Question about Hiroshima and Nagasaki

tybird

Its Evolution Baby wrote:

I have never heard that the Japanese were close to surrendering. Today on this thread is the first time I ever heard of that. I would like proof that they were ready to surrender because its news to me.

Somebody is going to throw out some intercepted messages between a Soviet ambassador and the Japanese to say that surrender was imminent...it always appears on this WWII threads on the Train. I believe in its story about like I believe in the tooth fairy. Besides, the Soviet Union had declared war on Japan and was gobbling up Japanese territory....I sure that folks in the Japanese government would tell them anything that they wanted to hear.

Its Evolution Baby

tybird wrote:

Somebody is going to throw out some intercepted messages between a Soviet ambassador and the Japanese to say that surrender was imminent...it always appears on this WWII threads on the Train. I believe in its story about like I believe in the tooth fairy. Besides, the Soviet Union had declared war on Japan and was gobbling up Japanese territory....I sure that folks in the Japanese government would tell them anything that they wanted to hear.

Yea I don't believe that either. I honestly believe that Japan was in it for the long haul. If a surrender was imminent and we dropped the bomb anyways, there would be a ton of hate and resentment towards the American people from Japan. Instead they love and embrace every aspect of our culture. Just ask Eddie and the boys.

Japan at the time was ruled by a dictator and dictators don't tend to surrender. They have to be defeated.

Solat13

_FiveAgainstOne_ wrote:

You do realize that's complete bullshit.

The real number is estimated between 3-10 million... NOT 20-30 million... not that I'm justifying it, but it's a big difference.

I can't believe some of the things I read on here though. The fact that people think all those hundreds of thousands of civilians dying were just collateral damage... what the fuck.... I bet had another country done that to the war-mongering United States right now, and your family was one of those bodies... well, you wouldn't be fucking thinking that same thing.

It was definitely not a "necessary" evil. After Germany lost, Japan was pretty much done, considering they were facing so many nations. The US just happened to move to drastic measures just to... according to history books... "end the battle for sure and make sure no more innocents were lost by the big bad Japanese empire (of course innocents lost by the good ole US were ok of course ...)"

give me a fucking break.

Also, just to clear this up... people seem to ALLLWAYS think had the US not interfered and saved the day, then the Nazis would have won and made everyone in the world a slave. That's completely UNTRUE. THE SOVIETS WOULD HAVE WON THE WAR ANYWAY. THEY WON THE WAR. WE JUST HAPPENED TO BRING A QUICKER END TO IT. NO MORE.

I feel like I've had to explain that to people about 467 million times.

Anyway to conclude my point, no, the killings were never and are still not justified no matter how many idiots try to do so. It's like that question in the Presidential debate last year...

"Would you all kill Osama Bin Laden at the risk of killing another innocent person?" (or something close to that). All the presidential candidates (dems) said yes, save for Kucinich. Then they all tried to change their answers and say "it depends on the situation...."

give me a fucking break.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v25/n22/john04_.html

It may be pointless to try to establish which World War Two Axis aggressor, Germany or Japan, was the more brutal to the peoples it victimised. The Germans killed six million Jews and 20 million Russians; the Japanese slaughtered as many as 30 million Filipinos, Malays, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Indonesians and Burmese, at least 23 million of them ethnic Chinese. Both nations looted the countries they conquered on a monumental scale, though Japan plundered more, over a longer period, than the Nazis. Both conquerors enslaved millions and exploited them as forced labourers – and, in the case of the Japanese, as prostitutes for front-line troops. If you were a Nazi prisoner of war from Britain, America, Australia, New Zealand or Canada (but not Russia) you faced a 4 per cent chance of not surviving the war; the death rate for Allied POWs held by the Japanese was nearly 30 per cent.

And according to another source, China had 16,000,000 civilian deaths

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties#endnote_China


http://www.asianholocaust.com/html/asian-holocaust-memorial03.html

As far as I know, our newspapers did not have a competition involving running counts of the number of decapitated Chinese by Japanese officers like the newspapers in Japan did during the war.

fuck

Its Evolution Baby wrote:

No I'm not blind. I think its a ridiculous and poor argument to say that 3 to 10 million is a big difference to 20 and 30 million. It's not that big of a difference when you are talking about a slaughter of innocent Asians.

So no I don't see your point because I don't think you have a valid one.

It's not an argument. It is fact. 3-10 million is a very big difference to 20-30 million. It's just a plain fact. Whether it's math or anything else, you can't argue that 20 is less than 3.

I was clearing up any misconceptions. How would you like it if someone came into this thread and said "The US killed 1 million people in the nuclear attacks on Japan, as opposed to the couple hundred thousand"? Would you just ignore that or would you say "Actually, the correct number is..."

