Hiroshima debate?

[godofthunder9010]

Hindsight is always 20/20 Ashes. There are few events in human history that somebody doesn't look back on and say, "Well sure it turned out okay, but you still screwed up here, here and here."

I would like to propose one particular reason that the dropping of the two Atom Bombs was, in retrospect, perhaps not such a great thing: Hiroshima and Nagasaki have provided the ultimate bloody shirt for the Japanese to wave all over the place. To this day, the Japanese hold the claims of their tens of millions of victims in utter contempt, they have used the deathtoll of less than half a million in the Atomic blasts and called themselves the real victims, and calling all accusers liars. The Japanese did not just kill tens of millions as an unfortunate side-effect of war. They executed and murdered them in the most brutal fashion they could manage. Those murders were ordered by the Japanese government at the highest levels. They did not just rape women when a few bad soldiers went off on their own to 'partake the spoils of war.' No, the highest levels of command in the Japanese Army organized the kidnapping and enslavement of over 20,000 non-Japanese women who were very often raped up to 40 times per day, nonstop for many years. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comfort_women
The Japanese made sport of bayonetting babies at Nanking for hellsake. And they have the audacity to hide behind Hiroshima and Nagasaki, telling the world that they are the real victims. When it comes to admitting their mistakes from World War II, Japan absolutely refuses to grow up and be responsible. To whatever degree Hiroshima and Nagasaki enable them to be so irresponsible ... I suppose that makes the two Atom Bombs a bad thing in a big way. Germany did not hide from its past, but the Atom Bomb gave Japan a ready made excuse.

 

[Young Winston]

Well, certainly not as much a factor as the other considerations, but I do believe it was weighed in. Americans hated the Japanese at the time it's true, but we do not as a people take any joy in killing even for vengeance.

After Pearl Harbour, the US Government beat the "vengence" drum very loud.

Read "h**l in the Pacific" and many other sources.

Why don't you read my full posts? If you had, you would know that my father fought the Japanese in the Pacific as a US Marine. My mother's brother was a POW of them and was forced into slave labor by them. I know full well what happened in the Pacific. That was not what I was talking about in so much as what the US administration and the American people as a whole felt. Vengeance yes, but killing for the sake of killing no - not the greater majority of Americans.

Vengence, unfortunately can bring its own pleasures. Much documentation of US and Allied soldiers experiences has shown that many enjoyed killing Japanese. It was the nature of the fighting, Japanese atrocities and the attitudes that prevailed at the time towards the Japanese race that brought this out. Even an idiot would know that it is not a part of American culture to kill just for the sake of it.

In the heat of battle, some terrible things were done on both sides. But that was the way it was. Ordinary people were brutalized by their experiences.

Of course you know all this already.

Most of this is off topic. Should continue this under another heading.

 

[Corocotta]

Corocotta........You seem to be suggesting that conventional bombs are okay, yet on one bombing raid Tokyo suffered 100,000 killed about the same number that killed in Hiroshima. So it is okay for them to killed in fire storm brought about by conventional bombing, your logic escapes me. Also you asked why they did not use conventional bombs to take out these Cities well one of the problem the American bombers were dropping bombs faster than they could be delivered. You are also going on about people still dying from cancers from this bombing, well it seems to me that some 60 years on the people would be dying any way. Yet as I have said in earlier posts former POW are dying from the mistreatment handed out to the by Japanese, so whats the difference except that you wear a CND badge

Well, the main difference btw a nuke and a conventional bomb is too obvious. The radiation of a nuke pass from generation to generation in the genes causing malformation and all shorts of cancer, a nuke also pollutes the enviorement for a couple thousand years...I think none of this things is created by T.N.T.

 

[LeEnfield]

Corocotta........If the residue of radiation is so bad around Hiroshima & Nagasaki then why are they still building around these sites. Have you seen any of the research done on the surrounding radiation or have you just thrown this in to help support your argument

 

[Corocotta]

Corocotta........If the residue of radiation is so bad around Hiroshima & Nagasaki then why are they still building around these sites. Have you seen any of the research done on the surrounding radiation or have you just thrown this in to help support your argument

No, I haven´t been measuring the amount of radiation.
But don´t you see a few differences btw a nuke and conventional weapons? Come on!

http://www.millennium-ark.net/News_Files/NBC/radiation.human.body.html

http://www.hiroshima-cdas.or.jp/HICARE/abe.html

 

[Charge 7]

Well, certainly not as much a factor as the other considerations, but I do believe it was weighed in. Americans hated the Japanese at the time it's true, but we do not as a people take any joy in killing even for vengeance.

