Japan wants an apology

[SCitizen]

So the japs want an apology for the nuclear bombs

Definitely, Bombing of Japan, Bombing of North Korea in 1950 -- 1953, and Bombing of Southeast Asia were acts of genocide by the United States. The total number of victims is about 2,500,000 civilians in three campaigns. Thus US should apologize.

 

[Tigerace117]

Definitely, Bombing of Japan, Bombing of North Korea in 1950 -- 1953, and Bombing of Southeast Asia were acts of genocide by the United States. The total number of victims is about 2,500,000 civilians in three campaigns. Thus US should apologize.

What planet are you living on?

Why the hell should the United States apologize for bombing regimes which routinely committed atrocities against their neighbors in the middle of a war?

Imperial Japan and North Korea especially. There was no "genocide" involved.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

Definitely, Bombing of Japan, Bombing of North Korea in 1950 -- 1953, and Bombing of Southeast Asia were acts of genocide by the United States. The total number of victims is about 2,500,000 civilians in three campaigns. Thus US should apologize.

Genocide is an attempt to extinguish a race or culture.

The A-bombs were an attempt to end the reign of terror that Japan was inflicting on the world at the time.

The bombing of North Korea and Southeast Asia were attempts to protect democracy from Communist oppression.

The US did the right thing, and it would be wrong to apologize for doing the right thing.

 

[ThirdTerm]

Under the Army's slogan, "ichioku gyokusai" (the shattering of the hundred million Japanese lives like a beautiful jewel), the Japanese were doomed to fight to the last man, if mainland Japan had been invaded by American troops. During the Battle of Okinawa, the people in Okinawa were encouraged to commit mass suicide, which was regarded as a beautiful Japanese tradition by military hardliners who resembled ISIS terrorists, and the Army handed out grenades to civilians for this purpose. Hiroshima gave Hirohito a good excuse to surrender, when surrender was not an option. Everyone in Japan breathed a collective sigh of relief when the war finally came to an end. In a way, Hiroshima had to take one for the team in order to save other parts of Japan from a genocide.

 

[FieldTheorist]

2. Justified or not? There is no "not" to it. It was justified. They were military targets, nor were we targeting civilians.

As you were already informed, targeting urban areas is not the same as targeting civilians, especially as the urban area was part of the industrial complex.

And you were already informed that it was an accepted Ally practice that you would bomb in order to cause surrender. That was true of the US and Great Britain especially. As you have also been told, that's the textbook definition of terrorism. That was the stated goal of 9/11 by Osama bin Laden, which was that it was to demoralize the US in an effort to prevent more US bombings like the al-Shifa bombing.

And this idea you have that they didn't care and were targeting civilians is totally absurd and shows you are spinning reality. [...] [/SIZE]

Advertising the Destruction of Hiroshima

[...]

Front side of OWI notice #2106, dubbed the “LeMay bombing leaflet,” which was delivered to Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and 33 other Japanese cities on 1 August 1945. ​

That's nice, but it's a pretty stupid argument. Like most forms of bureaucratic ass covering, this is clearly something they did to alleviate themselves of the guilt of what they were doing without having any serious affect. It's important to read your own sources, so let's do so:

Postwar surveys showed that the Japanese people trusted the accuracy of the leaflets and many residents of the targeted cities prepared immediately to leave their homes.4 The Japanese government regarded the leaflets with such concern that it ordered the arrest of those who kept or even read the leaflets and did not turn them in to their local police stations.​

And yet somehow, virtually no one in the city left. Why is that? For the pretty obvious reason that people don't --particularly in the middle of war-- have the power to suddenly mass relocate, and the US certainly wasn't stupid enough to not know this. Maybe the argument you can make is that they didn't want to personally kill everyone in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, but pretending like sending out a few flyers right before you devastate cities alleviates your guilt in mass murdering civilian populations.

