Hiroshima Anniversary

[stokedporcupine8]

[quote]aussie486 wrote:
stokedporcupine8 wrote:

Defending the dropping of the bombs as giving the Japanese what they deserved or talking about pdie, iutting the entire Japanese race to death is childish and antithetical to understanding the the complex issues surrounding the bombings.

Didn’t see to many of those complex issues in your earlier post when you were stating that America had extermiated races of people in the past but hey its America, lets stick the boot in.
[/quote]

I never said there weren’t complex issues surrounding America’s Indian wars and the larger realm of European/Native relations. Certainly there were. The question though was not whether or not America’s Indian wars were justified, but simply whether they happened or not. I only brought up the Indian wars as a sarcastic retort to the idea that America is too good to eradicate a whole group of people. Now, with regard to the Hiroshima bombing, the question indeed was whether or not it was justified. Hence we do care about the complex issues surrounding the incident, because they are important to whether or not the bombing was justified.

In the end I said most reasonable people would think the bombing was if not justified, at least understandable. Your attitude and your overly simplistic analysis certainly doesn’t help us understand why it was justified though. Spewing war rhetoric about the evil Japanese and the good christian American soldiers ignores a whole host of issues.

[quote]
Complex issues my arse, incredible amounts of American die, incredible amounts of japanese die

or just incredible amounts japanese die, you choose.[/quote]

Such a simplistic choice only makes sense if you already read into the choice the mindless rhetoric about evil Japanese and good pure Americans. That’s the entire point. It’s obviously lost on you, so I give up.

[tom63]

[quote]Makavali wrote:
tom63 wrote:
You know if they never bombed Pearl Harbor…

Retaliation. Awesome.

And people wonder why others think poorly of America.[/quote]

It was a war nitwhit, what should we do send them flowers? Stop the dope and get a clue. in wart you defend yourself, not retaliate numbnuts. Because if you don’t you end up getting taken over and all that war stuff. Seriously, are all young people this retarded, or is it just a New Zealand thing?

[PB_Andy]

[quote]aussie486 wrote:
PB Andy wrote:
jj-dude, insightful post, thank you!

If anyone asks me “Then what would you have done PB Andy?”, here’s my answer: I have no idea. I wasn’t alive back then, and I wasn’t President.

Yep it was a insightfull post.

But if anyone asks me if i was the President, what i would have done: I would have dropped the first atomic bomb on the emperor’s palace, you know the guy who shows no remorse and still to this day the culture will not say sorry.

Start with the head of the beast and work down, that’s what i would have done.

[/quote]

That’s not a bad option, actually. I was talking with my mom and she asked the same question, of whether or not we could have just fucked up the emperor and all the important pieces of the military/gov’t. I’m assuming there was just too big of a risk to fly planes over central Japan?

Speaking of this, does anyone know of other options the Allied forces were considering other than the atomic bomb and invasion? I’m curious.

[aussie486]

[quote]stokedporcupine8 wrote:
Spewing war rhetoric about the evil Japanese and the good christian American soldiers ignores a whole host of issues.

[/quote]

Get at grip, they were evil, their war atrocities are unmatched, the death marchs and their treatment of prisoners, lets not start on the Germans who devised a process for killing as many civillans as possibe, in the end they were evil and they were defeated by people who wanted to rid the world at this time of this pestilence.

[aussie486]

[quote]PB Andy wrote:
Speaking of this, does anyone know of other options the Allied forces were considering other than the atomic bomb and invasion? I’m curious.[/quote]

    Thats a good question PB, the more you read on this topic, that one area that is a constant theme is the what would have been a horrendous loss of American life with a land invasion of Japan, sure there was secondary gain with the Russians but this is the one constant theme.
    Sure the civillans suffered but these are the same civillians and goverment that still to this day refuse's to say sorry or have history books outlining their role in ww2.

    Ask yourself, do u truly think they would have run up the white flag without the bombing, there was only one option.

[lixy]

Quick question: The US attacked Iraq in 2003 in a much condemned war. Supposing some Iraqis (or Iraqi sympathizers) had access to nukes and detonated a few in American towns, how many of you would say that it’s justified?