After Pearl Harbour, the US Government beat the "vengence" drum very loud.

Read "h**l in the Pacific" and many other sources.

Why don't you read my full posts? If you had, you would know that my father fought the Japanese in the Pacific as a US Marine. My mother's brother was a POW of them and was forced into slave labor by them. I know full well what happened in the Pacific. That was not what I was talking about in so much as what the US administration and the American people as a whole felt. Vengeance yes, but killing for the sake of killing no - not the greater majority of Americans.

Vengence, unfortunately can bring its own pleasures. Much documentation of US and Allied soldiers experiences has shown that many enjoyed killing Japanese. It was the nature of the fighting, Japanese atrocities and the attitudes that prevailed at the time towards the Japanese race that brought this out. Even an idiot would know that it is not a part of American culture to kill just for the sake of it.

In the heat of battle, some terrible things were done on both sides. But that was the way it was. Ordinary people were brutalized by their experiences.

Of course you know all this already.

Most of this is off topic. Should continue this under another heading.

So then it appears you've finally understood what I was saying all along.

 

[LeEnfield]

Was it vengeance or was it self preservation, back in those you had make sure the buggers were dead, or they would jump up and come at you again. Like some other people toady they felt there only path into heaven was to die on the battlefield. After a number of Allied soldiers had been killed by Japanese pretending to surrender,a much firmer line was taken. Then just how do you expect them to react. It was a time when the old slogan held true, the only good Japanese is a dead one. Just have look at the numbers of prisoners taken on some of these islands, they did not want to surrender they wanted to fight to the last and this is just what they did. Next thing you will be saying the Kamikaze pilots were actual on their way to surrender when they were either shot down or crashed on landing

 

[Charge 7]

I only stated that vengeance played a part, but not by far the more important part. I did say that it was, as you suggest LeEnfield, that saving lives was paramount. Next most important was sending a message to the Russians. Vengeance came after that and not, as I also stated, for the sake of killing. Vengeance played a role in that Pearl Harbor, Singapore, Manila, and yes, Nanking as well had all come before. A ruthless bloodthirsty enemy gets short consideration when it comes right down to it.

 

[LeEnfield]

America like Britain having got into a war that was forced upon them, main aim was to pursue all aspects of this conflict to bring about a satisfactory conclusion, and if this meant taking drastic action to win this war then so be it. Most men killed to protect them selfs, there pals, and to win. They also knew in the Pacific campaign after a very short while that they would be shown little mercy if the surrendered.

 

[TBA_PAKI]

There are three major factors that conclude the use of Atom Bomb over Japan in WWII:

- The huge risk involved in conventional invasion of Japan by US forces as Japanese were well known for their stubborn resistance during fighting on ground. And this meant that huge number of Man-power would be lost in the invasion process.

- The projection of power to Soviet Union.

- Japanese leader "Suzuki's" decision of not to surrender even after the defeat. This perception is widely used by US Media to justify the act of use of Atomic Bombs.

Also do note that this decision was made by President Harry S. Truman and it might be possible that he had a harsher perception about armed conflicts.

 

[Lord Londonderry]

Well, certainly not as much a factor as the other considerations, but I do believe it was weighed in. Americans hated the Japanese at the time it's true, but we do not as a people take any joy in killing even for vengeance.

After Pearl Harbour, the US Government beat the "vengence" drum very loud.

Read "h**l in the Pacific" and many other sources.

Why don't you read my full posts? If you had, you would know that my father fought the Japanese in the Pacific as a US Marine. My mother's brother was a POW of them and was forced into slave labor by them. I know full well what happened in the Pacific. That was not what I was talking about in so much as what the US administration and the American people as a whole felt. Vengeance yes, but killing for the sake of killing no - not the greater majority of Americans.

Vengence, unfortunately can bring its own pleasures. Much documentation of US and Allied soldiers experiences has shown that many enjoyed killing Japanese. It was the nature of the fighting, Japanese atrocities and the attitudes that prevailed at the time towards the Japanese race that brought this out. Even an idiot would know that it is not a part of American culture to kill just for the sake of it.

In the heat of battle, some terrible things were done on both sides. But that was the way it was. Ordinary people were brutalized by their experiences.

Of course you know all this already.

Most of this is off topic. Should continue this under another heading.

So then it appears you've finally understood what I was saying all along.

We all have understood all along but you didn't realize it.

 

[Missileer]

There are three major factors that conclude the use of Atom Bomb over Japan in WWII:

- The huge risk involved in conventional invasion of Japan by US forces as Japanese were well known for their stubborn resistance during fighting on ground. And this meant that huge number of Man-power would be lost in the invasion process.

