The Decision to Drop: WWII Atomic Bomb

Was it the right decision?

Yes, it was a neccessity.	31.4%	[ 38 ]
No, it was immoral.	26.4%	[ 32 ]
It was immoral BUT a neccesity.	31.4%	[ 38 ]
On the fence.	10.7%	[ 13 ]
Total Votes:			[ 121 ]

[holdingontobelieve]

Here's an interesting topic for all of you history buffs out there. (Or people who enjoy moral debates. wink )


The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were nuclear attacks near the end of World War II against the Empire of Japan by the United States at the executive order of U.S. President Harry Truman.
The bombs killed as many as 140,000 people in Hiroshima and 80,000 in Nagasaki by the end of 1945. Since then, thousands more have died from injuries or illness attributed to exposure to radiation released by the bombs.

- Those who argue in favor of the decision to drop the bombs generally assert that they caused the Japanese surrender, preventing massive casualties on both sides in the planned invasion of Japan. That they had to cause mass panic to get the Japanese people who'd been brainwashed to surender.

- Those who argue against the decision to drop the bombs characterize them as inherently immoral, crimes against humanity, and state terrorism. They may also argue that they were militarily unnecessary, claiming that Japan was going to surrender anyway.


Once again I'm asking my fellow Gaians. xp What's your opinion?
The bombings gave a speedy end to the war and was much safer than an invasion. But what was the cost? Thousands of civilian lives. Mothers, daughters, children... the list goes on.
...Does the end justify the means? How far can we go to ensure our own security?

[Stickman1337]

since it's already over and done with, any further justification or disproval seems moot at this point, but what the hell i say for, let's stir the pot a little.

we told them to surrender or we'd do it, and they continually said no, so we lived up to our word i suppose.

but like i said, what happened..happened and we can't much change it 3nodding

[Repellant]

They did it to save troops and battleships. And it worked.

[Shou Eitoku]

Here is the deal. I see it as immoral, but that is really what war IS to me.

I have been reading up on relations between China and Korea with Japan. It turns out from many recent happenings in both China and Korea is that they share this hate against Japan. For what reason? Japan has use the Korean's as experiments during WWII. Japan has raped many as well as killed many in China (AKA Nanking.) Japan has also killed many Koreans and Chinese civilians as well as military personnel. Both countries feel that Japan hasn't personally apologized to them. Is this immoral in Japan's fault? YES!

Germany and the Holocaust, enough said.

Now, lets fast-forward to the atomic bomb. Yes, many agreed that if it wasn't used, Japan will keep going on. I mean seriously suicide bombers. I do have sympathy for those who were caught in the atomic bomb though. The horror stories of burnt flesh, no one except you of your classmates survive, being separated from your love since you were younger. The U.S. used it to show the rising Soviet Union that U.S. is still in power and at the same time deal a blow to Japan so that they'll stop the war.

Aside from what is done is done, relations between Japan to Korea and China is still horrible. This whole issue of WWII is creating riots in Korea and China and cause some dramatic happenings in Japan as well.

[lostwingman]

2 words, Total War

That was how WWII was fought and thats how it ended

/thread

[FRF_Hentai_Heitai_Reborn]

It was a nessecity, if atomic bombs were not used, the Japanese Empire would have won by causing so many American casualties that they sign a peace treaty when the public starts complaining about the deaths, ie Vietnam, Iraq.

Quote:

I have been reading up on relations between China and Korea with Japan. It turns out from many recent happenings in both China and Korea is that they share this hate against Japan. For what reason? Japan has use the Korean's as experiments during WWII. Japan has raped many as well as killed many in China (AKA Nanking.) Japan has also killed many Koreans and Chinese civilians as well as military personnel. Both countries feel that Japan hasn't personally apologized to them. Is this immoral in Japan's fault? YES!

The Japanese did not use Koreans in Scientific Experiments, they used Chinese prisoners. Korea was a Japanese colony for 40 years before WW2, they were treated as second class citizens, not slaves.

Also Japan has indeed apologised numerous times and gave compensation. The Chinese just enjoy bitching since they are communists. And the Koreans have no jusification whatsoever as no atrocities beyond colonial policing were imposed on Koreans.

[Plunged_In_Octane]

Of course it was justified. It was ******** war. You think the Japanese empire would have hesitated to drop a nuke on us if it was them that first invented it?

[Thousand years of Ween]

FRF_Hentai_Heitai_Reborn

It was a nessecity, if atomic bombs were not used, the Japanese Empire would have won by causing so many American casualties that they sign a peace treaty when the public starts complaining about the deaths, ie Vietnam, Iraq.

