Jump to content
Wednesday, July 12, 2017
  • Welcome to the forum!

    Welcome to the War History Online Community Forum, please register or login to start commenting.

Joris

The atomic bombs on Japan, necessary or war crime?

Tell us what you think!  

48 members have voted

  1. 1. The atomic bombs on Japan was

    • a necessary evil
      14
    • a military necessity
      32
    • a war crime
      3


Recommended Posts

On 11/9/2017 at 8:28 AM, Joris said:

What is your opinion on using the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

we didnt want to, but we had to . it saved lives in the long run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Far more lives would have been lost if we had not used it, and the war would have lasted much longer.  I did not expect to return home - yet here I am. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/3/2017 at 1:29 PM, Gunnar Sivertsen said:

There is a view among some historian that Japan's leadership was already discussing the possibility of a negotiated peace proposal. The U.S. wanted unconditional surrender. The other major reason for using the two atom bombs was that Truman wanted to curtail Stalin's participation in the defeat of Japan so that Stalin would be prevented from claiming Japanese territories. (As it happened, USSR gained Sakhalin Island). So, the two bombs were dropped to precipitate a quick defeat. Hence, the use of the atom bombs were a war crime.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were story’s,the Japanese were attempting to surrender,through Swiss mediation??,,but I do believe it was a warning,of sorts,to the Soviet Union,,,who by this time,had become,the “bogeyman “;to the Allies,,,,,,remember,the war in Europe,had been over,for a couple of months and the Russians were by then,imposing their iron will,on Eastern Europe,,,,,,,,and that lasted,for over forty years,,   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2017 at 7:19 AM, Paul Riccoboni said:

Indeed. Why the yanks allowed them to keep face by keeping their god emperor is beyond me. They should have forced a total unconditional surrender like the allies did by carpet bombing german cities. The japs killed thousands at pearl harbour a total unprovoked attack on the USA itself justification enough for total surrender upon american victory let alone the millions of chinese killed and raped. 

 

On 12/18/2017 at 7:59 AM, Gunnar Sivertsen said:

Charles, in response to Edward, you call on Edward to provide evidence the atom bombings really were war crimes and that they were not carried out to save time. I have put forward the documentary evidence provide by Gar Alperovitz, in his book, "The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb", that al least part of the reason was to end the war quickly so as to stop Soviet military advances and claim Japanese territory - that is, the bombs were dropped to save time, as Edward says. 

Second - and here I address Panzerkampwa... too, as well as Charles - there is the saying, "Two wrongs don't make a right". You are of course right that gruesome war crimes were committed by both sides; this does not absolve either party - crimes do not cancel each other out. Or does, "Revenge is sweet" have any objective validity? Our revenge makes us feel better but does it have the desired effect on the enemy's attitude toward us? France meted out her revenge on Germany in 1919 but 20 years later Hitler had used German resentment as an excuse for launching another war; he and they had 'learned' nothing from our harsh treatment of them at the Peace Conference.      

 

On 12/18/2017 at 7:59 AM, Gunnar Sivertsen said:

Charles, in response to Edward, you call on Edward to provide evidence the atom bombings really were war crimes and that they were not carried out to save time. I have put forward the documentary evidence provide by Gar Alperovitz, in his book, "The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb", that al least part of the reason was to end the war quickly so as to stop Soviet military advances and claim Japanese territory - that is, the bombs were dropped to save time, as Edward says. 

Second - and here I address Panzerkampwa... too, as well as Charles - there is the saying, "Two wrongs don't make a right". You are of course right that gruesome war crimes were committed by both sides; this does not absolve either party - crimes do not cancel each other out. Or does, "Revenge is sweet" have any objective validity? Our revenge makes us feel better but does it have the desired effect on the enemy's attitude toward us? France meted out her revenge on Germany in 1919 but 20 years later Hitler had used German resentment as an excuse for launching another war; he and they had 'learned' nothing from our harsh treatment of them at the Peace Conference.      

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did the Americans,agree to keep the Emperor,in place,,,,, because politics trumps morality,every time.,,,,it made the occupation,easier,,Japan faced a hostile communist empire,North Korea,China,Soviet Union,,,,by this time,the “fascist war”was over,,,the new enemy,had been identified,at least,a couple of years earlier,,,,Generally,”The Red Menace “,communism,,,,specifically,the Soviet Union,,,  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×