Question about Hiroshima and Nagasaki

PJ_Saluki

I just don't understand the point of this exercise. No matter what we believe about the bombings, they happened and that can't be taken back. All we're doing is banging our heads against a wall here.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Has anyone here bothered to watch the Documentary "Trinity and beyond"?

If not....do.

The first two atomic bombs were science experiments...

at the time, the Japanese were viewed at lab rats...

PJ_Saluki

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Has anyone here bothered to watch the Documentary "Trinity and beyond"?

If not....do.

The first two atomic bombs were science experiments...

at the time, the Japanese were viewed at lab rats...

"Trinity" is freaking amazing. Man, this might make me a sick fuck, but I love the way mushroom clouds look. Nukes are horrible but they're also pretty damned cool. It's amazing how much destruction they cause. I'm just glad they haven't been used since Hiro and Naga.

Byrnzie

NCfan wrote:

do you have any idea what Japan had been up to in the Pacific in the years prior to Pearl Harbor?

Also, why is it that we gave 99% of all the territory back to the rightful owners after we conquered the Japanese?

You think the U.S was simply minding it's own business out there in the Pacific and had no idea of what was coming?
And as for giving 99% of all the territory back after 1945, tell that to the people of the Phillipines and Micronesia. Also, tell it to the people of those countries in the Pacific region who had to endure brutal dictatorships propped up by the U.S after the war- Indonesia, for example.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v11/v11p431_Lutton.html
'In September 1944, John T. Flynn launched Pearl Harbor revisionism when he published a forty-six page booklet entitled The Truth about Pearl Harbor. Flynn argued that Roosevelt and his cronies had been plotting war against Japan at least since January 1941. The Administration continued needlessly to provoke the Japanese government throughout the rest of the year, and on November 26, 1941, delivered a diplomatic ultimatum that no government could possibly accept. Flynn also suggested that Kimmel and Short were given the wrong instructions from Washington headquarters, thus aborting the taking of effective measures at the base.

In early 1945, a thirty-year-old historian, William L. Neumann, published a brochure, The Genesis of Pearl Harbor. He reviewed the diplomatic background to the outbreak of the war and pointed out how the Roosevelt Administration had launched an economic war against Japan in the summer and fall of 1941. Neumann concluded that both sides were responsible, but that Washington could not have been surprised by the attack at Pearl Harbor, given FDR's diplomatic activities in the months and days preceding December 7th.'


The U.S. Financial Siege of Japan Before Pearl Harbor
'In his book published by the Naval Institute Press, Miller contends that the United States forced Japan into international bankruptcy to deter its aggression. The Japanese government had a huge cache of dollars fraudulently hidden in New York. In July 1941, President Roosevelt froze the money to "bring Japan to its senses, not its knees," Miller asserts. Roosevelt’s intentions were thwarted, however, by U.S. bureaucrats who were determined to deny Japan the dollars needed to buy oil and other resources for economic survival. Miller demonstrates that the deprivations facing the Japanese people as a result of the fund cutoff buttressed Japan’s choice of war at Pearl Harbor.'

RolandTD20Kdrummer

PJ_Saluki wrote:

"Trinity" is freaking amazing. Man, this might make me a sick fuck, but I love the way mushroom clouds look. Nukes are horrible but they're also pretty damned cool. It's amazing how much destruction they cause. I'm just glad they haven't been used since Hiro and Naga.

Yeah, what blew me away (no pun intended) was how many nukes were actually created and detonated in the years immediately following Hiroshima and Nagasaki... I think it was over 300 (345?) ...that's an immense crap load of unnecessary environmental contamination.

A little excerpt...the nuke cannon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LodXqmQ4wYw

insane...

Byrnzie

tybird wrote:

P.S. There still exists no pre-A-bomb documents from the Japanese government that speak of any possibility of surrender.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n3p-4_Weber.html
A Beaten Country

Apart from the moral questions involved, were the atomic bombings militarily necessary? By any rational yardstick, they were not. Japan already had been defeated militarily by June 1945. Almost nothing was left of the once mighty Imperial Navy, and Japan's air force had been all but totally destroyed. Against only token opposition, American war planes ranged at will over the country, and US bombers rained down devastation on her cities, steadily reducing them to rubble.

What was left of Japan's factories and workshops struggled fitfully to turn out weapons and other goods from inadequate raw materials. (Oil supplies had not been available since April.) By July about a quarter of all the houses in Japan had been destroyed, and her transportation system was near collapse. Food had become so scarce that most Japanese were subsisting on a sub-starvation diet.

