Why is America given shit over Nagasaki and Hiroshima?

[Docturphil]

I did, twice in fact.

Yep. Was mistaking you for another poster... My bad.

[Allybeboba]

Yep. Was mistaking you for another poster... My bad.

Easily done when a thread is moving quickly.

[willemh]

Killing innocent people is wrong. In every single case, for every single reason. Killing one innocent person to save millions is still wrong. Life is sacred, when it comes to innocent human lives there is no grey area. There is simply black and white.

It really is as simple as that, and I have no idea why after 70 years we're discussing this subject on an online gaming forum for 26 pages. Do you really believe something new will come out of this that hasn't been figured out at least 50 years ago?

[Deleted]

because they killed innocent people who had no choice but to work for the bad guys just to make a living and feed their families

[Moratori]

Exactly and before WW2, the only aspects of Western culture they were adopting was military weaponry. The Japanese were still very guarded and protective of their culture from Western influences. That all changed when they surrendered the way that they did to end WW2. Now they've wholly Westernized and I find it disgusting. Things like Bushido have been forced into the subconscious of the people while anime loli fetish crap runs amok.

Wholly westernized? I don't even... As someone that's currently residing in Japan, no, they haven't.

[Aliven]

People don't understand the Japanese culture back then. They had never ever lost a war in their history. Ever...
Surrender was not even in their vocabulary. Farmers had been ordered to fight with wooden sticks to the last person. We were going to have kill literally everyone on the island.

Yes i agree with that. Thats why full scale invasion was unwise. Still, the goverment and people in charge were divided in theyr view of war.
What is funny is that, when broadcast was going almost no one from common folk understand what Hirohito is talking about. Because he was using ancient dialect of some sort :P

[Independent voter]

Australian physicist Mark Oliphant was a key figure in the launching of both the British and United States nuclear weapons programmes

[Aliven]

It was considerably more than just "two idiots" and given the history of such actions against orders the extremists in Japan found "unacceptable", dismissing what happened out of hand is unwise. Hell ultra nationalists in Japan were STILL attacking politicians in Japan until sometime in the 70s.

Once it was broadcast and the attempt had failed, yes there was little question that it would be followed, especially given the High Command's acceptance of it. But again there were soldiers who still refused to believe the surrender and didn't give up for years afterwards.

But thats the thing - high command accepted the decision of Hirohito instantly. They were shocked, the mere though of surrendering was against their world view. So was raising hand on emperor or disobeying order. Thats why they agree and commit suicides. But it was never in question would they do it. Once the emperor said word it was done.
Thats why it changes nothing really.

[Sam the Wiser]

America made the right choice.

[Symphonic]

While it was a horrible thing to happen to innocent people, I'm afraid fighting would not have stopped for many more years. It was the right decision, and hopefully nobody forgets what happened, or else there will come a time when there is a war big enough that another one will be used. In fact, probably multiple bombs from multiple countries.

[PACOX]

because they killed innocent people who had no choice but to work for the bad guys just to make a living and feed their families

That was the nature of war back then because

a) Munitions was extremely inaccurate so you tend to hit stuff harder to make sure your objectives were met. You couldn't hit a factory in a city and not expect civilian casualties.

b) Japan needed to get hit hard to bring it back to reality. If the bombs didn't do it then the island would've been annihilated in an invasion.

The blood is on the hands of Japanese government.

[Aeula]

People don't understand war very well.

They blame amarrica for creating the atomic bomb and making them fear it, they don't necessarily realise that if America hadn't done it, somebody else would have. America dropped two bombs, how many do you think World War 2 Japan, Nazi Germany or hell, even the joke of the world: North Korea would have dropped if they were the first to develop the weapon?

The world recovered and now that we know the dangers of the weapon, they've never seen use in war again.

Yes, innocents died, but so what? Both sides targeted innocents by the thousands throughout the war, for good reason. That's the way war works.

[PACOX]

Fighting fire with fire is the realistic way to look at this and nothing can dispute this.

However, nothing changes the fact that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were an act of terror which affected the civil population to hasten the capitulation of Japan. Does the families who fed American soldiers that commited war crimes in the Middle East also deserve to die? Probably in the minds of radical Islamic Terrorists. Would you say their their actions are moral?

There is no way in my mind you can take the moral high ground on these kind of things.

No one said the people deserved to die...

And a military operation is not an act of terror. The differences may be nuanced but they aren't the same.

Would it have been more acceptable for the US to let the war last longer, meaning more civilian on the ground?

[Deleted]

People don't understand war very well.

They blame amarrica for creating the atomic bomb and making them fear it, they don't necessarily realise that if America hadn't done it, somebody else would have. America dropped two bombs, how many do you think World War 2 Japan, Nazi Germany or hell, even the joke of the world: North Korea would have dropped if they were the first to develop the weapon?

