Hiroshima And The Atomic Bomb

[chriso_cd 0]

so my class mates and i recently had an assignment related to the justification of the atomic bombing of japan in WWII, and i thought it would be interesting to spread this topic and see some different views on this! so here are the facts:After August 6th and 9th of 1945, the world began to question the leader of the most powerful nation in existence, for his decision to use a weapon so unimaginably powerful against the country of Japan, to end World War II and restore peace in the world. Despite the loss of life and utter destruction of the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the decision to bomb was justified in salvaging American lives by preventing an invasion of Japan, Ending World War II, and in pure retaliation after the monstrous surprise attack on the United States Naval station in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. In the preceding weeks before dropping the first bomb, President Truman and other allied leaders issued an ultimatum from Potsdam stating the terms of surrender of the Japanese military. It was announced that, ignoring this would result in "the inevitable and complete destruction of the Japanese armed forces and just as inevitably the utter devastation of the Japanese homeland". After japan ignored this ultimatum, treating it as a bluff, president Truman evaluated his options: possibly lose millions of Americans in an invasion of the japanese mainland that would probabily last months and cost millions of dollars, or drop one bomb and end the war in days at the cost of no american lives. When the options were weighed and the predictions of the after affects of the bomb were considered, the order was given to bomb.Adding to this justification, the complete destruction of the japanese mainland and the incredible loss of life, contributed significantly to the ending of the war with Japan for many reasons. First, it instilled fear in Japan. When the world realized the damage the United States could cause with just one plane and one bomb, it could be said that most of Japan alone ?lost their stomach for the war?. Second, by carefully selecting the cities for destruction, the japanese military would be at a great disadvantage in supplies, man power and will. Because of these reasons, the war with Japan was quickly resolved and peace treaties were signed within the week of the bombing. Finally, the bombing was justified solely because Japan bombed the United States first! Like it or not, it could be compared to a rivalry between siblings, he hit me first, so I hit him back! As immature as that sounds, consider the United States? standing among other countries in the world. As of World War II, the US was the most powerful country in the world, not counting the Soviet Union, and with Europe in shambles, and still recovering from the first world war there was no one left. Point being, the US could not just invade and drag out the war, much less, do nothing! It was important that we showcase our power, and instill fear throughout the world, to let everyone know that when we say we mean business, that we mean business. By instilling fear of nuclear war, peace was reinstated and the US was taken seriously. Conclusively, it?s very easy to see, even when considering opposing sides, that using an atomic bomb on Japan was vindicated by not risking American lives, quickly ending the war, and in retaliation. The majority of the people i have heard from seem to be split 50/50 on this topic - justified or not.... so any response is welcomed, --- please show you opinion on this!!!

[kudmus 0]

I don't see how a normal person in his right mind can say such ruthless killing of inocent pple is justified. Taking other lives to save lives at home is one of the selfish decisions politicians are forced to make but who said some people are worth killing. If America had to kill inocent Japanese people(women and children included) just because they had some diferences at government level then I think it's very easy to justify 9/11. Anyone can say "America hit us first, so we have to hit them harder". There are a few antions in this world that have not been affected by America's cruelty in one way or the other. Besides, is anyone supposed to suffer for being ruled by a hot head? It's that kind of thinking that is making me and other Zimbabweans suffer. We are denied access to a lot of things online because almost every sane leader in the world hates our president. We hate him too. He has mae our lives miserable by taking away our liberties, killing our industries, bringing our economy to it's knees and denying us the chance to choose another leader. How are we supposed to feel about all this? On top of the pain I can't get access to PayPal, internet.com and other cool sites simply because I'm in a sunctioned country.

At fisrt we welcome the sunctions because they were said to be "targeted sunctions" imposed on Mugabe and his allies but now they are affecting us more than him.

So next time before you justify an act of cruelty think about the affected people and remind yourself that those guys are people like you. People who also want a good life. I'm literally crying as I'm writing this. I mean there are tears on my cheeks right now.

You wouldn't want to dye for what Bush did to Iraq, would you?

Think about it.