On the night of March 9-10, 1945, a wave of 300 American bombers struck Tokyo, killing 100,000 people. Dropping nearly 1,700 tons of bombs, the war planes ravaged much of the capital city, completely burning out 16 square miles and destroying a quarter of a million structures. A million residents were left homeless.

On May 23, eleven weeks later, came the greatest air raid of the Pacific War, when 520 giant B-29 "Superfortress" bombers unleashed 4,500 tons of incendiary bombs on the heart of the already battered Japanese capital. Generating gale-force winds, the exploding incendiaries obliterated Tokyo's commercial center and railway yards, and consumed the Ginza entertainment district. Two days later, on May 25, a second strike of 502 "Superfortress" planes roared low over Tokyo, raining down some 4,000 tons of explosives. Together these two B-29 raids destroyed 56 square miles of the Japanese capital.

Even before the Hiroshima attack, American air force General Curtis LeMay boasted that American bombers were "driving them [Japanese] back to the stone age." Henry H. ("Hap") Arnold, commanding General of the Army air forces, declared in his 1949 memoirs: "It always appeared to us, atomic bomb or no atomic bomb, the Japanese were already on the verge of collapse." This was confirmed by former Japanese prime minister Fumimaro Konoye, who said: "Fundamentally, the thing that brought about the determination to make peace was the prolonged bombing by the B-29s."

RolandTD20Kdrummer

White Light, Black Rain - The Destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4480965960351299329&q=white+light+black+rain&total=106&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

PJ_Saluki

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

White Light, Black Rain - The Destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4480965960351299329&q=white+light+black+rain&total=106&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

How very sad.

Kann

reborncareerist wrote:

Point.

Moot point. Because what he says means that :
1 - when choosing to drop the bomb(s) the us did not know for sure it would lead to surrender. Which meant they were willing to sacrifice 2 cities just to try.
2 - the us did not know how many bombs would be needed. would they have continued to destroy cities until the japanese surrendered?

Quak

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

White Light, Black Rain - The Destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4480965960351299329&q=white+light+black+rain&total=106&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

oh my, feel so sad now

tybird

Byrnzie wrote:

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n3p-4_Weber.html
A Beaten Country

Apart from the moral questions involved, were the atomic bombings militarily necessary? By any rational yardstick, they were not. Japan already had been defeated militarily by June 1945. Almost nothing was left of the once mighty Imperial Navy, and Japan's air force had been all but totally destroyed. Against only token opposition, American war planes ranged at will over the country, and US bombers rained down devastation on her cities, steadily reducing them to rubble.

What was left of Japan's factories and workshops struggled fitfully to turn out weapons and other goods from inadequate raw materials. (Oil supplies had not been available since April.) By July about a quarter of all the houses in Japan had been destroyed, and her transportation system was near collapse. Food had become so scarce that most Japanese were subsisting on a sub-starvation diet.

On the night of March 9-10, 1945, a wave of 300 American bombers struck Tokyo, killing 100,000 people. Dropping nearly 1,700 tons of bombs, the war planes ravaged much of the capital city, completely burning out 16 square miles and destroying a quarter of a million structures. A million residents were left homeless.

On May 23, eleven weeks later, came the greatest air raid of the Pacific War, when 520 giant B-29 "Superfortress" bombers unleashed 4,500 tons of incendiary bombs on the heart of the already battered Japanese capital. Generating gale-force winds, the exploding incendiaries obliterated Tokyo's commercial center and railway yards, and consumed the Ginza entertainment district. Two days later, on May 25, a second strike of 502 "Superfortress" planes roared low over Tokyo, raining down some 4,000 tons of explosives. Together these two B-29 raids destroyed 56 square miles of the Japanese capital.

Even before the Hiroshima attack, American air force General Curtis LeMay boasted that American bombers were "driving them [Japanese] back to the stone age." Henry H. ("Hap") Arnold, commanding General of the Army air forces, declared in his 1949 memoirs: "It always appeared to us, atomic bomb or no atomic bomb, the Japanese were already on the verge of collapse." This was confirmed by former Japanese prime minister Fumimaro Konoye, who said: "Fundamentally, the thing that brought about the determination to make peace was the prolonged bombing by the B-29s."

