An act we never faced up to. Dropping two atomic bombs on Japan.

[Cyrano]

I was fortunate enough to have as a friend an elderly man who had fought in WWII. And he believed that nuking Japan was one of the worst crimes in human history.

There are those who sit in bars and talk about how, if we didn’t drop those bombs, a million American troops would have died invading the Japanese mainland. No one really knows or can know if this was true.

And there are others who believe, as did my friend, that it was unnecessary and perhaps the most barbaric act in human history. He believed that a nuclear demonstration would have been sufficient.

Before you respond to this thread, keep in mind that those two bombs were dropped on cities. They weren’t dropped on military installations. They were dropped on civilian populations – children, women, old people – two cities filled with human beings.

None of us can fully put ourselves back into that era and we couldn’t know how we would have felt about it at the time.

Since then, no nuclear weapon has been used. Perhaps the horror was/is just too terrible to deal with.

So let me get to the bottom line. There are some here on DU who were alive back then. Most of us were not. But whether you were alive or not, what are your thoughts about nuking a civilian population?

On edit: And the reason I ask this is because I have heard too many people say "We should just stop screwing around and nuke (fill in the blank)."

[Donny]

1. I faced up to it long ago.

[virgogal]

2. I was 12 years old and am ashamed to admit we all cheered when we heard about the bombings. It

meant people we knew would be coming home.

God,it seems so long ago.

What a horror.

[11 Bravo]

82. I'm 60 years old. I'm not in the least ashamed to admit that I probably would not be here ...

had not the bomb been dropped.
In 1944 my Dad was flying Hellcats off of an escort carrier, near Okinawa. They had already received a kamikaze attack and been torpedoed. His carrier limped back to Australia, while his squadron was transferred to another ship. He completed his tour, rotated back to the States, and was preparing to head back to the Pacific, when Japan finally surrendered. My odds of being around to type this would have been precipitously lower had not the bomb been employed. Otherwise, an invasion of the Japanese home islands would have been necessary. (And I seriously doubt that the Japanese would have diminished the ferocity of their suicide attacks knowing that their homeland was about to be overpowered.)

[virgogal]

84. Glad you're here. The Japanese would have fought to the last man and

the death toll would have been higher.

They were fighting for an emperor that they thought was a God.

I'm sure your Dad was pleased it ended when it did.Not many of that brave generation left.

[ZombieHorde]

3. Total war is a myth. The US intentionally targeted innocent people. nt

[Scruffy1]

7. I'm always amamzed how the standard lie goes unquestioned.

Even my father, who knew better, bought into it. I think that the truth was so horrible that the only way to deal with our own evil. was to ignore it.Yet I still the old chestnut repeated about a an invasion of Japan causing x casualties. No historian or military historian knows of any such plan to invade Japan or any official estimate. It was simply to test a new toy and to impress the Reds. Many years ago I asked my grandfather, who had been on the Army General Staff about it and his only reply was "It was evil."

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

8. Operation Olympic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Olympic

[Throd]

13. You believe the American military had no invasion plan for Japan?

They were going to stop at Okinawa?

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TheWraith]

51. Actually, the lie here is yours.

"No historian or military historian knows of any such plan to invade Japan or any official estimate."

This is so false, you might as well say the sun revolves around the Earth.

The plan for the US invasion of Japan was code-named Operation Downfall. It consisted of two major phases, Operation Olympic and Operation Coronet, each taking about six months.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall

The claim that the US use of nuclear weapons was a test has long since been debunked; the weapons had in fact been extensively and operationally tested long before they were sent into combat.

[hunter]

85. Atomic bombs hadn't been tested on living cities.

Plans for the conventional invasion of Japan were entirely moot with the successful Trinity test.

Nagasaki was an extremely well studied combat test of plutonium weapons. The USA knew these weapons were going to be the weapon of the future. The plutonium reactors at Hanford were built for the mass production of nuclear weapons. We had 120 "Fat Man" type bombs by 1949, despite the post-war refitting of the plants to make them more reliable and improve safety.

