Dark Anniversary

[King Edward]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/august/6/newsid_3602000/3602189.stm

Today marks the 59th Anniversary of one of the darkest days in human History, the first wartime use of an A-Bomb. Story From bbc.co.uk ~:(

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

I know nuclear weapons are bad (maybe a bit worse than conventional weapons) and its usage in Japan began the nuclear age, but...

Without it, at least for Americans and Japanese, it could have been worse. A US invasion in Japan would have cost 1,000,000 casualties pretty early on... And that is only US killed. Civilian death woud be way higher.

And since Hiroshima and Nagasaki, no one has used nukes on anyone. Just keep that in mind.

[Gregoshi]

I think I'm of like mind as you Alexander. if the US was forced to invade Japan, the Japanese casualties would have been staggering - forget US casualties. I recall seeing a documentary not too long ago on the Okinawa(?) campaign. In the last day(s) when the US was about to take control of the whole island, the Japanese women on the island were jumping off a very tall cliff into the ocean to escape capture by the Americans. Some even had their children in their arms. They showed some footage of these death leaps. It was very chilling to see. With that kind of mentality, it seems to me that the Japanese civilian population would have been devastated had the fight been taken to the Japanese main islands.

As ugly as the bomb was, in the long run, they may have saved more lives through their use. Regardless, it is still a sad and distubing event.

[discovery1]

I have to agree with you two:if the US was set on the UC surrender, then the bomb was the best way two go. Although, they would have surrendered if they could keep their emp, which they did anyway.

A little off topic: I consider it odd that so many are so angry about this one raid, yet before it many cities were destroyed by convential bombs. What is the difference? To me, it seems that the only one is concentration, but to me that seems trivial. Many die in both cases.

[Kaiser of Arabia]

We should have nuked moscow when the pinkos still controlled it!

[Don Corleone]

I'm going to pretend I missed Capo's comment. ~:cool:

I think it's because the US did it to the Japanese and people expected better. For some reason, the firebombing of Dresden is often held up as a war crime of horrific consequence, but you never hear that we learned that tactic watching the Luftwaffe bomb London for three months.

If we had to fight it out with the Japanese to the end in a conventional war, there would not be a Japanese nation today. It really would have been 'boiling frog syndrome'. For those who are unfamiliar, the idea is if you drop a frog into a pot of boiling water, he jumps right back out again. But, if you put him into a nice warm pot, then slowly turn the heat up, he'll boil to death, happily. The Japanese would have sustained staggering losses, but they would have been distributed over time and their national identity would not have allowed them to surrender in the face of that. In many ways, the A-bomb gave them exactly what they needed: they were faced with a staggering, uncounterable foe. There was no dishonor for them to quit fighting after that.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Hey, I like that 'boiling frog' metaphore! Pretty much sums up what I think as well.

Contrary to what a lot of people believe, no event in Japanese history saved as many Japanese lives as these two bombs did.



Apart from that, much as I respect the Japanese, war-time Japan had this one coming. If you can't stand a punch, don't pick a fight...

[Kaiser of Arabia]

yup.
After Iwo Jima, Okinawa, Gudacanal, The Bataan Penninsula etc etc etc, they deserved it.

[Oaty]

The bombing raids caused way more casualties than both A-bombs together. One thing the U.S. did was they never targeted Hiroshima and Nagasaki once with a conventional bombing raid. They were sparing these cities to test these new bombs. The U.S. wanted to see the bombs full effect on a large city unscarred by conventional bombs. Also Stalin had something to do with a possible delayed surrender. It is possible that second bomb may not have been dropped, but Stalin never relayed a message from the Japanese to the other allies. Guess he figured his spies would also get him some data on the U.S. nukes. and 2 cities with data is better than 1. Another problem with the Japanese surrendering was they had also committed war crimes. So a deal was made that there would be no war trials but the Japanese had to had over all there scientific research that was done inhumanely against people. Of course the war crimes were probably close to nil compared to the Germans, but it was probably not seen worth 2 million plus lives of both Japanese and Americans to go after such a select few for there attrocities

[Ser Clegane]

In case anybody is interested - there has been a rather interesting thread on this topic in the Monastery a while ago:
old a-bomb thread (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/archive/index.php/t-29959.html)

@Capo: your immature comments really add to the surrealism of my life ~:rolleyes:

[discovery1]

Of course the war crimes were probably close to nil compared to the Germans, but it was probably not seen worth 2 million plus lives of both Japanese and Americans to go after such a select few for there attrocities
You're joking right?

The Japanese made the Germans look like angles

http://www.centurychina.com/wiihist/
http://www.kimsoft.com/kr-japan.htm
http://www.kimsoft.com/korea-j1.htm
http://vikingphoenix.com/public/JapanIncorporated/1895-1945/jpwcrmz.htm

And on and on.

Edit:
We wouldn't accept just them keeping thier emp. Why would we let their generals get away?

Edit: Edited for language - Gregoshi

[mercian billman]

Of course the war crimes were probably close to nil compared to the Germans

This statement is absolutely bogus. The Japanese used chemical weapons in their war against China and were planning to use those weapons against the US before the IJN shot the idea down because, they were unwilling to send 4 submarines on a possible suicide mission. Cases of Bubonic plague are still being reported in Manchuria.

If you've seen any pictures of Manila after the war you'll notice the city was more destroyed than either Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Manila was the 2nd most devastated city of the war after Berlin and, Hiroshima and, Nagasaki pale in comparison.

