bombings on japan, were the really needed Options

[*mipadi*]

oh what, so bombing a military target isn't justified?

Not in all cases. Do we go around bombing every single military target? Of course not. So simply being a military target is not wholly justifiable. The fact of the matter is that we killed 70,000 or so civilians in Nagasaki alone, for what amounts to either a) a test of a weapon, b) a show of force, or both. One can argue that those civilians could have become guerilla warriors, but if we argue that the potential for becoming a soldier (of any variety) is justification for execution, then we're going to get a bit over our heads. If that's the case, then couldn't Germany claim that they were at war with Poland, so it was acceptable to gas Polish Jews, homosexuals, and Roma, because those people could have risen up against Germany? Where precisely do we draw the line on civilian and armed militant?

Also, the argument isn't about whether any bombing is justified--I'm speaking of the specific bombing of Nagasaki. Hiroshima was (arguably) a justifiable act of war, but again, I disagree with calling Nagasaki justified, for the reasons I have already outlined in above posts.

[*kryogenix*]

Not in all cases. Do we go around bombing every single military target? Of course not. So simply being a military target is not wholly justifiable. The fact of the matter is that we killed 70,000 or so civilians in Nagasaki alone, for what amounts to either a) a test of a weapon, b) a show of force, or both. One can argue that those civilians could have become guerilla warriors, but if we argue that the potential for becoming a soldier (of any variety) is justification for execution, then we're going to get a bit over our heads. If that's the case, then couldn't Germany claim that they were at war with Poland, so it was acceptable to gas Polish Jews, homosexuals, and Roma, because those people could have risen up against Germany? Where precisely do we draw the line on civilian and armed militant?Also, the argument isn't about whether any bombing is justified--I'm speaking of the specific bombing of Nagasaki. Hiroshima was (arguably) a justifiable act of war, but again, I disagree with calling Nagasaki justified, for the reasons I have already outlined in above posts.

Nagasaki was a military industrial center. Bombing it would be one more nail in the coffin. It's not like the Polish Jews were mass producing arms in their houses.

[*mipadi*]

Nagasaki was a military industrial center. Bombing it would be one more nail in the coffin. It's not like the Polish Jews were mass producing arms in their houses.

That's really just a tiny portion of my argument. It in and of itself is not necessarily supportive of my claim, but combined with all the reasons I listed in that same post and prior to that post, it makes a valid claim.

[sadolakced acid]

The error returned was:

Flood control is enabled on this board, please wait 30 seconds before replying or posting a new topic

none the less, nagasaki was a military target. it was hit in a state of open warfare, and thus entirely justified.

[*mipadi*]

none the less, nagasaki was a military target.  it was hit in a state of open warfare, and thus entirely justified.

Maybe legally, but morally and ethically? I think not.

[sadolakced acid]

Maybe legally, but morally and ethically? I think not.

it was moral, it was ethical.

now, if the bombing was after their surrender, then no.

but it was still in a state of open warfare. it wasn't like the japanese, where they attacked when there was a premise of peace.

[*mipadi*]

it was moral, it was ethical.

now, if the bombing was after their surrender, then no.

Arguably so, but my argument is that, given that it Japan was on the verge of surrender, and there was no need to drop a bomb and kill tens of thousands of civilians, it was not a necessity.

Your argument may stand if we had attacked only military personnel, but that was not the case.

[sadolakced acid]

Arguably so, but my argument is that, given that it Japan was on the verge of surrender, and there was no need to drop a bomb and kill tens of thousands of civilians, it was not a necessity.

Your argument may stand if we had attacked only military personnel, but that was not the case.

was it fully known that japan was truely on the verge of surrender? was there no doubt that it was really the verge of surrender, and not some sort of fake-wounded ploy to launch a massive attack?

[*mipadi*]

Testimony and other evidence shows that Japan likely planned to surrender, especially after the bombing of Hiroshima.

[sadolakced acid]

Testimony and other evidence shows that Japan likely planned to surrender, especially after the bombing of Hiroshima.

testimony and evidence avalibe at the time?

if the japanese were going to surrender after hiroshima, why didn't they?

[*mipadi*]

if the japanese were going to surrender after hiroshima, why didn't they?

The details of a surrender were in discussion.

We gave them three days. Has government been known to do anything in three days?

[sadolakced acid]

The details of a surrender were in discussion.