The U.S.A. wanted to know what these bombs would do to a city. The war provided the opportunity.

[Mendocino]

87. My father was a

Lieutenant jg. on LST-938. He knew and was briefed on all the plans necessary for his ships part in the invasion of the home islands.

BTW, If you go wiki and enter LST-938, there is a picture of his ship sailing into San Francisco Bay on their final return to the states.

[Romulox]

17. Who did the Japanese target, hmmm?

:silly: :hi:

[WinkyDink]

21. Our Navy?

[Romulox]

36. Oh dear. You seem to be unaware of Imperial Japan's genocide on the Asian mainland.

:eyes:

[ZombieHorde]

76. They targeted civilians. How do you feel about that?

How do you feel about targeting civilians?

I don't like it.

[Spider Jerusalem]

92. War industries, naval shipyards, and military depots.

Legitimate targets of war. The civilian deaths are regrettable, sure, but then I'm not certain how Nanking, the Bataan death march, the Japanese treament of prisoners of war, the medical experiments, forced labour, and so on weren't much worse.

[ZombieHorde]

95. What do you use as your moral compass? How do you determine right from wrong? nt

[Youth Uprising]

4. Hiroshima and Nagasaki where crimes against humanity.

There was no need to drop the bomb. The population of Japan where used as lab rats.

[AnOhioan]

9. Exactly...and as a warning to Stalin.

[JVS]

49. And to prevent Stalin and his Red Chinese buddies from getting all of China before Japan surrendered

[doc03]

15. What do you think Germany or Japan would have done

if they got the bomb first? How many people civilian and military would have been killed in an invasion of the Japanese mainland?

[WinkyDink]

23. You didn't read the entire OP, did you? Arguing for an imagined future is specious.

[themadstork]

53. Say I killed a few families with some new biochemical blight.

"But they may have done the same to me if -they- had instead acquired the biochemical blight!" As if that somehow excused what you yourself decided to do with the chemical agent.


Easy way to recognize cowardly moral excuses: if they attempt to distract from their status as a moral agent, a being that makes decisions. You did X, but it was in your power to do Y. Pointing to tons of other people doing X explains nothing about why you chose not to do Y. The objective of those who cannot answer for the decisions they make is usually to obscure the fact that they are a thing that makes decisions.

[JCMach1]

90. +1... anyone think Hitler would have spared London, or NYC?

There were already NAZI plans on the book to bomb NYC...

[Cid_B]

48. Oh God... you did it twice...

were.... WERE....

[Wait Wut]

5. How about not nuking...period?

But, if I have to answer the question as asked, I think it's unforgivable. However, even if we had nuked a military installation it wouldn't have made "that" much difference to the civilian areas. Japan is a small country.

My d-i-l is Okinawan so I've been going over this in my head a lot in the past few years. Especially considering her mother's initial refusal to allow her marriage to my son because of WWII.

[Nye Bevan]

34. I can understand the mother's position.

I would never allow my children to marry anyone from England, because of the War of 1812.

[Wait Wut]

59. Actually, I felt bad for her.

She lost her favorite uncle at the Battle of Okinawa along with a young cousin. Her family was torn apart and forced to move to another island. She hates the Japanese and American military equally. My son happened to be a Marine. She's changed her opinion, though. In a very humble and gracious way.

[cliffordu]

96. lol. Well played....

:rofl:

[MicaelS]

6. My opinion has always been

That if the bomb has been available 6-12 months sooner, or the war lasted 6-12 months longer, then Berlin would have been the first target. Those who now condemn the use of the bombs on Japan would not have said a thing about their use on Germany. Their attitude would have been that the dirty Fascists got what they deserved.

The Nazis were executing more people toward the end of the war in the concentration camps because they had perfected the mechanical means of the Holocaust. How many Jews, Poles, Gypsies, homosexuals and others might have been saved if the war in Europe had ended 6-12 months sooner?

