Was Hiroshima Necessary?

[Woahify]

NOTE: This is a touchy subject, so please be respectful.


I believe it was not at all necessary, I will state my main points. Please bring up any flaws you see, and debate!

1. Japan was already in a state of defeat. Their military was defeated to a whim, as was their air force and navy. They were surrounded by the US with their island hopping technique. Japan knew the war was wrapping up by April 1945, and an Ally victory was due.

2. Japan was not really given a fair warning at all. They were just told that they would be given "complete and utter destruction." Yeah, everybody tells that to their enemies when in a war.. They didn't even bring up talks of a new, destructive weapon until TWO WHOLE DAYS after the first bomb.

3. Japan was actually looking to end the war. There was a leaked cable message by Hirohito on July 12, 1945 stating that he wanted to end the war on the condition he wouldn't be charged of war crimes. Japan didn't surrender only because they were afraid the emperor would be charged of war crimes, then executed, or simply gotten rid of.

4.It didn't save millions of American lives as stated by Truman. Military experts estimate around an actual 46,000 American deaths. This was if they invaded BOTH Kyushu and Honshu!

5. Americans did it.. because they were Japanese. The atomic bombs were to scare Russia. By the end of the war, Russia had risen as the big Communist power, and American hysteria had kicked in. Dropping an a-bomb on Russia, wasn't justified at that time, because it was a blatant move to start a war on Russia, and they were Europeans. Japanese were perceived as less than human. It is sad, but that is how it was.

6.To show companies what they invested in. During the research of the atomic bomb, much money was put in to the research - 2 billion USD. They didn't spend all this time and money on the atomic bomb to not use it.

7. To gain a foot hold on the Asia region. Think about it, Japan was the only imperialist power in the region. America had just defeated this imperialist power, so why not set up shop?



This is a horrible tragic event, and I am very embarrassed that my country did such a horrible thing...

 

[SevenStarsHK2N]

Was it necessary,

that depends on who you talk to.

Japan would not be the nation it was were it not for the unilateral and total takeover by the Americans.

Had there been any further delay in Japanese surrender, they would have been invaded by the Russians.
With everything that entails.

History would have been very different.

this:

3. Japan was actually looking to end the war. There was a leaked cable message by Hirohito on July 12, 1945 stating that he wanted to end the war on the condition he wouldn't be charged of war crimes. Japan didn't surrender only because they were afraid the emperor would be charged of war crimes, then executed, or simply gotten rid of.

Is the worst form of cowardice you can imagine.
This person must be without any honor what so ever. to let hundreds and thousands die just because you care about yourself.

The surrender was to be unconditional - his nation and people were threatened with "devastation" - the man who was supposed to lead Japan acted like a selfish frightened little child. If anyone in my family had been killed in those bombings i would spit on his grave.

 

[nahadef]

I say no. Never has there been a solid reason to deploy an atomic bomb on a civilian population. There's no rationalizing that sort of thing. It's now a part of history I hope is never repeated.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

I have to agree with def.

Killing a bunch of civilians did not end the war.

If it could have, then Japan would have surrendered after the firebombing of Tokyo in March, five months before Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which killed more people than either atomic bombing.

Americans just like to tell themselves that the A bombs ended the war and saved lives, so as to not feel like a tub of turds for indiscriminantly murdering women, children, babies and old men by flattening a civilian city totally against the rules of war, both written and in the spirit of them.

I expect this thread to get flooded with excuse after excuse because American denial on this subject is stronger than the Hulk. And its odd since none who wil ever post here had anything to do with it. So I was born in the same country as Harry S. Truman. So what? He was a MFing war criminal and mass murderer.

Sorry I cannot treat this delicately. Its not a delicate subject. Its about killing, and its about reality and denial.

Now, let the obfuscations begin. My prediction is that the point that the bombs did not end the war and obviously would not end the war will be ignored, and instead supporters will start with the excuses as to why America "had" to do it...despite the obvious fact that all that would be accomplised was more death of innocents, aside from the peripheral issues like scaring Russia.

 

[SevenStarsHK2N]

TBH I think the whole war was complete BS.