We gave them three days. Has government been known to do anything in three days?

japan declared war on the US a hour or so after pearl harbour.

mayhaps they could have declared surrender an hour or so after hiroshima.

[*mipadi*]

japan declared war on the US a hour or so after pearl harbour.

Yeah, you're right. I bet it wasn't even until Pearl Harbor that Japan even thought about declaring war on the US.

[sadolakced acid]

Yeah, you're right. I bet it wasn't even until Pearl Harbor that Japan even thought about declaring war on the US.

so?

yea, it was suppose to be right before the pearl harbor attacks but war is war.

[*kryogenix*]

The details of a surrender were in discussion.

We gave them three days. Has government been known to do anything in three days?

It doesn't matter. We gave them an ultimatum. They responded with mokusatsu. If they wanted to avoid further destruction, they would have surrendered then and there.

[*mipadi*]

It doesn't matter. We gave them an ultimatum. They responded with mokusatsu. If they wanted to avoid further destruction, they would have surrendered then and there.

Was it mokusatsu, or did we misinterpret their response?

[*CrackedRearView*]

Well, I'm not going to repeat everything I've said in this thread. I'll just dash it out.

- 150 civilians were killed at Pearl Harbor (an unnecessary by-product).
- The Japanese tenacity was halted (essentially, we prevented them from overexerting themselves in war).
- We played a key part post-Hiroshima in giving Japan a key position in the world economy.

So, I guess I'll just reiterate the fact that I think it was necessary to drop them.

It's a shame that the bomb on Nagasaki missed its target. We're still kicking ourselves for that.

[ikayto]

Well, my history book taught me they made the decision to drop the two bombs to save american lives. The closer they got to the main land of japan, the more and more lives of american soldiers were lost. So to cut down time, and lives they used their new toy to show the world our strength.

The japanese didn't surrended when we dropped the bomb, they surrendered sometime later when Russia got involved.

I think it was just a quick decisive way to end the war.

[*kryogenix*]

Was it mokusatsu, or did we misinterpret their response?

That's irrelevant. Whether or not it was mokusatsu, or they were still planning on the surrender, they delayed. We wanted a response. They didn't.

[DrSMooTH]

it was a fast and effective response to the japanese threat of america. now, i don't argee with the millions of deaths and serious injuries it caused, but it did make the japanese a little more aware of what they were dealing with, which had an effect on their decision to surrender.

[*Statistik*]

Of course.

[*CrackedRearView*]

Of course.

Why do you do that? Why do you go into decent forums and trash them with your mindless spam?

Did you forget to take your meds again?

[Chii]

well... the bombs DID make the japanese surrender...
but i feel sorri for all the innocent civilians there...
stupid government. x]
just like the samurais in the last samurai!! [haha i just saw that.... x] goood movie]

the US dropped flyers in advance telling the japanese to get out of hiroshima because they were going to bomb it but the japanese were like "yeah whatever."

call me biased but i think they deserved it.

being killed by an atomic bomb is nothing, you just die in a matter of seconds. this may be a bit off topic but that's nothing compared to what japan did to china and korea a handful or years prior to the bombing.

the japanese army was given orders to rape everyone female in china's old capital, nanking. it didn't matter if the female was 3 or 93...and they were also taught how to stick a bamboo stick up a girl's vagina and rip out her insides.

i think that's why my boyfriend's mother's family had to relocate...she still doesn't even know where any of her family is. and japan has never apologized for what they did to china. it's all in this book rape of nanking

the koreans were taken as slaves to work in japanese factories while the japanese fought in the war. some koreans were "comfort women" and were forced to have sex at least 100 something times a day with soldiers. those koreans are still in japan because their honor is destroyed.

horrible things should happen to horrible people.

[zepfel]

it was a fast and effective response to the japanese threat of america. now, i don't argee with the millions of deaths and serious injuries it caused, but it did make the japanese a little more aware of what they were dealing with, which had an effect on their decision to surrender.

im fairly sure there are better ways to show the japanese what they were dealing with than killing and mutialating thousands of innocents.




in response to chii's "they dropped flyers warning them," what would you do? my reaction would probably have been: nobody could possibly commit an act so evil - theyre just bluffing.

[sadolakced acid]

^ the japanese knew people could do something that terrible. they did it all the time. it was thier tactic.