Those scientists who worked on the bomb (many of the Jewish refugees from Hitler) did not seem to develop scruples until it was clear that Germany would no longer be the target. They knew for a fact that Berlin, and its civilians would certainly be the main target. They certainly didn’t have any concerns about German civilians being killed.

For those who cry moral outrage I see no difference between the fire-bombing of Dresden, Tokyo and other Japanese cities and the atomic bombings. Dead is dead.

The Japanese were just as bad as the Nazis. But too many people weep tears for the “victims" of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as if the Japanese did nothing to start the war in Asia. The Chinese suffered between 20-35 million casualties during the Japanese invasion of China (1937-1945). The Japanese forced Korean women into sexual slavery as “comfort women” in field brothels where the women were forced to sexually service, as many as 70 Japanese soldiers a day. In other words these women were raped 70 times a day for yeasr on end. Everywhere the Japanese conquered, they acted like barbarians toward Allied POWS and civilians. The Japanese beat, starved, tortured and executed men and women. They used living human beings as living test subjects in their infamous biological warfare Unit 731.

People these days find it easy to take some moral high-ground when they are not involved in a war to the knife for the future of civilization. Hindsight is easy.

Finally, I personally think if Truman had not used the bomb out of moral scruples, and Operation Downfall had gone ahead, then America would have suffered terrible casualties. The truth about the bomb would have come out. And I think Truman would have been impeached.

[apocalypsehow]

11. This pretty much covers my thinking on the subject, and has the added benefit of being historically

accurate and true. But that's a tough sell with the "Amerika wuz war criminal #1!!!!" crowd.

[cliffordu]

18. Yep. I agree completely.

[csziggy]

28. +1000000

[fishbulb703]

46. +1. Firebombings killed more people anyway, so it is essentially arbitrary.

[closeupready]

54. +1001.

nt

[pintobean]

63. Exellent post

Journal material.

[MannyGoldstein]

10. Eisenhower thought that dropping those bombs was wrong.

I was surprised to find that out.

Far more Japanese were killed in other bombings, though.

It was a big war, and war is hell.

[Rabblevox]

12. I would have authorized one, against a much smaller city...

My dad, uncle, and grandfather were in the Pacific Theater WWll.

The barbarisms committed by the Japanese equaled, and in many cases eclipsed anything done by the Nazi's.

A "ground war" in Japan would have been the most brutal, horrifying thing the world has ever seen.

They needed to be stopped, and stopped hard.

But one would have been enough.

[WinkyDink]

26. Well, those innocent civilians of "a much smaller city" just don't count, do they?

Nothing like arguing against war crimes by arguing FOR more, by "the good guys."

(Don't reply with any lecture; I'm WELL aware of Nanking, Bataan, and the Holocaust.)

[Rabblevox]

44. So you would have preferred a ground war? I can only assume you've never had a loved one...

in uniform during wartime.

And I can guarantee you've never worn one yourself.

[themadstork]

58. His not wearing a uniform means murdering civilians is okeydokes?

[Rabblevox]

62. No, of course not. But it DOES mean that if you have never been in combat, you should tread...

carefully.

The Japanese were PURELY the aggressive nation in the Pacific. I wish there had been another way to stop them, but I don't see it.

If you have any thoughts as to how the war in the Pacific could have been ended otherwise, I'm all ears.

[themadstork]

73. Don't really buy this. People are always trying to put whatever absurd requirements on

moral reasoning. Most likely he said something you didn't like, and instead of addressing what was said on the merits you chose to make "know your place"-type attacks on his character.

It would be quite convenient if the only people qualified to object to X act were those who have done X act. Makes the pool of those who find X to be unjustifiable practically vanish.

[comtec]

78. Do you know WHY the Japanese did what they did?

also don't confuse the peaceful Japanese of today with the Japanese of 60+ years ago.

Japanese is a beautiful, rich, and old culture.
but it's not peaceful.