[kasm 0]

so my class mates and i recently had an assignment related to the justification of the atomic bombing of japan in WWII, and i thought it would be interesting to spread this topic and see some different views on this! so here are the facts:

 

After August 6th and 9th of 1945, the world began to question the leader of the most powerful nation in existence, for his decision to use a weapon so unimaginably powerful against the country of Japan, to end World War II and restore peace in the world. Despite the loss of life and utter destruction of the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the decision to bomb was justified in salvaging American lives by preventing an invasion of Japan, Ending World War II,

.......

The majority of the people i have heard from seem to be split 50/50 on this topic - justified or not.... so any response is welcomed, --- please show you opinion on this!!!

1. No justification to killing civilian in war. Yes Japan has bad history not only to the American but all region including my Australia. They wanted take Australia and ending the war saved Australia. But America have to battle the soldiers not the civilian.

 

2. Why the Geneva Convention then?

 

3. Why they don't kill the prisoner of war and abide with rules.

 

4. Why we blamed Saddam Hussein?

 

5. Why we blame Palestinian who invited these suicide bombing in Israeli cities. Why we didn't find to them execuse. That people occupied for 40 years and haven't tanks and airplanes.

 

6. There is things not by voting and say 50-50.

[Janissary 0]

...Ending World War II, and in pure retaliation after the monstrous surprise attack on the United States Naval station in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.

I think you are using word monstrous as "i]large scale[/i] right? Not as evil act. Because I think PearlHarbor raid can be justified easier than the nuke bombing.

 

USA was an important player in WW2 even before entering it. All the fronts are equally evil in my mind. Because all of them entered to war in hopes of getting stronger by stealing from other. Politicians and people back in that era were still thinking as they're in age of empires.

 

In WW1 when OttomanEmpire lost the war. The winning side wasnt interested in peace or anything. All they want is resources, that's why they forced Turk authorities with not-acceptable peace treaties even after Turks gave up all their goals.

 

In WW2... Japan was in no-condition to fight back but also no way near to accept un-acceptable treaties. That's why they were nuked.

 

I cant easliy blame USA politicians. After all, they lost so many resources because of Japan and if Japan were to victorious they would too try something similiar. As I said, back in days we, humans are all bad.

 

I hope we are better now. In conclusion today's people and leaders should never think the option of targeting civilians, never again. The Hiroshima is a sin for all man kind. Admit it, we would all hit the red button to save our butts. We could even do worse things during war times.

 

But what it hurts me most. Today some people dont see Hiroshima as a bad thing and I even remember a person saying "I like Bush because he's kind of man who dont afraid to use the nukes again if necessary." Maybe he's a extreme example but still more or less there are people still thinking a nuke as an option.

 

Something like a nuke can only be necessary if alien mothership on its way to enslave humanty.

 

Oh, oh... Why is the 2nd bomb? To send a message of "yeah, we can redo it again and again"

Edited June 13, 2008 by Janissary (see edit history)

[iGuest 3]

CommentHiroshima And The Atomic Bomb

Kudmus,

I definitely agree with you and I know how you feel because I come from a country that was also affected by the cruelty of the US politics and bombed first by US in 1995 and then by NATO in 1999...My beautiful country Serbia where many innocent people lost their lives so there is no way in hell anyone can tell me that his can be justified...It's all about the politics and power, they don't care who they run over and kill in the process as long as they get to the oil or whatever it is that they're after... Some people just need to open their eyes and start reading and traveling more  before making comments about certain issues that they know nothing about...

Kudmus, I will keep you in my prayers and hope that some day you are free to access to anything you need.

-reply by Comment

[iGuest 3]

The tradgedy of Hiroshima and the dogmatic chase for freedomHiroshima And The Atomic Bomb

Justifying the actions of america with foolhardy Americans running the show is a hard case to develop or show to anyone without being told "there must have been a better way".

 ScarilyEnough, though I hate the thought of innocent people dieing for anyCause, the advent of the nuclear bomb being used when it was usedEither by fate or by the intervention of God Himself, probably savedThe entire world from nuclear holocaust. The other major powers at theTime who were not friendly with America were also on the verge ofDeveloping the technology as well. Some say they were within weeks ofDeveloping one. Should one of the bombs have been released when theOthers were already developed, we would have all struck each other withOur greatest new weapon and possibly entire countries would have beenDevastated before we stupid humans came to an agreement to stop beforeWe ran out of livable space.