Nor does it change the fact that we didn't do this when we selected the firebombings, which was a far, far larger death toll to the Japanese civilian populace. You can create whatever fictional lofty history you want about our decisions, but we ended World War II by terrorizing our opponents. We didn't start the war, we were justified in defending ourselves, but don't cling to some delusional fantasy where we didn't willing butcher millions in order to achieve our goals. Maybe we had to do a lot of it, but that doesn't make it noble or great. We'll never know what diplomacy with the Japanese governments would have done or what the effects of bombing non-civilian areas would have had.

And you have the gall to speak of someone's temerity?

That's such an awkward sentence, but yes, I do presume to question your temerity, at least regarding your disbelief in the intentions of people who knew the consequences, performed their stated actions, and achieved their stated goals.​

 

[Toggle Almendro]

And you were already informed that it was an accepted Ally practice that you would bomb in order to cause surrender. That was true of the US and Great Britain especially.

Bombing to induce enemy surrender is accepted military practice everywhere.

As you have also been told, that's the textbook definition of terrorism. That was the stated goal of 9/11 by Osama bin Laden, which was that it was to demoralize the US in an effort to prevent more US bombings like the al-Shifa bombing.

If anyone told him that, he'd best get advice from someone else. Terrorists differ significantly in that they target civilians.

That's nice, but it's a pretty stupid argument. Like most forms of bureaucratic ass covering, this is clearly something they did to alleviate themselves of the guilt of what they were doing without having any serious affect. It's important to read your own sources, so let's do so:

Postwar surveys showed that the Japanese people trusted the accuracy of the leaflets and many residents of the targeted cities prepared immediately to leave their homes.4 The Japanese government regarded the leaflets with such concern that it ordered the arrest of those who kept or even read the leaflets and did not turn them in to their local police stations.​

And yet somehow, virtually no one in the city left. Why is that? For the pretty obvious reason that people don't --particularly in the middle of war-- have the power to suddenly mass relocate, and the US certainly wasn't stupid enough to not know this. Maybe the argument you can make is that they didn't want to personally kill everyone in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, but pretending like sending out a few flyers

It was far more than a few flyers.

If civilians did not leave the areas that was a shame, but that wouldn't be our fault.

right before you devastate cities alleviates your guilt in mass murdering civilian populations.

Wartime strikes against military targets are neither murder nor mass murder.

Nor does it change the fact that we didn't do this when we selected the firebombings, which was a far, far larger death toll to the Japanese civilian populace.

Far higher according to whom?

We most certainly did drop warning leaflets before our conventional raids.

 

[Tigerace117]

And you were already informed that it was an accepted Ally practice that you would bomb in order to cause surrender. That was true of the US and Great Britain especially. As you have also been told, that's the textbook definition of terrorism. That was the stated goal of 9/11 by Osama bin Laden, which was that it was to demoralize the US in an effort to prevent more US bombings like the al-Shifa bombing.



That's nice, but it's a pretty stupid argument. Like most forms of bureaucratic ass covering, this is clearly something they did to alleviate themselves of the guilt of what they were doing without having any serious affect. It's important to read your own sources, so let's do so:

Postwar surveys showed that the Japanese people trusted the accuracy of the leaflets and many residents of the targeted cities prepared immediately to leave their homes.4 The Japanese government regarded the leaflets with such concern that it ordered the arrest of those who kept or even read the leaflets and did not turn them in to their local police stations.​

And yet somehow, virtually no one in the city left. Why is that? For the pretty obvious reason that people don't --particularly in the middle of war-- have the power to suddenly mass relocate, and the US certainly wasn't stupid enough to not know this. Maybe the argument you can make is that they didn't want to personally kill everyone in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, but pretending like sending out a few flyers right before you devastate cities alleviates your guilt in mass murdering civilian populations.

Nor does it change the fact that we didn't do this when we selected the firebombings, which was a far, far larger death toll to the Japanese civilian populace. You can create whatever fictional lofty history you want about our decisions, but we ended World War II by terrorizing our opponents. We didn't start the war, we were justified in defending ourselves, but don't cling to some delusional fantasy where we didn't willing butcher millions in order to achieve our goals. Maybe we had to do a lot of it, but that doesn't make it noble or great. We'll never know what diplomacy with the Japanese governments would have done or what the effects of bombing non-civilian areas would have had.







