for its own interests, not to save Asian people. so stop that slogan of ''we saved the world''.
America was largely responsible for the liberation of many nations in WW II, whether or not you place any value on that. And the Allies were working together to to defeat some of the most inhuman regimes ever, the bombs were dropped to end the war and save lives, many of them asian.
Just because you have such a low opinion of America and Americans doesn't make your opinion relevant in the slightest.
Majority of Chinese are very gratful to WWII American administration (especially uder FDR) during WWII. US government was the first to lend help to China when the war broke out at 1937 by Japanese invasion.
US government was also the first government to put oil sanction on Japan IN ORDER TO STOP JAPANESE INVASION ON CHINA, and they got Pearl Harbor as the result of it.
So Asian people indeed viewed WWII American as liberator, especially after what Japanese had done to them. China at that time was only able to draw Japan into a War quigmare, but not able to defeat them. It was US who help us won the war.
Japan "STARTED" the war, they set things into momentum. And for this reason alone, every single Allie's civilian/solider's life weight more than Japanese one during WWII. American had full right to do whatever to Japan in order to prevent more death to its soliders. Heck, imagine what would China do if we had the bomb at that time. But you can't argue aginast any military action against the Japan during WWII, because their suffering was the seed of their own action.
Wow, you are so sensitive about any criticism against America that it is either all or nothing for you, isn't it? So if we criticise the atomic bombs , we are not feeling well that the Americans and the allies won the war and we are automatically siding with Japan and Germany? For your information, I absolutely do not care who won the war. I am simply criticising the atomic bombs (in this topic).
You haven't been around long enough to see some of the very intense debates I've had with American members here. I've even been accused of hating America by one(The General). The fact is I have a low tolerance for B.S., which is why I'm not going to waste any more time playing head games with you.
US government was the first to lend help to China when the war broke out at 1937 by Japanese invasion. US government was also the first government to put oil sanction on Japan IN ORDER TO STOP JAPANESE INVASION ON CHINA, and they got Pearl Harbor as the result of it. So Asian people indeed viewed WWII American as liberator, especially after what Japanese had done to them. China at that time was only able to draw Japan into a War quigmare, but not able to defeat them. It was US who help us won the war.
The fact that America helped China in the war does not mean that America cared for the Chinese people at all and it does not prove any thing. America really helped Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war. They gave Iraq all kinds of military trainings and weapons (including the chemical weapons), They sanctioned Iran to weaken them, Saddam was practically being taught by America and was fighting alongside America against Iran. We all know what happened to Iraq the moment they became useless and became a target for America, Don't we? How about the Kurdish people in Iraq? America orchestrated a revolt for the Kurdish people against Saddam but abandoned them at the last minute to let them be all slaughtered. Or how about Afghanistan? America helped and sided with the Afghans to fight against the Soviets, but look what they did to the Afghans afterwards. Need I go on? The point is, it is normal for America to side and help with certain nations when it suits their interests.
Originally posted by Dream208
Japan "STARTED" the war, they set things into momentum. And for this reason alone, every single Allie's civilian/solider's life weight more than Japanese one during WWII. American had full right to do whatever to Japan in order to prevent more death to its soliders. Heck, imagine what would China do if we had the bomb at that time. But you can't argue aginastany military action against the Japan during WWII, because their suffering was the seed of their own action.
Dream 208, we have already been through your logics of revenge and weight of life...etc. Just read back the thread from THIS POST until THIS POST.
Originally posted by DukeC
You seem to equate America today with America of 1941, they were very different.
Well if America today and America in 1945 (it is 1945 by the way) are so different, then why do you (who lives in America today) take every criticism about America in 1945 so personally? Obviously you consider America then and now as the same entity. So you can't complain about me doing the same. Also In my opinion America's imperialism is exactly the same in 1945 and now. I am only bringing up the current times to point out the hypocrisy and give some examples.
Originally posted by DukeC
You also seem to want to put America on the same level as Japan.
Well they are quite similar, aren't they? Both are imperialist. both invade and destroy other nations for their own selfish reasons,....etc. Perhaps the difference is that with Japan it was really obvious whereas with America it is not because they are the most powerfull nation in the world and are so good at disguising it.
