Do you think it was the right decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan to end WW2?

[AlbqOwl]

Footnote to previous post: And one more time: after such a graphic demonstration of what nuclear weapons can do, nobody has used one since. That is a very important bit of positive icing on the whole cake.

 

[Fantasea]

Re: Do you think it was the right decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan to end W

Actually the Japanese had already offered a conditional surrender,

You are correct -- a 'conditional' surrender.

The condition was that the Allies simply stop the fighting, go home, and leave Japan to it's own devices.

With intelligence telling the Allied commanders that Japan still had more than four million men under arms, thousands of planes, hundreds of ships, and a still unfulfilled need for natural resources which it did not possess, what is the logical scenario?

Simply this. The Allies, tired and economically spent after up to thirteen years of Japanese conquest, withdraw, disband their armed forces, revert to a peace time economy, and resume normal life.

A few years down the road, Japan, having rebuilt its navy, developed new weapons and aircraft, expanded its armed forces, decides to resume its aggressive posture and begins to, once again, invade its neighbors. Now it is the strongest military force on earth because the Allies have "beat their swords into plowshares", as it were.

This was the risk that the Allies viewed and no one wanted to look forward to World War III.

The only way to mitigate against this scenario was to occupy Japan and ensure that its armed forces and military production capabilities were neutralized.

Hence 'unconditional' surrender, which included full occupation was the only reasonable course for the Allies. Since the Japanese would not voluntarily accept occupation, the war continued.

The Japanese were committed to defend the home islands to the death, as they had the outer islands of Iwo Jima and Okinawa where even Japanese civilians fought to the death or committed suicide rather than surrender.

The Allies estimated that the combined Japanese and Allied death toll resulting from an invasion of the home islands would run into the several of millions over the course of several years. They saw the A-bomb as a way to bring the war to an immediate end, which it did with a saving of millions of lives.

When docking a dog, is it less painful to cut off the tail an inch at a time? Certainly not. One whack, in the right place, and it's over.

and Jesus didn't really go on about self defence did he, meanwhile God said it was alright to stone adulterers to death

I don't understand the relevance here. As I recall, Christ didn't challenge Mosaic law. He simply admonished, in it's being carried out that, "Let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone."

Had there been a hypocrite or a sinless person present, the outcome would have been different for the adulterous woman.

 

[sissy-boy]

Re: Do you think it was the right decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan to end W

the japanese committed crimes that make the Nazis look like Mr. Rogers. The average japanese civillian was more indoctrinated and fanatic then then the most brainwashed SS.

they deserved it

from a sociological stand point i love the bomb. we destroyed their religion with explosives

"oh ****! no more horrifying death explosives! the emperors not a god! whatever you say, just no more!"

Your very statement includes you with the likes of your 'nazi's' and 'fanatics'. How can you stand as a 'moralist' when you advocate the mass murder of civilians??

What an imbecile!

 

[new coup for you]

Re: Do you think it was the right decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan to end W

it depends on whether you see the killing of killers as moral and how you view the japanese civillian populace

i think they're just as guilty as the millitary

and i'm fine with the killing of killers

ask some old Koreans, Chinese or Fillipinos how they feel about the atomic bombing

they're all about it

 

[kal-el]

let me ask you this Kalel. How is that the Empire state building exists? Did someone make it? Did someone design it? Please just answer those questions.

I fail to see the relevance to the topic at hand in answering those questions.

 

[Binary_Digit]

I fail to see the relevance to the topic at hand in answering those questions.

I think it was pertaining to whether or not God controls life, not man. His point was, the empire state building didn't rise up from the ashes of evolution, something had to create it. He seems to believe the same thing must have happened with the entire universe. Hopefully I got that right.

 

[kal-el]

I think it was pertaining to whether or not God controls life, not man. His point was, the empire state building didn't rise up from the ashes of evolution, something had to create it. He seems to believe the same thing must have happened with the entire universe. Hopefully I got that right.

You are absolutely right as far as I am concerned. However, I do Not beleieve in a "immaterial" God, I believe in a supreme being. I do believe wholehardetly in the Christ and the Scriptures. You should check out the evolution vs. creationalism thread, I am attempting to prove that the earth was to complicated to come about by random chance, it must be the fruit of an ouside intervention.

 

[ludahai]

Re: Do you think it was the right decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan to end W

Actually the Japanese had already offered a conditional surrender, and Jesus didn't really go on about self defence did he, meanwhile God said it was alright to stone adulterers to death.

As has already been pointed out, the "conditions" by which Japan would surrender were not acceptable to the allies. The Japanese would have been able to retain their war machine and their militaristic government.

 

[ludahai]

Re: Do you think it was the right decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan to end W

Your very statement includes you with the likes of your 'nazi's' and 'fanatics'. How can you stand as a 'moralist' when you advocate the mass murder of civilians??

