# Two Japanese Talking A-Bombs



## ToughOmbre (Jun 30, 2007)

Defense Minister *Fumio Kyuma* said the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan by the United States during World War II was an inevitable way to end the war, a news report said Saturday.

"I understand that the bombing ended the war, and I think that it couldn't be helped," Kyodo News agency quoted Kyuma as saying in a speech at a university in Chiba, just east of Tokyo.

Kyuma's remarks drew immediate criticism from Japanese atomic bomb survivors.

"The U.S. justifies the bombings saying they saved many American lives," said *Nobuo Miyake*, 78, director-general of a group of victims living in Tokyo. "It's outrageous for a Japanese politician to voice such thinking. *Japan is a victim."*

Japan a victim? Don't think the survivors of the Bataan Death March would agree.


----------



## 102first_hussars (Jun 30, 2007)

This type of thing can be argued to death with no progress


----------



## evangilder (Jul 1, 2007)

Ask the people of China, Korea, the Philippines and many others if _Japan _was the victim... 

Maybe if the young Japanese were taught the *truth *about what happened, they might have a better understanding.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 1, 2007)

I say fly "FIFI" over Hiroshima and Nagasaki every August. F#ck em...

Nobuo Miyake apparently was a survivor - well you could kiss my American ass, I hope your kidneys glow when you piss!


----------



## evangilder (Jul 1, 2007)

Or something burns when he pees....Wait, that might just be the clap.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 1, 2007)




----------



## 102first_hussars (Jul 1, 2007)




----------



## Graeme (Jul 1, 2007)

FLYBOYJ said:


> I say fly *"FIFI"* over Hiroshima and Nagasaki every August. F#ck em...
> 
> Was it the Confederate Air Force that had a display (mid 1970s?) where a 'mushroom cloud' pyrotechnic was exploded in unison with FIFI's flyover- which caused a stir in Japan and America?
> Also vaguely remember reading about a Smithsonian display of a partial(?) B-29 *minus* the history of Hiroshima and Nagasaki because the Institute didn't want to offend the Japanese (1995?)- which also caused a stir.
> Political correctness on both sides of the Pacific?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 1, 2007)

**** em. They bitch because we wanted to end the war. What about all the crimes they commited. They dont teach that to there own people. They have never learned from there mistakes.

I am going to stop now before I say things I should not say.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 1, 2007)

Graeme said:


> Was it the Confederate Air Force that had a display (mid 1970s?) where a 'mushroom cloud' pyrotechnic was exploded in unison with FIFI's flyover- which caused a stir in Japan and America?
> Also vaguely remember reading about a Smithsonian display of a partial(?) B-29 *minus* the history of Hiroshima and Nagasaki because the Institute didn't want to offend the Japanese (1995?)- which also caused a stir.
> Political correctness on both sides of the Pacific?


Correct on both counts but I think the Smithsonian reversed its decision. During the 1990s Bill Clinton and "Political Correctiveness" was the order of the day.


----------



## Cyrano (Jul 1, 2007)




----------



## trackend (Jul 1, 2007)

From my old mans book Bills War "_The dropping of the atomic bombs to those of us who had survived years of the war and were waiting to be ordered to land on the shores of japan meant that many thousands of men who would have died carrying out those orders would be able to go home. No wonder they cheered when they heard the news. Its easy to pass judgment sitting at home in an armchair. I believe that a great many more Jap lives would have been sacrificed had the invasion of the Japanese mainland gone ahead".
_


----------



## ToughOmbre (Jul 1, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> **** em. They bitch because we wanted to end the war. What about all the crimes they commited. They dont teach that to there own people. They have never learned from there mistakes.
> 
> I am going to stop now before I say things I should not say.



What bothers me more is when *Americans* (usually libs) argue the fact that the bombs did not have to be dropped. I guess as long as there is history there will also be "revisionists".


----------



## Cyrano (Jul 1, 2007)




----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 1, 2007)

I dont understand how revisionism can be good at all? It is changing history? Sorry I dont understand what you mean by that.


----------



## syscom3 (Jul 1, 2007)

In Aug 1995, I was in Indonesia when the 50 the anniversary of the bombings was being marked in various countries of the region.

I remember a very elderly Chinese (maybe Korean?) lady being interviewed on TV.

She said "why did the US stop with 2 bombs"?

And she meant it!


