Do you think nuking Japan was a necessary evil?

[Chrysia]

Pearl harbor was an attack on a military target. If you were looking for an illustration of barbarism given the sadistic nature of the Japanese regime at the time, that isn't it. It is the sort of shit the US does on a daily basis to any one who blocks its trade deals.

Btw If you expect people to be polite, it might be a good idea not to sanction genocide. I don't think any one who does that deserves any respect.

I mean, if you want actual acts of barbarism by the Japanese, there are plenty. Nanking springs immediately to mind. Pearl Harbor was contrary to the standard strictures of war, but it was by no means barbarous.

[timoteo]

I think the decision to nuke Japan was a necessary evil. That does not mean it is a time in our countries history that should be praised or romanticized. I see it as a horrible black eye in our countries history however, most of what I read would tends to suggest that the decision to nuke Japan saved potentially hundreds of thousands of lives.

[Deleted]

No, I was going to thank you for helping us build the atomic bomb.

Britain contributed to the Manhattan Project by helping initiate the effort to build the first atomic bombs in the United States during World War II, and helped carry it through to completion in August 1945 by supplying crucial expertise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britis...hattan_Project

This is another thing americans tend to do. They assume everyone thinks in nationalistic, tribal terms. I'm British so I must be in favour of actions by a British government that predates my existence.

Btw I seem to recall someone leaked the research to the Russians.

- - - Updated - - -

I mean, if you want actual acts of barbarism by the Japanese, there are plenty. Nanking springs immediately to mind. Pearl Harbor was contrary to the standard strictures of war, but it was by no means barbarous.

That was my point, thanks.

- - - Updated - - -

I think the decision to nuke Japan was a necessary evil. That does not mean it is a time in our countries history that should be praised or romanticized. I see it as a horrible black eye in our countries history however, most of what I read would tends to suggest that the decision to nuke Japan saved potentially hundreds of thousands of lives.

History is written by the victors. If ISIS win the present conflict in Iraq and Syria in a hundred years similar rationalizations will make their way into history books.

[MasterOfNone]

This is another thing americans tend to do. They assume everyone thinks in nationalistic, tribal terms. I'm British so I must be in favour of actions by a British government that predates my existence.

Btw I seem to recall someone leaked the research to the Russians.

- - - Updated - - -



That was my point, thanks.

- - - Updated - - -



History is written by the victors. If ISIS win the present conflict in Iraq and Syria in a hundred years similar rationalizations will make their way into history books.

Not sure what kool-aid you drink, but I'm sure it's tasty

1. If you believe what you first said, then I assume you don't hold any later generations of America responsible for slavery? We fought brother on brother, neighbor on neighbor to be the "guys" to end slavery. Not to mention over a race of people that historically was one of the least abused races, but I digress.

2. History by the victors eh? Well I guess the whole world was the victors because pretty much everyone agrees to the savagery of the Japanese back then. Their code of military conduct suggested suicide and not to be captured as it was dishonorable. Therefore bombing them saved lives on both sides. The Japanese did not have a reputation for surrender or for good prisoner treatment. This is a fact. Winner or not.

[timoteo]

This is another thing americans tend to do. They assume everyone thinks in nationalistic, tribal terms. I'm British so I must be in favour of actions by a British government that predates my existence.

Btw I seem to recall someone leaked the research to the Russians.

- - - Updated - - -



That was my point, thanks.

- - - Updated - - -



History is written by the victors. If ISIS win the present conflict in Iraq and Syria in a hundred years similar rationalizations will make their way into history books.

If your argument was that the total estimated causalities was embellished or exaggerated by the victor I think you would be closer to the truth. That was a time where our government and military were not as accountable to the public as they are now but there is no way that their claims are entirely fabricated.

[YUPPIE]

you know what's disturbing is some Americans say "they'd do it again" if push came to shove.

FUCK.

[Sting]

Should've nuked the entire island that way we'd have avoided all the weeb shit.

[jimmyjingle]

Yeah. The guilt has made us take half measures in every subsequent war, to disastrous effect.

[tylenol]

you know what's disturbing is some Americans say "they'd do it again" if push came to shove.

FUCK.

How is that disturbing? if a country is trying to take over various other countries and doing all the horrible shit they were doing in China and whatnot, who wouldn't be for a quick end to that? rather then sending in the cavalry, getting them killed and countless civilians killed....there is a reason the US holds Japans car keys so to speak in the military department (easing up a bit now days for good reason though) it's so they don't try that bullshit again

People forget that even after the US firebombed Japan (which did way more damage, killed way more people then the nukes) they still didn't give up, go look up Japans military numbers during the end when they were preping for an invasion, they weren't down or out, they were instructing civilians to use any weapons they had or could make to kill Americans...if Operation Downfall happened it would've been a slaughter on both sides till the other nukes being made were finished anyway

[Chrysia]

How is that disturbing? if a country is trying to take over various other countries and doing all the horrible shit they were doing in China and whatnot, who wouldn't be for a quick end to that? rather then sending in the cavalry, getting them killed and countless civilians killed....there is a reason the US holds Japans car keys so to speak in the military department (easing up a bit now days for good reason though) it's so they don't try that bullshit again

People forget that even after the US firebombed Japan (which did way more damage, killed way more people then the nukes) they still didn't give up, go look up Japans military numbers during the end when they were preping for an invasion, they weren't down or out, they were instructing civilians to use any weapons they had or could make to kill Americans...if Operation Downfall happened it would've been a slaughter on both sides till the other nukes being made were finished anyway

We've been over this, Operation Downfall was not the only other option. The Japanese navy and air force were decimated by this point. It's questionable how many lives would have been saved/lost during a naval blockade, and the Soviets may not have endorsed that plan, but the choice was not a dichotomy.

