Hiroshima victims speaks about bomb on 65th anniversary

[Ryzorian]

Japan was ready to fight to the death, we know that from all the war material we found hidden all over after we took over Japan. Potential losses would have been stagering.

I know Horshima was not the orginal target, but the primary was also relatively undamaged. As to why didn't we drop it on an island to demonstrate...we weren't sure it would actually work, makeing a "demonstration only to have it be a dud" woulda been a disaster. The second one was droped so soon to kinda prod Japan along quickly, Russia had joined the pacific fight and we didn't want Japan divided up like Germany was.

Is there a sort of barbaric quality to the whole thing, certainly. You also have to take into account all the propaganda from both sides back then, Neither country really liked each other, hated would be a better term, despised even.

Two nations, that utterly hated each other at the time, threw themselves into one of the most viscious wars every fought. I don't see it as wich nation was more evil or not. Both sides committed atrocious acts, both sides felt justified in doing them. It was hammer and tongs the whole way and niether would call it quit's unless something massive interevened. The BOMB, was that one thing. Like it or not, it prolly saved both countries from years of relentless bloodletting and hatred.

I'm not kidding, go look at some of the old war propaganda from back then, complete obliteration seems to be the mindset between the two countries back then.

[Ronin4hire]

Ryorian, Sangetsu and all those that think the decision to use the bomb was morally justifiable. Your (American?) version of history is not the definitive one.

The Hiroshima Myth by John V. Denson

Every year during the first two weeks of August the mass news media and many politicians at the national level trot out the "patriotic" political myth that the dropping of the two atomic bombs on Japan in August of 1945 caused them to surrender, and thereby saved the lives of anywhere from five hundred thousand to one million American soldiers, who did not have to invade the islands. Opinion polls over the last fifty years show that American citizens overwhelmingly (between 80 and 90%) believe this false history which, of course, makes them feel better about killing hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians (mostly women and children) and saving American lives to accomplish the ending of the war.

The best book, in my opinion, to explode this myth is The Decision to Use the Bomb by Gar Alperovitz, because it not only explains the real reasons the bombs were dropped, but also gives a detailed history of how and why the myth was created that this slaughter of innocent civilians was justified, and therefore morally acceptable. The essential problem starts with President Franklin Roosevelt’s policy of unconditional surrender, which was reluctantly adopted by Churchill and Stalin, and which President Truman decided to adopt when he succeeded Roosevelt in April of 1945. Hanson Baldwin was the principal writer for The New York Times who covered World War II and he wrote an important book immediately after the war entitled Great Mistakes of the War. Baldwin concludes that the unconditional surrender policy ". . . was perhaps the biggest political mistake of the war . . . . Unconditional surrender was an open invitation to unconditional resistance; it discouraged opposition to Hitler, probably lengthened the war, costs us lives, and helped to lead to the present aborted peace."

The stark fact is that the Japanese leaders, both military and civilian, including the Emperor, were willing to surrender in May of 1945 if the Emperor could remain in place and not be subjected to a war crimes trial after the war. This fact became known to President Truman as early as May of 1945. The Japanese monarchy was one of the oldest in all of history dating back to 660 B.C. The Japanese religion added the belief that all the Emperors were the direct descendants of the sun goddess, Amaterasu. The reigning Emperor Hirohito was the 124th in the direct line of descent. After the bombs were dropped on August 6 and 9 of 1945, and their surrender soon thereafter, the Japanese were allowed to keep their Emperor on the throne and he was not subjected to any war crimes trial. The Emperor, Hirohito, came on the throne in 1926 and continued in his position until his death in 1989. Since President Truman, in effect, accepted the conditional surrender offered by the Japanese as early as May of 1945, the question is posed, "Why then were the bombs dropped?".... (the article continues)

[Ryzorian]

Unconditional surrender was the only way the US was going to go after Pearl Harbor , FDR knew that, an so did Truman. You pick a fight with us, you don't get to set "conditions" for when it stops. You think you can go into a bar and pick a fight with the biggest baddest guy in there and then somehow call it off with "conditions"? That's how that generation thought back then.

As to the emperor bit, we understood the importance of the emperor to the spirit of Japan, that's partly why they didn't try him as a war criminal. ( Not that we didn't get all the war trials we needed/wanted anyway) However, that came with a cavete, he had to give a speech at ground zero of Horishima. We made it a point that the emperor stayed emporer because we allowed it, based on our good graces, not because it was a condition we agreed to meet.