----------



## Haztoys (Jul 1, 2007)

Why is it ok to kill thousands of people with hundreds of bombs and thousands of men... But if you use a atomc bomb its wrong...???..And this was war times ..And Japan started it .. And Japan's lucky we did not play by there "rules' of war

Killing is killing .....Right...Dead is dead...

More on both sides would of died if we would of landed on the beach...

Crazy how Japan will not own up to what they did..


----------



## Cyrano (Jul 1, 2007)




----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 1, 2007)

syscom3 said:


> In Aug 1995, I was in Indonesia when the 50 the anniversary of the bombings was being marked in various countries of the region.
> 
> I remember a very elderly Chinese (maybe Korean?) lady being interviewed on TV.
> 
> ...



I remember that...


----------



## ToughOmbre (Jul 1, 2007)

Cyrano said:


> Revisionism is generally good, but sadly some revisionists do it not to reach more accurate historical truth, but to promote their own political arenda or ideology. Holocaust revisionists for an example are human filth...



"Generally good"? Can't agree. Here in the US, the revisionists are re-writing the history books to be PC or to promote their left-wing (usually) agendas. If you read through a current typical high school level US History textbook, it would be hard to tell what country's history they're talking about.

At least in the case of the PC Smithsonian "Enola Gay" display of the 90's, which cast the Japanese in a favorable light as victims, the outrage of millions of traditional Americans won a small, but important, victory in the cultural wars we have been waging here for many years.


----------



## trackend (Jul 1, 2007)

The Japanese where total bastards never mind about the honorable sons of Nippon ect after what had happened in China,Malay,the Philippines Etc and the allied prisoner treatment, they got what they deserved, and perhaps the world needed to see the horrific effect of Atomic warfare to prevent it happening again.


----------



## Cyrano (Jul 1, 2007)




----------



## Virtual_pilot (Jul 12, 2007)

Using nukes in that fashion was what nowdays would be classified as terrorism. That along with Dresden, but hey the winners don`t get judged... in this world. But all responsible sure got their places in hell reserved once they did that.


----------



## ToughOmbre (Jul 12, 2007)

Virtual_pilot said:


> Using nukes in that fashion was what nowdays would be classified as terrorism. That along with Dresden, but hey the winners don`t get judged... in this world. But all responsible sure got their places in hell reserved once they did that.



Only PC, revisionist historian, muti-cutural, secular progressive idiots would classify American strategic bombing in WW II as terrorism. 

You got a problem with a decision (A-bombing Japan) that saved the lives of tens of thousands of American soldiers, not to mention millions of Japanese?


----------



## k9kiwi (Jul 12, 2007)

You reap what you sew,
Start a war and your people will glow.


----------



## Graeme (Jul 12, 2007)

k9kiwi said:


> You reap what you sew,
> Start a war and your people will glow.



That must make the Enola Gay a 'sewing machine?!

(sorry k9kiwi-just mucking with your brain!)


----------



## timshatz (Jul 13, 2007)

k9kiwi said:


> You reap what you sew,
> Start a war and your people will glow.



Catchy. I like it.


----------



## timshatz (Jul 13, 2007)

Virtual_pilot said:


> Using nukes in that fashion was what nowdays would be classified as terrorism. That along with Dresden, but hey the winners don`t get judged... in this world. But all responsible sure got their places in hell reserved once they did that.



Been my experience the less people know about the Pacific war in 1945, the more likely they are to be idealistic about it. Not to get into a long (many pages), drawn out discussion on it, but the A-bomb was amazingly effective in that it did convince the Japanese, finally, that the war was finished and they'd lost. 

The more you study it, the more amazing it is. That war should've ended in about May of 1946 with another 10 million or so dead (mostly Japanese).


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 13, 2007)

Virtual_pilot said:


> Using nukes in that fashion was what nowdays would be classified as terrorism. That along with Dresden, but hey the winners don`t get judged... in this world. But all responsible sure got their places in hell reserved once they did that.



 

You obviously are very clueless and guessing off of your screen name as Virtual Pilot you dont get out much and live in a computer game hollywood world.

Do you realize that if we had not dropped the bombs how many US and allied Soldiers would have died taking that Island house for house? Do you realize how many more Japanese soldiers would have been killed? Do you realize how many more Japanese civilians, women and children would have died? Let alone that Japan might have been under the Soviet Sphere of influence after they came down from the North.

I dont think you do. I think you need to learn more about the Pacific Theatre of Operations in WW2.

Im just saying....


----------



## timshatz (Jul 13, 2007)

Adler, you are on it. 