That's nice and backs up my point about how a prolonged siege of Japan combined with a continued aerial bombardment would have resulted in more deaths than the two atomic bombs, but it does not disprove my point that NO official documents exist or have ever be found to exist that show that Japan was ready to surrender prior to the a-bombs.

tybird

Kann wrote:

2 - the us did not know how many bombs would be needed. would they have continued to destroy cities until the japanese surrendered?

The U.S. only had two bombs. Would they have continued to destroy cities until the Japanese surrendered??? What's the goal of war??? Should the Allies have stopped their European efforts at Germany's border and said that's enough?? All of the Axis regimes had to be removed from power.

Collin

tybird wrote:

It was war...bombs were dropped on innocents from Hawaii to Singapore to Nanking to Tokyo to Dresden to Stalingard to London to Paris to Rome to Manila and beyond. These innocents were supporting a regime that had butchered millions of other innocents for nearly a decade. Innocents in numbers of this magnitude were going to die until the regime surrendered based on the terms of the victors, whether it occurred through two bombs or thousands of bombs or an outright invasion of the home islands.

Yes, I am okay with killing innocent people to save other people. It's been happening as long as this species has gathered into groups.

Yes, you can apply sixty year old logic to events that happened sixty years ago...simply because it was the basis that they were working. They did not have your 20/20 hindsight or even a working "Magic EightBall." Their decision was based on what they thought and knew at the time.

Next time there's a school shooter, let the swat team come and shoot a dozen people and the shooter. The killer could have killed thirty people. Job well done. Your logic. It's okay to kill innocent people to save others. Or is it only okay when those people are non-American?

9/11, the victims deserved to die. I don't care, it wasn't my grandmother that died. This is exactly the logic that I've seen here and it sickens me. And I know what you'll say, America was the hero in the WW, the good guy. And you're right. But a good guy that made mistakes (it's ok to admit them, no one can be perfect, every country makes mistakes. You can only learn from them). I'm glad the US won, don't get me wrong. But I'm sad so many innocent people died, but what's even worse is that you guys don't even care. Innocent people died, remember the shock on 9/11. 3000 people innocent people died, I live in Belgium and I saw people cry here. Think about the families of the people who were killed and go and tell them, 'these terrorist want a war, so bummer, innocent people die'.

I know they didn't want to save others with their actions on 9/11. But to the families of the victims it really doesn't matter. Go tell a guy his pregnant wife died because it's better this way. Tell a grandmother her entire family died, but you were justified in dropping the bombs because if you hadn't they might have died. Tell them their children, fathers, mother ... deserved to die.

It's so disgusting, you don't even show a sign of compassion or grief. I don't care whether you think dropping the bombs was justified or not. You can think it was justified in order to win the war, save other people etc. - though I disagree, I can understand that - but what I can't understand is you talk about those innocent people dying like it's a trivial thing, like it's meaningless.

Sure, your grandfathers died for your freedom. But so did over 200,000 innocent people in Japan. Their deaths meant the end of the war.

I also think that if we forget about the people that died, about all the innocent people that died in war (by friendly or enemy fire), that war will always be a reality.

edit: Also, it's sixty years later. I think you know a lot more than the people who lived sixty years ago. It's not wrong to use that knowledge.

A lot of German people were afraid to do something during the nazi regime. Today Germans don't hide behind that. They don't say, "but they were afraid. Protesting meant prison or worse." They are ashamed. They feel sorry.

PJ_Saluki

Collin wrote:

Next time there's a school shooter, let the swat team come and shoot a dozen people and the shooter. The killer could have killed thirty people. Job well done. Your logic. It's okay to kill innocent people to save others. Or is it only okay when those people are non-American?

9/11, the victims deserved to die. I don't care, it wasn't my grandmother that died. This is exactly the logic that I've seen here and it sickens me. And I know what you'll say, America was the hero in the WW, the good guy. And you're right. But a good guy that made mistakes (it's ok to admit them, no one can be perfect, every country makes mistakes. You can only learn from them). I'm glad the US won, don't get me wrong. But I'm sad so many innocent people died, but what's even worse is that you guys don't even care. Innocent people died, remember the shock on 9/11. 3000 people innocent people died, I live in Belgium and I saw people cry here. Think about the families of the people who were killed and go and tell them, 'these terrorist want a war, so bummer, innocent people die'.