What an imbecile!

You have no idea what you are talking about. It is true that the war crimes committed by the Japanese make the the Nazis look like Boy Scouts! Remember, the Japanese started the war in 1937 when they attacked China. THey then proceeded to attack nearly every other country in the region, including the United States. They massacred hundreds of thousands of civilians in Nanjing, thousands in other cities, killed people for committing "economic crimes" like eating rice in the northeastern Chinese area of Manchuria. Comfort women, Bataan Death March, biological experiments on POWs and enemy national civilians, most notably just outside of Harbin, China.

The Japanese civilians weren't about to overthrow their government, like the Italians did. This makes them morally culpable. Furthermore, providing that the Allies DID launch a ground invasion, far more people (Japanese civilians, soldiers, and American soldiers) would have died than had perished in the firebombings and the atomic bombs.

Is the use of atomic weapons an evil? Yes. However, they were used to prevent an even greater evil and to eliminate the greatest evil Asia had to that point in history every known.

 

[SKILMATIC]

Originally Posted by Binary_Digit
I think it was pertaining to whether or not God controls life, not man. His point was, the empire state building didn't rise up from the ashes of evolution, something had to create it. He seems to believe the same thing must have happened with the entire universe. Hopefully I got that right.


You are absolutely right as far as I am concerned. However, I do Not beleieve in a "immaterial" God, I believe in a supreme being. I do believe wholehardetly in the Christ and the Scriptures. You should check out the evolution vs. creationalism thread, I am attempting to prove that the earth was to complicated to come about by random chance, it must be the fruit of an ouside intervention.

Ok then why did you just say....

I fail to see the relevance to the topic at hand in answering those questions.

I dont see the relevence of this statment i you agreed to that of which binary digit said. Which BTW I am impressed binary very good job. Only if kal-el wouldhave gotten it. Instead of trying to dodge the question like most people try to do.

 

[SKILMATIC]

And if you beleive that there is a God. Then you must certainly beleive in the creators word dont you? Or do you not think God is perfect?

 

[ElGringo17]

Uhgreen wrote:

I forgot who said it, but it's true, "War is the murder of women and children" or something to that degree.

Which once again proves that men are disposable, second class citizenry and we live in a matriarchal, gynocentric society wherein women have all the power and choice.

 

[kal-el]

Ok then why did you just say....



I dont see the relevence of this statment i you agreed to that of which binary digit said. Which BTW I am impressed binary very good job. Only if kal-el wouldhave gotten it. Instead of trying to dodge the question like most people try to do.

Because I don't see the correlation between the building of the Empire State Building and the dropping of the atomic bombs.

 

[SKILMATIC]

If you would be so kind to bear with me I was getting to that point but I have to get a few answers from you first to see that you understand certain things. But if you arent willing to answer simple yes or no questions then I see no relevance in you debating this subject.

 

[rudy0908]

Re: Do you think it was the right decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan to end W

You have no idea what you are talking about. It is true that the war crimes committed by the Japanese make the the Nazis look like Boy Scouts! Remember, the Japanese started the war in 1937 when they attacked China. THey then proceeded to attack nearly every other country in the region, including the United States. They massacred hundreds of thousands of civilians in Nanjing, thousands in other cities, killed people for committing "economic crimes" like eating rice in the northeastern Chinese area of Manchuria. Comfort women, Bataan Death March, biological experiments on POWs and enemy national civilians, most notably just outside of Harbin, China.

The Japanese civilians weren't about to overthrow their government, like the Italians did. This makes them morally culpable. Furthermore, providing that the Allies DID launch a ground invasion, far more people (Japanese civilians, soldiers, and American soldiers) would have died than had perished in the firebombings and the atomic bombs.

Is the use of atomic weapons an evil? Yes. However, they were used to prevent an even greater evil and to eliminate the greatest evil Asia had to that point in history every known.

What it came down to were two choices: and evil one (dropping of atom bomb) vs. an even more evil option (invasion). They would both end with many deaths of innocent people, but something had to be done. We chose to do something terrible to prevent an action that would be even worse. We made the best available choice.

 

[SKILMATIC]

What it came down to were two choices: and evil one (dropping of atom bomb) vs. an even more evil option (invasion). They would both end with many deaths of innocent people, but something had to be done. We chose to do something terrible to prevent an action that would be even worse. We made the best available choice.

Very well objectively put rudy.

 

[cherokee]

Re: Do you think it was the right decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan to end W

It ended ww2 didnt it?....
So yes it was worth it....