If one people above all else have truly mastered the art of war, it's the Japanese.

Ive always wanted to live and work in Japan, the opportunity's never come up however.

I was raised in the bay area, with two best friends who were very Nipponji! so don't even try to pull the racist card on me gaijin baka aho!

However the reality is QUITE fascinating.
WWII was destined to happen exactly as it did.

And lick it or not, the Atomic attacks on the INDUSTRIAL cities/harbors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were VERY necessary.

Both to end the war fast (100k casualties vs 10's of MILLIONS) and to give Stalin a warning.

Make no doubt, if the Japanese had developed the nuke, the WOULD have used it without question or hesitation.

[themadstork]

79. How is this a response to what I said?

This strikes me as very bizarre, and I'm not sure why it was addressed to me.

[Romulox]

14. What were your friend's thoughts on the Rape of Nanking?

He seems like a wise man. He must have mentioned the Japanese genocide on the Asian mainland, no? :hi:

[WinkyDink]

27. What's your point? One war crime deserves another? Awesome logic, there!

[Romulox]

33. I wanted to hear this wise man's FULL perspective on the war. Seems he didn't look that deep.

:shrug:

[WinkyDink]

37. You wanted an essay, maybe? (Your disingenuousness is painfully obvious.)

[Romulox]

40. You are over-emotive and under-informed on this subject, it would seem. nt

[slackmaster]

16. You should be on how Thanksgiving celebrates genocide against Native Americans now.

Nuke guilt is for the last couple of weeks of July through August 9.

[cliffordu]

19. Yep - lol....

[Throd]

24. That's why I make my special pecan pie!

[WinkyDink]

31. Laughing about the FACT of genocide against indigenous peoples? For the sake of myth and turkey?

Nice.

Do you also think Washington could not tell a lie?

[slackmaster]

42. Who's laughing?

I'm talking about manners here. It's simply inappropriate to discuss the last century's military use of nuclear weapons after Columbus Day.

[Throd]

45. Not laughing at genocide, just amused by the annual hand-wringing at DU.

I also enjoy the Columbus Day, Independence Day, and St. Patrick's Day arm flapping on DU.

[WinkyDink]

20. I think, whatever the ostensible reason, it's pretty evident that both bombings were war crimes.

[JVS]

22. The atomic bombs definitely saved Japanese and American lives.

American lives were saved for the obvious reason of not needing to invade.

Japanese lives were saved because the preparation for invasion would have involved a lot more conventional bombing to soften up the target. Several hundred B-29s with conventional payloads were just as capable of wiping out those cities as 1 with an atom bomb. And such conventional bombing would have continued.

[WinkyDink]

29. What about "deliberately killing civilians is a war crime" do you not get?

[JVS]

43. The part where they deliberately targeted civilians.

During WWII the idea was that in order to defeat your opponent you had to destroy their industrial capacity. Air-raids at the time were justified in that manner. For example, Coventry had been one of the major centers of the British Auto industry and then tank industry when it was targeted. Same thing for the extensive Allied bombing of every major German or Japanese city. They wanted to starve the war machine of supplies. Of course, it was quickly learned that the accuracy of bombing was poor indeed and that civilians would inevitably get killed. Still, it was not as deliberate a targeting of civilians as the US would conduct in the Vietnam war when we bombed farmland with B-52s

[DinahMoeHum]

52. The notion that civilians are innocent and off limits in wartime went out the door

a long time ago. ON ALL SIDES.

Even before September 1, 1939.

It all goes back to ancient history and conquering empires.

World War II was unique in that it was the closest thing to total war.

Total war means total death. If it takes killing civilians and bombing cities to break their nation's will to fight, that's what goes on.

Oh, and BTW, even after 2 atomic bombs, some Japanese military people and politicians STILL wanted to fight on. It finally took Emperor Hirohito to step in and say, in effect: War's Over.


Sorry to step all over your genteel notions of fair play in wartime. That doesn't exist.