The fact that you are trying to use that against me just shows how close-minded and ignorant you are. Also, I love how the only part of my argument you are trying to take apart is the part that ISN'T EVEN AN ARGUMENT.

tybird wrote:

Somebody is going to throw out some intercepted messages between a Soviet ambassador and the Japanese to say that surrender was imminent...it always appears on this WWII threads on the Train. I believe in its story about like I believe in the tooth fairy. Besides, the Soviet Union had declared war on Japan and was gobbling up Japanese territory....I sure that folks in the Japanese government would tell them anything that they wanted to hear.

So what's your reasoning to not believing it? That "folks in the govt would tell them anything they wanted to hear"? That's a very poor argument.

Its Evolution Baby wrote:

Yea I don't believe that either. I honestly believe that Japan was in it for the long haul. If a surrender was imminent and we dropped the bomb anyways, there would be a ton of hate and resentment towards the American people from Japan. Instead they love and embrace every aspect of our culture. Just ask Eddie and the boys.

Japan at the time was ruled by a dictator and dictators don't tend to surrender. They have to be defeated.

Hi.

I just wanted to remind you of a couple things, incase you didn't know.

So... the year now is 2008.

World War II was over 60 years ago.

Your argument... makes no sense. That's like saying "WHY DOESN'T GERMANY HATE US BECAUSE WE INVADED THEM N STUFF?"

Japan has completely changed since the 1940s... they have a new government and everything, and have major economic power int he world. Just because the Japanese don't hate Americans does not justify the bombings. End of story.

You really are brain-washed.

SPEEDY MCCREADY

_FiveAgainstOne_ wrote:

You do realize that's complete bullshit.

The real number is estimated between 3-10 million... NOT 20-30 million... not that I'm justifying it, but it's a big difference.

I can't believe some of the things I read on here though. The fact that people think all those hundreds of thousands of civilians dying were just collateral damage... what the fuck.... I bet had another country done that to the war-mongering United States right now, and your family was one of those bodies... well, you wouldn't be fucking thinking that same thing.

It was definitely not a "necessary" evil. After Germany lost, Japan was pretty much done, considering they were facing so many nations. The US just happened to move to drastic measures just to... according to history books... "end the battle for sure and make sure no more innocents were lost by the big bad Japanese empire (of course innocents lost by the good ole US were ok of course ...)"

give me a fucking break.

Also, just to clear this up... people seem to ALLLWAYS think had the US not interfered and saved the day, then the Nazis would have won and made everyone in the world a slave. That's completely UNTRUE. THE SOVIETS WOULD HAVE WON THE WAR ANYWAY. THEY WON THE WAR. WE JUST HAPPENED TO BRING A QUICKER END TO IT. NO MORE.

I feel like I've had to explain that to people about 467 million times.

Anyway to conclude my point, no, the killings were never and are still not justified no matter how many idiots try to do so. It's like that question in the Presidential debate last year...

"Would you all kill Osama Bin Laden at the risk of killing another innocent person?" (or something close to that). All the presidential candidates (dems) said yes, save for Kucinich. Then they all tried to change their answers and say "it depends on the situation...."

give me a fucking break.

it was 20-30 million...

fuck

Solat13 wrote:

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v25/n22/john04_.html

It may be pointless to try to establish which World War Two Axis aggressor, Germany or Japan, was the more brutal to the peoples it victimised. The Germans killed six million Jews and 20 million Russians; the Japanese slaughtered as many as 30 million Filipinos, Malays, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Indonesians and Burmese, at least 23 million of them ethnic Chinese. Both nations looted the countries they conquered on a monumental scale, though Japan plundered more, over a longer period, than the Nazis. Both conquerors enslaved millions and exploited them as forced labourers – and, in the case of the Japanese, as prostitutes for front-line troops. If you were a Nazi prisoner of war from Britain, America, Australia, New Zealand or Canada (but not Russia) you faced a 4 per cent chance of not surviving the war; the death rate for Allied POWs held by the Japanese was nearly 30 per cent.

And according to another source, China had 16,000,000 civilian deaths

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties#endnote_China


http://www.asianholocaust.com/html/asian-holocaust-memorial03.html

As far as I know, our newspapers did not have a competition involving running counts of the number of decapitated Chinese by Japanese officers like the newspapers in Japan did during the war.