 Now I know this is all theoreticalAnd it's hard to accept since it didn't happen and the "It could haveBeen worse" scenario never seems to cut it, but it is naive to condemnAn action without thinking what might have happened should not theEvents of the past occurred.

 

As far as holding currentResentment towards Americans in today's culture I think is also aMistake. Americans do not desire the killing of others.The people ofAmerica for the most part are extremely pacifist until threatened.Especially with the devastating power of weapons of today, even idleThreats of using chemical or nuclear weapons demands action to prevent the tragedy of mutual destruction.We no longer live in the Cold War era,But I can not even describe to you the mass fear of that time of hopingOne country does not finally fire the first nuke at another. Once one nuke is sent to another country and causes mass devastation, it's the beginning of hate and fear that will annihilate almost all of us until we cannot kill anymore.

ConsequentlyIt is smart to remember that America is another country living in fearOf what can happen. America started this engine of potential massDevastation, but likewise they try to keep that engine stalled with allTheir might.

Should you live in a country where you hateYour leader, and you hate America even more because America oppressesYou because of that leader, then fight for freedom. It's an AmericanMotif. Americans will not live under oppression. Squeeze too tight andThe people snap and do stupid things to get free again. Americans haveShed their own blood, killed their brothers, killed others all with theDeclaration of being free. They as a whole would rather die than liveIn a cage.

 

It's a sad sobering fact. The price of freedomIs high. Americans have been taught that since they were little. I hateKilling. I want the world to live freely as well. I hate it when aHuman cannot understand another and it leads to each other confiningEach other. If I had the money, I'd pay for everyone I could get aholdOf to find a way to a free place. But some people are screwed up. HowDo you deal with someone who is willing to kill to keep others underOppression? Do you negotiate with them and ask politely to stop? Or doYou finally get fed up with it and set down your foot and tell them toSTOP, get out of here, or things are not going to be the same?

It'sHard to grasp everyone's situation. We all just want to live and livePeacefully on equal terms with everyone else. So what do you do aboutIt to get there? Do you just dream or do you fight for it?

This is how an American thinks.

Sorry I got so way off topic :-). I believe in love and in God, and I fight against acts of war all I can.I believe killing to find your freedom is wrong, but I also believeLiving under oppression without shouting out is also wrong. If you'reSurrounded by darkness and you know it, you have to shine a light. 

InThe case of Japan and Hiroshima, killing the citizens was wrong, butThe citizens were the supporters of the government regardless if theyWere forced to or not. If they were truly against it, they needed toRise up against that government. If they didn't rise up, then it's theSame as saying they are fine with what the government was doing. ThatIs the risk of not shouting out and being a light. If you are not aLight then you are the same as the dark and you may be swept away withThe dark when the light comes.

I'm not condemning the citizensHere. I'm just saying that this event is nothing more than the pastNow, and it is something we must reflect on with respect to see all ofWhat went wrong to lead to such a horrific event. Knowing what wentWrong is the first step to not making the same mistake again.

-reply by Diniden

 

[iGuest 3]

Alternatives to Atomic BombingsHiroshima And The Atomic BombThere was only one peace overture authorized by the "Big Six" running the Japanese Government. That one peace feeler was rebuffed by the USSR. The planned invasion would have likely resulted in much greater loss of life than the A-bombs, for both Allies and Japanese. The Japanese could not win the war, but the ?Big Six? were absolutely committed to a last ?Decisive Battle? (Ketsu-Go). They believed that the war-weary Americans would agree to (unreasonable) demands by the ?Big-Six? that the militarists remain in charge in Japan and that they be allowed to retain some possessions, such as Korea and Formosa and they be allowed to try their own war criminals. Not all senior officers would have chosen the bomb, but none of them thought we should have allowed the militarists to stay in power.So what else to do? By 10-01-1945 the occupation authorities declared that 10 million Japanese were near starvation. No surprise since the Japanese Cabinet knew of the starvation probability in the Spring of 1945. Therefore continuing the very effective Naval Blockade would likely have resulted in many more civilian deaths. Or Truman could have let the Russians invade. The Japanese Cabinet never discussed surrendered to anyone, except with these unreasonable demands to stay in power.Truman Administration knew this because they were reading not only the Japanese secret messages, but also those of thirty foreign nations, some of whom were our allies. In 1995 the rest of these secret Japanese intercepts of military and diplomatic traffic were finally declassified.I suggest viewers here read "Downfall" by Richard B. Frank. The detailed assessment of these important questions is very even-handed. If you are a busy person, at least do yourself a favor and read the reviews at Amazon.-reply by NavyHelo

