[Opinion] Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - Justified or no?

[Breccia]

the atomic bomb was an unknown at this point and you might not now this the world didn't have internet during ww2

Japan didn't need the internet to know they'd been hit by the most dangerous weapon the world had ever seen. The sun rose twice.

And I don't need to justify this. The decisions were made 75 years ago by people who are all dead now, and a generation before I was born. We have the benefit of hindsight now, and the world's changed. My original statement even laments the fact that the bombs were dropped due to tragic inability to understand or communicate. Half or more of the people here have been saying "if we knew then what we know now, we wouldn't have" and that's great. Doesn't apply to the original issue, back in 1945, when the Americans had no good answers left, and picked what seemed like the least bad one -- incinerating two cities full of civilians, to send the message "give up" in the largest letters the human race has ever seen.

I'd like to think we've learned the lesson as a species. These weapons have never been used in war since. Hopefully, we have. I hope to never learn I'm wrong.

[Easo]

You know, if you want to sleep better at night and justify it like this then please do so.
Otherwise.
3 days is hardly enough time to surrender when you don't even know what the F is going on, the atomic bomb was an unknown at this point and you might not now this the world didn't have internet during ww2 or youtube to livestream this event.

Kind of sad how you really can't defend this and yet you try.

Oh please, just stop.
They could have always surrendered before, they were demanded to surrender, they knew the war was lost, there were enough warnings and the firebombings already had showed that Allies WILL bomb them if they keep this up. After the second bomb and the decision to surrender there was even a coup attempt to continue the war because the fucking fanatics wanted to fight that badly.
Oh, and telephones existed. Tokyo knew before the second bomb that Hiroshima was flattened. It does not take long to radio to Allies that they would surrender, yet they did not.
Enough.

[qwerty123456]

You can justify anything if you really try hard enough.

Eventually someone was going to use Nuclear weapons and one could argue that its good that we used them when they were relatively smaller/weaker but still so horrible that people swore off using them for anything other than dick measuring contests.

You could also argue that the event made the Japanese more sympathetic and less villainous in the eyes of most of the world except like China.

[zealo]

Oh please, just stop.
They could have always surrendered before, they were demanded to surrender, they knew the war was lost, there were enough warnings and the firebombings already had showed that Allies WILL bomb them if they keep this up. After the second bomb and the decision to surrender there was even a coup attempt to continue the war because the fucking fanatics wanted to fight that badly.
Oh, and telephones existed. Tokyo knew before the second bomb that Hiroshima was flattened. It does not take long to radio to Allies that they would surrender, yet they did not.
Enough.

That alongside that the reactions from the other major powers weren't " what was that thing they just did???" so much as " The Americans cracked it on how to build a working bomb!".

E.g the transcript from their German nuclear scientist counterparts discussing the matter while imprisoned and being secretly recorded after finding out fairly shortly afterwards is a good read on the matter of understanding in the Axis powers of whether it could possibly be done.

[muto]

100% justified. It saved more lives in the long run. A full blown ground invasion, and more fire bombings would have resulted in way more overall deaths.

[YUPPIE]

You could also argue that the event made the Japanese more sympathetic and less villainous in the eyes of most of the world except like China.

don't forget South Korea. And for good reason.

[Thee ANCOM]

Not really, you are missing the point. They showed the USSR that the USA were ready to deploy those things in conventional warfare if needed. And we are living in a fallout world right now because the USSR leaders were not fools.

I get your point, I think it's reprehensible is what my point is.

[ati87]

Japan didn't need the internet to know they'd been hit by the most dangerous weapon the world had ever seen. The sun rose twice.

And I don't need to justify this. The decisions were made 75 years ago by people who are all dead now, and a generation before I was born. We have the benefit of hindsight now, and the world's changed. My original statement even laments the fact that the bombs were dropped due to tragic inability to understand or communicate. Half or more of the people here have been saying "if we knew then what we know now, we wouldn't have" and that's great. Doesn't apply to the original issue, back in 1945, when the Americans had no good answers left, and picked what seemed like the least bad one -- incinerating two cities full of civilians, to send the message "give up" in the largest letters the human race has ever seen.