I know they didn't want to save others with their actions on 9/11. But to the families of the victims it really doesn't matter. Go tell a guy his pregnant wife died because it's better this way. Tell a grandmother her entire family died, but you were justified in dropping the bombs because if you hadn't they might have died. Tell them their children, fathers, mother ... deserved to die.

It's so disgusting, you don't even show a sign of compassion or grief. I don't care whether you think dropping the bombs was justified or not. You can think it was justified in order to win the war, save other people etc. - though I disagree, I can understand that - but what I can't understand is you talk about those innocent people dying like it's a trivial thing, like it's meaningless.

Sure, your grandfathers died for your freedom. But so did over 200,000 innocent people in Japan. Their deaths meant the end of the war.

I also think that if we forget about the people that died, about all the innocent people that died in war (by friendly or enemy fire), that war will always be a reality.

edit: Also, it's sixty years later. I think you know a lot more than the people who lived sixty years ago. It's not wrong to use that knowledge.

A lot of German people were afraid to do something during the nazi regime. Today Germans don't hide behind that. They don't say, "but they were afraid. Protesting meant prison or worse." They are ashamed. They feel sorry.

Comparing 9/11 to Hiroshima and Nagasaki is apples and oranges. They're not even close to each other. Last time I checked, we weren't in a declared war with those fundamentalist wackos who flew jets into buildings. But, we were at war with Japan. Not. The. Same. You're right about one thing, though: Dropping those bombs did end the war. It was a hardcore motherfucker move, but it accomplished the goal. It sucks for the Japanese that nobody believed they would surrender, but if you want to assign blame, assign it to their leadership, not ours. I guess you want Americans to tell you we're ashamed? Good luck. It wasn't the high point of our nation's existence, but it sure as hell wasn't turning a blind eye to Nazism. Man, it must be nice to live in Belgium. While its citizens were being railroaded by Hitler and his goons, U.S. and other Allied troops were dying to save them. People in Belgium don't have to deal with people criticizing them for winning the worst war the world has ever seen. They sat back and took it up the ass from the Germans but their hands are blood-free.

Commy

PJ_Saluki wrote:

Comparing 9/11 to Hiroshima and Nagasaki is apples and oranges. They're not even close to each other. Last time I checked, we weren't in a declared war with those fundamentalist wackos who flew jets into buildings. But, we were at war with Japan. Not. The. Same. You're right about one thing, though: Dropping those bombs did end the war. It was a hardcore motherfucker move, but it accomplished the goal. It sucks for the Japanese that nobody believed they would surrender, but if you want to assign blame, assign it to their leadership, not ours. I guess you want Americans to tell you we're ashamed? Good luck. It wasn't the high point of our nation's existence, but it sure as hell wasn't turning a blind eye to Nazism. Man, it must be nice to live in Belgium. While its citizens were being railroaded by Hitler and his goons, U.S. and other Allied troops were dying to save them. People in Belgium don't have to deal with people criticizing them for winning the worst war the world has ever seen. They sat back and took it up the ass from the Germans but their hands are blood-free.

sigh, do people not read threads anymore?

again, According to the official US Strategic Bombing Survey
Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.

THATS FROM THE US GOV'T, THE PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY DROPPED THE BOMBS. THey've even apologized to Japan for dropping them. IT was a barbarous act that should never have happened, period.








http://www.anesi.com/ussbs01.htm

tybird

Collin wrote:

Next time there's a school shooter, let the swat team come and shoot a dozen people and the shooter. The killer could have killed thirty people. Job well done. Your logic. It's okay to kill innocent people to save others. Or is it only okay when those people are non-American?

9/11, the victims deserved to die. I don't care, it wasn't my grandmother that died. This is exactly the logic that I've seen here and it sickens me. And I know what you'll say, America was the hero in the WW, the good guy. And you're right. But a good guy that made mistakes (it's ok to admit them, no one can be perfect, every country makes mistakes. You can only learn from them). I'm glad the US won, don't get me wrong. But I'm sad so many innocent people died, but what's even worse is that you guys don't even care. Innocent people died, remember the shock on 9/11. 3000 people innocent people died, I live in Belgium and I saw people cry here. Think about the families of the people who were killed and go and tell them, 'these terrorist want a war, so bummer, innocent people die'.

I know they didn't want to save others with their actions on 9/11. But to the families of the victims it really doesn't matter. Go tell a guy his pregnant wife died because it's better this way. Tell a grandmother her entire family died, but you were justified in dropping the bombs because if you hadn't they might have died. Tell them their children, fathers, mother ... deserved to die.