I know I won’t.

[Makavali]

[quote]tom63 wrote:
Makavali wrote:
tom63 wrote:
You know if they never bombed Pearl Harbor…

Retaliation. Awesome.

And people wonder why others think poorly of America.

It was a war nitwhit, what should we do send them flowers? Stop the dope and get a clue. in wart you defend yourself, not retaliate numbnuts. Because if you don’t you end up getting taken over and all that war stuff. Seriously, are all young people this retarded, or is it just a New Zealand thing?[/quote]

Coupled with other things you’ve said in this thread, I stand by what I said. No I’m not suggesting you send them flowers, but your “they hit us so we hit them back” rhetoric is why people think your country is full of retarded rednecks.

[Makavali]

[quote]tom63 wrote:
Makavali wrote:
tom63 wrote:
You know if they never bombed Pearl Harbor…

Retaliation. Awesome.

And people wonder why others think poorly of America.

It was a war nitwhit, what should we do send them flowers? Stop the dope and get a clue. in wart you defend yourself, not retaliate numbnuts. Because if you don’t you end up getting taken over and all that war stuff. Seriously, are all young people this retarded, or is it just a New Zealand thing?[/quote]

Coupled with other things you’ve said in this thread, I stand by what I said. No I’m not suggesting you send them flowers, but your “they hit us so we hit them back” rhetoric is why people think your country is full of retarded rednecks.

[Magarhe]

I think they could have invited the Japanese Emperor to witness a demo of the bomb dropping on an uninhabited area. If refused, then drop it somewhere that it could be witnessed. I don’t think they needed to drop the second one, I think they wanted live test subjects to see what it would do. I think atrocities were done on both sides.

I think it is appalling that in Japan the history has been erased, not taught, wiped from textbooks like it never happened, yet in Germany it is rammed down your throat. And Italy, hey, they were never the enemy? I have nothing against the ever changing alliances in the world but the history should not be altered.

It is also pretty messed up that the attack on Pearl Harbour was 100% known in advance and allowed to happen to bring the US into the war. I hope everyone knows that already, or is this more history that has been hidden or revised?

Summary of war:
Assholes at the top and behind the scenes wanting money and power and compensation for small dicks start it
Media controlled by them spouts lies telling the population of atrocities done and the subhuman nature of the enemy
Poor patriotic suckers go out and die and/or commit atrocities, which are used by the enemy to create more conflict

[tom63]

[quote]Makavali wrote:
tom63 wrote:
Makavali wrote:
tom63 wrote:
You know if they never bombed Pearl Harbor…

Retaliation. Awesome.

And people wonder why others think poorly of America.

It was a war nitwhit, what should we do send them flowers? Stop the dope and get a clue. in wart you defend yourself, not retaliate numbnuts. Because if you don’t you end up getting taken over and all that war stuff. Seriously, are all young people this retarded, or is it just a New Zealand thing?

Coupled with other things you’ve said in this thread, I stand by what I said. No I’m not suggesting you send them flowers, but your “they hit us so we hit them back” rhetoric is why people think your country is full of retarded rednecks.[/quote]

In the real world if you throw a punch at me, I will hit you hard. It’s not being retardfed. It’s self preservation. You seriously are mentally deficient. You won’t defend yourself? If your country is attacked you will just roll over and take it? Maybe, but I won’t and tamerica never has.

Newsflash, we don’t care if people like us. Japan attacked this country. We should just roll over to them? they committed atrocities, they tortured prisoners, while we treated their guys with decency. they had the rape of Nanking, the Bataan death march.

So we chose a course of action that actually saved Japanese lives and Us lives and we’re the bad guy? I don’t think so. Again if I could chose a course of action that would cause the death of a 100000 enemies, I would to save one US serviceman’s life. They are the enemy and could surrender.

Which they would have the option of doing. If not, it’s on them. When you’re in a war it’s not sharesies. Well we kicked your butt there and you lost a lot of guys, so this time we’ll do this were more of my guys get killed.