I think those from allied countries really don't have too much sympathy, simply because. the Axis powers tried to take over the world, destroy freedom, initiate genocide and create a fascist dictatorship which would have seen the suffering and butchering of Millions.
We only came into the ar because you guys were being dicks.

in essence - "you started, we finished it"

A ground offensive would have been much more costly in terms of lives, It would also have resulted in pretty much everything north of Tokyo now belonging to the Russians, lol if you live in North Japan now, boy imagine REALLY living in North Japan - and we all know how much the Russians like giving things back. oh yes and every woman in north Japan would have been gang raped.

One of the other issues is that Japan playing the "victim" card doesn't sit well. Imperialist Japan army had absolutely NO REGARD for human life.
I mean seriously - Imperial Japan did some down right sick and evil ****.

You tested biological weapons on innocent Chinese
the Americans tested Nuclear weapons on the Japanese

I think one has to be VERY careful when talking about war crimes and Japan.

Never in the history of humanity has such vile actions, been committed on such a scale, with such industrialization, to so many.

Again, the key for me is that the Japanese should have surrendered LONG before the bombs were dropped.
question.

Why should america have risked even 1 single extra soldier more than was entirely necessary?
Japanese forces were being routed - yet still no surrender
Japan was on the back foot, It stood no chance against the force of the Allies - yet still no surrender
Japan was offered the chance to surrender - yet they did not.
(were they perhaps planing to mount some kind of gorilla defense, which would have been very costly to Allied troops)
That would be the only reasonably conclusion you could draw.

Why then should the USA have risked their soldiers?
The Japanese did not listen to the situation in front of them
The Japanese did not listen to threats
They sure knew that the Bombs existed - but decided to call the Allies bluff

So I have a counter question.
Why should the Allies have risked the lives of their own young men with a costly and drawn out land invasion?

 

[Mark of Zorro]

Well that was not a long wait. Just as predicted.

 

[dsvlee]

Was it necessary? I do not know. But the soldier of US who dropped the bomb said he never regreted after he saw "what they had done to Chinese."
You gave so many reasons to support yourself. But I, even as a Chinese BELIEVE that , AMERICAN JUST WANTED TO END THE WAR.
Japan killed and raped Nanking, and made more than 300,000 citizens in less than 3 days. They killed 100s of thousands just for fun. And American threw the bomb killing 200,000 Japanese to stop war. So which do you prefer?

 

[dsvlee]

And when anyone who try to answer this questions, remember Chinese were still fighting with Japanese at that time, soldiers and innocent ppl were dying every minutes in Asia. Remember this, then you can give so "peaceful answer".

 

[nahadef]

dvslee doesn't surprise! China was hurt in the war, therefore hundreds of thousands of Japanese citizens deserved to die. What a savage. If he had his way, Asia would be war torn for the next millennia like the Middle East...

 

[Mark of Zorro]

But I, even as a Chinese BELIEVE that , AMERICAN JUST WANTED TO END THE WAR.

Here we go. The bombings did not end the war. But supporters will just keep acting like they did.

Japan killed and raped Nanking, and made more than 300,000 citizens in less than 3 days. They killed 100s of thousands just for fun. And American threw the bomb killing 200,000 Japanese to stop war. So which do you prefer?

None of the above.

There is no excuse for killing one group of people for the crimes of another group of people EVER. The Japanese at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not responsible for the Rape of Nanking, the bombing of Pearl Harbor or ANYTHING!

And the A-bombs STILL did not end the war!

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

Some misinformation here by the OP and Zorro (as usual).

The US was not the first to bomb civilians in their cities. That honor goes to the Germans in Spain and the Japanese in China. By war's end, all parties were using this tactic. At the time Hiroshima got plastered, the A-bomb was considered to be simply a better bomb for doing the dirty work.

When the US dropped that bomb, they weren't even sure it would work. Or how it would work. Certainly, the lasting effects of radiation poisoning were not understood.

The Japanese were previously attempting a negotiated end to the war, which would have let the military remain in charge. After years of watching the Japanese military at work, this solution was not acceptable to the Allies.

Our own military, based on its island-hopping experience, estimated to Truman that it would take more than a million soldiers and at least two years to complete a conventional attack on the Japanese main islands. At a cost of several million lives lost on both sides. A factor of ten over the lives lost at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Japanese people were indoctrinated to fight to the death or kill themselves, as occurred at Okinawa .

Use of the A-bombs was a terrible step, but one that was preferable to the alternatives.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

The US was not the first to bomb civilians in their cities. That honor goes to the Germans in Spain and the Japanese in China.

