Why is America given shit over Nagasaki and Hiroshima?

[Logwyn]

It's freedom fighter. At least get the quote right. =p

But, I was speaking to tactics, not the level of righteousness.

I did... Can't I be wrong on my own quote?!?!?!

[Tijuana]

I did... Can't I be wrong on my own quote?!?!?!

It's a famous saying: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

[Hawthorne Wipes]

Because the wanted to nuke the same country that, years laters gave us things like HighSchool DxD.
Shame on you!

[Deleted]

After the two bombs had been dropped and Soviet had attacked Japan it still took six more days before the actual unconditional surrender on August 15th.

To set it in perspective Dönitz was give total power after Hitler suicide. Dönitz was no fantatic or thought victory was possible and he wanted to surrender as soon as possible, but it still took him about 8 days......

[Jinpachi]

Japan raped its way across China and was in league with a nation that wanted to commit genocide on those it deemed impure, alcoholics, addicts and so on.

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

They did horrible things that make the atomic bombs look like vacation. While the civilians were not directly guilty ( they still fed those soldiers, produced their weapons and ensured they had a place to retreat to ) of all those things, they were still what kept the army afloat.

So why exactly is it wrong, in a war against an axis of tyrants and psychopaths, to fight fire with fire? Had the Axis won we'd have seen hundreds of millions killed due to their race. Two atomic bombs are a small price to pay in order to quell that evil for good.


What kind of General could look the wives of his fallen soldiers in the eyes and say

'' We could've ended the war sooner. Your husband would still be alive, had I bombed their cities. But I put the lives of their civilians, the ones that feed the army, above that of my own men. "

Holy hell, I'd see that as treason. As the military leader your main goal is to kill the enemy and protect your own men/nation. And that's precisely what they did.

You can't think of war from an individual's standpoint. It's nation vs nation, and the citizenry are part of that nation. When it comes down to us vs them, you bet your ass it's going to be them.

[Hablion]

In some article i read years and years back I believe said the total of deaths be higher if they didn't since they were willing to fight down to every man woman and child. So in the term of human lives lost it might of been the lesser of two evils. Still a shame to see any life lost though

[Allybeboba]

Americans being spoon fed propaganda glorifying the use of atomic bombs.

What a wonderful world we live in. At the same time they go ape shit over any country that tries to acquire nuclear weapons. Hypocrits.

For the record, the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan is a gigantic warcrime and the US should be punished for it. People are still dying to this very day, the number of casualties is unfathomable.

Please quote the source where it was a warcrime in 1945.

[Cyi]

are you trying to justify killing with nukes? not to mention that most of the victims were civilians?
don't be dense & stop this blind patriotism

Yes, I am doing exactly that, justifying the use of the Nukes. If you actually read history you would recognize that most casualties of WWII bombings, on both sides of the pond were civilians. The fire bombing alone took way more lives then the nukes did. In addition, if you read what I actually typed, I used the evidence of their behavior as justification to not wanting to attack the mainland with an army, hence the nukes.

- - - Updated - - -

Americans being spoon fed propaganda glorifying the use of atomic bombs.

What a wonderful world we live in. At the same time they go ape shit over any country that tries to acquire nuclear weapons. Hypocrits.

For the record, the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan is a gigantic warcrime and the US should be punished for it. People are still dying to this very day, the number of casualties is unfathomable.

Easy for you to judge 7 decades later. As for the unfathomable amounts of people that have died or are dying, I call crap. The Japanese as a whole are doing pretty well health wise especially given a large percentage are smokers. This has nothing to due with patriotism and all to do with reality, something I see more and more of the younger generation struggling with. Its easy to "think" about what is right, another altogether to actually do what "needs" to be done.

[baskev]

Actually they did but cloud formation prevented them from proper targetting, so they went for the backup target - Nagasaki. With the goal of hitting the Mitsubishi factory. Which they completely missed. So not only did they kill 60k civilians, they also completely missed the target they were after and did 0 damage to the Japanese military. So good :/

Kyoto was not the target they wanted to go for..kokura. And yes they missed and killed civilians. But again...(sigh kinda feel like a skipping record right now). The main question asked by the maker of the thread was...why is america given shit over A bombs and is it just that they should be blamed or not. Witch i answer already.
I even stated they i found the second bomb throwing not smart etc.

- - - Updated - - -

so much bullshit that i can smell it from other side of world :|
US raped in germany, for the sake of precision they often group-raped women and girl and then give them some food as "payments".
in some lesser form in italy it happens (where anyway goumiers were a bigger problem) and in japan the rapes continued for years under the occupations and even now there are cases, there is a reason if in okinawa US troops are largely hated....
after the bombs a lot of US doctors come to study the survivors, even using them as cavies after lured them for medicines or using even complacent local doctors.
damn, US maccartism whas so crazy that there was an organization (Kyanon Kikan) that kidnapped and tortured kids to use them as spies...
maybe US wasnt the worst of all, but damn if they were bullshit

And you can small bs...impressive.
Not know by me that they also raped. Then america should be added to the rapist list. Lets put it this way...america did not do it on the grand scale the others did.