That's such an awkward sentence, but yes, I do presume to question your temerity, at least regarding your disbelief in the intentions of people who knew the consequences, performed their stated actions, and achieved their stated goals.

Dude---even after they got nuked there was an attempt to launch a coup in order to continue the war.

What makes you think "diplomacy" would have worked with these guys? They were fully willing to fight to the last Japanese civillians to try and stop the Allies.

 

[Excon]

And you were already informed that it was an accepted Ally practice that you would bomb in order to cause surrender. That was true of the US and Great Britain especially. As you have also been told, that's the textbook definition of terrorism. That was the stated goal of 9/11 by Osama bin Laden, which was that it was to demoralize the US in an effort to prevent more US bombings like the al-Shifa bombing.



That's nice, but it's a pretty stupid argument. Like most forms of bureaucratic ass covering, this is clearly something they did to alleviate themselves of the guilt of what they were doing without having any serious affect. It's important to read your own sources, so let's do so:

Postwar surveys showed that the Japanese people trusted the accuracy of the leaflets and many residents of the targeted cities prepared immediately to leave their homes.4 The Japanese government regarded the leaflets with such concern that it ordered the arrest of those who kept or even read the leaflets and did not turn them in to their local police stations.​

And yet somehow, virtually no one in the city left. Why is that? For the pretty obvious reason that people don't --particularly in the middle of war-- have the power to suddenly mass relocate, and the US certainly wasn't stupid enough to not know this. Maybe the argument you can make is that they didn't want to personally kill everyone in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, but pretending like sending out a few flyers right before you devastate cities alleviates your guilt in mass murdering civilian populations.

Nor does it change the fact that we didn't do this when we selected the firebombings, which was a far, far larger death toll to the Japanese civilian populace. You can create whatever fictional lofty history you want about our decisions, but we ended World War II by terrorizing our opponents. We didn't start the war, we were justified in defending ourselves, but don't cling to some delusional fantasy where we didn't willing butcher millions in order to achieve our goals. Maybe we had to do a lot of it, but that doesn't make it noble or great. We'll never know what diplomacy with the Japanese governments would have done or what the effects of bombing non-civilian areas would have had.



That's such an awkward sentence, but yes, I do presume to question your temerity, at least regarding your disbelief in the intentions of people who knew the consequences, performed their stated actions, and achieved their stated goals.

Thank you for the stupid reply and for again demonstrating that you have no clue as to what you speak.

It is not text book terrorism, it was a war where the enemy's citizens were warned of what was forth coming.
It was not mass murder nor was it a war crime.
Go spew your delusional hatred elsewhere.

 

[ThirdTerm]

What's strange about this leaflet is that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not listed in the potential target list. There were a couple of target cities for atomic bombings but the list was kept secret from ordinary citizens. The Target Committee decided that Kyoto, Hiroshima, Yokohama and Kokura Arsenal were potential targets and Nagasaki was bombed accidentally due to the bad weather over Kokura.

6. Status of Targets

A. Dr. Stearns described the work he had done on target selection. He has surveyed possible targets possessing the following qualification: (1) they be important targets in a large urban area of more than three miles in diameter, (2) they be capable of being damaged effectively by a blast, and (3) they are unlikely to be attacked by next August. Dr. Stearns had a list of five targets which the Air Force would be willing to reserve for our use unless unforeseen circumstances arise. These targets are:

