Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9173 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,585 Year: 4,842/9,624 Month: 190/427 Week: 0/103 Day: 0/8 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Was the Use of Atomic Bombs Against Japan Justified?
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4225 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 8 of 140 (623158)
07-08-2011 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by dronestar
07-08-2011 10:35 AM


Re: Let the short debate begin
Hi dronestar,
Hmmm. In this specific case, you are FOR specifically targeting and bombing civilians (a lot of them!), that includes women, children and babies. Am I correct?
I dont exactly see it as being any different then when we, or our allies, chose to area bomb any other cities, Dresden, Hamburg...ect.
quote:
The attack during the last week of July, 1943, Operation Gomorrah, created one of the greatest firestorms raised by the RAF and United States Army Air Force in World War II,[2] killing 42,600 civilians and wounding 37,000 in Hamburg and practically destroying the entire city.
wiki
quote:
It is argued that Dresden was a cultural landmark of little or no military significance, a "Florence on the Elbe" (Elbflorenz), as it was known, and the attacks were indiscriminate area bombing and not proportionate to the commensurate military gains.[5][6]
In March 1945 the NS regime ordered its press to publish death toll numbers for the Dresden raids of 200,000. Since then, some death toll estimates were as high as 500,000.[7] An independent investigation commissioned by the city council in 2010 reported a maximum of 25,000 victims.[8]
wiki
quote:
The purpose of the area bombardment of cities was laid out in a British Air Staff paper, dated September 23, 1941:
"The ultimate aim of an attack on a town area is to break the morale of the population which occupies it. To ensure this, we must achieve two things: first, we must make the town physically uninhabitable and, secondly, we must make the people conscious of constant personal danger. The immediate aim, is therefore, twofold, namely, to produce (i) destruction and (ii) fear of death.
I think it is pretty clear that we were no less moral in using the nukes then we were when we area bombed many targets in the war, we used these same tactics mant times in Japan before we dropped our new bomb.
A test over water wouldn't have proved anything, something has to be destroyed in order to fully understand the bombs power, did it have to be 2 cites?? Maybe not. We did not drop any conventional bombs on those cities prior to the nukes so all the damage would be easily seen to have been a result of the nuclear bombs.
We will never fully Know what Truman's advisers told him, hell he didn't even know about the bombs til FDR died, I am sure he relied heavily on what the experts and his military advisers told him, maybe you might know of something he wrote about it later in life?

"No sympathy for the devil; keep that in mind. Buy the ticket, take the ride...and if it occasionally gets a little heavier than what you had in mind, well...maybe chalk it off to forced conscious expansion: Tune in, freak out, get beaten."
Hunter S. Thompson
Ad astra per aspera
Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by dronestar, posted 07-08-2011 10:35 AM dronestar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by dronestar, posted 07-08-2011 12:12 PM fearandloathing has replied

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4225 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 11 of 140 (623163)
07-08-2011 12:41 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by dronestar
07-08-2011 12:12 PM


Re: Let the short debate begin
C'mon, . . . you certainly heard that two wrongs don't make a right.
I am not saying it was right, we done many things as far as area bombing goes that I feel was wrong. What I am saying is that our choice to use the bombs on Japan was no different then when we targeted other cities for area bombing. It was a different kind of weapon is all. I am not sure if we fully understood the long term effects, if we did we may have chosen a different route as far as a display goes.
if someone wanted to show their destructive capability, and then exploded an ATOMIC BOMB for show
I agree, but we only had a limited number of bombs ready to use as weapons, we would've had 3 more in sept and 3 in oct with an increase in production after that if I remember correctly. Popping one off over water does not show how destructive it truly is, with our limited number available a show was probably viewed as a potential waste. Waiting would've been an option, but I don't know how it would've affected our plans on an invasion, and I still feel like somthing needed to be destroyed in order to show them what they were facing. I have often wondered if it was ever suggested to drop one on one of the smaller less populated islands.