Go ask people living in east Asia if the Japanese war crimes were "probably nil compared to the Germans." You will hear the exact opposite, the Japanese were far worse than the Germans.

[Ser Clegane]

I am actually a bit reluctant to join another discussion on the a-bombs dropped on Japan but I can't hep it ~:p

While I can accept the necessity to drop the Hiroshima bomb as a means to quickly end a cruel war I have some doubts that the Nagasaki bomb was justified. People argue that Japan did not surrender after the first bomb but quickly did so after the second one, claiming that this fact proves that only the second bomb made the surrender possible.
However, I am not convinced That Japan would not have surrendered even after the first bomb. There were only a couple of days between the two bombs - days that were probably very chaotic.
During these days has there been a serious attempt to negotiate a surrender of Japan? I am not aware of any high level communications between the Allies and Japan during these days (which might be due to my ignorance but in the last thread on this issue nobody referred to attempts to seriously convince Japan to surrender during the days between Hiroshima and Nagasaki).

So IMO the US might have been too eager to drop the second bomb (albeit in a very difficult situation) and I am not convinced that Japan would not have surrendered after Hiroshima already given slightly more time (the quick surrender after the second bomb is understandable as the Japanese had to realize that the US might continue dropping a-bombs without even starting to negotiate a surrender).

[Don Corleone]

Oaty, where does your signature quote come from? It's been tickling my brain for days....

[Longshanks]

It was only by luck that Japan surrendered at all. Even after both atomic bombings the Supreme War Council was deadlocked on the surrender decision. This was effectively a victory for the hawks, as the deadlock meant continuation of the status quo, in this case, the war. It was only the unprecedented intervention by Hirohito following the atomic bombings that broke the deadlock. Even then, the hawks, were unwilling to accept it. They launced a coup aimed at killing the doves, seizing the Imperial palance, destroying the surrender recording, and using a captured Hirohito as a puppet to continue the war. The coup attempt nearly succeeded, with the rebels at one point in control of the Imperial palace. A clever palance servant was able to sneak the recording out pass the guards however, and the rest is history.

Without the atomic bombings Japan would have never surrendered. The atomic bombings ultimately saved Japanese lives as well. Incidentally, doves on the Supreme War Council have made statements to that effect.

[Beirut]

They started the war. They behaved like animals. They refused to surrender.

"Boom!"

Et voila.

[gaelic cowboy]

Cant argue with that my friend

[Oaty]

Oaty, where does your signature quote come from? It's been tickling my brain for days....


It comes from Red Dawn and refers to the fact when you have guerilla warfare you hunt down the guerillas not the civilians

[fenir]

The Japanese War Crimes, made the Nazis look like angels.

But very few Japanese were brought to trial, like the chemical weapons tests on POW's and Chinese. These guys where actually sent back to the USA to develop US weapons, and the cures.
In return they got a full pardon and nice house in the country.
Kinda sick imho.

NOTE: it is considered by many that the TWO A- bombs actually killed less people together, than either of the Firestorms in Hamburg, or Dresden.


IMHO.
It is very easier in our time, to sit here and pass judgement on the use of these weapons, to sit here in all our blood brought security, and lay blame, in our self appointed arrogance.
Perhaps we should be saying thank god they used them, otherwise i for a fact, wouldn't have been born. nor would a good deal of those posting on this website.
Unfortunately, it was an evil that had to happen. But most people find it hard to admit, something so terrible can save so many lives.

Thank you to those men and woman, thank you for saving both my grandfathers lifes'. My Mothers and Fathers, and there brothers and sisters, and my brothers and sisters and cousins, And thank you for saving mine.


fenir

[Papewaio]

Chemical/Nerve Weapons leftover from WWII:

China angry over 'WWII gas' spill (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/3140637.stm)


Chinese victims of WWII gas threaten to sue Japan (http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=1&id=287073)

Experts to dispose of WWII chemical bombs (http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-06/18/content_340357.htm)

Japanese probing chemical weapons (http://english.sina.com/news/china/6831276.shtml)

----

WWII Atrocities... killing patients in bed, starving POWs, gutting pregant women to determine the winner of a bet of which sex the child was...

Allied WWII prisoners of Japanese still suffer (http://www.weekender.co.jp/LatestEdition/000526/coverstory.html)

Japanese Atrocities in World War II (http://www.boogieonline.com/revolution/multi/war/WWII/japan.html)

[ah_dut]

seriously though, as stated before hitler is a sissy in the war crimes stakes in WW2 compared to Japan. and Yes i believe that the a bomb use was justified, a short sharp shock was necessary to make a real japan.

Edit: edited for language. - Gregoshi

[lancelot]

I have read that many attempts were made by the japanese to surrender with dignity (through feelers/non-public means) But the US refused every one of them.

[Suppiluliumas]

The Japanese wanted to keep their military. So, yes, if you feel that that equals dignity then you are correct. The US presumably did not want to leave Japan capable of restarting the war any time in the near future.

[Lechev]

Go ask people living in east Asia if the Japanese war crimes were "probably nil compared to the Germans." You will hear the exact opposite, the Japanese were far worse than the Germans.
Ask those Australian POWs and you'll get a better idea what cruelties these japanese are capable of. ~:angry:

In WWII Nazi Germany have committed actrocities, but they admit their wrong doings and make an effort to be honest in telling truth to their younger generations. But the Japanese chose to blanket out by truth by editing their history textbooks and omit out the actrocities that they had done. ~:mad:

Edit: edited for language. - Gregoshi