Reply With Quote
I didn't have to attend too many days of Mr. Common Sense's common sense curriculum to understand why a country promising the eradication of another country nonstop should not attain nuclear weapons.
Being taught to be scared.
You asked why it's sad. I am merely attempting to articulate exactly why it's a horror that should never be forgotten.
I didn't have to attend too many days of Mr. Common Sense's common sense curriculum to understand why a country promising the eradication of another country nonstop should not attain nuclear weapons.
Being taught to be scared.
The bombs only created a temporary peace. It lead to the arms race and the subsequent Cold War--which, killed thousands of people without ever escalating into a full-scale war. The first bomb was enough. Yes, we flexed our muscle to show that we'd be the go-to nation after WWII, but Nagasaki was just for show and that is a bit excessive.
I consider it 100% true that there was motivation, if only slight, to use the bombs as a sort of "revenge" for pearl harbor and as a way to flex our shortlived nuclear monopoly. One must remember the context: Japanese and Germans were being herded into camps, for Chrissakes. America was at war, complete mobilization allocation of all resources, and many soldiers' lives had already been lost (though I seem to remember more died in the civil war than all subsequent wars combined, even including iraq's total to date). Additionally, we were clearly moving past multiple eras: changing from a 'barely scrape' along mindset for most Americans, to a veritable golden age in comparison; and out of the isolationism iden y that never was relieved following WW1 (which ultimately extended both the great depression and WW2 IMO). Flexing our scientific and military might through the bombs in an attempt to end further extreme amounts of bloodshed was indirect affirmation that not only were the bad times for Americans in the past, but that the world was witnessing the birth of the first true global superpower, both economically and concerning military prowess.
While these are probably the opposite of justification, I believe they are essential to understanding the context in which the bombs were used.
Last edited by z0sa; 08-06-2009 at 03:09 PM.
This is true.
We were insistent on "unconditional" surrender; while the emperor wanted to be able to save SOME face; apparently Japan was willing to surrender on terms; Truman wouldn't negotiate AT ALL.
Lives were lost on both sides of the semantics of the surrender; honestly don't know how I feel about that.
As horrible as any loss of life is; including "Iraq" in your statement is superfluous. There are several DAYS of war this country has fought that produced more loss of life than the entirety the Iraq war has.
That's why they call it a Necessary Evil, or the Lesser of Two Evils.
There were plans to keep bombing, city after city, until they surrendered. If one bomb was enough, they would have surrendered. They didn't, so one bomb obviously was NOT enough. Nagasaki was not just for show. It was for the same reason the first one was used. A quick way to end the war without invading. Now, did it also show what we were capable of and was showing the world what we had relevant? Sure....was it THE motivation....NO.
Americans have purchased so many Japanese goods since then that we have indirectly financed the additional creation of more than 200,000 Japanese people so we are even.
Quite true and Americans werent the only one.
See Russia demanding the invasion of Berlin, where they raped, killed and pillaged everything and everyone who was left.
See Britain firebombing Berlin for three straight days after it was clear Germany was finished. I remember hearing that the Brits dropped more bombs in those three days than they did for the entire war up until that point combined.
Fact is, we werent alive for WW2 (most of us anyway, unless xray is still lingering). Not one of us knows the horror of that war or the ferocity of a Japanese defense of its island. Or being Britain where Germany does nothing but bomb the ever-loving out of you day and night for 5 years straight. Or being a Russian and having the cost of war total over 9 million people, much of those prisoners sent to concentration camps to be experimented on then euthanized.
Its fast and easy for us to judge now and I am just as guilty. But the bloodlust for the atrocities committed by the Axis powers could not be ignored by the Allies. They would pay a heavy, heavy price in blood for their ambitions and trangressions...and they all did except Italy (who wisely surrendered long before revenge ever became a concept of negotiation).
That was a bummer day. Even though I wasn't alive at the time I still feel guilty about it every time I visit Japan. I have a hard time thinking of all the civilian women and children that were killed instantly. I'm not saying that we shouldn't have done it, just that it's nothing to be proud of.
I am guessing you are not old enough to remember the days of civil defense drills in elementary school.Being taught to be scared.
--WikipediaDuck and Cover was a suggested method of personal protection against the effects of a nuclear weapon which the United States government taught to generations of United States school children from the early 1950s into the 1980s. This was supposed to protect them in the event of an unexpected nuclear attack which, they were told, could come at any time without warning. Immediately after they saw a flash they had to stop what they were doing and get on the ground under some cover—such as a table, or at least next to a wall—and assume the fetal position, lying face-down and covering their heads with their hands.
if you have empathy for japan see rape of nanking, that will fix things
By all means sir, drop that er, twice!
I love Asian women, I've probably contributed to the creation of a few Mexi-Japs myself, but I never stuck around to find out for sure.
Uh, there were signs that after the Hiroshima bomb the Imperial Gov't had decided to wave the white flag. Whether this is true 100%, who knows exactly. If you don't think the usage of the bomb was not at all for show as well as ending the world's most deadliest conflict, I think you're wrong. For too long had the U.S. and Britain held the Soviets in contempt and when the atomic bomb was dispensed, it was ALSO, not in confinement, a shot across the bow as to whom was now the shotcaller.
Well, at least the two losing sides of WWII were able to develop--which is more the exception than the norm. Both Germany and Japan have excelled in developing an iden y on the opposite spectrum from their nefarious war mongering. I have to say, that the usage of both Japanese and German imports is a plus that came from the endgame of that war.
I agree with the poster above--if you've had a chance to get with a Japanese woman, you will definitely know the benefits of the atomic bomb ;P
Wonder if a Japanese guy visiting Nanjing feels the same way?
"Japanese guy visiting Nanjing"
So US had to murder civilians, no other choice, because the Japs were murdering civilians? This makes America The Beautiful so much better than the rest of the world.
Careful B, your strawman is showing.
The only straw man here is why anybody cares about how a Japanese feels visiting Nanking.
Ughh its not sad, they shouldnt have ed with us!!!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