"No sympathy for the devil; keep that in mind. Buy the ticket, take the ride...and if it occasionally gets a little heavier than what you had in mind, well...maybe chalk it off to forced conscious expansion: Tune in, freak out, get beaten."
Hunter S. Thompson
Ad astra per aspera
Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by dronestar, posted 07-08-2011 12:12 PM dronestar has not replied

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4225 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


(1)
Message 24 of 140 (623203)
07-08-2011 3:37 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by dronestar
07-08-2011 2:58 PM


Re: Missing considerations
"military significance?" Oh puhlease, what were Japanese producing near the end of the Pacific war, thumbtacks, sharpened paperclips? Besides two rowboats and a dingy,
quote:
Defense preparations
Faced with the prospect of an invasion of the Home Islands starting with Kyūshū, and also the prospect of a Soviet invasion of Manchuria, Japan's last source of natural resources, the War Journal of the Imperial Headquarters concluded:
We can no longer direct the war with any hope of success. The only course left is for Japan's one hundred million people to sacrifice their lives by charging the enemy to make them lose the will to fight.[9]
As a final attempt to stop the Allied advances, the Japanese Imperial High Command planned an all-out defense of Kyūshū codenamed Operation Ketsugō.[10] This was to be a radical departure from the "defense in depth" plans used in the invasions of Peleliu, Iwo Jima, and Okinawa. Instead, everything was staked on the beachhead; more than 3,000 kamikazes would be sent to attack the amphibious transports before troops and cargo were disembarked on the beach.[8]
If this did not drive the Allies away, they planned to send another 3,500 kamikazes along with 5,000 Shin'yō suicide boats and the remaining destroyers and submarines"the last of the Navy's operating fleet"to the beach. If the Allies had fought through this and successfully landed on Kyūshū, only 3,000 planes would have been left to defend the remaining islands, although Kyūshū would be "defended to the last" regardless.[8] A set of caves were excavated near Nagano. In the event of invasion, these caves, the Matsushiro Underground Imperial Headquarters, were to be used by the army to direct the war and to house the emperor and his family.
wiki
It appears they still had quite a few ways to kill our troops left. My uncle Richard was on Okinawa, women and children jumped off the cliffs as opposed to being captured, the propaganda they had been indoctrinated with had convinced many were were baby eating raping killers and it would be better to die then be captured.
quote:
Mass suicides
With the impending victory of American troops, civilians often committed mass suicide, urged on by the Japanese soldiers who told locals that victorious American soldiers would go on a rampage of killing and raping. Ryukyu Shimpo, one of the two major Okinawan newspapers, wrote in 2007: "There are many Okinawans who have testified that the Japanese Army directed them to commit suicide. There are also people who have testified that they were handed grenades by Japanese soldiers" to blow themselves up.[27] Some of the civilians, having been induced by Japanese propaganda to believe that U.S. soldiers were barbarians who committed horrible atrocities, killed their families and themselves to avoid capture. Some of them threw themselves and their family members from the cliffs where the Peace Museum now resides.
What do you think would've happened if we had of invaded and not used the bombs?
I think it has more to do with the fact that you and many others demonize our use of those particular types of weapons. I wish it wasn't even possible to make them at all, I like nuclear power but would happily live without it if it meant all nuke weapons would be gone forever. History would be much different if we had not of used the bombs, many of us wouldn't be here at all.
We learned from what we did, I am glad we didn't use them in Korea like Douglas wanted to. It would take a lot of convincing to make me believe they didn't save countless lives of Americans and Japanese alike though.

