Do you think nuking Japan was a necessary evil?

[Saucexorzski]

How many times are we going to have this thread?

Humanity will have till nuclear weapons are considered obsolete in terms of effective destructiveness.

[NotFunny008]

After witnessing Obama (whom I despise) set foot into Hiroshima presumably to simply to assert his American might seeing how he made no apology or feel any real remorse, coupled with the responses of other Americans, this old topic came to mind again. Was nuking Japan necessary? I mean for how we demonize the act in one end, other Americans would remind you that Japan was ax-crazy during those times and we forced them into a surrender that saved more lives.

I am shocked that you sounded like as if Imperial Japan was blameless. Did you know how many people that they killed across the Far East before they were bombed to smithereens? Did you know how cruel and inhuman they were? For example, they threw babies in mid air to land on bayonet placed beneath.

[Demona3]

After witnessing Obama (whom I despise) set foot into Hiroshima presumably to simply to assert his American might seeing how he made no apology or feel any real remorse, coupled with the responses of other Americans, this old topic came to mind again. Was nuking Japan necessary? I mean for how we demonize the act in one end, other Americans would remind you that Japan was ax-crazy during those times and we forced them into a surrender that saved more lives.

If you read your history, the bombs did not need to be dropped. In fact, Japan had already surrendered before the bombing. President Truman at the time, decided that the US had to show its "might" to the Soviet Union. Hence the bombs were dropped. Yes, this is true, please google it.

[Dreknar20]

Hell yes, the Axis did as well, but it does not make acceptable from the Allies....

right, cause blowing up the enemies cities has absolutely no effect on their war effort. It was purely for fun and due to a massive surplus of bombs.

[NotFunny008]

No, mass-murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians is wrong pretty much under any circumstances.

Imperial Japan at the time did pretty much this using conventional weapons before they were bombed. May be we should ask if Japan was justified to kill hundreds of thousands civilians. Why are we treating Japan as the victim? They were the aggressor at the time.

[Kubaal]

They had ZERO remorse when they bombed Pearl Harbor, we should have ZERO remorse for our response. I like to look at the quote from the movie Swordfish.

"Anyone who impinges on America's freedom. Terrorist states, Stanley. Someone must bring their war to them. They bomb a church, we bomb ten. They hijack a plane, we take out an airport. They execute American tourists, we tactically nuke an entire city. Our job is to make terrorism so horrific that it becomes unthinkable to attack Americans."

[zealo]

Imperial Japan at the time did pretty much this using conventional weapons before they were bombed. May be we should ask if Japan was justified to kill hundreds of thousands civilians. Why are we treating Japan as the victim? They were the aggressor at the time.

Many of the ones responsible for things like unit 731 were pardoned by the US and never put on trial for their war crimes, in exchange for research data. Go figure why people don't know about imperial japan in that regard.

[Wallmaker Yahzarah]

It's never hypocritical to look at history from the present and pass judgement.

[Forogil]

edit: It`s not from wikipedia or some noname website...https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investi...ism-definition

Still not a reliable source, since it has been edited for length - and you still didn't understand it.

For length compare https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investi...ism-definition with https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2331

However, the most important part is that a terrorism act must be illegal in itself. But the US military is allowed to wage war so therefore a war by the military isn't a crime, and therefore not terrorism. Similarly you cannot claim "kidnapping" or "assassination" when punished for a crime and claim it also constitutes terrorism.

[Deleted]

May be we should ask if Japan was justified to kill hundreds of thousands civilians. Why are we treating Japan as the victim? They were the aggressor at the time.

You can not have it both ways. Either is it acceptable to deliberate kill hundreds of thousands of civilians to win the war or it is not, if the method is bayonet/bullets or incendiary/nuclear is irrelevant.

You cant say only we have the moral right to slaughter civilans to break the enemy, and if the enemy do it it is a warcrime... that is hypocrisy.

[nonameelf]

They had ZERO remorse when they bombed Pearl Harbor, we should have ZERO remorse for our response. I like to look at the quote from the movie Swordfish.

Are you comparing a military base to a city?

[Video Games]

The funny thing is the US is largely responsible for making Japan be on the world stage and their government in that time period. Japan had been an isolationist country until the US forced them to be open which lead to civil war in Japan. So, the US isn't exactly blameless in this.

I can blame them because while we did force them to open up, they were doing fine until the early 30s and the fascist military started taking over. I realize it's because tensions were boiling over, but they still didn't have to go to war.

[Forogil]

If you read your history, the bombs did not need to be dropped. In fact, Japan had already surrendered before the bombing. President Truman at the time, decided that the US had to show its "might" to the Soviet Union. Hence the bombs were dropped. Yes, this is true, please google it.

No. That is false. Some Japanese officials were considering surrendering, but they hadn't done so. Some US officials thought the bombs unnecessary - since the Japanese would surrender in a few months of conventional bombing (which would have cost more lives).

But please link your well-researched results of googling so we can see your true colors.

[Kubaal]

Are you comparing a military base to a city?

They attacked the US, and the US responded.

[Independent voter]

1. All four parties involved, Japan, Britain, US and Russia had a nuclear bomb program. Britain was actively helping the US, Russia was trying to steal secrets and nobody really knew how far along the Japanese were.

2. Britain the US and Russia warned Japan that they had the bomb and would use it if Japan didn't surrender immediately.

[GasaiYuno951]

fire bombing killed more people then both nukes. and I assume its way more painful to slowly burn to death then be instantly vaporized. soo If the US never dropped the nukes they would have just fire bombed more and way more citizens would have died

plus a added benefit of the bombing was that it has prevented WW3 thus far due to how feared nukes are

[monkmastaeq]

what reason would he need to apologize or feel remorse?

If your at war with Japan your whole purpose is to kill Japanese.

This guys right, they are lucky a dozen bombs didn't get dropped and wipe their civilization from history. In war your goal is to defeat your enemy and that should include wholesale slaughter of the entire populace

[nonameelf]

They attacked the US, and the US responded.

But you think a military base and a city are equivalent targets?

[Gadzooks]

Pretty much this. They had intelligence at the time they were making this decision that the Japanese Government was seeing the military party lose ground, and surrender was almost certain. It was just a matter of time, waiting for the political pressures to play out, a matter of weeks. The possibility of a land invasion of Japan proper was basically not going to happen either way.

Dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was more about demonstrating to Stalin that the Americans had beaten them to nuclear technology, since Russia had started to flex its muscles by then, than for any military objective in the WWII theater itself.

To complicate things even more, Japan was working on the bomb as well. If they'd built it first...would they have used it? Or Germany? We weren't the only ones trying to get it to work. It was already a superpower race when we got into it.

Should they have? The "correct" answer is no, of course. What's the real answer? I don't know, and I'm glad I don't have to decide, where it would lead to a real bomb going off.

[Molis]

Didn't we have this topic like 2 months ago?