Also, posting double doesn’t really make more of a point.

[tom63]

[quote]Magarhe wrote:
I think they could have invited the Japanese Emperor to witness a demo of the bomb dropping on an uninhabited area. If refused, then drop it somewhere that it could be witnessed. I don’t think they needed to drop the second one, I think they wanted live test subjects to see what it would do. I think atrocities were done on both sides. I think it is appalling that in Japan the history has been erased, not taught, wiped from textbooks like it never happened, yet in Germany it is rammed down your throat. And Italy, hey, they were never the enemy? I have nothing against the ever changing alliances in the world but the history should not be altered.

It is also pretty messed up that the attack on Pearl Harbour was 100% known in advance and allowed to happen to bring the US into the war. I hope everyone knows that already, or is this more history that has been hidden or revised?

Summary of war:
Assholes at the top and behind the scenes wanting money and power and compensation for small dicks start it
Media controlled by them spouts lies telling the population of atrocities done and the subhuman nature of the enemy
Poor patriotic suckers go out and die and/or commit atrocities, which are used by the enemy to create more conflict

[/quote]

Wrong, you don’t have to prove how tough you are first to some one in war. they had a chance to surrender and did not. They did not surrender after the first bomb. It is not accepted that Pearl Harbor was not a surprise. that claim has been disputed many times. There are those who say so, but there are sound arguments that dispute any such claims.

As for atrocities, show me any the US committed other than fighting. Bang, bang shoot stuff, bombings etc. This is war. It’s mean and dirty. and you have to try to win.

[Vegita]

I am pretty sure we didn’t bomb the central power points in japan because we didn’t want the country to become a post apocolyptic warzone. If you cut the head off the snake, the body dies, you would plunge that country back into the fudal japan of old, they would never be a threat again, but they would also be pretty useless to the rest of the world, namely the US.

We were in a knife fight with them and after a few exchanges, we pulled out a sawed off shotgun and popped them in the legs, it effectively crippled them, but we didn’t kill them, and when they healed they became our allies, this was a beneficial relationship, beneficial for both sides, they did not get killed and we gained an alli.

With regard to people around the world hating americans, I think the Japanese actually like us pretty well. It seems like an odd thing, but for whatever reason, they don’t seem to mind us at all, and i’m not talking about the government, I’m talking the people.

V

[stokedporcupine8]

[quote]Magarhe wrote:

I think it is appalling that in Japan the history has been erased, not taught, wiped from textbooks like it never happened, yet in Germany it is rammed down your throat. And Italy, hey, they were never the enemy? I have nothing against the ever changing alliances in the world but the history should not be altered.

[/quote]

Don’t forget we do the same thing in America. Our own history textbooks have a very selective memory as well.

[stokedporcupine8]

[quote]tom63 wrote:
Makavali wrote:
tom63 wrote:
Makavali wrote:
tom63 wrote:
You know if they never bombed Pearl Harbor…

Retaliation. Awesome.

And people wonder why others think poorly of America.

It was a war nitwhit, what should we do send them flowers? Stop the dope and get a clue. in wart you defend yourself, not retaliate numbnuts. Because if you don’t you end up getting taken over and all that war stuff. Seriously, are all young people this retarded, or is it just a New Zealand thing?

Coupled with other things you’ve said in this thread, I stand by what I said. No I’m not suggesting you send them flowers, but your “they hit us so we hit them back” rhetoric is why people think your country is full of retarded rednecks.

In the real world if you throw a punch at me, I will hit you hard. It’s not being retardfed. It’s self preservation. You seriously are mentally deficient. You won’t defend yourself? If your country is attacked you will just roll over and take it? Maybe, but I won’t and tamerica never has.

[/quote]

That’s it! It’s like on the playground, isn’t it? If someone comes up and hits me, I have the right to curb stomp them and beat the ever loving shit out of them, don’t I? There’s always justification for unlimited retaliatory action, no?

Anyway, in the real world that you like to tout so much there’s always more than two alternatives. You present a false dichotomy that after one is attacked they can either curl up in the fetal position and beg for mercy or are justified in using any level of force what so ever on the attacker.