Originally posted by DukeC
Japan was a highly militaristic nation led by officers and aristocrats that murdered anyone that opposed their agenda. The Japanese populace followed their leaders blindly and were led into an escalating cycle of violence that ended with the near destruction of the nation. In the process they directly contibuted to the violent and horrible death of millions of innocent people throughout the region. They used chemical and bioligical weapons on civilain populations and showed no concern at all for the lives of anyone else.
doesn't this all remind you of another country? Yes America. Perhaps the difference is that Japan ended with ''the near destruction of the nation'' whereas with America it ends with ''the destruction of other nations''.
Originally posted by DukeC
Whether it was the thousands of Korean comfort women who had lives of almost unbelievable misery or the over 90,000 Burmese that were worked to death to build a railway. I could go on and on but what's the point, you've made your mind up and nothing I or anyone else says is going to change that.
Very interesting, you only care about the misery/sorrow of other people when they help to justify what America did or does, but completely ignore the misery/sorrow of people which was caused by America.
Originally posted by DukeC
The fact is the whole world was consumed by insanity during both world wars, picking the act that ended that war and condemning it as criminal is just stupid.
First of all, I am not ''picking'' the atomic bombs. The thread is about the atomic bombs, If the thread is about the crimes of Japan, the Holocaust or any other crime in history I will criticise them, however this thread is about the atomic bombs. Simple as that. Secondly, As I have been saying many times the fact that the Atomic bombs ended the war is disputed. It is very much possible that they were dropped when the war was almost at its last and ending atage. As I have been saying the 9 atomic bombs were only an addition/prelude to America's invasion and were dropped
1. to stop losing half of Japan to the Soviets
2. to show America's power to the world especially the Soviets
3. to test the newly developed newclear weapons.
It is obvious from these facts that (the leaders of) America did not use the bombs with the intention of ''ending the war'' or ''saving the Asian people''. Now how many times have I written this? Let me throw back to you, that exact sentence you wrote to me. ''I could go on and on but what's the point, you've made your mind up and nothing I say is going to change that''.
Originally posted by DukeC
the bombs were dropped to end the war and save lives, many of them asian.
See, How many times did I write this, America dropped the bombs for its own interests. ''to save lives''? Oh come on, Don't you see? The atomic bombs (or any weapon of mass-destruction) are made for killing people and that is exactly what they did.
Originally posted by DukeC
Just because you have such a low opinion of America and Americans doesn't make your opinion relevant in the slightest.
First of all, If you can not take my opinions, it is your problem, not the relevance of my opinions. My opinions are as relevant as any other member's opinions including yours. Second of all I do have a low opinion of America as a nation or a government, but on the contrary to your assumption I do not have any specific generalized opinions towards individual American people, becasue I know that people are all different. However I have to say that the opinions of members like you are giving me a very good idea regarding the general American mindset and are shaping the image I have of the American mindset.
Originally posted by DukeC
You haven't been around long enough to see some of the very intense debates I've had with American members here. I've even been accused of hating America by one(The General).
Whether you were accused by other American members or not is not my business and has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that you are so sensitive towards any criticism against America and that you accused me of siding with Germany and Japan.
Originally posted by DukeC
The fact is I have a low tolerance for B.S., which is why I'm not going to waste any more time playing head games with you.
Well , if you think that my opinions are BS , why did you bother to reply until now? Why do you get so emotional towards my posts? Perhaps somewhere within you, you know that my opinions are right but you just can not accept or face them. Any way we will see if you will post and ''waste your time playing head games''' again or not. I am sure that the temptation to write back is very strong.
Finally since you call my opinions BS. I would like to quote from a book called ''Heagemony or Survival'' written by Noam Chomsky.
'Victors do not investigate their own crimes, so that little is known about them, a principle that brooks few exceptions: the death toll of the US wars in Indochina, for example is not known within a range of millions. The same principle underlay the war crimes trials after world war 2. The operational definition of ''crimes of war'' and ''crimes against humanity'' was staraightforward: crimes qualified as crimes if they were carried out by the enemy, not by the Allies. Destruction of urban civilian concentrations, for example, was excluded. The principle has been applied in subsequent tribunals, but only to defeated enemies or others who can be safely despised.'
It is easy to see why the destruction of urban civilian concentrations was excluded, The atomic bombs.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Share Topic
Printable Version
Google
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Windows Live
Yahoo Bookmarks
reddit
Facebook
MySpace
Newsvine
Furl
Topic Search 
Topic Options
Quote 
Topic: Atomic Japan
cool so what, north korea will be at the same level,as an atomic superpower we just hope they wont use it (unlike america)
.
what do u talkin about, the war is already over man... and china won...