[themadstork]

56. Any other laws you want to declare nonexistent?

Because there's a TV in the local Walmart I've had my eye on. . .

[quaker bill]

69. Name the recent (last 100 years) war that did not involve it

All war is crime. (I do not favor what was done, but my father was in the intended land invasion force for mainland Japan, so I probably would not be here to complain about it if things went the other way)

[themadstork]

30. Shameful to see those still trying to justify it to themselves.

And not surprising that most their attempts are deflections, finger-pointing.

[taterguy]

32. We face up to it every August

October is when we argue about Guadalcanal.

[JVS]

47. Yeah, this thread is 2 months out of season.

[DinahMoeHum]

72. And I, for one, don't play this guilt-tripping crap.

n/t

[WinkyDink]

35. Ya gotta love the "we had to commit war crimes to stop the evil war criminals" argument.

:-P

[Romulox]

38. This is not a contest based on volume of comments. nt

[WinkyDink]

41. You can stop any time!

[G_j]

39. well stated

K&R

[closeupready]

50. Given the circumstances at the time, it was a correct decision.

But going forward, I am for total 100% denuclearization of the globe.

[DinahMoeHum]

55. Thank you! My sentiments as well.

:thumbsup:

[polly7]

57. I've never understood why densely populated cities were chosen

instead of military bases?

[Zanzoobar]

61. Easy. More dead people.

[polly7]

64. Obviously. What made them so sure Japan would surrender because

of the largest number possible of people nuked? What if he just didn't care, and still had the military bases to carry on? Doesn't make sense to me, unless they knew Japan couldn't have carried on anyway.

[Zanzoobar]

68. Which military bases would you have recommended nuking?

[Zanzoobar]

60. Consider Hiroshima the demonstration.

They had three days to soak it in.

[izquierdista]

65. Two months too late

Normally this is the August 6th handwringing, followed by another one 3 days later. None of your questions are new, nor will any of the responses be, there is nothing more that can be added to either view. They might as well be written down and attached to Tibetan prayer wheels, the faster to spin them with.

[taterguy]

70. Your post is 36 minutes late . . .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2162893&mesg_id=2163133

[Zanzoobar]

71. Your post is 40 minutes late

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2162893&mesg_id=2163180

[ingac70]

66. They sell their shit here tariff free.....

We've paid for it enough.

[MrSlayer]

67. Hindsight is 20/20.

Was this really any worse than the bombing of London or Dresden or the firebombing of Tokyo? They did what they had to do. I'm not going to fret too much over things that happened 65 years ago.

[Motown_Johnny]

74. My father fought in WWII and if he were sent to invade Japan I might not be here

or my brother, or my sister, or their kids.... etc etc etc.


It was an all out war. Maybe it was wrong, maybe it wasn't. Not knowing how many might have died if we had not used it cuts both ways.


You also need to factor in the whole Pearl Harbor sneak attack thing. Not to mention other factors such as the Rape of Nanking.


They did very bad things. We did very bad things. It was a world war.

[aikoaiko]

75. What the Emperor said...

... Despite the best that has been done by everyone—the gallant fighting of the military and naval forces, the diligence and assiduity of Our servants of the State, and the devoted service of Our one hundred million people—the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage, while the general trends of the world have all turned against her interest.

Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should we continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization.

Such being the case, how are We to save the millions of Our subjects, or to atone Ourselves before the hallowed spirits of Our Imperial Ancestors? This is the reason why We have ordered the acceptance of the provisions of the Joint Declaration of the Powers.

The hardships and sufferings to which Our nation is to be subjected hereafter will be certainly great. We are keenly aware of the inmost feelings of all of you, Our subjects. However, it is according to the dictates of time and fate that We have resolved to pave the way for a grand peace for all the generations to come by enduring the unendurable and suffering what is unsufferable.