Clearly that sort of thinking is absolutely stupid and I believe that’s what Makavali has been trying to point out to you. While our use of the bomb was probably justified, the entire point which is lost on your simple reasoning is that it was not justified simply because “we were attacked first”. It probably wasn’t even justified simply because the Japanese were so evil, as some of you are clearly implying. If you think that dropping the atom bomb on the Japanese was justified because the Japanese committed horrible war crimes, then you truly need to step back and think about your own ethical dispositions. If you are to follow this line of thought then you are simply embracing a dangerous “two wrongs make a right” mentality.

The third point that in the end dropping the bombs probably saved lives is probably the substantial one. Of course the issues are far more complex then just that (ie, Need we have dropped two bombs? etc.), but you get the idea.

But anyway… if you want to stay in your little black and white world where our bombing of Hiroshima, Nagasaki and our slaughter of a quarter of a million people was justified because “they hit us first” and because “they’re so evil”, then that’s fine. As for me, I like to at least humor myself and think that the bombings, if at all, were understandable because we thought that overall their use would end the war more humanly and because our leadership at the time did not understand things like radioactive fallout.

[Varqanir]

It strikes me as tremendously ironic that in order to subdue the heathen Japanese, the United States ended up killing two-thirds of Japan’s entire Christian community with a single bomb.

I wonder how many of the 8,500 Japanese Christians incinerated in Nagasaki could have be considered “enemies.”

Ah well. Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnoscet.

[jj_dude]

? What makes any of you think that racism was the dominant reason for the US doing anything in the war? Many people in the US (like Douglas MacArthur) thought extremely highly of the Japanese and were, in turn, venerated. Serviceman are another issue – it is unrealistic to assume that someone who has witnessed countless deaths of friends on the battlefield would be unmoved. Yes, a lot of the servicemen did not like the Japanese, but they did respect them highly as fighters, which is one reason that post WW II oriental martial arts become such a hot topic in the US.

MacArthur also made the highly relevant comment that soldiers – the ones who are in the firing line and whose lives are on the line – are often the most opposed to war. To reduce them all to simple baby killers is, I’m sorry to say, stupid.

Here is the issue for you: You are in the middle of a war that has killed indiscriminate millions and must now consider that an invasion of Japan proper is the only way to stop it. It will take 15 - 20 million casualties and the Imperial command has decided that a scorched earth policy is their plan, forcing you to probably really commit genocide in the areas you want to control. They are banking that you will stand down, rather than fight that way. You can use a new weapon, created by Europeans* that will end it now. Do you really expect me to believe your contention that the only moral thing to do is to treat the men under your command like cheap movie extras and get them all killed?

Seriously, what would you do? The question of whether the citizens of Hiroshima & Nagasaki deserved to get incinerated is wholly separate from the question of whether that was what it would take to make the Imperial High Command stop the war. If their ultimate defense is scorched earth in which they bet that you will lose too many troops to consider invasion (and in grand samurai tradition are willing to sacrifice every peasant needed), then showing them that you can oblige them with no loss of life on the part of your men is a very sound strategy. This is how my acquaintance who lived through Nagasaki explained it to me. You are free to discount it if you wish, of course.

And as always, I might just be full of shit…

– jj

=====================
*The US was a technological backwater at the time, and was viewed much like Brazil is today. Big, chaotic, wild and hardly the place for civilized folk. Luis Alvarez, who was one of the few American Physicists at the time said that if it had been up to the US alone, making the bomb would have been “hopeless” How the US became a first world country following WW II is one of the most interesting stories, to say the least. It was only in 1926 that the US passed the magic number that even half of her population finally lived in cities. This is an indicator of urbanization and most European countries had attained it well over a century (or two, in some cases) before.

[stokedporcupine8]

[quote]jj-dude wrote:
? What makes any of you think that racism was the dominant reason for the US doing anything in the war? Many people in the US (like Douglas MacArthur) thought extremely highly of the Japanese and were, in turn, venerated. Serviceman are another issue – it is unrealistic to assume that someone who has witnessed countless deaths of friends on the battlefield would be unmoved. Yes, a lot of the servicemen did not like the Japanese, but they did respect them highly as fighters, which is one reason that post WW II oriental martial arts become such a hot topic in the US.