The real victims that never died would've been civilians. The US was about to start a Japanese version of "Operation Pointblank" (supposed to start in September 1945). In it, the railroads and bridges would've been prime targets for the USAF, RAF, RAAF and Naval Aircraft (as well as shore bombardment from Warships). As the B29s had already mined the waters around Japan, effectively wiping out the coastal shipping traffic, the only way to move material around Japan at that point was the Railroad. Japanese Railroads in 1945 were coastal in nature with trunk lines running into the interior. Once these are destroyed, the foodstuffs could not be moved around the 5 Islands.

By the summer of 1945, the average caloric intake of a Japanese civilian was on the order of 1500 calories per day. This at a time when heavy work was the norm. And that level of consumption was unsustainable. Take the destruction of the railroads, couple it with heavy labor and a deteriorating diet and you get starvation. As if that wasn't bad enough, the rice crop failed in the fall of 1945 (about the only thing that kept the Japanese alive in the winter of 1946 was the foodstuff stored for the invasion that was given to the Japanese).

The real killer in war is starvation. The Japanese in the Summer of 1945 were looking it right in the face. Add in the attendent diseases that come from a reduce immune system/caloric intake (Typhus, Tuberculousis, Rickets, ect) and diseases born of unsanitary conditions (bombing would've destroyed water and sewage disposal operations) such as cholera, dysintery, ect and you get a mass dieoff of the Japanese population even in places where there was no ground fighting. The worst would be in the cities. All these factors would combine to make the 1918 Influenza Outbreak look insignicant. Deaths would've gone into the millions. 

The bomb avoided that scenario. This does not mean the bomb was a good thing, but it was the lesser of all evils present.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 13, 2007)

Virtual_pilot said:


> Using nukes in that fashion was what nowdays would be classified as terrorism. That along with Dresden, but hey the winners don`t get judged... in this world. But all responsible sure got their places in hell reserved once they did that.



Tell it to this guy Bozo - at 96 I bet you he'll still kick you in the nuts for a dumb ass comment like that!






Why don't you try not to say much and just stick to your video games. Your stupidity is overwhelming.


----------



## Negative Creep (Jul 16, 2007)

Good post tim, I'd never really thought of it from that perspective before. Certainly and invasion and conquest of the mainland would have resulted in far more civilian deaths, and left the country in a state of even greater destruction


----------



## Soundbreaker Welch? (Jul 16, 2007)

What about an operation to kidnap the Emperor of Japan? The Japanese may not have been happy then.


----------



## Negative Creep (Jul 17, 2007)

Wasn't that just the work of a few renegade Army officers? The Imperial Guard stayed loyal and defended the palace, so the whole thing kindof fizzled out. Seeing as most of them saw the Emperor as a living God, I think any blame or animosity would have been directed towards the government, not him


----------



## merlin (Jul 18, 2007)

The attempted coup, wasn't against the Emperor as such. No, it was to protect him against those who were (they thought) giving him bad advice - they didn't seem to think - he could think for himself! But not only that, but also to secure - before the broadcast the recording discs of the Emperor's speech of surrender. If these had been found, maybe some senior officers may have come off the fence!! Then with the military in control all 'bets' are off.


----------



## Cojimar 1945 (Aug 2, 2007)

I think it is understandable that Japanese who did not directly participate in the war or commit any atrocities themselves would feel they were victims. Do all the board members here feel enormous guilt over the crimes committed by some people from their countries even though they personally had nothing to do with it? A nation is not a monolith but rather composed of may unique individuals who may not share the same views.


----------



## bigZ (Aug 2, 2007)

Virtual_pilot said:


> Using nukes in that fashion was what nowdays would be classified as terrorism. That along with Dresden, but hey the winners don`t get judged... in this world. But all responsible sure got their places in hell reserved once they did that.



But it was not nowdays. The US and her allies were commited to a total war and warm fuzzy feelings for the enemy dont come into it. With the potential loss of lives that a invasion would of afforded the A-Bomb would have been the more palletable choice. 

The ill informed always seem to forget that Napalm was killed more people in a single bombing raid and not the bomb. On the night of March 9-10 in what flight commander Gen. Thomas Power termed “the greatest single disaster incurred by any enemy in military history?” The Strategic Bombing Survey estimated that 87,793 people died in the raid, 40,918 were injured, and 1,008,005 people lost their homes.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 2, 2007)

Cojimar 1945 said:


> I think it is understandable that Japanese who did not directly participate in the war or commit any atrocities themselves would feel they were victims. Do all the board members here feel enormous guilt over the crimes committed by some people from their countries even though they personally had nothing to do with it? A nation is not a monolith but rather composed of may unique individuals who may not share the same views.