 

[new coup for you]

Re: Do you think it was the right decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan to end W

You have no idea what you are talking about. It is true that the war crimes committed by the Japanese make the the Nazis look like Boy Scouts! Remember, the Japanese started the war in 1937 when they attacked China. THey then proceeded to attack nearly every other country in the region, including the United States. They massacred hundreds of thousands of civilians in Nanjing, thousands in other cities, killed people for committing "economic crimes" like eating rice in the northeastern Chinese area of Manchuria. Comfort women, Bataan Death March, biological experiments on POWs and enemy national civilians, most notably just outside of Harbin, China.

The Japanese civilians weren't about to overthrow their government, like the Italians did. This makes them morally culpable. Furthermore, providing that the Allies DID launch a ground invasion, far more people (Japanese civilians, soldiers, and American soldiers) would have died than had perished in the firebombings and the atomic bombs.

Is the use of atomic weapons an evil? Yes. However, they were used to prevent an even greater evil and to eliminate the greatest evil Asia had to that point in history every known.

the lack of knoweldge of Japan's evil in WWII is a crime, i'm glad some people remember just how horrifying they were.

your average Japanese soldeir- the common "grunt" with no special political indoctrination- committed war crimes more heinous then that of the most fanatic SS or Commissars.

 

[SKILMATIC]

your average Japanese soldeir- the common "grunt" with no special political indoctrination- committed war crimes more heinous then that of the most fanatic SS or Commissars

You are absolutely right. The common japanses soldier were actually ordered from his superiors to basically devistate all "land and village" unless it was the "promise land" (China). They used to do things so profound such as have competitions to see how mordifing they could ravish a mans body. They also behaeded individuals who didnt bow to the japs and for other reasons. There capms were so bad that people committed suicide any way they could to get out of such terror.

Does anyone remember Nankang? In the city of Nankang, the japs invaded Nankang and totally destroyed the city and took every single man and male child and kiled them becasue they were thought of as an infestation. And to all the women and female children they all got raped several times by all of the 20000 jap soldiers. And there were over 200000 people in thecity of Nankang.

 

[kal-el]

You are absolutely right. The common japanses soldier were actually ordered from his superiors to basically devistate all "land and village" unless it was the "promise land" (China). They used to do things so profound such as have competitions to see how mordifing they could ravish a mans body. They also behaeded individuals who didnt bow to the japs and for other reasons. There capms were so bad that people committed suicide any way they could to get out of such terror.

Does anyone remember Nankang? In the city of Nankang, the japs invaded Nankang and totally destroyed the city and took every single man and male child and kiled them becasue they were thought of as an infestation. And to all the women and female children they all got raped several times by all of the 20000 jap soldiers. And there were over 200000 people in thecity of Nankang.

Ok, what about all the innocent Japenease civilians? Can we call it "the lesser of 2 evils" when we kill thousands in a few seconds? Do these means justify the end when even the end is such a beautiful cause such as peace? I say hell no! These phoney causes are Always wrong because they created death, and the death of a single person is terrible, whatever side they are on.
When we talk about innocent civilians, does that imply that the military is guilty and does that justify killing them? I say that there can not be any justification for killing innocent civilians than there can be for killing guilty military soliders and vice versa.

 

[SKILMATIC]

Ok, what about all the innocent Japenease civilians? Can we call it "the lesser of 2 evils" when we kill thousands in a few seconds? Do these means justify the end when even the end is such a beautiful cause such as peace? I say hell no! These phoney causes are Always wrong because they created death, and the death of a single person is terrible, whatever side they are on.
When we talk about innocent civilians, does that imply that the military is guilty and does that justify killing them? I say that there can not be any justification for killing innocent civilians than there can be for killing guilty military soliders and vice versa.

O god not you again.

 

[SKILMATIC]

Ok, what about all the innocent Japenease civilians? Can we call it "the lesser of 2 evils" when we kill thousands in a few seconds? Do these means justify the end when even the end is such a beautiful cause such as peace? I say hell no! These phoney causes are Always wrong because they created death, and the death of a single person is terrible, whatever side they are on.
When we talk about innocent civilians, does that imply that the military is guilty and does that justify killing them? I say that there can not be any justification for killing innocent civilians than there can be for killing guilty military soliders and vice versa.

When will you get it through your head that the japs would never surrendor under a ground invasion. The only reason they surrendured was already explained by me earlier in this thread. But let me put it in laymans terms for you my friend.

When an enemy is ruthless and unrelenting as the japs were, and when they can have the ability to fight you in an invasion they will do it to the last man. However, if the enemy who is still ruthless and unrelenting can not ever see you coming in the middle of the night or day and in the flash of a few seconds nearly 100,000 people are dead and there is nothing no one can do about it then it kinda draws you to conclude that you better give up or else you wouldnt even be able to fight your enemy anyway. Becasue your enemy is kiling hundreds of thousands and millions of you through a single B17 bomber at 40000 feet. the japs realized that there beloved invasion was never going to come with this invincible power. Plus they would rather surrendor to the US instead of russia.

