Do you think nuking Japan was a necessary evil?

[Al Gorefiend]

Abomb shaming? Wtf is that? Maybe dont kill civilians with weapons that can destroy civilians and an area for generations to come..

This recent trend of stirring the pot when it comes to America's decision to drop a bomb 70+ years ago.

[NineSpine]

The definition of war is a necessary evil.

We were at war, stop with all this atomic bomb shaming.

Al Qaeda was at war with us, do you believe 9/11 was therefore justified?

- - - Updated - - -

ahahahaha....... your moralistic idealism almost drips off you.

War is war, not a court case.

But do tell. If civilians are deemed 'innocent', what crime are they innocent of? And who then is guilty?

Al Qaeda was at war with us, do you believe 9/11 was therefore justified?

[Daymanmb]

How is killing 50,000 people with guns and knives different than killing them with an atomic bomb?

Death is death and every country involved in WW2 got their fair share of it. Yet its always Germany and America who carry the moral guilt.

Because one is strategically aimed at military installations and the other blanketly and indiscriminately kills everything for a loong time. How the fuck are people missing this small but important point?

[Jingoism]

Yes, of course. Anyone who thinks otherwise is simply historically illiterate and caught up in the modern day emoshun cult-ure.

[Obelisk Kai]

I love the Japanese. I love their culture, I love their exports, I love the bat shit crazy way they perceive the world. The world is, ultimately, a better place for having Japan in it.

But nuking Hiroshima was, at the time, the right choice.

Yes, hundreds of thousands died but hundreds of thousands of Japanese had already perished as a result of allied bombings against Japanese cities. Did that bring their Empire to it's knees? It did not. The supreme council for the direction of the war was inured to the sufferings of their people EXCEPT where the suffering could forment revolution and thus pose a threat to the throne.

Remember, the final plan of the Japanese Empire was Ketsu-Go. They knew they could no longer win, they simply planned to inflict casualties of such a magnitude on the invading forces of the Allies on Kyushu that the Allies would agree to a more favorable peace rather than continue the struggle. Truman had a moral duty to his people to avoid that.

You could argue that the Americans were sacrificing the lives of Women and children in an attempt to force the Japanese to surrender to spare the lives of soldiers.
You would be correct, they did.

But do not forget for one instant that while the Americans and the Japanese were planning their final battle over the home islands, that Japanese forces were occupying Korea, Indochina and huge swathes of China. How many millions of people, and allied POWs, suffered in captivity under the Japanese? Why is the Japanese civilian who died elevated over the millions of civilians murdered at the hands of the Imperial Army?

The Japanese civilian, who worked for the aggressor, possessed no special moral right to survive over the civilians of the lands they occupied. Civilians who would live once Japan was defeated, and who would die the longer the war dragged on.

[Dreknar20]

No, its purpose is to stop them attacking you.

And how exactly do you 'stop' them?

Oh right by killing crap tons of them and messing up their nation as much as possible.

[Daymanmb]

ahahahaha....... your moralistic idealism almost drips off you.

War is war, not a court case.

But do tell. If civilians are deemed 'innocent', what crime are they innocent of? And who then is guilty?

Who said innocent? I said soldiers and civs. It seems were both laughing at your ignorance.

[hrugner]

I used to think so, but more as a demonstration of what war was going to be like if we continued than as a necessary military action. But I guess I grew out of that forever ago. Even from that perspective it's just extremely high profile universal terrorism. An act that let everyone know that if they wanted to fight a war, it couldn't be in the open.

[nihila]

so?

How in anyway is the welfare/lives of the people your at war with close to those of your own people.

From the standpoint of humanity, Japanese and Americans lives are identical. From the standpoint of a government, you are right, your own people are more important. However, generally you try to avoid killing civilians especially when the war was already won, you don't do the exact thing that will kill 140 000 of them.

[Al Gorefiend]

Al Qaeda was at war with us, do you believe 9/11 was therefore justified?

- - - Updated - - -



Al Qaeda was at war with us, do you believe 9/11 was therefore justified?

I didn't use the word justified once. There is no justice in war. War is hell, but the OP asked "Was it a necessary evil?" so the answer is yes. It was evil, and necessary to end the war.

Jesus fuck I wonder if forums in Japan are full of shitposts like "Was Pearl Harbor a necessary evil?"