[Meeker Morgan]

77. Lucky for the world people like you were not in charge in 1945 n/t

[BlueCheese]

80. Consider Okinawa a prelude...

The battle for Okinawa took almost three months, and resulted in 60,000 US casualties, including 12,000 killed. Three times as many as lost in the entire Iraq war, in three months. Some 100,000 Japanese soldiers were killed, and anywhere from 50,000 to 150,000 civilians, many apparently forced into suicide.

This was for a small island of about 400 square miles. How much fighting would have been needed for the four home islands, with a population of 100 million?

[Bonobo]

81. The firebombing campaign was even more disgusting if that's possible.

Here is what Robert Mcamara said about it.

LeMay said that "If we'd lost the war, we'd all have been prosecuted as war criminals." "And I think he's right," says McNamara. "He, and I'd say I, were behaving as war criminals." . . . "LeMay recognized that what he was doing would be thought immoral if his side has lost. But what makes it immoral if you lose and not immoral if you win?"

http://www.ditext.com/japan/napalm.html

[foreigncorrespondent]

83. I mourn...

...the loss of lives all wars create. The dropping of the bombs on Japan truly was a crime against humanity, but that said I do have a question... didn't they warn the Japanese that this would happen if they didn't comply? I am sure I remember hearing that the big wigs had warned them, or am I mistaken? Not that the warning makes it right, it doesn't... nothing will ever make it right.

What I don't understand about the entire time as well is why cities and not military installations? Whoever decided cities were the right place to drop the bombs was a heartless pig.

[apocalypsehow]

89. First: yes, they did drop leaflets on the targets warning them days in advance that utter

destruction was about to come from the skies - millions of them.

Second, both targets, Hiroshima & Nagasaki, were legitimate military targets: Hiroshima, besides being the headquarters of one of Japan's largest Army headquarters (responsible for the defense of all of southern Japan), was also the frickin' naval port that the Japanese Navy returned to dock after Pearl Harbor; Nagasaki was an industrial center for military arms & ordnance production nearly unrivaled on the Island at the time of the bombings.

"Whoever decided cities were the right place to drop the bombs was a heartless pig"

Actually, I agree with this distinction: whoever decided cities were the right place to locate key military installations in the middle of a total war was/where a bunch of heartless pig(s). That would have been about no one American, but the Japanese military planners who inaugurated the war in the first place.

[tabasco]

86. Hundreds of thousands of infantrymen would have died if not for those bombs.

Japan was controlled by the lunatics and no, they were not getting ready to surrender.

[tritsofme]

88. The war needed to end. Truman made the right decision.

[JCMach1]

91. +1 even Truman might have decided differently after the fact...

given the situation, I think he made the right call.

Anything else is just historical revisionism.

[Comrade Richard]

93. My opinion?

That the nuking of Japan is a loaded event that is neither universally positive nor universally negative, the devastation brought about was horrific, and if Japan had ended up hating the US till the end of days I wouldn't hold it against them, but I believe that there is some small grain of truth to it being necessary - though not to the extent the government wants you to believe. We nuked Japan to prevent the loss of American life, plain and simple, but it's not so simple in that it was also to test out our military's new toy.

The Soviets brought down the Reich and we brought down the Japanese Empire, but my gut says that if we had intervened sooner rather than later, WW2 would not have seen such a massive loss of life as had happened. Sadly the US was too busy getting fat and rich off of profiteering from the war up to the point that the Axis attacked us.

[melm00se]

94. many factors

went into the decision to drop "the bomb".

Among them you had:

- US/Allied casualty projections
- Japanese casualty projections (lesser known)
- Postwar impacts of both
- Stalin/Soviet expansionism
- War weariness (US)

Japan would be a completely different place had the bombs not been dropped. The Home Islands would have been decimated far more than were at the end of the war.

All you have to do is look at the casualty figures (both sides) and extrapolate them out to the Japanese home islands and you can see that the exchange of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were "better" choices than the invasion of Japan.

[Odin2005]

97. The mass firebombing of cities was far more horrible than the nukes.

Remember that most buildings in Japanese cities at the time were wood and went up like matchsticks.