Not only is that a strawman, since neither of us said the U.S. was the first, its also a falsehood, since the proper term would be to "bombard cities", and its been done ever since the cannon was invented.

But I will take the time to say that two wrongs don't make a right and if you adopt the tactics of the Devil you may as well join forces with him.

Our own military, based on its island-hopping experience, estimated to Truman that it would take more than a million soldiers and at least two years to complete a conventional attack on the Japanese main islands. At a cost of several million lives lost on both sides. A factor of ten over the lives lost at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Several different sources in the military gave different estimates. You simply chose the most extreme one and its preposterous.

Further, it was not necessary to launch such an attack. Japan was about surrender and this was known.

The Japanese people were indoctrinated to fight to the death or kill themselves, as occurred at Okinawa.

That is not an excuse to kill babies and children.

Hell, it did not even pan out! Come on, you speak of this indoctrination, yet the Japanese surrendered. Its bizarre how people like you say they would fight to the death or commit suicide on one hand, then claim the threat of certain death by A-bomb made the surrender! Can you not see the paradox there? I don't know if you are trying bamboozle us or yourself!

Use of the A-bombs was a terrible step, but one that was preferable to the alternatives.

What alternatives? The A-bombs did not end the war!

As predicted, the supporters just keep dodging that fact! Japan was going to surrender anyway and it was known.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

Casualty estimates were based on the experience of the preceding campaigns, drawing different lessons:

In a letter sent to Gen. Curtis LeMay from Gen. Lauris Norstad, when LeMay assumed command of the B-29 force on Guam, Norstad told LeMay that if an invasion took place, it would cost the US "half a million" dead.[43]
In a study done by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in April, the figures of 7.45 casualties/1,000 man-days and 1.78 fatalities/1,000 man-days were developed. This implied that a 90-day Olympic campaign would cost 456,000 casualties, including 109,000 dead or missing. If Coronet took another 90 days, the combined cost would be 1,200,000 casualties, with 267,000 fatalities.[44]
A study done by Adm. Nimitz's staff in May estimated 49,000 U.S casualties in the first 30 days, including 5,000 at sea.[45] A study done by General MacArthur's staff in June estimated 23,000 US casualties in the first 30 days and 125,000 after 120 days.[46] When these figures were questioned by General Marshall, MacArthur submitted a revised estimate of 105,000, in part by deducting wounded men able to return to duty.[47]
In a conference with President Truman on June 18, Marshall, taking the Battle of Luzon as the best model for Olympic, thought the Americans would suffer 31,000 casualties in the first 30 days (and ultimately 20% of Japanese casualties, which implied a total of 70,000 casualties).[48] Adm. Leahy, more impressed by the Battle of Okinawa, thought the American forces would suffer a 35% casualty rate (implying an ultimate toll of 268,000).[49] Admiral King thought that casualties in the first 30 days would fall between Luzon and Okinawa, i.e., between 31,000 and 41,000.[49] Of these estimates, only Nimitz's included losses of the forces at sea, though kamikazes had inflicted 1.78 fatalities per kamikaze pilot in the Battle of Okinawa,[50] and troop transports off Kyūshū would have been much more exposed.
A study done for Secretary of War Henry Stimson's staff by William Shockley estimated that conquering Japan would cost 1.7-4 million American casualties, including 400,000–800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese fatalities. The key assumption was large-scale participation by civilians in the defense of Japan.[1]

But you know, there is a big difference between killing people who have picked up bamboo spears to try and kill you at the beach, even as you mow them all down with machine gun fire, and killing families in their own homes as they eat dinner with zero option for surrender. It disgusts me that people refuse to realize this and pump out excuses. And for what? To feel better about a decision we were given no voice in and no one from our families had a vote on, that happened before most of us were even born? Screw that! We are far enough away from it that there is no need for delusion whatsoever.

Yet, as I say that, some journalistic footage of the carnage at Hiroshima and Nagasaki has STILL not been shown to the public as it was locked away for censorship for the purpose of whitewashing and leaving the propaganda unchallenged. Puke inspiring frankly.

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

"It disgusts me that people refuse to realize this and pump out excuses."

You seem easily disgusted, about a lot of things.

 

[SevenStarsHK2N]

Part of the problem in today is actually that war does not involve the songle minded slaughter of civilians.