[Dreknar20]

Who said innocent? I said soldiers and civs. It seems were both laughing at your ignorance.

yet these train of comments started off with my annoyance of people always referring to people as 'innocent'

But either way, civilians are part of their nations war effort whether they like it or not. Probably why both sides blew the shit out of each others cities throughout the war.

[Daymanmb]

"Was it a necessary evil?" so the answer is yes. It was evil, and necessary to end the war.

The war was already over, keep drinking the koolaid.

[Genoreaper]

It's not evil at all. It's a world at war. What other options did the US have? Japan was NOT going to surrender. They would have fought for every inch of land until the last. The US was preparing for a mainland invasion. We would have won, but at the cost of an estimated 1million lives for the US military and an even higher figure for the Japanese. Invading Japan would have been a disaster. The two nukes was the right thing to do. Force them into surrender, and end the nonsense. You had only two choices. Invade and destroy the country, kill countless civilians + soldiers and lose over a million of your own? Or force them to surrender?

Evil would be dropping a nuke because we felt like it and hate the Japanese.

It was needed to end the conflict. The Japanese at that time did not listen to reason, they did not believe in surrendering, they viewed their emperor as a god.
The nukes created peace.

[Al Gorefiend]

Because one is strategically aimed at military installations and the other blanketly and indiscriminately kills everything for a loong time. How the fuck are people missing this small but important point?

And it ended the war?

[Obelisk Kai]

From the standpoint of humanity, Japanese and Americans lives are identical. From the standpoint of a government, you are right, your own people are more important. However, generally you try to avoid killing civilians especially when the war was already won, you don't do the exact thing that will kill 140 000 of them.

The war was not won, the Japanese Army was planning a final blood bath to make all the other massacres pale by comparison. They had no intention of surrendering until the bomb proved they would not have that final battle, America could obliterate them from the air. Couple that with the Soviet invasion of Manchuria and the collapse of civilian morale portending revolution...they gave up when their capacity to kill was taken from them and when continuing would endanger the throne.

[dd614]

I love the Japanese. I love their culture, I love their exports, I love the bat shit crazy way they perceive the world. The world is, ultimately, a better place for having Japan in it.

But nuking Hiroshima was, at the time, the right choice.

Yes, Hundreds of thousands died but hundreds of thousands of Japanese had already perished as a result of allied bombings against Japanese cities. Did that bring their Empire to it's knees? It did not. The supreme council for the direction of the war was inured to the sufferings of their people EXCEPT where the suffering could forment revolution and thus pose a threat to the throne.

Remember, the final plan of the Japanese Empire was Ketsu-Go. They knew they could no longer win, they simply planned to inflict casualties of such a magnitude on the invading forces of the Allies on Kyushu that the Allies would agree to a more favorable peace rather than continue the struggle. Truman had a moral duty to his people to avoid that.

You could argue that the Americans were sacrificing the lives of Women and children in an attempt to force the Japanese to surrender to spare the lives of soldiers.
You would be correct, they did.

But do not forget for one instant that while the Americans and the Japanese were planning their final battle over the home islands, that Japanese forces were occupying Korea, Indochina and huge swathes of China. How many millions of people, and allied POWs, suffered in captivity under the Japanese? Why is the Japanese civilian who died elevated over the millions of civilians murdered at the hands of the Imperial Army?

The Japanese civilian, who worked for the aggressor, possessed no special moral right to survive over the civilians of the lands they occupied. Civilians who would live one Japan was defeated, and who would die the longer the war dragged on.

Best post of the thread, and it shares my views.

[Daymanmb]

yet these train of comments started off with my annoyance of people always referring to people as 'innocent'

Idgaf, if you quote me, respond to what I say not what you think I might say.

[Al Gorefiend]

The war was already over, keep drinking the koolaid.

Ahahahahaha.

What?

Now you're just trolling.

The war in the Pacific was far from over.

[Kuntantee]

not this shit again :/

[bledgor]

Let's imagine for a moment that some group the U.S. warred with did the same. For example, the U.S. has taken part in overthrowing numerous democratically elected governments. Imagine one of them did the same, nuking San Francisco and New York. Americans would teach it as the day we were unlawfully terrorized by maniacs.

- - - Updated - - -



No, that isn't the purpose of war. That was the purpose of Nazis going to war though, which makes your comment ironic and amusingly ignorant.

Wrong, the purpose of WAR is to destroy your opponents ability/desire to wage war, and hopefully to ensure they never want to war with you again. Any other definition is wishful thinking.