Tell that to the families of POWs who were murdered during the Bataan death march, were they not victims as well? Were their loved ones not unique individuals?

"Vengeance is mine, say the lord, payback's a bitch...."[/QUOTE]


----------



## Negative Creep (Aug 3, 2007)

Cojimar 1945 said:


> I think it is understandable that Japanese who did not directly participate in the war or commit any atrocities themselves would feel they were victims. Do all the board members here feel enormous guilt over the crimes committed by some people from their countries even though they personally had nothing to do with it? A nation is not a monolith but rather composed of may unique individuals who may not share the same views.




They still allowed it to happen though, especially if they did nothing.Technically yes you could argue that those who played no active part in any war crimes could claim to be innocent. But wars are fought by countries or groups, not individuals. By that logic, someone who only finances terrorism could claim innocence, as they have no direct participation. A lot of Germans tried similar claims after the war; strangely everyone was suddenly a Communist or anti-Nazi all along


----------



## Cojimar 1945 (Aug 3, 2007)

The families of murdered POW's should direct their anger at the individuals that committed the crimes.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 3, 2007)

Cojimar 1945 said:


> The families of murdered POW's should direct their anger at the individuals that committed the crimes.


And that was done - but during WW2 the only way to get the Japanese to cease was to direct the war against the civilian population and although they did suffer greatly (and there were many that could be consider innocents) there was poetic justice served for the earlier atrocities their fellow countrymen committed through out the Pacific, that's the point here....


----------



## ToughOmbre (Aug 9, 2007)

Speaking of Atomic Bombs, on August 9th Nagasaki comes to mind. And with a completely clear conscience


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 9, 2007)

ToughOmbre said:


> Speaking of Atomic Bombs, on August 9th Nagasaki comes to mind. And with a completely clear conscience


Amen brother!


----------



## Aussie1001 (Aug 9, 2007)

Yes yes i seem to agree with mostly everything here !!!
Ignorence is bliss !!!!!!


----------



## ToughOmbre (Aug 9, 2007)

Aussie1001 said:


> Yes yes i seem to agree with mostly everything here !!!
> Ignorence is bliss !!!!!!



Not sure I understand what you're saying, especially the _Ignorence is bliss !!!!!!_ part.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 10, 2007)

Aussie after the other threads I think you need to explain yourself a bit more so people dont jump on you.


----------



## trackend (Aug 10, 2007)

I had this same disscussion with some people on our internal intranet just yesterday about the innocents under the A bombs my take is this. 

1. This was a total war not just the forces but the industrial and political power of every country was involved and with Japanese children being taught to use bamboo spears to attack the invaders a fanatical last stand was on the cards.

2. What would the outcome of an invasion of mainland Japan be in terms of losses on both sides. The only proven yard stick you could go by was Okinawa (need I say more )

3. The original surrender treaty had been re-issued and ammended to not include unconditional in order to allow the Emporer to continue in power
the Japanese govenment took this as a sign of weakness and intended to hold out for more consessions.

Lastly this is what I go by as I wasnt there thank heavens as to the rights and wrongs of the A-bombs.

" _To those of us who had been fighting the war for years the prospect of being ordered to invade Japan, and knowing the thousands and thousands of soldiers who would die carrying out those orders, was it little wonder that we all cheered at the news of the Atomic bombs being dropped and the chance of going home in one piece. It's easy to critisis 60 years later from an arm chair_ " 

Bill Miles Able Seaman RN


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 10, 2007)

trackend said:


> " _To those of us who had been fighting the war for years the prospect of being ordered to invade Japan, and knowing the thousands and thousands of soldiers who would die carrying out those orders, was it little wonder that we all cheered at the news of the Atomic bombs being dropped and the chance of going home in one piece. It's easy to critisis 60 years later from an arm chair_ "
> 
> Bill Miles Able Seaman RN



Amen...


----------



## T4.H (Aug 10, 2007)

My opinion:
It was OK to throw the first one to finish the war.
I'm not sure, that it was OK to throw the second one.
Some says, they throw them only to proof, that a Plutonium bomb works as good as a Uranium bomb.
Perhaps this is true. Perhaps not.
Perhaps they needed only to wait for few days.
Perhaps they could do the same if they would throw out several thousands of flyer with a picture of the second one over Tokyo.

I think, it would be worth to discuss about.

