Moral objections on warfare.

[evangilder]

Look, we can tit for tat about the horrors of war, but the simple fact of the matter is that a wounded Japanese soldier was even more dangerous than one who wasn't. They were fanatical to their deaths to kill American soldiers. Have you read the reports or talked to veterans who found their comrades that had died after days of torture by the japanese, with their eyes gouged out, their tongues cut out and their genitals removed and stuffed into their mouth??? Believe me, you see something like that and you are not going to be humane in your treatment of the ones who did this.

But that is another issue altogether. After the battle of Okinawa, it was clear that continued war against the Japanese mainlands were going to be equally, if not MORE bloody than Okinawa. More Japanese died on Okinawa than in the atomic bombings. You can't tell me that the next island was going to be any easier.

Atomic bombs are messy and horrible, no doubt, but continued battles against the Japanese would have been bloodier and more costly. After the war, there was more Japanese weaponry found stashed away to defend their homeland than originally thought by the allies. It would have been worse than the atomic bombings in terms of costs of lives, way worse.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Look, we can tit for tat about the horrors of war, but the simple fact of the matter is that a wounded Japanese soldier was even more dangerous than one who wasn't. They were fanatical to their deaths to kill American soldiers. Have you read the reports or talked to veterans who found their comrades that had died after days of torture by the japanese, with their eyes gouged out, their tongues cut out and their genitals removed and stuffed into their mouth??? Believe me, you see something like that and you are not going to be humane in your treatment of the ones who did this.

But that is another issue altogether. After the battle of Okinawa, it was clear that continued war against the Japanese mainlands were going to be equally, if not MORE bloody than Okinawa. More Japanese died on Okinawa than in the atomic bombings. You can't tell me that the next island was going to be any easier.

Atomic bombs are messy and horrible, no doubt, but continued battles against the Japanese would have been bloodier and more costly. After the war, there was more Japanese weaponry found stashed away to defend their homeland than originally thought by the allies. It would have been worse than the atomic bombings in terms of costs of lives, way worse.

AMEN!

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

And I agree completely. Well said Even.

 

[GT]

I think that you should stop writing in Big Letters as you know that is the same as shouting and you only make a fool of yourself.

There are so many cover ups that occurred after the Pacific War that you really have speak to the people and really read the witnesses reports and read the Now Official Documents on both sides,( I have!!), concerning the issue and they were of course classified as Secret after the War.

The cover up was only to justify the A-bombings and it is true that Japan had been defeated before and that they already were starving and that was the result of the US Naval blockade. Japan could have been easily like in Rabaul, left to wither on the vine if US wanted.

The truth is that it was a racial decision to bomb Japan, it would never happened in Europe. And as I told you before the US Navy and high ranking officials was opposed both to the A-bombings of Japan and the invasion of Japan for that specific reason. They knew and you don´t know only because you are blinded by what happened to your relatives.

Cheers
GT

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Whatever the issue was it saved lives my friend.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

NO - I WRITE IN BIG LETTERS TO GET THE POINT ACROSS - AND IF YOU THINK I'M SHOUTING SO BE IT! THIS IS ONE SUBJECT I MAKE NO APOLOGIES TO NO ONE - I COULD BE BLINDED BY WHAT I READ IN A BOOK OR WHAT IS ACTUALLY WITNESSED, BUT LET YOU SEE THE EXPRESSIONS ON THE FACES OF FAMILY AND FRIENDS WHO EXPERIENCED THIS WAR AND I THINK YOU'LL COME AWAY WITH A DIFFERENT FEELING!

Peace!

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I am not going to argue with you on that matter. I had members on both sides of the war and they both witnessed how it was the worst hell this world has ever known. Stories from both of them makes me cringe some times.

 

[evangilder]

I am not blinded. Sure there were some that opposed it. There will always be those that oppose any action in war. But obviously there were enough who did not to oppose it. Look at the casualties of Okinawa alone. Continued war would have made those numbers pale in comparison. To starve them out like on Rabaul would likely have prolonged there surrender by a year or more. After four years, it was time to put the war to an end. When the enemy is on the ropes and reeling, you finish them off, period. To let up means that they could do something desperate and turn the situation in their favor. You cannot state definitely that they would give up if left to starve. How many millions would die that way before they gave up?

They were a very proud people and only gave up when they realized how desperate their situation was when faced with the bomb.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

True also.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

PEACE TO ALL!

 

[GT]

( Whatever the issue was it saved lives my friend)

My reply to that is that the lives would be spared anyhow and all of the unnecessary casualties at Hiroshima and Nagasaki would be avoided as they were civilians.

I agree that the Bushi-Do was used in the wrong way but there were sometimes that the Japanese that showed mercy and one of these incidents was when my good friend Sakai spared a transport plane. I can not tell you what type it was as my notes are at my "Blue Heaven" in The Big Apple. But he saw some civilians looking at him by the windows of the transport and decided not to shot it down.

Cheers
GT

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Sabru Sakai - Now theres a class act! I met him in the 1970's, the most interesting and compassionate individual you could meet!