As to the question of morally justified? It shortened the war, so yes, it was.

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by Ryzorian

Unconditional surrender was the only way the US was going to go after Pearl Harbor , FDR knew that, an so did Truman. You pick a fight with us, you don't get to set "conditions" for when it stops. You think you can go into a bar and pick a fight with the biggest baddest guy in there and then somehow call it off with "conditions"? That's how that generation thought back then.

First of all, your barfight analogy is flawed as it only focuses on the fight and not the leadup to the fight. Its not like innocent America sitting there having a drink and then Japan sneaks up behind him and attacks him.

But whatever.... stupid analogy aside, what you say is true... if you dont have much leverage then you cant do much. The Americans could have at least heard them out though.. and this point doesnt escape the fact that the dropping of the bombs were an atrocity.

Originally Posted by Ryzorian

As to the question of morally justified? It shortened the war, so yes, it was.

Oh I see.. to you morality is about time... regardless of casualties.

That does not fit with my morals.

[Sangetsu]

People are so pampered nowadays, living in safe societies, with safety nets available to us if we get sick, lose or job, or get hopelessly into debt. We are well insulated against the difficulties human beings faced only a century ago. We look back with 20-20 hindsight and stupidly try to second guess the decisions of earlier generations, having no idea of the real life situations they faced at the time.

Does anyone realize why the Allies required an unconditional surrender? Does anyone remember the treaty of Versailles? Germany's conditional surrender to WW1? World War 1 was supposed to be the "war to end all wars", but that turned out not to be the case, didn't it? Only 2 decades after Germany's surrender, they once again started a world war. Germany's conditional surrender under the Versailles Treaty may have ended WW1 more quickly, and saved lives at the time, but in the long run it ended up leading to WW2, and costing the world countless millions of lives.

There was no way the Allies were going to repeat this mistake. When the war was won, they wanted it to stay won, and it worked. Germany and Japan were both permanently defeated, and never regained their military super-power status.

[dogsbody70]

re cruelty to POW's by the Japanese imperial army.

Japanese war crimes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Yes the A bombs were terrible. the japanese people suffered because of their military and government.

They committed atrocities in many Asian countries.

cruelty begets more cruelty-- and if there is only one way to stop the madness?

[dogsbody70]

Burma Railway - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[dogsbody70]

this is interesting by a british man who was a POW.

1 - The Prisoner List

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by Sangetsu

People are so pampered nowadays, living in safe societies, with safety nets available to us if we get sick, lose or job, or get hopelessly into debt. We are well insulated against the difficulties human beings faced only a century ago. We look back with 20-20 hindsight and stupidly try to second guess the decisions of earlier generations, having no idea of the real life situations they faced at the time.

Does anyone realize why the Allies required an unconditional surrender? Does anyone remember the treaty of Versailles? Germany's conditional surrender to WW1? World War 1 was supposed to be the "war to end all wars", but that turned out not to be the case, didn't it? Only 2 decades after Germany's surrender, they once again started a world war. Germany's conditional surrender under the Versailles Treaty may have ended WW1 more quickly, and saved lives at the time, but in the long run it ended up leading to WW2, and costing the world countless millions of lives.

There was no way the Allies were going to repeat this mistake. When the war was won, they wanted it to stay won, and it worked. Germany and Japan were both permanently defeated, and never regained their military super-power status.

You dont know what you are talking about.

The Versailles treaty was TOO harsh on Germany and that is why they went about things differently after WW2.

Furthermore... how is this related to the atomic bomb?

Im not second guessing anything... The bombs were dropped and that is just a part of history now. When Japanese people remember the days... it is generally speaking NOT an anti-American day.

What pisses me off is when Americans feel they need to justify the act using history that is actually pretty wrong.

[Ronin4hire]

Dogsbody... I dont know what your point is...

Japan did some terrible things too... nobody is forgetting that.

But this thread is about Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Furthermore... before anybody tries to justify the a bombs by comparing Japanese atrocities... I want to make this clear.

I dont believe that 2 wrongs make a right nor do I believe any of you who wish to justify the a bomb in that way, have thought through the implications of justifying an atrocity in that way.