The Fourth of the Four


----------



## ToughOmbre (Aug 10, 2007)

T4.H said:


> My opinion:
> It was OK to throw the first one to finish the war.
> I'm not sure, that it was OK to throw the second one.
> Some says, they throw them only to proof, that a Plutonium bomb works as good as a Uranium bomb.
> ...



If you say it was OK to drop the first bomb to end the war (it didn't), why would it not be OK to drop the second (which did end the war). The Japanese refused to surrender after the Hiroshima bomb and it took *six* days for them to surrender after Nagasaki, then only after the Emporer's intervention. The use of the atomic bombs wasn't racist (actually would have been used on Germany if necessary), wasn't meant to impress the USSR (though it probably did) and wasn't to "punish" the Japanese for wartime atrocities (although *NO* American in 1945 gave a hoot about any Japanese life). One reason and one reason only; end the war and SAVE AMERICAN LIVES (and in the process it saved many Japanese lives.


----------



## T4.H (Aug 10, 2007)

6 days was just to short.
Less or more they had to start a revolution, to get the military hardliner away.
Nowadays, 6 days seems to be long.
But at this time? No TV, no satelites etc.

And they have just to recognize that Hiroshima was gone. As I know, there was a total convusion for several days. As I know, there is only one picture of the atomic cloud. Only one man made any photos in Hiroshima at this day.

You are a japanese at this time.

What is a A-bomb?
Realy only one bomb?
We didn't have any picture?
Is Hiroshima realy destroyed?
What should we do now?

Perhaps they should throw some flyers with the picture of the first, the second bomb and with the atomic cloud over Hiroshima.8)


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 10, 2007)

T4.H said:


> My opinion:
> It was OK to throw the first one to finish the war.
> I'm not sure, that it was OK to throw the second one.
> Some says, they throw them only to proof, that a Plutonium bomb works as good as a Uranium bomb.
> ...




After the first atomic bomb the Japanese Government was given a specific amount of time (48 hours) to respond to cease fire demands. They did not do anything in the allotted time. And don't be fooled, there were many within the Japanese military that knew EXACTLY what happened at Hiroshima. There was no hidden agenda by the one man who had control over the bomb and that was Harry Truman. He would of kept nuking Japan until they surrendered. Any hypothetical or consparicy theory about some general or scientist wanting to see how a second bomb would work is just the imagination of some one between retarded and brain dead....


Hmmmm. 48 hours, not really a lot of time but neither was the time given to thousands Chinese, Koreans and allied POWs before they were butchered just because they quickly surrendered.

There is no discussion here, in fact some Chinese thought a third bomb was appropriate....


----------



## ToughOmbre (Aug 10, 2007)

T4.H said:


> Perhaps they should throw some flyers with the picture of the first, the second bomb and with the atomic cloud over Hiroshima.



If the destruction of Hiroshima didn't push the Japs to surrender, "flyers with pictures" weren't gonna do the trick either.

Like I said in another thread, I've got a 100% clear conscience about the atomic raids. I don't care what the Japanese knew or thought about the attacks. American lives saved, enough said!


----------



## T4.H (Aug 10, 2007)

This is your view.

I have my own one.

I have to finish for today. Soon we have 1 am.

Good night


----------



## Aussie1001 (Aug 10, 2007)

Yes Adler i can see your point !!!!
I sort of agree with T4.H however don't get me wrong the whole jappenese mentality of fight to the death would have inflicted thousands of casualities among You yanks and us Aussies, pommies etc.
So maybe it was a neccessary evil who knows.
Though i am sure that the top brass thought they were doing the best they could to save lives. Maybe in retrospect the scientist did want to see what happened, but hey hindsight's a b**ch.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 11, 2007)

ToughOmbre said:


> Like I said in another thread, I've got a 100% clear conscience about the atomic raids. I don't care what the Japanese knew or thought about the attacks. American lives saved, enough said!




Agreed 100%. It is real easy for people from another nation (that were not in a war with Japan at the time) to reflect back and comdemn the US for it. Frankly I dont give a **** what they think.


----------



## T4.H (Aug 11, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Agreed 100%. It is real easy for people from another nation (that were not in a war with Japan at the time) to reflect back and comdemn the US for it. Frankly I dont give a **** what they think.



With **** you mean me, I think.

Thanks.

I will go out of this thread now.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 11, 2007)

No actually I did not mean you. Did I say "Frankly I dont give a **** what T4.H thinks."?

I was meaning in general.


----------