Very strange. Your wikipedia article stated something contradictory to this one:

"R. J. Rummel, a professor of political science at the University of Hawaii, states that between 1937 and 1945, the Japanese military murdered from nearly 3,000,000 to over 10,000,000 people, most probably 6,000,000 Chinese, Indonesians, Koreans, Filipinos, and Indochinese, among others, including Western prisoners of war."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes#Mass_killings

I'll have to do more research and talk to my professor about it when I get back to school.

SPEEDY MCCREADY

_FiveAgainstOne_ wrote:

Very strange. Your wikipedia article stated something contradictory to this one:

"R. J. Rummel, a professor of political science at the University of Hawaii, states that between 1937 and 1945, the Japanese military murdered from nearly 3,000,000 to over 10,000,000 people, most probably 6,000,000 Chinese, Indonesians, Koreans, Filipinos, and Indochinese, among others, including Western prisoners of war."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes#Mass_killings

I'll have to do more research and talk to my professor about it when I get back to school.

his statement...

and your statement are from the same article....

the paragraph before your statement says......20-30 million

fuck

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

his statement...

and your statement are from the same article....

the paragraph before your statement says......20-30 million

Which is why I said it's "contradictory" and that "I'll have to do more research and talk to professors"...

SPEEDY MCCREADY

Solat13 wrote:

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v25/n22/john04_.html

It may be pointless to try to establish which World War Two Axis aggressor, Germany or Japan, was the more brutal to the peoples it victimised. The Germans killed six million Jews and 20 million Russians; the Japanese slaughtered as many as 30 million Filipinos, Malays, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Indonesians and Burmese, at least 23 million of them ethnic Chinese. Both nations looted the countries they conquered on a monumental scale, though Japan plundered more, over a longer period, than the Nazis. Both conquerors enslaved millions and exploited them as forced labourers – and, in the case of the Japanese, as prostitutes for front-line troops. If you were a Nazi prisoner of war from Britain, America, Australia, New Zealand or Canada (but not Russia) you faced a 4 per cent chance of not surviving the war; the death rate for Allied POWs held by the Japanese was nearly 30 per cent.

And according to another source, China had 16,000,000 civilian deaths

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties#endnote_China


http://www.asianholocaust.com/html/asian-holocaust-memorial03.html

As far as I know, our newspapers did not have a competition involving running counts of the number of decapitated Chinese by Japanese officers like the newspapers in Japan did during the war.

another part of that article that is mind boggling...

after the surrender of Japan....

a TOTAL of 56 Chinese POW'S were released by Japan...

THATS IT!!!!

56

SPEEDY MCCREADY

To determine the treatment of frostbite, prisoners were taken outside in freezing weather and left with exposed arms, periodically drenched with water until frozen solid. The arm was later amputated; the doctor would repeat the process on the victim’s upper arm to the shoulder. After both arms were gone, the doctors moved on to the legs until only a head and torso remained. The victim was then used for plague and pathogens experiments

nice.....

Kann

tybird wrote:

Somebody is going to throw out some intercepted messages between a Soviet ambassador and the Japanese to say that surrender was imminent...it always appears on this WWII threads on the Train. I believe in its story about like I believe in the tooth fairy. Besides, the Soviet Union had declared war on Japan and was gobbling up Japanese territory....I sure that folks in the Japanese government would tell them anything that they wanted to hear.

All I was saying is that the japanese's refusal to surrender wasn't as clear cut as some make it out to be. Depending on the sources you can find that several diplomatic measures were ongoing. It might not have worked, or taken way too long but sings were not as black and white.
... Well at least from what I read.

SPEEDY MCCREADY

In some cases, flesh was cut from living people: another Indian POW, Lance Naik Hatam Ali (later a citizen of Pakistan), testified that in New Guinea:

the Japanese started selecting prisoners and everyday one prisoner was taken out and killed and eaten by the soldiers. I personally saw this happen and about 100 prisoners were eaten at this place by the Japanese. The remainder of us were taken to another spot 50 miles [80 km] away where 10 prisoners died of sickness. At this place, the Japanese again started selecting prisoners to eat. Those selected were taken to a hut where their flesh was cut from their bodies while they were alive and they were thrown into a ditch where they later died

Eliot Rosewater

MLC2006 wrote:

the fact that they attacked us first isn't an excuse, it's a fact.

Yeah, and our government had NOTHING to do with it, right? :rolleyes: jesus.

Its Evolution Baby

_FiveAgainstOne_ wrote:

It's not an argument. It is fact. 3-10 million is a very big difference to 20-30 million. It's just a plain fact. Whether it's math or anything else, you can't argue that 20 is less than 3.

I was clearing up any misconceptions. How would you like it if someone came into this thread and said "The US killed 1 million people in the nuclear attacks on Japan, as opposed to the couple hundred thousand"? Would you just ignore that or would you say "Actually, the correct number is..."