MacArthur also made the highly relevant comment that soldiers – the ones who are in the firing line and whose lives are on the line – are often the most opposed to war. To reduce them all to simple baby killers is, I’m sorry to say, stupid.

Here is the issue for you: You are in the middle of a war that has killed indiscriminate millions and must now consider that an invasion of Japan proper is the only way to stop it. It will take 15 - 20 million casualties and the Imperial command has decided that a scorched earth policy is their plan, forcing you to probably really commit genocide in the areas you want to control. They are banking that you will stand down, rather than fight that way. You can use a new weapon, created by Europeans* that will end it now. Do you really expect me to believe your contention that the only moral thing to do is to treat the men under your command like cheap movie extras and get them all killed?

Seriously, what would you do? The question of whether the citizens of Hiroshima & Nagasaki deserved to get incinerated is wholly separate from the question of whether that was what it would take to make the Imperial High Command stop the war. If their ultimate defense is scorched earth in which they bet that you will lose too many troops to consider invasion (and in grand samurai tradition are willing to sacrifice every peasant needed), then showing them that you can oblige them with no loss of life on the part of your men is a very sound strategy. This is how my acquaintance who lived through Nagasaki explained it to me. You are free to discount it if you wish, of course.

And as always, I might just be full of shit…

– jj

=====================
*The US was a technological backwater at the time, and was viewed much like Brazil is today. Big, chaotic, wild and hardly the place for civilized folk. Luis Alvarez, who was one of the few American Physicists at the time said that if it had been up to the US alone, making the bomb would have been “hopeless” How the US became a first world country following WW II is one of the most interesting stories, to say the least. It was only in 1926 that the US passed the magic number that even half of her population finally lived in cities. This is an indicator of urbanization and most European countries had attained it well over a century (or two, in some cases) before. [/quote]

I think you are essentially correct, and that this is ultimately the context in which we must see the use of the bombs. All the silly comments about the evil Japanese deserving it are not helpful.

[Mikeyali]

[quote]Magarhe wrote:
I think they could have invited the Japanese Emperor to witness a demo of the bomb dropping on an uninhabited area. If refused, then drop it somewhere that it could be witnessed. I don’t think they needed to drop the second one, I think they wanted live test subjects to see what it would do. I think atrocities were done on both sides. [/quote]

I recommend watching a documentary called “The Last Mission”. It goes over some events during the final bombing run in the war. Long story short: Hirohito had recorded the surrender message following the second bomb on some wax discs. The day prior to them being played Major Kenji Hatanaka held the palace and emperor hostage during an obviously short-lived military coup. He intended to destroy the discs and continue the war. By chance this bombing run caused a blackout over the area and along with some loyal Japanese servants the discs were eventually played.

My point is that despite what we’ve been told it wasn’t a simple act of everyone wanting to surrender after the bomb went off.[quote]

I think it is appalling that in Japan the history has been erased, not taught, wiped from textbooks like it never happened, yet in Germany it is rammed down your throat. And Italy, hey, they were never the enemy? I have nothing against the ever changing alliances in the world but the history should not be altered.
[/quote]

Yeah, I’ve been to the museum at Nagasaki. That place is a vulgar shrine of anti-Americanism. It skates over any mention of Pearl Harbor or Japanese aggression and makes it look like the Americans came out of nowhere to bomb them. I recall a map of the city at the time where they pointed out all the hospitals, schools and orphanages but ignored barracks, munitions factories, ect.

The following is just one man’s opinion so take it for what it’s worth:

Morally I’m appalled we dropped the bomb. Speaking as a Marine, I’d rather see several thousand more Marines die invading Kysushu or Honsho than the mass extermination of civilians. We should be doing everything in our power to avoid civilian death. Being the good guys is a bitch. I could be wrong, but even if the Japanese were too proud to surrender before we hit the mainland, we had stopped their aggression. They were certainly no threat to Western Civilization any longer. Therefore we could have grabbed our toys and went home instead of invading the mainland or we could have spent the necessary lives in a ground invasion.