As was the case in WW2.

it allows people to be tricked into thinking that war is somehow anything other than horrific.

I always liked the quote.

"there can be no such thing as a war on terror, because war is terror"

the talk of innocent families killed in the hiroshima blast.

well what about the inoocent families who had their children taken away and forced to fight a war miles away from home?

The problem was - as correctly pointed out - that the Japanese were culturally against surrender.

This is why the initial US phsyops failed -

they dropped leaflets telling the Japanese to "surrender"

the sucess rate was near 0 -

however after some re working - the leaflets were dropped with "surrender" changed to "cease resistance" these new leaflets had the expected sucess rate.

take this text for example - instead of surrender - the term is come to an understanding

Officers and Soldiers of Japan

The battle you have put up has our sincere respect. We are quite confident, however, that victory will be ours, as in past operations. We have this confidence because of our officers and men, our superior scientific equipment, our artillery and our bombing.

When you left home, many thousands of miles away, you thought the Japanese would win. You have since learned that your planes and equipment are no match for those of the Allied forces.

Through the operations of our Air Force and navy, air and sea supremacy on the Pacific south of Taiwan belongs to us.

Because of this, it is impossible to move raw materials of military importance from the South Seas to Japan. Therefore, what is needed on the front line is lacking. For the same reason, the very moving of supplies to the front line is difficult.

We take it for granted, therefore, that you know you have no hope of winning. It is clear that your plight is not your fault but the fault of the army and navy staffs.

With the battle hopeless, what can you do? You can come to an understanding with our forces and preserve yourself for the rebuilding of Japan.

That was what Japanese officers and men on Guadalcanal and New Guinea did. They realized the futility of bloodshed and came to an understanding with us for the sake of their country after the war….

This crap about -

they tried to surrender...is nonsense...

the emperor could have surrendered all his forces in a single hour.
a single order for all men to lay down their weapons and ammunition and await capture.
for all navy vessels to dump their ammunition overboard - and cut their cannons.

but he didn't...did he.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

well what about the inoocent families who had their children taken away and forced to fight a war miles away from home?

Okay, just sos ya know, if I or anyone I know gets in any sort of scuffle with a Brit, I am going to come kick your @$$ 7stars, and beat up your kids too. Seems I will have to for my own protection, since once the first blow is struck, there are no innocents. And if your brother kills someone in my family, I will kill anyone in your family I can get hold of, cause, you know, what about ME? (sigh).

Makes about as much sense as cutting off your nose because your toes hurt. Nose rhymes with toes! Crazy town.

The problem was - as correctly pointed out - that the Japanese were culturally against surrender.

You keep forgetting that they did.

It makes zero sense to say that a people would rather die than surrender, then claim they surrendered because they were faced with death.

But I don't expect you to spot the painfully obvious contradictions in your words. Can't remember you ever doing it before.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

"It disgusts me that people refuse to realize this and pump out excuses."

You seem easily disgusted, about a lot of things.

This might surprise you...but most of what we talk about here is controversial and extreme.

I actually spend the bulk of my non-internet life undisgusted. You seem to suffering from a slight case of something similar to media bias.

 

[SevenStarsHK2N]

Okay, just sos ya know, if I or anyone I know gets in any sort of scuffle with a Brit, I am going to come kick your @$$ 7stars, and beat up your kids too. Seems I will have to for my own protection, since once the first blow is struck, there are no innocents. And if your brother kills someone in my family, I will kill anyone in your family I can get hold of, cause, you know, what about ME? (sigh).

I was including and actually referring to Japanese families.

The emperor and military elite started a war they KNEW would get people killed.

again - why should the allied have risked any more lives than absolutely necessary?

yes on the one hand, the Japanese army was so weak that as soon as it started actually getting attacked in seriousness it crumbled against the allies

lol they may have been on the same side as ze Germans, but the Japanese war machine didn't even come close.

The Japanese air defence was so weak, and got destroyed so quickly, that the Americans were rourinly conducting day-time bombing raids on Tokyo.

why did the emperor not surrender at this point?

why did he not do everything in his power to protect his people?

oh yea - because he was worried about himself,

worried that he might get pulled up for the actions HE took. for the war HE started.

like i said - were I to have a relative who died in the war - I would spit on his grave

 

[dsvlee]

dvslee doesn't surprise! China was hurt in the war, therefore hundreds of thousands of Japanese citizens deserved to die. What a savage. If he had his way, Asia would be war torn for the next millennia like the Middle East...