I'd like to think we've learned the lesson as a species. These weapons have never been used in war since. Hopefully, we have. I hope to never learn I'm wrong.

So you admin that you are wrong? Because that's the only conclusion I can draw based on your reaction.

[Breccia]

So you admin that you are wrong?

Um...are you asking if I think, based on what we know now, that it was a bad decision? Or are you asking if my attempt to explain what happened at the time based on the information known at the time is off because the US implicitly trusted Stalin to jump in, even though they were going to drop a second bomb anyhow?

[PC2]

If a war is already operating under the premise that civilians are fair game then I don't see a meaningful distinction between killing them slower with conventional weapons(or fire) vs nukes.

[PACOX]

You know, if you want to sleep better at night and justify it like this then please do so.
Otherwise.
3 days is hardly enough time to surrender when you don't even know what the F is going on, the atomic bomb was an unknown at this point and you might not now this the world didn't have internet during ww2 or youtube to livestream this event.

Kind of sad how you really can't defend this and yet you try.

They weren't ignorant, they knew exactly what the first bomb meant
They certainly knew what a nuclear bomb was, no one had managed to build one. Hell all parties knew that the first guy with the bomb was going to be the victor.

[Low Hanging Fruit]

Justified. The war was swiftly ended afterwards. The world got to see first hand how bad the use of these weapons were. Two good news situations when stopping the worse war ever and not having these weapons used freely in the next were reasonably desired outcomes. Both nations have become friends both militarily and economically after the fact which says a lot. So the only people that really harp on about are those that have a bone to pick for some other reason.

[YUPPIE]

Both nations have become friends both militarily and economically after the fact which says a lot. So the only people that really harp on about are those that have a bone to pick for some other reason.

the US and Japan are not friends, just neutral.

[Orange Joe]

the US and Japan are not friends, just neutral.

Don't think we would have bases in and do military exercises with someone we are just "neutral" to.

[YUPPIE]

Don't think we would have bases in and do military exercises with someone we are just "neutral" to.

we keep military presence in Japan because we don't trust them and vice versa. Japanese people hate the presence of US troops stationed there but we never forgave them for WW2 so we're not going anywhere.

A lot of people question whether Japan really has real freedom or independence or whether it's a puppet state for the American interests near the area.

[Orange Joe]

we keep military presence in Japan because we don't trust them and vice versa. Japanese people hate the presence of US troops stationed there but we never forgave them for WW2 so we're not going anywhere.

A lot of people question whether Japan really has real freedom or independence or whether it's a puppet state for the American interests near the area.

Source?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan%...ates_relations

Public opinion



Views on Japan in the United States^[89]


According to a 2015 Pew survey, 68% of Americans believe that the US can trust Japan, compared to 75% of Japanese who believe that Japan can trust the United States.^[90] According to a 2017 Pew survey, 57% of people in Japan had a favorable view of the United States, 75% had a favorable view of the American people, and 24% had confidence in the US president.^[91] A 2018 Gallup poll showed that 87% of Americans had a favorable view of Japan.^[89]

[YUPPIE]

Source?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan%...ates_relations

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_O..._rape_incident
leading to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...es_Japan#Crime

also very recently
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ct-coronovirus

Also the Japanese political cabinet is run by ultranationalists that deny any wrong in WW2, which would mean they are spiritually enemies of America. Abe is one of these people deep down but he likes to curry favor with America outwardly.

[Orange Joe]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_O..._rape_incident
leading to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...es_Japan#Crime

also very recently
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ct-coronovirus

None of those say what you are claiming.

I mean hell this is in one of them

Even though in 2002, 73.4% of Japanese citizens stated that they appreciated the mutual security treaty with the U.S. and the presence of the USFJ,

[Low Hanging Fruit]

Source?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan%...ates_relations

The person debating this is one of those agenda andies that has to force thier own view into the matter. These facts probably won't make a difference.

[shadowmouse]

It was a war, there were no "nice folks".

As I said, there was plenty of blame to spread around. Law of War was in an evolving state and WWII, for all the questionable exceptions, at least set about drawing lines and giving some form to the ideals of the Kellogg-Briand Pact.