[iGuest 3]

no justificationHiroshima And The Atomic Bomb

I've been to hiroshima in japan and the bombing there was completely un-justified. The american goverment knew japan was going to attack them before they did, there is proof of this, and pearl harbour was a military base meaning all people there were willing to risk their life for their country. Hiroshima was not and is not a military base, its a city like every other. Full of civillians young and old. If you/your teacher/most of the american people went to the memorial site to see some of the remains of childrens clothes and toys and hear some of the stories the people who lived through it had to say you'd see there was no justification. Children skin melted off there body because of the heat, and sure as hell children weren't a threat to america were they? the government took the cowards way out and played dirty, not to say that the japanese were completely innocent, but the children and civilians were. So in short there was NO justification for the A-bomb.

[iGuest 3]

HiroshimaHiroshima And The Atomic Bomb

Is there a death count in the Hiroshima bombing? I've heard a few estimations, but is their an actual body count? I'm writing a paper for school and would like to know. 

-reply by Phina

[iGuest 3]

I feel exactely what you are saying. In fact killing of people can not be truely justified. In fact nobody has a right to kill Bin Laden but people have the authority to put him in jail because he is a danger to other peoples lives.

 But you need to digest the situation that forced United states to drop the bomb. Even though United States chose  a land invasion of Japan, more Japanese than those killed inby the atomic bomd would have. Man there was no way out. For United States unless of course you propose that it should have kept quiet by not avenging or retariating when Japan attacked. Serious Imagine this. It is impossible man .If the president tried this, he would have been impeached (throught out of power).And another one would have been elected.

The way you talk about peoples' death, I get the feeling that the men who were massacred in pearl harber also didn't deserve to die just because they were soldiers because they are not less human than civilians.  I also have a question.How do Japanese justify this too ?. They can't either. Besides US was seriously negotiating with them and  they pretended to show dislike for war but went behind their backs and bombed pearl harbor.

The world is crazy. US had to protect I's self so that nothing of that sort happens again. You US is only a counrty just like Zimbabwe, they tried their best to limit causaulities. Beleive me, that was the lowest posible number of causualties because Japanese just couldn't surrender.

It is sometimes tough to say that they made the best possible available decision. I am not a huge fun of United States because they enslaved my forefarthers but you have to admit that they were right on the Atomic bomb. It's tough that some innocent people died but more would have died anyway.

No country is like United States, Britain is not even clause. They made some mistakes in the past but atleast they try to fix them. I would have prefered the bomb to be dropped by some other country because most people don't take care to understand the whole situation. They quickly blame US for it. 

 

-reply by juko john

[iGuest 3]

question for JanissaryHiroshima And The Atomic Bomb

If terrorists were boming US cities one by one. Would you like it when the president went on television and begged for mercy when he has nukes to end the whole thing? 

Killing people is just wrong, it does not matter who is killed. it is just wrong. But what can we say , the world is crazy, tough decisions have to be made. 

-question by juko john

[iGuest 3]

Justification of A-Bomb useHiroshima And The Atomic Bomb

Although terrible that it was used on civilians, because it was used the world knows the horror and destruction an A-bomb has on the environment and civilization. Now mankind is probably more skeptical to use the weapon after WWII, which is probably why the bomb hasn't been used in war since 1945.Who knows without the bomb, perhaps Japan would have not given up and the world would be plagued with an oppressive, human right violating, war criminal ran totalitarian dictatorship in the pacific. Perhaps Japan would have been defeated without the bomb, but the soviet union without knowing the horror of the A-bomb would have used the bomb on the US or vise versa later on.