Wouldn't have happened
we'd bring in Russia to aid us
and that was a huge no no
one of the major reasons why we decided to drop it in the first place

No doubt we would have won it either way, just one way would have been more bloody for us

[FRF_Hentai_Heitai_Reborn]

Thousand years of Ween

FRF_Hentai_Heitai_Reborn

It was a nessecity, if atomic bombs were not used, the Japanese Empire would have won by causing so many American casualties that they sign a peace treaty when the public starts complaining about the deaths, ie Vietnam, Iraq.

Wouldn't have happened
we'd bring in Russia to aid us
and that was a huge no no
one of the major reasons why we decided to drop it in the first place

No doubt we would have won it either way, just one way would have been more bloody for us

The Japanese Military kept 90% of their entire military capability in the home islands in preparation for the American invasion. That was the entire Japanese plan from the start of the war. Capture large amounts of Islands to buy time as the Americans take them one by one, and using the navy to hold them off as Japan strips Indonesia of oil and rubber. Fight America fully in the home islands until America backs off and lets Japan continue to invade China due to excessive casualties. Americans are democratic, and frankly intolerant to any sort of loss. Losing 1 million soldiers would be enough. Taking Japan would cause at least 10 million.

There were 40,000 kamikaze planes ready to attack the American invasion fleet, imagine them attacking troop laden, slow transports with the advantage of cover, surprise, predetection, and close base proximity. The Japanese military had predicted correctly where both American invasions for Operation Downfall, not to mention the day Operation Downfall was planned, a storm passed through the route of the invasion.

[Thousand years of Ween]

FRF_Hentai_Heitai_Reborn

Thousand years of Ween

FRF_Hentai_Heitai_Reborn

It was a nessecity, if atomic bombs were not used, the Japanese Empire would have won by causing so many American casualties that they sign a peace treaty when the public starts complaining about the deaths, ie Vietnam, Iraq.

Wouldn't have happened
we'd bring in Russia to aid us
and that was a huge no no
one of the major reasons why we decided to drop it in the first place

No doubt we would have won it either way, just one way would have been more bloody for us

The Japanese Military kept 90% of their entire military capability in the home islands in preparation for the American invasion. That was the entire Japanese plan from the start of the war. Capture large amounts of Islands to buy time as the Americans take them one by one, and using the navy to hold them off as Japan strips Indonesia of oil and rubber. Fight America fully in the home islands until America backs off and lets Japan continue to invade China due to excessive casualties. Americans are democratic, and frankly intolerant to any sort of loss. Losing 1 million soldiers would be enough. Taking Japan would cause at least 10 million.

There were 40,000 kamikaze planes ready to attack the American invasion fleet, imagine them attacking troop laden, slow transports with the advantage of cover, surprise, predetection, and close base proximity. The Japanese military had predicted correctly where both American invasions for Operation Downfall, not to mention the day Operation Downfall was planned, a storm passed through the route of the invasion.

If properly done the Japanese would have failed massively
Your looking at the 3 Allied powers womping on one island nation from 3 different spots.

While I do not have the exact troop locations on me (If you do I can get an invasion plan down for ya), The allied forces (including russia) would be splitting the japanese forces into 3 fronts. Add that in, plus bombers raining down on Tokyo from 3 different nations.
Japanese would have to jump over some major hurdles if they wanted to win a defensive battle.

While they were excellent at digging in, they're plans usually fell to holy hell once US troops made any sort of ground.

The war would have been a ********

[FRF_Hentai_Heitai_Reborn]

Thousand years of Ween

FRF_Hentai_Heitai_Reborn

Thousand years of Ween

FRF_Hentai_Heitai_Reborn

It was a nessecity, if atomic bombs were not used, the Japanese Empire would have won by causing so many American casualties that they sign a peace treaty when the public starts complaining about the deaths, ie Vietnam, Iraq.

Wouldn't have happened
we'd bring in Russia to aid us
and that was a huge no no
one of the major reasons why we decided to drop it in the first place

No doubt we would have won it either way, just one way would have been more bloody for us

The Japanese Military kept 90% of their entire military capability in the home islands in preparation for the American invasion. That was the entire Japanese plan from the start of the war. Capture large amounts of Islands to buy time as the Americans take them one by one, and using the navy to hold them off as Japan strips Indonesia of oil and rubber. Fight America fully in the home islands until America backs off and lets Japan continue to invade China due to excessive casualties. Americans are democratic, and frankly intolerant to any sort of loss. Losing 1 million soldiers would be enough. Taking Japan would cause at least 10 million.