"No sympathy for the devil; keep that in mind. Buy the ticket, take the ride...and if it occasionally gets a little heavier than what you had in mind, well...maybe chalk it off to forced conscious expansion: Tune in, freak out, get beaten."
Hunter S. Thompson
Ad astra per aspera
Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by dronestar, posted 07-08-2011 2:58 PM dronestar has not replied

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4225 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


(1)
Message 100 of 140 (624705)
07-19-2011 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Modulous
07-19-2011 2:54 AM


Re: my unstudied view of the situation
Hi mod,
If you have time I think this might give you a little insight to what we were facing if we had to invade, chapter 4. OPERATION KETSU-GO..gives a fair idea of what they had in store for us. I personally feel like if we hadn't used the bombs nothing short of invasion would've worked.
quote:
Title: V [Marine] Amphibious Corps Planning for Operation Olympic and the Role of Intelligence in Support of Planning.
Author: Major Mark P. Arens, USMCR [MCIA]
Thesis: That the intelligence estimates of the Japanese forces and their capabilities on Kyushu, for Operation Olympic, were so inaccurate that an amphibious assault by the V Amphibious Corps would have failed.
Discussion: This research paper, while addressing events at the strategic and operational level, will concentrate primarily on the V Amphibious Corps, one of four corps comprising the ground assault force in Operation Olympic, the projected invasion of Kyushu, Japan, in November 1945. It will focus on the planning phase of the operation and the intelligence used in that process.

"No sympathy for the devil; keep that in mind. Buy the ticket, take the ride...and if it occasionally gets a little heavier than what you had in mind, well...maybe chalk it off to forced conscious expansion: Tune in, freak out, get beaten."
Hunter S. Thompson
Ad astra per aspera
Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Modulous, posted 07-19-2011 2:54 AM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by Modulous, posted 07-19-2011 1:52 PM fearandloathing has replied

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4225 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 102 of 140 (624710)
07-19-2011 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Modulous
07-19-2011 1:52 PM


Re: dichotomy?
Are you seriously suggesting that the only two options were to engage in total war invasion or strategic nuclear bombs?
No I guess we could've continued to fire bomb their cities and blockaded the islands letting them starve, which they were well on the way to already, transportation and infrastructure was in a state of shambles. Waited on the Russians maybe? Either way more deaths probably would've occurred then from using the bombs.
I am not free of insight into the possibility of a tough invasion
Sorry, earlier in this tread you refereed to yourself as "unstudied" and I thought you might want to look at other info, no insult intended, I could be swayed if provided credible proof they wanted to surrender, hell some of the military even tried to prevent the surrender msg from going out. They were fanatics, remember the solider who fought on til 1974 because he wouldn't believe they had surrendered.
Edited by fearandloathing, : No reason given.

"No sympathy for the devil; keep that in mind. Buy the ticket, take the ride...and if it occasionally gets a little heavier than what you had in mind, well...maybe chalk it off to forced conscious expansion: Tune in, freak out, get beaten."
Hunter S. Thompson
Ad astra per aspera
Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Modulous, posted 07-19-2011 1:52 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by Modulous, posted 07-19-2011 2:44 PM fearandloathing has replied

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4225 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 106 of 140 (624721)
07-19-2011 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by Modulous
07-19-2011 2:44 PM