It's so disgusting, you don't even show a sign of compassion or grief. I don't care whether you think dropping the bombs was justified or not. You can think it was justified in order to win the war, save other people etc. - though I disagree, I can understand that - but what I can't understand is you talk about those innocent people dying like it's a trivial thing, like it's meaningless.

Sure, your grandfathers died for your freedom. But so did over 200,000 innocent people in Japan. Their deaths meant the end of the war.

I also think that if we forget about the people that died, about all the innocent people that died in war (by friendly or enemy fire), that war will always be a reality.

edit: Also, it's sixty years later. I think you know a lot more than the people who lived sixty years ago. It's not wrong to use that knowledge.

A lot of German people were afraid to do something during the nazi regime. Today Germans don't hide behind that. They don't say, "but they were afraid. Protesting meant prison or worse." They are ashamed. They feel sorry.

This is almost too stupid to respond to....I never said that the folks on 9/11 deserved to die...but somewhere someone said it and believed it, and I am sure that someone who believed that would have no problem looking a relative of the victim in the face and saying so. See there's two sides to every story or every conflict. I know that principle has existed as long as we have huddled together as a species. It was "Total War"....civilians were going to die on any and all sides. Innocent U.S. civilians died in the Philippines....innocent U.S. civilians died in Hawaii...the Japanese invaded the Aleutian Islands...whose innocents are more valuable...depends on your point of view, eh?

The Terrorists wanting a war...maybe...wanting to make a statement was more likely the reason for 9/11. Yes in their frame of reference, no one in the United States was innocent (except for maybe the members of their fifth column). Yes, there are people who think like that in this world. That's not my logic...that's just the facts.

The U.S. made mistakes in fighting WW II, but the Atomic bombs were not a mistake.

tybird

Commy wrote:

sigh, do people not read threads anymore?

again, According to the official US Strategic Bombing Survey
Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.

THATS FROM THE US GOV'T, THE PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY DROPPED THE BOMBS. THey've even apologized to Japan for dropping them. IT was a barbarous act that should never have happened, period.







http://www.anesi.com/ussbs01.htm

That hindsight is 20/20 dead on...still no official document exists from the Japanese that indicates that they were considering surrender prior to the bombings...none..zip...zero. It does not matter what they said after the war...the war was over, and Mr. Peabody had not made his Way-back Machine available to the U.S. government in 1945.

The survey was conducted by a newly independent branch of the armed services. I would expect to overpraise their efforts in any post-war documents of this nature...got to keep the money flowing...they still believed that a nation could be conquered totally by aerial forces, and this document is them trying to prove that point.

Commy

tybird wrote:

That hindsight is 20/20 dead on...still no official document exists from the Japanese that indicates that they were considering surrender prior to the bombings...none..zip...zero. It does not matter what they said after the war...the war was over, and Mr. Peabody had not made his Way-back Machine available to the U.S. government in 1945.

The survey was conducted by a newly independent branch of the armed services. I would expect to overpraise their efforts in any post-war documents of this nature...got to keep the money flowing...they still believed that a nation could be conquered totally by aerial forces, and this document is them trying to prove that point.

Everyone knew Japan was in a terrible state. The NY Times' military analyst, "The enemy, in a military sense, was in a hopeless strategic position...", referrring to Japan.

But again, that's hindsight. fine.

The Japanese code had been broken at the time of the bombings, and Japan's messages were being intercepted. Japan had instructed their ambassador to start peace talks with the allies, through the soviets. This was known to the allies. Japan had even spoken of surrender a full YEAR before the atomic bombs were dropped. On July 13 Japan's foreign minister, Shigenori Togo, wired Moscow ,"...unconditional surrender the only obstacle to peace." This message was decoded and sent to Washington.

Small steps were all that were needed to end the war, instead they dropped 2 atomic weapons on civilian populations in an act many consider to be the first act of the cold war. They wanted to show the world, not only did we have nukes, but we have the balls to use them, a lesson counted in the hundreds of thousands of lives.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

they didnt surrender after the first bomb was dropped.







who surrenders secretly? this theory is bullshit, sorry.

Byrnzie

MrSmith wrote:

they didnt surrender after the first bomb was dropped.



who surrenders secretly? this theory is bullshit, sorry.

The second bomb was dropped 3 days after the first. The Japanese government still didn't know exactly what had happened at Hiroshima when the 2nd bomb was dropped.