The world recovered and now that we know the dangers of the weapon, they've never seen use in war again.

Yes, innocents died, but so what? Both sides targeted innocents by the thousands throughout the war, for good reason. That's the way war works.

Some ISIS nutcase kills someone with an axe. Millions of yanks go "Waah waah waah SO unfair".

Someone brings up Hiroshima and Nagasaki, same yanks go "There are always casualties in WAR!" like they are some retard in an action film.

Either there are rules to war or not. If there aren't you can't expect other people to fight you with gloves on.

[AeneasBK]

No one said the people deserved to die...

And a military operation is not an act of terror. The differences may be nuanced but they aren't the same.

Feel free to articulate said nuance. "Because we say so" is incredibly nuanced, I'll grant you.

Would it have been more acceptable for the US to let the war last longer, meaning more civilian on the ground?

"It's okay we did it because it saved American lives"

Isn't much of a defense against any shit levelled over it.

I thought the raison du jour was that it meant the inevitable upcoming war with Russia was colder than it would otherwise have been; leaving the entire globe a lot more stable. Which is good

[baskev]

Japan has apologized to China numerous times, beginning in the early 70s. Sorry that you haven't kept up.

Sorry that you do not know the facts...China is not the only one who was victim to this...Dutch people and Indonesian people and other asian country's. Some like korea got compensation and acknowledgement, some got apology's some did not.

[LaserChild9]

People don't understand the Japanese culture back then. They had never ever lost a war in their history. Ever...
Surrender was not even in their vocabulary. Farmers had been ordered to fight with wooden sticks to the last person. We were going to have kill literally everyone on the island.

Did you even think about what you were saying? We were gonna have to kill them all coz farmers with wooden sticks yo! Seriously? So you think that because we might have had to face farmers with sticks and civilians wielding household objects a nuke was the best answer? That's like using a bazooka to kill a mouse! The mouse may have been a mild irritant but he didn't really pose any danger to you, a bazooka is just excessive.

If Truemans logic about giving the ok to this was 'But those pesky farmers and their wooden sticks need to be vaporized!' then that dude was a nut-job.

[Akainakali]

But thats the thing - high command accepted the decision of Hirohito instantly. They were shocked, the mere though of surrendering was against their world view. So was raising hand on emperor or disobeying order. Thats why they agree and commit suicides. But it was never in question would they do it. Once the emperor said word it was done.
Thats why it changes nothing really.

The "divine emperor" has been little more than a figurehead in Japan for most of it's history. It's one of the reasons why it wasn't until such a dire moment that Hirohito finally acted. Someone like Hirohito can yes, have a decisive impact, but they'd best be very, very careful about how and when they tried to do it.

Any emperor who decided to get independent and start trying to exercise real authority rapidly found that they would be unable to exercise their "divine authority" for all sorts of reasons and potentially even fatal ones.

The guys at the top of Japan were ruthless and power hungry for centuries. Imperial Japan was never a nice place to live and the emperor was a basically useful tool, not a figure of real authority.

[Rafoel]

Did you even think about what you were saying? We were gonna have to kill them all coz farmers with wooden sticks yo! Seriously? So you think that because we might have had to face farmers with sticks and civilians wielding household objects a nuke was the best answer? That's like using a bazooka to kill a mouse! The mouse may have been a mild irritant but he didn't really pose any danger to you, a bazooka is just excessive.

If Truemans logic about giving the ok to this was 'But those pesky farmers and their wooden sticks need to be vaporized!' then that dude was a nut-job.

>> the point
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
>> you

[baskev]

Is that why Hitler allied with the Japanese, or was fond of Muslims?
The Nazis cause the genocide and they were responsible for euthanasia but the issue is more complex than you might think

Also why do people keep calling them Nazi's ??

Back on topic though, this relativism isn't good for anyone.
Were Al Qaeda justified in the 9/11 terrorist attack because the US keeps destabilising the middle east?
History isn't fucking black and white. If you think your country is the "good guys" you're an idiot


They only rolled up to fight their proxy war and use chemical agents on rice farmers, but I guess that's okay because Vietnam attacked the US right?

First off. I did not forget muslims. But if i typed out the list then it would be a very very long one.
And yes it is more complex. But i was responding to fact that people think disabled people where not targeted. they where!

Because not all nazi's where german, and not all german where nazi's...

What did i say about muslims or 9/11 nothing so stfu. And did i talk about being the good guy no i did not!!.

And yes its freaking complex...that was my point!!!!

So half of your response in BS. Because i did not talk about it. And responded on 1 thing that was said.

And what i say about japan in ww2, where the bombs not act of wars...yes they where, where the needed yes they where. By most accounts if they where not used they would have fought to the end with WAY WAY more deaths after that.

And thank you for calling me a idiot...just proves you only hear your self talk.