Study the survivors to see what happened is not the same thing as dr mengele type stuff...okay....

And i never said america was the good guy and did not wrong.

So lets make the sentence more correct for you:

Old one
Ally's ( except for russia) did not rape, torture, experiment on civilians , russia, japan and germany did!!

New one:
Ally's ( except for russia and usa) did not rape, torture, experiment on civilians , like russia, japan and germany on mass did. And America did on a smaller scale ( for some of the stuff)!!

As for the kyanon Kikan...could link some info?!?!?!? because little to be found on it.

And sigh...thread guy ask a question. And it was: was it wrong to use the bombs....
I gave a answer. But people like you keep coming up with stuff that has nothing to do with the question. So ill say it again...:

- Was i a morally good thing to use the bombs : NOOOO!!!!
- Where the targets perfect: NO
- Are the targets for a bomb like that ever perfect: NO
- Should it be a war crime...Yes and no. Yes it was mass murder. But no it was the intend to bomb something else. There are some many facets to this its hard to say yes or no. But i lean more towards yes
- But was it a historical good thing to use 1 them: YES. It scared russia and america in not going to war right after WW2. It showed the people how dangerous A bombs/nukes are. It stopped the war in japan. Witch if it would have gone on killed way more civilians then the a bombs did.

If people like you want to debate the morality of wars etc please make a thread for that. because 50% of the responding to this thread do not even read what the the original poster is asking.
To put it simple: He asked how to make a apple pie. Not about the laws of hiring your own pastry chef.

[Deleted]

When you see terrorist killing civilian you know why they are giving shit.
When you see american doing the same time*1000 there is no wonder why they are given shit.

I'm not saying america = terrorist. But not understanding why america is given shit is precisely why people fear americans. Not understanding the most basic consequence to killing thousand people in a instant is definitvly scary.

One can defend the use of atomic bomb (I do not agree, but there are logical arguments behind) but asking why people don't like people being atomised is just scary...Atomic bomb should be the ultimate solution and nobody should be casual about this. Hiroshima and Nagasaki does not make american the bad people, but it declined them the right of being the good one. Americans convinced that they are the heroes of the story is a problem for everyone in the world.
One liner arguments are no good.

[the game]

America is given shit because haters love us.

[Forogil]

To set it in perspective Dönitz was give total power after Hitler suicide. Dönitz was no fantatic or thought victory was possible and he wanted to surrender as soon as possible, but it still took him about 8 days......

He did not want to surrender unconditionally - he wanted a peace with the west, and to avoid the Soviets.
Where did we see that mix-up of surrender with conditions and unconditional surrender before?

On a related note some forces under his command surrendered earlier, and some countries thus celebrate liberation earlier.

[Mormolyce]

Sure it would - it's pretty easy to justify brutality as a nation fighting a defensive war. What's the correct tradeoff of American conscript lives for Japanese civilian lives if you're the President? It's nowhere near 1:1 from where I sit. Maybe 10:1. Maybe 100:1. Maybe something approaching infinite. A plausible case could be made for just about anything there and I would not like to be the guy that actually has to make the decision.

There's also a game theoretical case for completely disproportionate retaliation. A nation that utterly annihilates its attackers is not a nation to be fucked with.

A) There is no tradeoff, war crimes are never acceptable.
B) America was not fighting a defensive war.

...and you can say that now, but back then in the US? You'd be saying differently.

I would not at all.

And that is why we nurtured them and helped them rebuild after the war. Look at what Russia did.

That excuses nothing and you did that because it was politically expedient, not out of any sense of charity.

Why only the US? Britain and Russia signed the Potsdam Declaration too. Britain and the US had a deal were neither would use the atomic bomb without permission from the other.



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

The Queen gave him a knighthood.

The US wouldn't have had a nuke until after the war if it wasn't for Britain.

Mark Oliphant, an Australian physicist at the University of Birmingham, were tasked with carrying out a series of experiments on uranium. By February 1940, Thomson's team had failed to create a chain reaction in natural uranium, and he had decided that it was not worth pursuing.[5] But at Birmingham, Oliphant's team had reached a strikingly different conclusion. Oliphant had delegated the task to two German refugee scientists, Rudolf Peierls and Otto Frisch, who could not work on the University's radar project because they were enemy aliens and therefore lacked the necessary security clearance.[6] They calculated the critical mass of a metallic sphere of pure uranium-235, the only fissile isotope found in significant quantity in nature, and found that instead of tons, as everyone had assumed, as little as 1 to 10 kilograms (2.2 to 22.0 lb) would suffice, which would explode with the power of thousands of tons of dynamite.[7][8][9]

Oliphant took the Frisch–Peierls memorandum to Tizard, and the MAUD Committee was established to investigate further.[10] It directed an intensive research effort, and in July 1941, produced two comprehensive reports that reached the conclusion that an atomic bomb was not only technically feasible, but could be produced before the war ended, perhaps in as little as two years. The Committee unanimously recommended pursuing the development of an atomic bomb as a matter of urgency,

I don't care which nation the people involved in committing the greatest war crime in history are from. Everyone with a hand in it, or who makes apologies for it, are guilty.

