Do you think nuking Japan was a necessary evil?

[Canpinter]

It wasn't necessary, it was simply evil

And what would you have done?

[Bigbamboozal]

I didn't say that you were wrong - just asked you to support your statements - since that is the normal behaviour of someone stating something.
Previously in the thread I have seen many vainly trying to support that the nuclear bombings weren't "necessary" by linking to holocaust deniers and crazy people blogging.

However, "google doesn't take much effort bud, try it" cuts both ways. So YOU do it.


Have the trade embargos with Cuba or N. Korea worked any better? The simple answer is that often there is no good solution: trade or no trade there will be problems.

Here you go bud: http://www.globalresearch.ca/secret-...-nazis/5439236
As to your assertion about Cuba and N. Korea, I don't give that as much weight as say Iran and Iraq, to name just one situation where selling supplies to both sides bit America in the ass, mostly because it isn't 'as' relevant to what I am talking about...


OT: But seriously, the rest of Allied nations have never seen America fess up and be accountable, for the damage they caused. Anyone want to point fingers at the rest of Allied forces and say "well did they apologize for such and such"?
Anyone?
No?
Right...
Because that would be insane, and deflective, and childish.
Just own your shit. It's yours.

[Deleted]

It wasn't necessary, it was simply evil.

At this point of history Japan was ready to surrender, bombs weren't needed. Land invasion wasn't needed. And peace talks already were in place.

Say the Russian who assulted Berlin insted of encircle the city and wait....a assult of the city weren't needed, peace talks was already in place......

[provaporous]

Shot at with what? The Japanese navy was almost out of fuel, pretty close to out of ships, most of their planes were in disrepair. The one thing that is unquestionably true about the situation with Japan is that an invasion of the mainland would have been a monumentally bad decision, that we can definitely agree on, but no, the Emperor would not have had his men fight until all the males were dead. The Emperor was tired of the war, he just needed the right motivation to tell the military to go fuck themselves.

First of all, i meant that they would make the lives of the blockaders a living hell with guerrilla attacks and suicide attacks with what they had left.
The Emperor wasn't the only one in charge, all the data the US had at the time said they would fight to the last man, and that the Japanese Generals had as much, if not more, sway than the Emperor.


Some say their might of been merit to detonating a nuke to show the Japanese what we were capable of, but I doubt it would of worked, remember it took the leveling of TWO cities to get them to surrender.

[PACOX]

Better to have used the bombs at the end of a war when all the other countries were wrapping up then in the middle of a war when other countries had a bomb as well.

The Soviets stealing the plans to the bomb was inevitable, as was other countries building one. Better for the world to witness a live bomb used in a real world scenario than to unleash its devastating nature in the middle of a war where others could drop on as well. its pretty much repeating WW1 with nukes or the Cold War. Thankfully we got the latter, where the world knew the true power of nukes and tipped towed around starting another world war vs actually starting another one. Its no question that had not the US demonstrated what what a war better nuclear nations had looks like, NATO and the Warsaw Pact would've gone to war, and both would've dropped a nuke with as the aggressor or in retaliation.

The US didn't lose Korea and Vietnam, the US backed out at the threat of nuclear war. The Soviets didn't lose in Afghanistan, they backed out at the threat of nuclear war. Nukes are a fail safe against the total war of WW1. Nukes were a catalyst for the age of diplomacy, where wars are waged with sanctions rather than bombs. Because everyone knows attacking a nuclear nation, truly threatening the sovereignty of a nuclear nation, means that they will unleash those nukes before they fall. Nukes mean that if you want to go full evil empire and the world can't beat you through conventional methods then they'll drop a nuke on your ass. Hiroshima and Nagasaki changed the way we wage war as a species, made a us a little less trigger happen and more diplomatic because we know how devastating total war, nuclear war, could potentially be now that we've started to tap into world ending physics.

[Drihan]

205 38.46% No

Seriously? How deluded can you be that 2 bombs is worse than the millions that would of died if we had to invade Japan. Japan would of fought until no males remained, their whole society would of been destroyed. I honestly cannot think of any reason to not use the bomb.

Funny, when America does it, it's a necessary evil. When Israel does the same thing, they are evil bastards and need to be sanctioned and sentenced for warcrimes.

Some say their might of been merit to detonating a nuke to show the Japanese what we were capable of, but I doubt it would of worked, remember it took the leveling of TWO cities to get them to surrender.

This I don't get. The bombs were dropped 1 day apart, there is not a snowball's chance in hell the US could have gotten any sort of information about what Japan had planned after the first one dropped.

[ElDoorO]

Yes, I think it was necessary to save more lives (ultimately).
No, I don't think we should apologize. Obama didn't apologize.
Yes, I think we should feel some amount of sorrow with a clear understanding it had to be done.

I think that last statement in the same way I'd hate to shoot my mom, dad, friends, etc if they turned into a zombie and I had to shoot them. I'd hate to do it but I'm not going to bitch out. Same principle. It's not something we should be proud we did.

I don't think we should be angry at them. I also don't think we need to "remember" this forever. I think my generation should be the last to really care about it. The future generations should view it as history and not related to them more than it's "our" history in the same way you don't think of your ancestors when it comes to slavery. You didn't own slaves or were a slave. Same here. All the vets will be dead and it's time for us to "move on" from that point in time and build a better future from it.

[Chrysia]

This I don't get. The bombs were dropped 1 day apart, there is not a snowball's chance in hell the US could have gotten any sort of information about what Japan had planned after the first one dropped.

3 days apart, actually.

