Nukes

Little boy ( Hiroshima ) and Fat man ( Nagasaki ) - Necessity or crime?
How do you think?

depends on the viewpoint of how much morality one wishes to ascribe to modern warfare and it's neverendings means of waging it....vs. the period in history where very little morale concern was exhibited to wit just prior to the end of the 19th century and upon the completion of WW1 with it's horrific casualtie rates, altho a case may be made for earlier dating as far back as 1864....ala the orginal Hague treaty.  http://www.icrc.org/Web/Eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/5KZGE6

Edited by Centrix Vigilis - 22-Feb-2007 at 19:14

Necessity. Dead people are dead people, whether they did from a nuke or from a conventional bomb. A nuke is a VERY large explosive device. Nothing else. I don't see how Hiroshima differs from Dresden, Hamburg, Tokyo, Kobe, London, Shanghai and a dozen other cities in that respect.

Depends how you look at it I suppose; a necessary crime?

Adalwolf wrote: kasper wrote: A crime; and Sparten, who says the firebombing of Tokyo and Dresden wasn't a crime?  I do. World War II was a total war, everything was a target. The point of the mass bombings was to cripple the Axis morale and production capabilities, and it succeeded.

Edited by pekau - 23-Feb-2007 at 12:36

First point of view,the Japanese character:we must take under consideration somebody who was the leading actor in his own drama.The Japanese.The Japanese would never surrender to the Americans so easily and without a bloody fight.That's why they were even training civilians to learn how to hold swords ,guns and how to fight with them.If the Americans never threw that bomb,then it would ,be most likely, a massacre of almost the same climax.So,by throwing the bombs ,the Japanese surrendered,without the massacre and the destruction of a possible American invasion in the Japanese islands.

From this point of view:nessecity.

Second point of view,the information of the American goverment:Before the attack with the bombs,the Japanese goverment had already taken under heavy consideration the choice of surrender.A few months before,in 18th June 1945,the Supreme Military council of Japan took for the first time under consideration the case of surrender.There was already the imperial intention for negotiations of peace through the USSR.The Americans,already by the 12 July 1945-date when Japan turned diplomatically to the USSR,had a strong evidence of a Japanese intention for capitulation .Moreover, they had already broken the Japanese communication codes,thus being aware of the Japanese diplomatic and military movements,through the ULTRA network and the MAGIC reports.

From this point of view:the American goverment knew that their Japanese counterparts wanted peace.Yet,they through the bombs.Crime.

Third point of view,military status quo of Japan:A landing of the American forces to the Japanese islands,and especially that of Kiusu (if i spell it right) could end up to be a disaster.The Japanese goverment had gathered there thousands of men and women,more specifically 14 infantry divisions,7 small indepedent brigades,3 tank brigades etc.There were also 12.725 army and navy aircrafts,most of which would be used for kamikaze attacks.The Imperial Navy had 2 cruisers ,23 destroyers which could be used in static positions as heavy land and AA artillery ,45 submarines,115 "koryu" submarines,300 "Kairyu" submarines,120 "Kaiten" manned torpades which could be used in kamikaze attacks,plus the 4.000 "Shin-yo" and "Maru-ni" special attack crafts,also for kamikaze attacks.In a few words,the Americans could have heavy losses in a possible landing,thus being not succesfull.

From this point of view:A nessecity.

Four point of view,the  intentions of the American goverment:The fact that there were intentions of creating a third nuclear bomb,showed that the Americans did not care about civilians.In fact,it's  intentions was to devastate Japan with the worst attack,thus giving a quick end.A quick end would ensure that Japan would stay in the American sphere of influence,thus diminishing the danger of an important Soviet influence in the Far East.The target from the beginning was the Japanese people,in order to wear down the Japanese fighting spirit and to de-legitimize the Japanese goverment to the eyes of the common Japanese civilians,thus eliminating those goverment members who would ask more capitulation conditions.

From this point of view:A bloody crime.

Fifth point of view,the bomb itself:We must admit ,that during that years,nobody really knew the exact consquenses of a nuclear bomb in  land ,air and human body,in the shorterm and in the longterm.So,a nuclear bomb would be ,in the eyes of the American military and political leadership,nothing more than a cheaper and quicker solution of strategic bombing,a strong bomb.The Japanese ace Saburo Sakai ,said in one of his interviews ,that he would also do the same thing if was asked to throw a nuclear bomb,because ,simply,nobody really knew what a terrible weapon it was.

From this point:A crime of ignorance.









Edited by Spartakus - 23-Feb-2007 at 15:34

You have right,nobody has the right to take the life of sb else.There are many things who i,as a human being,fear in life.The most important things i fear is God's wrath ,and generally the wrath of the supernatural, as well as human arrogance and ignorance. But ,by studying history,i discovered that there are many factors,parametres and different points of view about one issue,thus making it more complex and making me more carefull when dealing with it.

In the bottom line,though,i agree.War is a stupidity.

Well, he gave me free will in dealing with myself,not with others.

Pacificsm and associated spiritual/religious philosophies are delightful in theory, atrociously immaterial in historical reality.

Adalwolf wrote: Nonesense, the Christian god gave you free will, so by that reasoning you are free to do want you want, even kill!