 

[evangilder]

Certainly there were compassionate Japanese as there were Americans as well. Both sides had their share of animals.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

YEP - PEACE TO ALL !
:BIG:

 

[GT]

Yes! I will agree to let there be Peace instead of War and don´t let him rule no more.

Cheers
GT

 

[trackend]

I firmly believe the dropping of the bomb was the correct action I also believe the reason for the second bomb on Nagasaki was two fold One the delegation that was sent to report back on the destruction of Hiroshima to the Japanese government was delayed due to air transport problems this added an extra day to the trip also The Russians had begun a massive thrust in Manchuria with plans to claim large areas of the far east Truman used the Second bomb to hurry up the Japanese surrender and to warn the Russians.
The Axis forces wanted to enslave or exterminate millions upon millions of people and they butchered millions upon millions in attempting it. I'm not saying that atrocities where not committed by the allies but what ever way you look at it the Nazis and the Japanese carried out the most revolting acts the world has ever seen from Nan-king too the Bel-sen from Manchuria too Yugoslavia would the allies even have thought of going too war had it not been for the aggression of these nations I don't think so. I'm getting a bit fed up with people trying to say yes but look what the allies did. The Nazis and the Japs bloody well started it and the allies finished it and the world is a dam sight better off because of it most of us wouldn't even be around if bleeding Adolf and the Sons of Nippon had had their way. In the end they dragged the world into the gutter where morality was a very poor second to victory.

 

[Anonymous]

The Japanese did not have another choice after the embargo was put to affect They could only have chosen not to continue their war in China before that.

Why? They could have chosen to stop their expansion in China at any time. It was not that they could not, it was that they would not. The greed of Japan's leadership dictated their behavior.

The fact is Japan simply wanted the resources from China and were unwilling to trade for them - they wanted to steal them. When the USA and Britain acted to stop them with the embargo/blockade, after numerous diplomatic appeals which were ignored, Japan opted for war with the USA and Britain.

The war was still basically a colonial war and Hawaii had been annexed on 7 July 1898, and this action was the culmination of more than 50 years of growing US commercial interests in the Hawaiian islands. What happened after the war was that the colonist countries discovered that all of their colonies wanted to be free and some became free after a war with the suppressing colonial countries, one of the last being free was Vietnam. Hawaii the one and only not to become free and instead becoming the 50th state to the US on 29 Aug 1959.

It is not true that "all of their colonies wanted to be free". Some did not. Some are protectorates to this day, having judged the benfits outweight any costs.

The World was a very different place prior to WWI. With WWI, the rules changed. One big difference was the nature of communications and transportation had made the World a "much smaller place". A new age of accountability and human rights had dawned, and an end to Colonialism had been mandated in 1928 per the Briand-Kellogg Peace Pact, where more than 60 nations including both Germany and Japan pledged not to resort to war in furtherance of national goals. A pledge it violated just 6 years later by invading China and SE Asia.

If you read the terms of the Atlantic Charter (1941), which was by-and-large dictated by FDR, the following assertions clearly show the American position:

Second, they desire to see no territorial changes that do not accord with the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned;

Third, they respect the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will live; and they wish to see sovereign rights and self government restored to those who have been forcibly deprived of them;

Fourth, they will endeavor, with due respect for their existing obligations, to further the enjoyment by all States, great or small, victor or vanquished, of access, on equal terms, to the trade and to the raw materials of the world which are needed for their economic prosperity;

Interestingly, while Churchill all to willingly agreed with FDR and signed the charter, after the war, he claimed that the right of self-determination was to apply to the colonies of the "bad nations" such as Italy, but not to those of Britain or France.

The decision to drop the bomb was a atrocity of an magnitude never equaled in modern history just because of the reasons that I have stated above and can repeat again.

The Japanese was defeated the had no oil and scrapmetal to continue the war effectively and almost the entire war machinery was gone. The only reason for the A-bomb was that it was the only way to test the bomb as the war in Germany was over and that there was No Way the US would have used the bomb in ETO anyhow!. That fact is that one has to understand in the minds of people and military at that time, let´s try it on the Japs!

It was the US military that pressed for the A-bomb to be tested instead of some other wise and by the wars end accepted methods. There were many that opposed the droppings of the A-bomb at high level but they were "bulldozed".

Cheers
GT

First of all, the A-bomb had already been tested. Your contention that the choice to drop the bomb was in order to test it is nonsense.

Second, despite being beaten, the Japanese would not surrender. As far back as about Oct. 1944 the Japanese had sought a negotiated peace with the USA, but this was unacceptable. Any negotiated peace would leave Japan too capable of rearming itself and then re-initiating war. It made no sense to give Japan a "time-out" so they could recuperate, and the USA did not want to have to maintain a large military force on the boarder with Japanese territories.

You are right, Japan was beaten. And they knew they were beaten. But they would not surrender. They made their intention to inflict as much harm on the USA as possible, and their disregard for the lives of the Japanese people, all too clear in numerous battles including Iwo Jima and Okinawa, and through the use of Kamikazes. There was no sign that Japan would surrender unconditonally, and without the use of the A-bomb an invasion would be required. There was also much reason to believe that any such negotiated peace would not be honored by the Japanese military leadership anyway. The Japanese had two main terms in their peace offerings; First that the Emperor would remain untouched. Second that there would be no occupation of the Japanese mainland.