[Forogil]

Here you go bud: http://www.globalresearch.ca/secret-...-nazis/5439236

And as expected a known unreliable conspiracy site, and still it doesn't show that US companies sent substantial supplies to Nazi Germany before US entered the war - only that they provided assistance with equipment and had subsidiaries in Europe build equipment; except for the Oil shipped to Spanish Canary Islands by Panama-flagged ship. Spain was aligned with the Axis - but not part of the war.

And others who don't believe in conspiracy theory don't see any evidence for oil being sent to Germany:
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtop...19876&start=15

The reason I write conspiracy theory is that you forgot to look up who wrote the information:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Chossudovsky

Obviously I don't just trust Wikipedia - but I am able to read other texts at the same place:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/is-the-...undone/5526121

Like a New Pearl Harbor

George W. Bush’s war-cabinet-in-waiting signaled its plans for the global coup d’é·tat a year prior to the 9/11 false flag terror event. In a report of the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), the Israel Firsters laid out a plan whose real aim was to transform the Jewish state’s dispossessed regional enemies into one part of a worldwide Islamic enemy said to be posed against the so-called “West.” In order to build up the military muscle of the US Armed Services so it could act as an enforcer of the interests of a “Greater Israel,” public consent for this agenda would have to be engineered through the manufacturing of a surprise attack “like New Pearl Harbor.”

(and much more). So basically an anti-Semitic conspiracy site, and not something reliable.

As to your assertion about Cuba and N. Korea, I don't give that as much weight as say Iran and Iraq

Ah, so when the facts are complicated and no solution is really good you dismiss everything else.

- - - Updated - - -

3 days apart, actually.

True, so let us have the reliable time-line:

US bombing Hiroshima, August 6
Soviet attacking Japan, August 8-9 (depending on time-zone).
US bombing Nagasaki, August 9
Korea divided along 38th parallel between US and Communist, August 10
Japan surrendered unconditionally, August 15
US next possible bombing, August 17-18 (the bombs had to manufactured and shipped; there was no stock-pile)

[Oktoberfest]

Obviously yes, it ultimately saved hundreds of thousands of lives by preventing a Japan mainland invasion from the US, it also stopped a Japan mainland invasion by the Soviet Union, which would've only made things worse as well.

Yup

Also there are things like this which 99.9999% of the planet has no knowledge of


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_100

[Deleted]

And as expected a known unreliable conspiracy site, and still it doesn't show that US companies sent substantial supplies to Nazi Germany before US entered the war - only that they provided assistance with equipment and had subsidiaries in Europe build equipment; except for the Oil shipped to Spanish Canary Islands by Panama-flagged ship. Spain was aligned with the Axis - but not part of the war.

You say this as if the conventional view Americans have of the incident wasn't heavily distorted by the establishment media. That certainly doesn't bear any more relation to the actuality of events than conspiracy theorists do, it is mostly Pentagon propaganda. A very different view of events is taught abroad, and I'm not talking about countries which do not have diplomatic relations.

[Independent voter]

You say this as if the conventional view Americans have of the incident wasn't heavily distorted by the establishment media. That certainly doesn't bear any more relation to the actuality of events than conspiracy theorists do, it is mostly Pentagon propaganda. A very different view of events is taught abroad, and I'm not talking about countries which do not have diplomatic relations.

Is it widely known in Britain that the US wouldn't have had the bomb without British help?

[Deleted]

Is it widely known in Britain that the US wouldn't have had the bomb without British help?

Do you have tourette's syndrome or something? I know. Why do you keep saying this?

[Mosotti]

I was necessary and not evil. They were the evil. The Japanese back then were not some nice little people that take pictures and make Toyotas, they were some retarded imperial motherfuckers set to conquer the world.

[Independent voter]

Do you have tourette's syndrome or something? I know. Why do you keep saying this?

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

Couldn't have done it without you.

[Deleted]

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

Couldn't have done it without you.

What, me personally?

- - - Updated - - -

I was necessary and not evil. They were the evil. The Japanese back then were not some nice little people that take pictures and make Toyotas, they were some retarded imperial motherfuckers set to conquer the world.

Look in the mirror.

[Independent voter]

What, me personally?

Ahahahahahah.

[Low Hanging Fruit]

Not all surrenders are unconditional. The Emperor was trying to surrender with conditions, in spite of opposition from his military council. The nuclear strikes pushed him over the edge to fully defy his military council and accept unconditional surrender.

The only accepted condition for surrender was unconditional and for many years Japan was aware of that. Just as it was for Germany. Of course, yes, they ended up caving on the sovereignty of the Emperor at the end and allowed him to remain a symbol. Mostly because it was a symbol that collaborated in the end. But you have to ask yourself if the nuclear strikes pushed him to grow a pair and finally stand up to the council than they were certainly justified. I am unaware of those events because frankly I don't care enough. Crying about something that happened 70+ years ago sounds like spilled milk to me. When other mother fuckers start saying sorry for attacking other nations for starting the shit war then maybe we can say sorry for how we ended it.

[Taeldorian]

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.

Big difference between killing soldiers and killing civilians. How is this even a question?

[Forogil]

You say this as if the conventional view Americans have of the incident wasn't heavily distorted by the establishment media.

I write that without mentioning, knowing in detail, or deeply caring about the conventional view Americans have of the "incidents", since that would require sampling a cross-section of America (it would be foolish to assume that history is taught the same everywhere), knowing the facts (and you haven't shown that you know them), and understanding the causes of any distortions.

However, regardless of that, the counter to propaganda and distortions are certainly not different propaganda and distortions, but facts.