In the end the world is a probably a better place because the bomb was used, maybe the US could have picked another target. At least the Americans had the decency not to bomb Kyoto, which was a target but taken off the list because of its meaning to Japanese people. Anyways Japan shouldn't have bitten off more than it could chew by declaring war on the US in the first place

-reply by John

[iGuest 3]

saving lives and ending catastrophie go Paul Tibbets and Tom FerbereeHiroshima And The Atomic Bomb

The A-bomb is completely justified in my opinion because that is all I can speak for MY OPINION. We saved lives by not storming the beaches and getting slaughtered. We expressed our power and how far we would go to win. It was economically better. Started a new age of technology and weapons. It was payback for Pearl Harbor where we lost many troops and troops may be troops but they are still people. Killing around 120,000 people and saving supposedly Millions is enough reason for me to back it up.

-reply by Aakash

 

[iGuest 3]

I served with the U.S. Navy in Japan frm 1985 to 1997 and visited both Hiroshima and Nagasaki.I would implore those who view the atomic bombings as wrong to view Hiroshima as not a victim but a warning.It's not well known in the west just how opposed Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto was to a war with the United States. At one point in his career he had to be kept at sea to prevent his assassination by Imperial Army zelots who viewed the Western thinking naval officer as a traitor.Yamamoto made it clear to the Japanese high command that an attack on Pearl Harbor, while successful, would be an act of national insanity. He realized the eventuality of Japan's defeat and hoped until the final hour that war would be averted.It's sad Yamamoto died, he was the only Japanese with a mental capacity.The Japanese people allowed their government to drag them into a hellish war in China, a war that was costing the Japanese people dearly in lives lost. Then to further their madness, the warloads decided to attack the most powerful western nation on earth.Madness...utter madness. That's why we have the atomic dome in Hiroshima, not because of a so called U.S. war crime but because of a group of Japanese maniacs.I grew in my service there a deep enduring love for the people of Japan, for their martial history, for the principles of true Bushido...a way of life twisted and distorted for the use of the maniacs who led Japan to its ruin.Hiroshima is a warning against maniac leaders, like the current scumbags of Iran who are following the same road to national hell and dragging the Iranian people with them. It is Hiroshima all over again!The only criminals who deserve hatred and the absolute disgust of humanity are the scumbags now enshrined at Yaskuni Japan, the very maniacs who caused Hiroshima in the first place. That is the legacy Hiroshima leaves behind.SignedDaniel Rush USN RetiredDannavy85@yahoo.com

[iGuest 3]

It was never justified, and one can argue that the Allies were more wicked than the Axis, and as I say more wicked than the Axis, before you bring up the Nanking Massacre and such, don't forget that Britain had a brutal hold on their own colonies, and America was built on the genocide of 60 million Native Americans.Pearl Harbor was a valid military target, and almost all the people that died were military personnel. After that, the only American civilian deaths were 6 people from balloon bombs. Nothing else. On the other hand, America carried out mission SPECIFICALLY against CIVILIANS. American textbooks tend to skim over the firebombing and blockade, which utterly dwarfs the atomic bombings in death and devastation. In fact, Japanese overtures for peace came as early as 1943, and from then on they were frantically trying to surrender. America was deliberately vague in their surrender terms, and using the term "unconditional surrender" into keeping Japan from reaching a decision, for they were afraid that the Americans were going to humiliate, or even execute their emperor.The Potsdam Declaration was a big lie, just another ploy to keep the Japanese from surrendering and leaving out specific details. It did warn of utter destruction, but that's what the firebombing already DID, so the Japanese probably interpreted it as continued hostilities, hence preparing to fight to the end, they didn't expect it as a pair of instant massacres of innocent women and children. Even the Strategic Bombing Survey and several generals including MacArthur knew that the blockade and conventional bombing was enough.And also? on the day of the second atomic bombing, moments before the bomb was dropped, the prime minister announced to the population that the only choice left was to surrender. The Americans deliberately didn't give them enough time to see the damage and devastation.The truth is, the atomic bombing wasn't for ending the war, it was to show the Soviets what we could do, the atomic bombings wasn't the end of WWII, it was the start of the Cold War.