(1) Kyoto - This target is an urban industrial area with a population of 1,000,000. It is the former capital of Japan and many people and industries are now being moved there as other areas are being destroyed. From the psychological point of view there is the advantage that Kyoto is an intellectual center for Japan and the people there are more apt to appreciate the significance of such a weapon as the gadget. (Classified as an AA Target)
(2) Hiroshima - This is an important army depot and port of embarkation in the middle of an urban industrial area. It is a good radar target and it is such a size that a large part of the city could be extensively damaged. There are adjacent hills which are likely to produce a focussing effect which would considerably increase the blast damage. Due to rivers it is not a good incendiary target. (Classified as an AA Target)
(3) Yokohama - This target is an important urban industrial area which has so far been untouched. Industrial activities include aircraft manufacture, machine tools, docks, electrical equipment and oil refineries. As the damage to Tokyo has increased additional industries have moved to Yokohama. It has the disadvantage of the most important target areas being separated by a large body of water and of being in the heaviest anti-aircraft concentration in Japan. For us it has the advantage as an alternate target for use in case of bad weather of being rather far removed from the other targets considered. (Classified as an A Target)
(4) Kokura Arsenal - This is one of the largest arsenals in Japan and is surrounded by urban industrial structures. The arsenal is important for light ordnance, anti-aircraft and beach head defense materials. The dimensions of the arsenal are 4100’ x 2000’. The dimensions are such that if the bomb were properly placed full advantage could be taken of the higher pressures immediately underneath the bomb for destroying the more solid structures and at the same time considerable blast damage could be done to more feeble structures further away. (Classified as an A Target)
(5) Niigata - This is a port of embarkation on the N.W. coast of Honshu. Its importance is increasing as other ports are damaged. Machine tool industries are located there and it is a potential center for industrial despersion. It has oil refineries and storage. (Classified as a B Target)
(6) The possibility of bombing the Emperor’s palace was discussed. It was agreed that we should not recommend it but that any action for this bombing should come from authorities on military policy. It was agreed that we should obtain information from which we could determine the effectiveness of our weapon against this target.
Atomic Bomb: Decision -- Target Committee, May 10-11, 1945

 

[Toggle Almendro]

What's strange about this leaflet is that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not listed in the potential target list. There were a couple of target cities for atomic bombings but the list was kept secret from ordinary citizens. The Target Committee decided that Kyoto, Hiroshima, Yokohama and Kokura Arsenal were potential targets and Nagasaki was bombed accidentally due to the bad weather over Kokura.

As I recall there were three different leaflet versions printed for that drop. Each version listed 12 cities, for a total of 36. But they struck Tokyo off the list after printing it and blotted out the circle that they had used for Tokyo, so there were really 35 cities warned.


Your record is of an earlier target discussion meeting. The list was revised a few times before the final list was selected.

The final list was:

1. Hiroshima
2. Kokura Arsenal
3. Niigata
4. Nagasaki

Due to the fuel issue in the second bombing, Niigata was way out of range. They barely had enough usable fuel to make a single pass over Nagasaki.

 

[ThirdTerm]

I found two other versions that include Tokyo, Nagaoka, Hakodate, Ogaki, Ichinomiya, Kurume, Kotaru, Akita and Takayama. But it's doubtful if there is another version of the so-called LeMay leaflets with Hiroshima and Nagasaki clearly printed on it, especially because Nagasaki was not on the original target list. A B-29 bomber left the island of Tinian intending to drop an atomic bomb on the city of Kokura. But on arriving at the target, the plane found it obscured by clouds and turned south and went to its secondary target: Nagasaki. Furthermore, Niigata, a third atomic bombing target, is not listed in the three leaflets. Hiroshima, Kokura, Niigata, and Nagasaki may have been intentionally excluded from the LeMay leaflets as part of a strategic deception campaign.

 

[blackjack50]

A-Bomb Survivors Want Obama to Meet, Apologize in Hiroshima - ABC News

So the japs want an apology for the nuclear bombs but are still unwilling to give one for pearl harbor.

How about they apologize for the rape of Nanking?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Toggle Almendro]

But it's doubtful if there is another version of the so-called LeMay leaflets with Hiroshima and Nagasaki clearly printed on it, especially because Nagasaki was not on the original target list.

By the time the bombs were dropped, Nagasaki was on the target list:
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/41b.pdf
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/41e.pdf

 

[Grand Mal]

Definitely, Bombing of Japan, Bombing of North Korea in 1950 -- 1953, and Bombing of Southeast Asia were acts of genocide by the United States. The total number of victims is about 2,500,000 civilians in three campaigns. Thus US should apologize.

Do you buy the headline of this thread, that a small organization of activists in Japan equals 'the Japs'? Do you not see the dishonesty built in to this thread?