Re: dichotomy?
quote:
UCLA Center for East Asian Studies
East Asian Studies Documents
Exchange of Letters Regarding
the 1945 Surrender of Japan
August 10-11, 1945
Although some members of the Japanese government had been working to end the Pacific War, it was only after atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that the government formally moved to surrender to the Allied Powers. Below is the formal offer of surrender as conveyed by the Swiss and the U.S. response. The Japanese sought assurances that the Emperor not be imprisoned or tried and the U.S. reiterated the terms expressed in the Potsdam Declaration while indicating that the Emperor would be expected to act as directed by the Supreme Allied Occupation Commander.
Japanese Government Offer of Surrender
August 10, 1945
Sir;
I have the honor to inform you that the Japanese Minister in Switzerland, upon instructions received from his Government, has requested the Swiss Political Department to advise the Government of the United States of America of the following:
"In obedience to the gracious command of His Majesty the Emperor who, ever anxious to enhance the cause of world peace, desires earnestly to bring about a speedy termination of hostilities with a view to saving mankind from the calamities to be imposed upon them by further continuation of the war, the Japanese Government several weeks ago asked the Soviet Government, with which neutral relations then prevailed, to render good offices in restoring peace vis a vis the enemy powers. Unfortunately, these efforts in the interest of peace having failed, the Japanese Government in conformity with the august wish of His Majesty to restore the general peace and desiring to put an end to the untold sufferings entailed by war as quickly as possible, have decided upon the following.
"The Japanese Government are ready to accept the terms enumerated in the joint declaration which was issued at Potsdam on July 26th, 1945, by the heads of the Governments of the United States, Great Britain, and China, and later subscribed to by the Soviet Government, with the understanding that the said declaration does not comprise any demand which prejudices the prerogatives of His Majesty as a Sovereign Ruler.
"The Japanese Government sincerely hope that this understanding is warranted and desire keenly that an explicit indication to that effect will be speedily forthcoming."
In transmitting the above message the Japanese Minister added that his Government begs the Government of the United States to forward its answer through the intermediary of Switzerland. Similar requests are being transmitted to the Governments of Great Britain and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics through the intermediary of Sweden, as well as to the Government of China through the intermediary of Switzerland. The Chinese Minister at Berne has already been informed of the foregoing through the channel of the Swiss Political Department.
Please be assured that I am at your disposal at any time to accept for and forward to my Government the reply of Government of the United States.
Accept (etc.)
Grassli,
Charge d'Affaires ad interim of Switzerland
U.S. Reply to the Offer of Surrender
The Honorable James F. Byrnes Secretary of StateAugust 11, 1945Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of your note of August 10, and in reply to inform you that the President of the United States has directed me to send you for transmission to the Japanese Government the following message on behalf of the Governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and China:
"With regard to the Japanese Government's message accepting the terms of the Potsdam proclamation but containing the statement, 'with the understanding that the said declaration does not comprise any demand which prejudices the prerogatives of His Majesty as a sovereign ruler,' our position is as follows:
"From the moment of surrender the authority of the Emperor and the Japanese Government to rule the state shall be subject to the Supreme Commander of the Allied powers who will take such steps as he deems proper to effectuate the surrender terms.
"The Emperor will be required to authorize and ensure the signature by the Government of Japan and the Japanese Imperial General Headquarters of the surrender terms necessary to carry out the provisions of the Potsdam Declaration, and shall issue his commands to all the Japanese military, naval and air authorities and to all the forces under their control wherever located to cease active operations and to surrender their arms, and to issue such other orders as the Supreme Commander may require to give effect to the surrender terms. "Immediately upon the surrender the Japanese Government shall transport prisoners of war and civilian internees to places of safety, as directed, where they can quickly be placed aboard Allied transports.
"The ultimate form of government of Japan shall, in accordance with the Potsdam Declaration, be established by the freely expressed will of the Japanese people.
"The armed forces of the Allied Powers will remain in Japan until the purposes set forth in the Potsdam Declaration are achieved."
Accept (etc.)
James F. Byrnes
Secretary of State
Mr. Max Grassli
Charge d'Affaires ad interim of Switzerland
Source: Department of State Bulletin, Vol. XIII, No. 320, Aug. 12, 1945
Didn't they make an offer in January?
I don't know of anything formal they presented, I could be wrong.
the atomic bombs didn't fix Japan's logistical problems.
No, but it stopped things from getting worse and allowed us to begin to help them rebuild.
I'm not entirely confident in the capacity for anyone to have the right level of information to justify it.
I agree, I would like to read H.S.T. book to see what he says his various advisers told him regarding using the bombs. I also belive we didnt know the full, lasting effects of the bombs either, based on what we knew at the time it probably seemed like a better option then it would today.
AbE...source
Edited by fearandloathing, : added source link

"No sympathy for the devil; keep that in mind. Buy the ticket, take the ride...and if it occasionally gets a little heavier than what you had in mind, well...maybe chalk it off to forced conscious expansion: Tune in, freak out, get beaten."
Hunter S. Thompson
Ad astra per aspera
Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Modulous, posted 07-19-2011 2:44 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by Modulous, posted 07-19-2011 4:55 PM fearandloathing has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024