There were 40,000 kamikaze planes ready to attack the American invasion fleet, imagine them attacking troop laden, slow transports with the advantage of cover, surprise, predetection, and close base proximity. The Japanese military had predicted correctly where both American invasions for Operation Downfall, not to mention the day Operation Downfall was planned, a storm passed through the route of the invasion.

If properly done the Japanese would have failed massively
Your looking at the 3 Allied powers womping on one island nation from 3 different spots.

While I do not have the exact troop locations on me (If you do I can get an invasion plan down for ya), The allied forces (including russia) would be splitting the japanese forces into 3 fronts. Add that in, plus bombers raining down on Tokyo from 3 different nations.
Japanese would have to jump over some major hurdles if they wanted to win a defensive battle.

While they were excellent at digging in, they're plans usually fell to holy hell once US troops made any sort of ground.

The war would have been a ********

It was unlikely Russia would have joined in, they have no navy, especially not in the pacific, and I highly doubt the Americans would be willing to help them in any manner. Not to mention there is nothing of strategic value in Hokaido.

The landing points that were planned was a landing in Tokyo and Kyushu, both right in places the Japanese prepared for.


Strategic bombings proved to be useless in Germany and Japan, causing more material loss then gain, indeed the fact that the Japanese decided not to even launch its aircraft against the bombers, preferring to keep them secret points to how utterly useless the bombings were besides killing civilians unvital to the war effort. Hence why the Germans and the Russians never bothered making any.

Also, all previous battles the American fought the Japanese were against 4 divisions at most. Okinawa was defended by 4 divisions, Iwo Jima by one. Japan had 170 Divisions at ready, and several more Civil Defence divisions made up of locals. Also remember that the invasion of those islands were against division WITH NO SUPPLIES INCOMING, yet it took how many months to take them?

Also, the Japanese terrain is much more suited to defence, being extremely hilly, mountainous, and forested. Tanks would be largely useless, giving the Japanese a huge advantage as they were largely infantry based.

All of this is ignoring the devestation the Kamikazes would have caused to the landing fleet. In Okinawa, only 5% of Kamikazes hit a target. In Kyushu it would have increased to 50%, as the pilots would know before hand where the enemy is, and would not have to expose itself to AA fire by flying high to find the enemy. Not to mention the Enemies close proximity would prevent the Allies from having an effective air screen, especially considering land airbases are vastly superior to naval aircraft carriers.

Again, the american people are intolerant to any casualties, the number of deaths piling up would force them to sign a peace treaty. Even if we assume they don't, what would prevent the USSR from signing a pact with Japan to fight the Americans as they are tied up in Japan, enabling the Soviets to rampage into Europe.

[Shou Eitoku]

FRF_Hentai_Heitai_Reborn

It was a nessecity, if atomic bombs were not used, the Japanese Empire would have won by causing so many American casualties that they sign a peace treaty when the public starts complaining about the deaths, ie Vietnam, Iraq.

Quote:

I have been reading up on relations between China and Korea with Japan. It turns out from many recent happenings in both China and Korea is that they share this hate against Japan. For what reason? Japan has use the Korean's as experiments during WWII. Japan has raped many as well as killed many in China (AKA Nanking.) Japan has also killed many Koreans and Chinese civilians as well as military personnel. Both countries feel that Japan hasn't personally apologized to them. Is this immoral in Japan's fault? YES!

The Japanese did not use Koreans in Scientific Experiments, they used Chinese prisoners. Korea was a Japanese colony for 40 years before WW2, they were treated as second class citizens, not slaves.

Also Japan has indeed apologised numerous times and gave compensation. The Chinese just enjoy bitching since they are communists. And the Koreans have no jusification whatsoever as no atrocities beyond colonial policing were imposed on Koreans.

They both perceive it as unofficial because of the actions the Japanese still do. In most wars there is an apology, and there IS an apology in the lines of war reparations I suppose. A few still visit the Kazuhino Shrine (the current prime minister is standing clear from it though) that is highly controversial. It houses the dead of the war criminals during WWII. The fact that Japan occupied Korea and parts of China is enough of a justification for Korea. I really do not know much about South Korea other than that they share similar resentments with Japan though. The three countries ARE trying to make some peace out of this situation, especially with North Korea and its nuclear tendencies.

Japan also mask's some of it's darker history (especially WWII) and making it sound like Japanese nationalism, I won't debate over this because I am 100% sure that China also has it's own history smothering, but if Japan really wants better relations with China, than Japan needs to fix some stuff.