[TheEaterofSouls]

Didn't we give them the option and call them literally as we were overhead about to bomb the cities? After their leader still refused then we dropped the bomb? The guy basically didn't give a shit about the civilians or anything?

[Chrysia]

Didn't we give them the option and call them literally as we were overhead about to bomb the cities? After their leader still refused then we dropped the bomb? The guy basically didn't give a shit about the civilians or anything?

It's more that the Emperor was a figurehead, and the military viewed surrender as so dishonorable they wouldn't give him the green light. When it became clear the US was ready to nuke them into submission, the Emperor defied the military and declared his intention to surrender. There was an attempted coup, but the military leadership didn't have the support they needed from the troops to pull it off. While the Emperor didn't care for his citizens per se, he cared about his legacy, and being the Emperor that let his country be turned into a radioactive wasteland wasn't his idea of a legacy.

[Kellhound]

We've been over this, Operation Downfall was not the only other option. The Japanese navy and air force were decimated by this point. It's questionable how many lives would have been saved/lost during a naval blockade, and the Soviets may not have endorsed that plan, but the choice was not a dichotomy.

Given the Divine Wind forces and submarine forces still operational, a naval blockade would have cost American lives. It was the best option to end the war with the least amount of further US casualties, and that is always the best option for the winning side.

[Chrysia]

Given the Divine Wind forces and submarine forces still operational, a naval blockade would have cost American lives. It was the best option to end the war with the least amount of further US casualties, and that is always the best option for the winning side.

I'm not trying to say the blockade was a perfect or better option, but it was an option.

[MasterOfNone]

I'm not trying to say the blockade was a perfect or better option, but it was an option.

I have read many of your replies this thread and have decided to respond in this fashion. I'll pretty much respond to everything you postulate, with out facts mind you, with one word. Senjinkun. Until you fully comprehend the culture of the Japanese back then, and the lengths they were willing to go to by their own military code of conduct, everything you suggest is pretty much bs. No offense.

[Chrysia]

I have read many of your replies this thread and have decided to respond in this fashion. I'll pretty much respond to everything you postulate, with out facts mind you, with one word. Senjinkun. Until you fully comprehend the culture of the Japanese back then, and the lengths they were willing to go to by their own military code of conduct, everything you suggest is pretty much bs. No offense.

You know, except the actual facts that the Emperor faced an attempted coup due to his decision to surrender, the Japanese fleet had few escort and harassment units to begin with, and what few they had were decimated by wars end, and their destroyer fleet was cut in half and unsuitable for attacking a blockade, due to being easy targets., the Japanese Air Force was plagued with problems throughout the war, and by the end of the war had few aircraft in working condition, and US forces had long since learned to counter their few advantages, and the fact that Japanese military production had lagged behind the US in everything but subs for the entirety of the war, much of the capacity for which was being systematically destroyed by US Air raids.

I've done the research. The people supported the Emperor, and the military convinced the Emperor total war was the only option to cement his legacy. By the end of the war, the Emperor's resolve was already wavering. He needed a push. A naval blockade might have had the same effect as the bombs.

If you read more of my replies, say, from 2 pages ago, you'll note that I think that within the full context of the end of World War II, dropping the bombs was most likely necessary, but not to get Japan to surrender. We had other options for that, though none that would bring our forces home as swiftly. Dropping the bombs was at least as much to intimidate the Soviets as it was to push the Emperor into defying the military.

[Kellhound]

I'm not trying to say the blockade was a perfect or better option, but it was an option.

A blockade was not an option. It would have cost more American lives and would have allowed the USSR to grab more territory than it already had.

[Deleted]

Why didn't they use tazers?

[Chrysia]

A blockade was not an option. It would have cost more American lives and would have allowed the USSR to grab more territory than it already had.

Again, it's qualities as an option are irrelevant, it was an option. It was a perfectly feasible solution given our superiority in both sea and air power. Even Japanese submarines had posed little risk to the US fleet since 1943, and the Japanese fuel supplies were dwindling.

[OneSent]

Killing hundreds of thousands of people to hypothetically "save" hundreds of thousands of people...

I can't imagine a single scenario where that could ever be justified.

"Necessary evil" is still evil. It's just a lie we tell ourselves to rationalize immoral actions; a euphemism of sorts, so that we feel less guilty.