And again, the Soviet situation dictated the use of the bomb. It was absolutely necessary to prevent Soviet expansion into SE Asia. Without Japan's immeadiate surrender, more than half of China and the northern Islands of Japan were likely to fall to the Soviets. Even had Japan surrendered the Soviets might well have claimed these lands. The use of the A-bomb was a signal to the Soviets as well as the Japanese. The Japanese were far better off having suffered the relatively small losses at Hiroshima and Nagasaki than to have had the Soviets occupy the northern islands.

I don't see what the whining over the use of the A-bombs is all about. More people were killed by conventional bombing of Japanese cities, something like 400,000 in Tokyo alone in a single raid. The A-bomb just made it undeniably clear that failure to surrender meant utter destruction. No argument that the Japanese could somehow hold out for a negotiated peace could be taken seriously anymore.

Finally, what right do the Japanese have to complain about how they were treated? At every opportunity they showed nothing but contempt and loathing for non-Japanese. They had no regaurd for non-japanese human life. There is absolutely no doubt that if the Japanese had developed the A-bomb they would have used it in a heartbeat. And, even though they were beaten, they were still trying to coordinate a biological attack against the USA which they knew would only inflict suffering on civilians and achieve no military objectives.

The Japanese were a vile culture prior to WWII. Bushido is promoted as some kind of honorable code - it was not. It was a way of life that justified the terrorizing and slaughtering of innocents at the whim of the noblility. It was a means to subjigate responsiblity for ones own actions. It was the ultimate institutionalization of the "I was only following orders" excuse for totally unacceptable behavior. Wrapping evil in a pretty box of ritual and cerimony does not change what it is.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[DAVIDICUS]

RG said,

"Bushido is promoted as some kind of honorable code - it was not. It was a way of life that justified the terrorizing and slaughtering of innocents at the whim of the noblility."

"Wrapping evil in a pretty box of ritual and cerimony does not change what it is. "


Well said.

 

[Anonymous]

I think that you should stop writing in Big Letters as you know that is the same as shouting and you only make a fool of yourself.

There are so many cover ups that occurred after the Pacific War that you really have speak to the people and really read the witnesses reports and read the Now Official Documents on both sides,( I have!!), concerning the issue and they were of course classified as Secret after the War.

The cover up was only to justify the A-bombings and it is true that Japan had been defeated before and that they already were starving and that was the result of the US Naval blockade. Japan could have been easily like in Rabaul, left to wither on the vine if US wanted.

The truth is that it was a racial decision to bomb Japan, it would never happened in Europe. And as I told you before the US Navy and high ranking officials was opposed both to the A-bombings of Japan and the invasion of Japan for that specific reason. They knew and you don´t know only because you are blinded by what happened to your relatives.

Cheers
GT

You're full of crap GT. You have not read the primary source documents or you'd not be saying what you are saying. I have read them, I may even dig some of them out and photo and post them for you soon.

Even the behavior of the Nazi's pales beside that of the Japanese.

Your contention that we could wait and starve out the main Islands of Japan is foolishness. They would simply never have surrendered. In the meantime, the requirements of maintaining a blockade would have required the USA to maintain a huge military presence in the region - something we did not want to do. Our soldier's wanted to go home!
Or are you suggesting that we should have continued to bomb the crap out of them with conventional weapons however long it might take for them to surrender?

And you ignore the situation with the Soviet's entirely. By the end of October it was projected that the Soviets would have held all of Mongolia,

I suggest you familiarize yourself better with this topic.

The Final Months of the War With Japan; Signals Intelligence, U.S Invasion Planning, and the A-Bomb decision and the War-time intelligence document on the same site are a good place to start.

Peering through
Different Bombsights - Military Historians, Diplomatic, Historians, and the Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb is a good "looking at it from all sides" article.

The following map depicts hypothetical positons of the major powers had USA followed your thinking and not dropped the A-bomb in early August 1945.

The Soviets actually were well positioned to invade Japan via 50 km Soya Strait from the Island of Sakhalin to the Northern Japanese Island of Hokkaido, which they held most of throughout the war (Japan never contested it). From Hokkaido the main Island of Honshu could be easily invaded.

The Soviets would probably have reached Tokyo first, and we would have ended up with Japan being split into an E. Block vs. West situation and an occpuation which would have totally and irrevocably destroyed Japan as a culture. The A-bomb was critical to keeping the Soviets out of SE Asia, espeically the Japanese home Islands.

The dropping of the A-bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the best thing that could have happened to the Japanese given their situation and unwillingness to accept it.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Nonskimmer]

NO - I WRITE IN BIG LETTERS TO GET THE POINT ACROSS - AND IF YOU THINK I'M SHOUTING SO BE IT! THIS IS ONE SUBJECT I MAKE NO APOLOGIES TO NO ONE -

Peace!

I like this man!

Btw, that's an interesting hypothetical map RG.