And yes thanks for correcting me, guess I was incorrect in some fields, but the issue is still out there that South Korea and China are having tensions with Japan.

Dispute over territories near South Korea, Japan, and China. Some islands that South Korea claims as theirs are also claimed by Japan, parts near the Ryukyu Islands are also in some extent claimed by China (Sea routes, etc.)

I am just saying that war is what caused this neutral , I think I should minor in East Asian Studies -.-... I don't like this tension especially when I want to visit and possibly live in those three respective countries for a while.

[Steamcog System]

We should have dropped something better. Like, a bunch of pink fuzzy teddy bears. To show them that we care, and that we don't like the war, and want it to end. That we want to promote peace and tolerance, in addition to freedom. That we can work things out diplomatically instead of militarily.

And then that's when we drop the bomb, when they least expect it.

[Damnati]

Japan was not going to surrender. The closer we got to the mainland of Japan, the harder the fighting was getting. And not due to inherently better defenses. The soldiers were fighting ahrder.

And here's an interesting point. My friends grandfather was part of a special demolition squad. Today, they would be part of the special forces, black ops. One of their jobs was to demolish a money printing factory. The Japanese had been printing money for all the nations it planned to take over. to have a new currency. They hadbills for Korea, China, Vietnam, India, America, Canada, Mexico, and more. In fact, he has one of possibly 4 binders of every bill the Japanese were printing. A souvenir I guess.

The Japanese were quite serious about their intentions. And they intended to fulfill them.

The book Code Talkers, while it is fictitious (it follows no real person), is factual in the events and data it portrays, merely from a fictitious viewpoint. The Japanese were enmassing thousands of kamikaze planes, boats, and vehicles, in case the mainland were ever attacked. Millions of Japanese would have died, as would millions of Americans, in just the first few days of fighting.

However, there was an alternative. But it would have taken longer. bat bombs.

While PETA would hate the idea today, it was the single msot effective weapon against Japanese cities, made primarily of wood. What they were, was that a bomber would fly overhead, and a few dozen thousand bats would be released (the mechanics of how are slightly complicated. Wont bother getting into it). Each bat would have a timer and some napalm (was invented just for this purpose, but later was re purposed). They would be timed for shortly after daybreak. The bats would wake up, see the sun about to come out, and find places in the city to roost. And at sunrise, tens of thousands of fires would start across the city, in places hard to see, in these wooden structures. They would be small, but in attics, on overhangs, and other places that are hard to see, making it so the fires are well matured by the time they're noticed. While at the same time, giving residents time to escape. And the sheer number of fires would make them impossible to fight off. A single bomber would level an entire city, with notably fewer casualties. It was proven when, during a trial, a mistake happened, and the abts woke up too soon. Going to roost in the buildings at the test facility. Even knowing the fires were about to erupt, and they were prepared, the entire facility burned down within an hour. It was incredibly effective.

However, it would take time. And America wanted to show it was the strongest. That it was not to be messed with. And, I believe, they wanted to get even for Pearl Harbor. So as the project neared its completion and was ready to be done on a large scale, it was shelved. A few months later, the Bombs were dropped.

So were they one of the best options? Of course. Thousands, instead of millions. But they weren't the only choice. Japan would have been damaged far more, but far fewer would have died, if the abt bombs were used. Not to mention, the Cold War could have been avoided, if the bombs were kept secret. Which, based on how well they kept the entire project secret, could have been done fairly easily.


I would like to point out that every historian and military commander says that invasion of the Japanese mainland, even with multiple nations, was not an option. Saying ten million Americans would die in the attempt was a number smaller than it really would be (how many battles have we really fought where we lost less than expected?). the entire population was brainwashed to fear and hate the Americans. And they had years to build up an incredibly strong homeland security. Not to mention, attacking an island nation is one of the hardest offensive battles to be fought. Point in case, the Nazi's being unable to attack England directly (Operation Sealion anyone?), even though they had one fo the finest military forces in the world.

[Damnati]

Steamcog System

We should have dropped something better. Like, a bunch of pink fuzzy teddy bears. To show them that we care, and that we don't like the war, and want it to end. That we want to promote peace and tolerance, in addition to freedom. That we can work things out diplomatically instead of militarily.

And then that's when we drop the bomb, when they least expect it.

Americans sent tokens of good will to Japan. Know how we got them back? Clipped to the shallow water torpedoes that attacked Pearl harbor.

Even if we dropped them wads of cash, they wouldn't have slowed down for an instant.