But at the end of the day it's the US that launched them.

[Independent voter]

I don't care which nation the people involved in committing the greatest war crime in history are from. Everyone with a hand in it, or who makes apologies for it, are guilty.

But at the end of the day it's the US that launched them.

If that's what lets you sleep at night.

[pateuvasiliu]

Based on the things you are saying, it just seems you lack the basic moral compass to understand the issue. Killing civilians is bad. Every nation on this planet agrees with that. Every single one. I don't think the US should feel some great daily shame over this event, but it's certainly not something we are prideful of. Doing this in modern day warfare, is a war crime. Do you understand that? Do you actually think that if we used nukes against a nation today, that nobody would take issue with that? Like...really, man?

I don't fucking care if Christ himself comes down from the heavens and says killing civilians is bad.

You didn't tell me WHY civilian lives matter more than the men that were FORCED to join the army.

- - - Updated - - -

You can't think of war from an individual's standpoint. It's nation vs nation, and the citizenry are part of that nation. When it comes down to us vs them, you bet your ass it's going to be them.

Oh, definitely. I agree with this mindset.

Civilians do more for an army than the infantry these days.

[Mormolyce]

If that's what lets you sleep at night.

I'm not following your logic. You think I should be up late at night thinking about this Mark Oliphant guy?

[Tijuana]

I don't fucking care if Christ himself comes down from the heavens and says killing civilians is bad.

You didn't tell me WHY civilian lives matter more than the men that were FORCED to join the army.

- - - Updated - - -



Oh, definitely. I agree with this mindset.

Civilians do more for an army than the infantry these days.

Slow down, guy. There is no reason to get upset. These are basic concepts that are normally not refuted, so I don't have a solid argument at the ready.

That said, I think you are leaving out some of the basic nuance of your misunderstanding. Forcing people to join an army is also bad, but plainly necessary in this case. The issue really isn't about whose life is worth more, either. It's the fact that at least soldiers can defend themselves. Are you equally outraged at instances where we put the lives of women and children above the men? This is kind of the same thing...sort of.

Why is it hard to understand that, this decision by Truman was not easy, and there is no right answer if he was wrong or right? Those bombs are something we have a distaste for now, but I'm not sure we would do it any different, if we had a second chance.

[Shadowferal]

I would not at all.

Bullshit...so much I call it as a lie.
At that time you have no info given to you other than newspapers and the radio. The occasional items thrown in cinemas as well.
In the US men were lining up to enlist. (Damn good reason why they were called the "Greatest Generation), because they believed they were fighting the good fight. And after Pearl Harbor was attacked without any fucking provocation, you'd be at the head of the line. You'd be ashamed if you were disqualified because of physical reasons ("4F"), but you'd would never live down being labeled a coward. (Not one business would even hire you if they thought that you were hiding instead of going out there to fight. Because as it was put then, There's no running away from this)
Any attempt to say differently only reveals how little you know of the social mores that existed then.

Of course it shows what kind of a person you are today...

[Deleted]

I don't fucking care if Christ himself comes down from the heavens and says killing civilians is bad.

You didn't tell me WHY civilian lives matter more than the men that were FORCED to join the army.

- - - Updated - - -



Oh, definitely. I agree with this mindset.

Civilians do more for an army than the infantry these days.

its not about who matters more, it's about military necessity and proportionality.

Usually its not militarily necessary to attack population centers (not to be confused with industrial centers).

The obvious exception is a total war situation, but WW2 was really the last of those.

It's quite easy to see why attacking strategically unimportant/unneeded targets is considered bad.

[Arachnofiend]

In some article i read years and years back I believe said the total of deaths be higher if they didn't since they were willing to fight down to every man woman and child. So in the term of human lives lost it might of been the lesser of two evils. Still a shame to see any life lost though

That's a misconception caused by a lie the politicians of the time wanted spread. The Japanese have never been this zealous hive mind that people like to portray them as; they had negotiated for surrender prior to the bombings, and the only reason the war continued was that the US insisted on unconditional surrender.

The ironic thing is that the point negotiations fell through on was that the Japanese wanted the Emperor to keep his position. Which ended up being the case in the post-bombing peace treaty anyways. So.