- The projection of power to Soviet Union.

- Japanese leader "Suzuki's" decision of not to surrender even after the defeat. This perception is widely used by US Media to justify the act of use of Atomic Bombs.

Also do note that this decision was made by President Harry S. Truman and it might be possible that he had a harsher perception about armed conflicts.

I agree with your perception of President Truman. He was a tough little character with a mean streak. He once threatened to kick a reporter's butt because he criticized his daughter's piano playing. He didn't care for the Japanese in the beginning of the war and was really pissed at the end. Most Americans, including me, believe that type of man was what we needed during the war. The old timers called him Harry Assed Truman.

 

[Strongbow]

More people-100,000-died in the 9th March incendiary attack than at Hiroshima (Max Hastings).

Oddly enough, Soviet entry into the war on August 8th was more influential than the atomic explosions in convincing Japanese leaders that they must quit (Max Hastings).

Heard of Max Hastings, Mr Charge?

 

[LeEnfield]

Max Hastings, a reporter but like a lot a people he was not around when all this went on. You really needed to be involved in this period to have some understanding of what it was all about. Okay you have read books, and have seen John Wayne do his stuff. To be around at that time and see the effort that went into this war, to meet people who lost relatives in this war. Many of of your views on these matters have been shaped by your teachers or your parents. I don't think that during this time you would not find many people who were worried about dropping the Atom Bomb, they were only to thankful that the war was over.

 

[Charge 7]

More people-100,000-died in the 9th March incendiary attack than at Hiroshima (Max Hastings).

Oddly enough, Soviet entry into the war on August 8th was more influential than the atomic explosions in convincing Japanese leaders that they must quit (Max Hastings).

Heard of Max Hastings, Mr Charge?

Interesting, Strongbow how you always take aim at me on these threads despite the postings of several others here who have echoed my statements. Have a vendetta do we?

As your countryman, LeEnfield said, Max Hastings wasn't there. I'll take the word of the participants over a reporter with a book to sell.

 

[Lord Londonderry]

If any of you people have read Max Hastings books or articles you would know that his opinion has never been against the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima. He is actually sympathetic to the reasons why it was dropped. His arguments are very compelling.

He wrote an article last week, I think it was in the Times headed

"It's all too easy, knowing what we know now, to accuse Truman of being a war criminal"

Strongbow is stating some information researched by an excellent author of non-fiction books on WW2.

Max Hastings most recent work is Armageddon:The Battle for Germany 1944-45. He is researching a study of the war against Japan.

Some of you forum contributors better start reading some of Max Hastings work. He is a great writer, an excellent researcher with considerable knowledge and perspective of WW2.

 

[Young Winston]

Max Hastings, a reporter but like a lot a people he was not around when all this went on. You really needed to be involved in this period to have some understanding of what it was all about. Okay you have read books, and have seen John Wayne do his stuff. To be around at that time and see the effort that went into this war, to meet people who lost relatives in this war. Many of of your views on these matters have been shaped by your teachers or your parents. I don't think that during this time you would not find many people who were worried about dropping the Atom Bomb, they were only to thankful that the war was over.

Max Hastings has stated compelling arguments supporting the dropping of the atom bombs. You need to read his material which Strongbow seems to have done.

 

[Strongbow]

The following is an extract from a Max Hastings article:

"In August 1945, amid a world sick of death, Allied lives seemed very precious, while the enemy appeared to value neither his own nor those of the innocent. Truman's Hiroshima judgement may seem wrong in the eye's of posterity, but it is easy to understand why it seemed right to most of his contempories".


Mr Charge, Max Hastings has always written powerful arguments supporting Truman and his contempories for their decision to use the A-bomb on Hiroshima.

Have you read much of his material? "Das Reich" is a fantastic book about an SS Panser Division in France during the Normandy landings.

I think you would enjoy his books.

 

[Charge 7]

I welcome the suggestion of Mr. Hastings' books. Should I come across one and have the time to read it, rest assured I will. Trust me though, I have quite enough reading going on in my life these days. When an officer has returned to duty after some years of retirement they don't exactly say "hi" and let you just go on like it was yesterday. Add to that I am beginning a new chapter in my military career as a leadership trainer.

 

[LeEnfield]

What ever Max Hastings wrote you really needed to be around at this time to understand the mood of the people. Even today on the news were some ex Japanese POW's who were saying that can't even be in the same room as a Japanese person over what they saw and went through.