The morality aside, looking through the wide lens of history I’m glad we did it. The only reason I’m glad we did it is because had we not dropped the A-bomb, sometime between then and now a more modern nuke (H-bomb or whatever they were) would have been used and the results would have been far worse. Instead we dropped the weakest atomic bombs and it gave us a horrifying (albeit overinflated) sense of the power of nuclear weapons, causing us to not use one since.

I’d also like to throw out there that while we certainly did have moral superiority here (to argue otherwise is an absurdity), we did not come close to living up to our duty or principles as Americans. Isn’t it ironic that while we are talking about the concentration camps, we were interning our own citizens? Equally ironic is that in an effort to fight socialists and dictators abroad we had a four-term socialist president who stepped down only because he had a boat space in hell waiting on him.

mike

[orion]

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
It strikes me as tremendously ironic that in order to subdue the heathen Japanese, the United States ended up killing two-thirds of Japan’s entire Christian community with a single bomb.

I wonder how many of the 8,500 Japanese Christians incinerated in Nagasaki could have be considered “enemies.”

Ah well. Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnoscet.[/quote]

I guess if they’re crispy they are his?

[tom63]

[quote]stokedporcupine8 wrote:
tom63 wrote:
Makavali wrote:
tom63 wrote:
Makavali wrote:
tom63 wrote:
You know if they never bombed Pearl Harbor…

Retaliation. Awesome.

And people wonder why others think poorly of America.

It was a war nitwhit, what should we do send them flowers? Stop the dope and get a clue. in wart you defend yourself, not retaliate numbnuts. Because if you don’t you end up getting taken over and all that war stuff. Seriously, are all young people this retarded, or is it just a New Zealand thing?

Coupled with other things you’ve said in this thread, I stand by what I said. No I’m not suggesting you send them flowers, but your “they hit us so we hit them back” rhetoric is why people think your country is full of retarded rednecks.

In the real world if you throw a punch at me, I will hit you hard. It’s not being retardfed. It’s self preservation. You seriously are mentally deficient. You won’t defend yourself? If your country is attacked you will just roll over and take it? Maybe, but I won’t and tamerica never has.

That’s it! It’s like on the playground, isn’t it? If someone comes up and hits me, I have the right to curb stomp them and beat the ever loving shit out of them, don’t I? There’s always justification for unlimited retaliatory action, no?

Anyway, in the real world that you like to tout so much there’s always more than two alternatives. You present a false dichotomy that after one is attacked they can either curl up in the fetal position and beg for mercy or are justified in using any level of force what so ever on the attacker.

Clearly that sort of thinking is absolutely stupid and I believe that’s what Makavali has been trying to point out to you. While our use of the bomb was probably justified, the entire point which is lost on your simple reasoning is that it was not justified simply because “we were attacked first”. It probably wasn’t even justified simply because the Japanese were so evil, as some of you are clearly implying. If you think that dropping the atom bomb on the Japanese was justified because the Japanese committed horrible war crimes, then you truly need to step back and think about your own ethical dispositions. If you are to follow this line of thought then you are simply embracing a dangerous “two wrongs make a right” mentality.

The third point that in the end dropping the bombs probably saved lives is probably the substantial one. Of course the issues are far more complex then just that (ie, Need we have dropped two bombs? etc.), but you get the idea.

But anyway… if you want to stay in your little black and white world where our bombing of Hiroshima, Nagasaki and our slaughter of a quarter of a million people was justified because “they hit us first” and because “they’re so evil”, then that’s fine. As for me, I like to at least humor myself and think that the bombings, if at all, were understandable because we thought that overall their use would end the war more humanly and because our leadership at the time did not understand things like radioactive fallout. [/quote]

It’s not the playground,it’s war. I am an adult, if you try to hit me I will defend myself to the best of my abilities up to and including lethal force if it is legally justified and necessary.

The same goes in war. You people are seriously in need of some common sense.