The fact that you are trying to use that against me just shows how close-minded and ignorant you are. Also, I love how the only part of my argument you are trying to take apart is the part that ISN'T EVEN AN ARGUMENT.


So what's your reasoning to not believing it? That "folks in the govt would tell them anything they wanted to hear"? That's a very poor argument.


Hi.

I just wanted to remind you of a couple things, incase you didn't know.

So... the year now is 2008.

World War II was over 60 years ago.

Your argument... makes no sense. That's like saying "WHY DOESN'T GERMANY HATE US BECAUSE WE INVADED THEM N STUFF?"

Japan has completely changed since the 1940s... they have a new government and everything, and have major economic power int he world. Just because the Japanese don't hate Americans does not justify the bombings. End of story.

You really are brain-washed.

First of all don't talk down to me. I don't like it and its pissing me off.

Second a lot of Jewish people still have resentment towards Germans. Chinese and Japanese hate each other. My girlfriend is Armenian and she and all of her family HATES the Turks for the genocide of 1914. So time doesn't heal all wounds.

Germany doesn't hate us because a lot the people are still feeling guilty for allowing the Holocaust to happen. The people either deny it happened or don't talk about that time period at all. I wrote a paper on it in college a few years back and its amazing how much guilt still exists in Germany for allowing the Nazi's to take power. So time hasn't healed that wound either.

Third the bombings may not have been justified because of the long term effects but we didn't know the long term effects until we dropped the bomb. We were still researching the sucker in the 1950's years after dropping it for the first time. Still a full scale invasion of Japan would have led to Civilian Deaths as well as US soldiers death. Young men who joined after our country was attacked by Japan. So if you want me to lose sleep at night over what we did in Hiroshima or Nagasoki I won't. It was a horrible tragedy, but it wouldn't have happened had Japan not involved us in the war.

And Lastly I'm not brainwashed because I don't believe the US is always wrong. I love my country enough to know that we are right as much as we are wrong. You sound more brainwashed with your Anti America Propaganda then I ever will. Especially how you have to correct people that Russia would have won the war without us. Would Russia have fought to save the innocent Asians dying at the hands of the Japanese? I think not. Also its debatable if Russia could have defeated the Nazi's but there was no question that the Nazi's were done after the US got involved. So that means we had an effect on the outcome.

WWII was a WORLD WAR. Russia defended there border successfully but imo could care less if the rest of Europe fell to the Nazi's. The US involved themselves in all aspects of the World War so yes I think we deserve the credit we give ourselves for the outcome. The credit that is openly shared with Russians and the UK btw in any history book.

SPEEDY MCCREADY

The International Military Tribunal for the Far East stated that 20,000 (and perhaps up to 80,000) women were raped, their ages ranging from infants to the elderly (as old as 80).[20] Rapes were often performed in public during the day, sometimes in front of spouses or family members that were tied up and forced to watch. A large number of them were systematized in a process where soldiers would search door-to-door for young girls, with many women taken captive and gang raped. The women were then killed immediately after the rape, often through mutilation, including breasts being cut off, or stabbing by bamboo (usually very long sticks), bayonet, butcher's knife and other objects into the vagina. According to some testimonies, other women were forced into military prostitution as comfort women. There are even stories of Japanese troops forcing families to commit acts of incest.[21] Sons were forced to rape their mothers, fathers were forced to rape daughters. One pregnant woman who was gang-raped by Japanese soldiers gave birth only a few hours later; the baby was perfectly healthy (Robert B. Edgerton, Warriors of the Rising Sun). Monks who had declared a life of celibacy were forced to rape women for the amusement of the Japanese.[21] Chinese men were forced to have sex with corpses and infants, Chinese men were forced to have their penises cut off by bayonets for "humorous" reasons as detailed by some Japanese soldiers, and the testicles were as well, cut off (some men were forced to eat them), farmers were forced to commit zoophiliac acts with their livestock. Men were tied up by Japanese soldiers and hit in the crotch area with bamboo sticks. Any resistance would be met with summary executions. While the rape peaked immediately following the fall of the city, it continued for the duration of the Japanese occupation