Do you understand now? The a-bomb was inevitable. If you like life so much as I do then beleive me when I say the outcome of a ground invasion would be much much more costly then a couple of a-bombs on outer vilages. We were supposed to drop it on Tokyo but the US was gracsious enough not to drop it on a city who had a population of about 2.5million people. I think the decision of droping it on japan was the smartest thing we couldve done.

If you are such a smart individual as you think you are. Then tell me mr. professional on japanses foreign affairs, what would you have done in that situatuon? Not even fight? Ground invasion? Try to make peace(impossible to an already infuriated japan)? What?

 

[kal-el]

When will you get it through your head that the japs would never surrendor under a ground invasion. The only reason they surrendured was already explained by me earlier in this thread. But let me put it in laymans terms for you my friend.

When an enemy is ruthless and unrelenting as the japs were, and when they can have the ability to fight you in an invasion they will do it to the last man. However, if the enemy who is still ruthless and unrelenting can not ever see you coming in the middle of the night or day and in the flash of a few seconds nearly 100,000 people are dead and there is nothing no one can do about it then it kinda draws you to conclude that you better give up or else you wouldnt even be able to fight your enemy anyway. Becasue your enemy is kiling hundreds of thousands and millions of you through a single B17 bomber at 40000 feet. the japs realized that there beloved invasion was never going to come with this invincible power. Plus they would rather surrendor to the US instead of russia.

Do you understand now? The a-bomb was inevitable. If you like life so much as I do then beleive me when I say the outcome of a ground invasion would be much much more costly then a couple of a-bombs on outer vilages. We were supposed to drop it on Tokyo but the US was gracsious enough not to drop it on a city who had a population of about 2.5million people. I think the decision of droping it on japan was the smartest thing we couldve done.

If you are such a smart individual as you think you are. Then tell me mr. professional on japanses foreign affairs, what would you have done in that situatuon? Not even fight? Ground invasion? Try to make peace(impossible to an already infuriated japan)? What?

I see where you are coming from, but I am against any and all wars. You say that the US was gracious? O man, you are a sad, sad, individual, terribly caught in the net of violence. As violence snowballs, it is no longer possible to be satisfied with easy replies designed to disturb no one, whose political correctness will not stop it from happening again.

Too many horrors, too many murders! And for each of these deaths, the killers always had their own "good reasons", either they were defending their country, or defending their family, or their honor. It's crystal clear now. Now we could understand why Jesus was crucified, why millions of people died at the hands of the Inquisition, during religious or civil wars, and through the Nazi massacres. It's alot easier to understand how a simple stock boy,or banker could have been a crucifier, or burn witches, or even become an SS soldier, sending women and children to the death chambers. They all thought that they were doing something good for humanity. A "cause" one could say. The first ones were getting rid of a "rebel" who wanted to overthrow their traditions, and others felt that people who lived differently were responsible for bad crops, or the plague, or even the economical crisis. Idiots can be excused from thinking these things, but Not the governments who by giving these horrendous ideas to everybody, can control and manipulate them however they see fit.

I am far from a professional expert on Japanease affairs, and I honestly don't know what I would have done in that situation. But like I said earlier, whether the bombs are dropped from a plane, or strapped to their belts, they still apply the same terrorism.

 

[SKILMATIC]

but I am against any and all wars.

Your more of an idealist than i am. Look, you are living in a dream world. This world doesnt and will never exist. You knowmnothing o how the world works and that of the intent of man. It is becasue when man committed the first sin is when the idea that utopia could exist went down the toilet. You cannot be against defense for if you are you are really insane. We were simply defending our other men and women in the service from a ground slaughter. Is that wrong? I think not. If we never attacked either in an invasion or a-bomb we would have lossed an insanely lot more lives than you can possibly imagine.

 

[Kelzie]

Your more of an idealist than i am. Look, you are living in a dream world. This world doesnt and will never exist. You knowmnothing o how the world works and that of the intent of man. It is becasue when man committed the first sin is when the idea that utopia could exist went down the toilet. You cannot be against defense for if you are you are really insane. We were simply defending our other men and women in the service from a ground slaughter. Is that wrong? I think not. If we never attacked either in an invasion or a-bomb we would have lossed an insanely lot more lives than you can possibly imagine.

Okay two things. If a world without war will never exist, I say we give up now. I'm not saying it's going to be in the next five years, but I think at some point, humans will stop throwing our lives away. Maybe that's idealistic, but I'd prefer that then believing that there is always another war on the horizon.

Second thing. We have experienced starvation, hunger, pestilence, and all manners of evil because we ate some fruit? Kind of sounds like the short end of the stick to me...