Nahadef, a Warcrime supporter comes again.
I have repeated many times that you may sound more civilized before you stop being rude.
I just said one can never forget TENs of MILLIONs of dead caused by nazy Japan, before you mourn for those dead in Japan.
Is it ridiculous that sb cried for nazys while not cared for victims killed by nazys?

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

"like i said - were I to have a relative who died in the war - I would spit on his grave"

My wife lost her father as a result of the war. He caught malaria while stationed in the Philippines, and died about ten years later from heart complications.

My wife's mother would never spit on the Emperor's grave, but she was so angry at the Japanese government for leading the country into war that she in effect spit in the government's face by refusing to accept the soldier's widow's pension to which she was entitled, even though she was left to raise three kids on her own.

Most Americans would have sought a measure of payback by going after as much compensation as they could get. But to this Japanese women, the best way to express her contempt was to refuse any help from the authorities.

 

[dsvlee]

Here we go. The bombings did not end the war. But supporters will just keep acting like they did.



None of the above.

There is no excuse for killing one group of people for the crimes of another group of people EVER. The Japanese at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not responsible for the Rape of Nanking, the bombing of Pearl Harbor or ANYTHING!

And the A-bombs STILL did not end the war!

Japan surrendered imediatly after bomed. And I didnot say those Japanese citizens should respond. I said you just cannot forget those killed by Japan nazy soldiers.

 

[dsvlee]

dvslee doesn't surprise! China was hurt in the war, therefore hundreds of thousands of Japanese citizens deserved to die. What a savage. If he had his way, Asia would be war torn for the next millennia like the Middle East...

Still, when you pretend to be a "peace lover". Donot say something like "Chinese were deserved to die because their government were evil, like culture revolution" or " Never to deploy a bomb on a japanese civilian population" stuff. This makes you more naive.
And you should know Nazy Japanese even send children & women to battle field. While Germany made 6 million Jews dead in Europe. Japanese made 30 million ppl dead only in China.
I repeat, Japanese even cut pregnant women's belly to take out their babies just for fun! So Japanese are truely not like Germany. Japanese nazy are animals. Germany were way better. You even used the word "civilized" to describe "Japanese at WWII".
Keep on insulting me by your "professional" English skill. Make me learning more words like "savage" or "dump", peaceful man.

 

[Elayne]

Japan surrendered imediatly after bomed. And I didnot say those Japanese citizens should respond. I said you just cannot forget those killed by Japan nazy soldiers.

Surrendering a week and a half after first bomb (Hiroshima) is immediate?

 

[dsvlee]

1st, Japanese are now still worshiping their war crimes at Yasukuni shrine every year, which means Japanese never care if their invasion was wrong or not. Even now, many Japanese still believe war victims deseve it and Japanese nazy are heroes. Every year, when Jews and German mourn victims in Europe. Some Japanese would wear nazy clothes to mourn Japanese nazy in Japan, acting like some serious illed psycho.
So everyone can imagine what Japanese nazy would be at WWII time. They were just histeric. At the year 1945, they had 5 million army together(although more than 3 million soldiers were children), and 1 million soldiers in China, 200 thousand in Korea and southeast Asia, the rest inJapan proper. Do you really think they could surrender?
2nd, although most Chinese hate nazy very much after WWII, but many orphans abandoned by Japanese was raised up by Chinese family. When some of them returned to Japan, they were even biased by their own ppl. I donot want to prove Chinese not hate Japanese. I just want to say because there are many races in China, Chinese can accept others more easily. So every time when a Japanese say"they have to own weapons because of Chinese's threat", this just slaps Japanese's own face. And make Japanese look like some terrorists to Chinese.
3rd, I felt sorry about your lose in nuke leakage accident. But I was wondering why Japan had built so many nuke facilities in such a narrow place? My gosh, 55 nuke station? Crazy nation. For 2000 yrs, you have never changed. Donot tell me Japanese are peace lovers. One day, the whole world will regret for bearing it. So here, I want to say American's nuke bomb did give Japanese a lesson. But Japanese could only learn this far. So I donot think some one have right to blame American, the teacher. The problem is why Japanese cannot get a good lesson from this.

 

[nahadef]

dvslee = racist