Its Evolution Baby

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

The International Military Tribunal for the Far East stated that 20,000 (and perhaps up to 80,000) women were raped, their ages ranging from infants to the elderly (as old as 80).[20] Rapes were often performed in public during the day, sometimes in front of spouses or family members that were tied up and forced to watch. A large number of them were systematized in a process where soldiers would search door-to-door for young girls, with many women taken captive and gang raped. The women were then killed immediately after the rape, often through mutilation, including breasts being cut off, or stabbing by bamboo (usually very long sticks), bayonet, butcher's knife and other objects into the vagina. According to some testimonies, other women were forced into military prostitution as comfort women. There are even stories of Japanese troops forcing families to commit acts of incest.[21] Sons were forced to rape their mothers, fathers were forced to rape daughters. One pregnant woman who was gang-raped by Japanese soldiers gave birth only a few hours later; the baby was perfectly healthy (Robert B. Edgerton, Warriors of the Rising Sun). Monks who had declared a life of celibacy were forced to rape women for the amusement of the Japanese.[21] Chinese men were forced to have sex with corpses and infants, Chinese men were forced to have their penises cut off by bayonets for "humorous" reasons as detailed by some Japanese soldiers, and the testicles were as well, cut off (some men were forced to eat them), farmers were forced to commit zoophiliac acts with their livestock. Men were tied up by Japanese soldiers and hit in the crotch area with bamboo sticks. Any resistance would be met with summary executions. While the rape peaked immediately following the fall of the city, it continued for the duration of the Japanese occupation

Stop spreading facts.

America sucks.

tybird

_FiveAgainstOne_ wrote:

So what's your reasoning to not believing it? That "folks in the govt would tell them anything they wanted to hear"? That's a very poor argument.

That and the fact that no other documents back-up any Japanese intentions to surrender prior to the A-bombs.

This tactic was the same thing that Japan was doing in December of 1941.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

this is what war is. war kills mass quantities of innocent people. there is no nobility in it. WWII was more than just storming the beaches of Normandy or the battle of Midway. You have to include fire bombing civilians, nukes, prison camps, and all these other heinous acts in your calculations when going to a war fought against an enemy of near equal strength. THESE ACTS WILL OCCUR, MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT. they are unavoidable to a degree. This is why war should only be fought as a last resort! Thats what fucktard cowboy, wannabe pilots like Bush don't understand.

But that doesn't mean war should never be fought. WWII, even with its atrocities, was a war that had to be fought. Innocent people had to die. Lots of them. Its a terrible price but one that had to be paid. This was not Vietnam or Iraq; losing does not mean our cultural destruction. Those wars could be fought with limited strength, because it didnt mean our destruction. In contrast, with WWII, the stakes were for nothing less than the SURVIVAL OF THE FREE WORLD!!! If you try to fight such a war with an arm tied behind your back or only halfheartedly, you risk your very survival. Total war should be fought with everything yu have, even if the enemy is on the brink of defeat or weaker than you. You don't let up until they surrender.

To say the people were evil because they had to make terrible decisions to win a war for survival is just ignorant and self-righteous, because you are a fucking fool if, under those circumstances, you don't fight with every available weapon in your arsenal until the enemy surrenders.

Dustin51

Dont know if anyone covered this, dont feel like reading through all the posts but agree these were horrible acts. I read something one time that said that the Japanese were trying to negotiate with us for week prior to their surrender. They knew what was coming and they wanted to surrender but we ignored them because Truman wanted Russia to know what we could do them.

lalalalaaaaaaaa

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

The International Military Tribunal for the Far East stated that 20,000 (and perhaps up to 80,000) women were raped, their ages ranging from infants to the elderly (as old as 80).[20] Rapes were often performed in public during the day, sometimes in front of spouses or family members that were tied up and forced to watch. A large number of them were systematized in a process where soldiers would search door-to-door for young girls, with many women taken captive and gang raped. The women were then killed immediately after the rape, often through mutilation, including breasts being cut off, or stabbing by bamboo (usually very long sticks), bayonet, butcher's knife and other objects into the vagina. According to some testimonies, other women were forced into military prostitution as comfort women. There are even stories of Japanese troops forcing families to commit acts of incest.[21] Sons were forced to rape their mothers, fathers were forced to rape daughters. One pregnant woman who was gang-raped by Japanese soldiers gave birth only a few hours later; the baby was perfectly healthy (Robert B. Edgerton, Warriors of the Rising Sun). Monks who had declared a life of celibacy were forced to rape women for the amusement of the Japanese.[21] Chinese men were forced to have sex with corpses and infants, Chinese men were forced to have their penises cut off by bayonets for "humorous" reasons as detailed by some Japanese soldiers, and the testicles were as well, cut off (some men were forced to eat them), farmers were forced to commit zoophiliac acts with their livestock. Men were tied up by Japanese soldiers and hit in the crotch area with bamboo sticks. Any resistance would be met with summary executions. While the rape peaked immediately following the fall of the city, it continued for the duration of the Japanese occupation

All very accurate information...

...and it has absolutely NOTHING to do with America carrying out a massive slaughter of civilians.