Discussion in 'Atomic Bombs In the Pacific' started by thecanadianfool, May 5, 2012.
GS take it easy, take it easy, was just clarifying on a previous post for Tamino. Not starting a fruitless debate.
Alrighty then... it's not easy, you know, being green and all...
Also, that picture you posted. I've seen many regarding the ruthless, sadistic atrocities the Japanese and Germans committed, but that picture, with that awful, carefree smile, made my skin crawl.
Are we to start calling you Kermit now?
And sing the "Rainbow Connection" when you login
Rainbow connection...Nah!...His theme song.
Taking into the account brutality of the Japanese Army, these two bombs are just a small fraction of that what could have been considered as a justified pay-back. They've deserved more.
In addition to that, blood-thirsty Japanese public at home supported the Army and sadistically enjoyed reading reports of pathologically inhumane actions of their Army. Here is a report from Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shimbun (*):
SUB-LIEUTENANTS IN RACE TO FELL 100 CHINESE
RUNNING CLOSE CONTEST
Sub-Lieutenant Mukai Toshiaki and Sub-Lieutenant
Noda Takeshi, both of the Katagiri unit at Kuyang,
in a friendly contest to see which of them will first
fell 100 Chinese in individual sword combat, are
well in the final phase of their race, running almost
neck to neck [sic].
Could you even imagine such a report in British or American newspapers? That is the difference and justification.
They've more than deserved it.
The report is taken from Nial Ferguson: The War of the World, pp 476
I should not use the Japanese atrocities as a justification for the use of the nuclear bomb,because,the nuclear bomb was not used as a revenge for the Japanese atrocities :its aim was very simple : to finish the war very quickly and to save American lives .And this aim was enough as justification : if even 1 American live was saved by the nuclear bomb,this was enough as justification .
Talking about the Japanese atrocities is falling in the trap of the whining brigade .
The Japanese sadistically slaughtered millions of innocent Asians of all types (Chinese, Vietnamese and neighboring territories, Korean, India) during their Imperial push of the 1930s through WWII. Forcing sons and fathers to rape mothers and daughters and sisters. Raping women with sharp, hard, and pointed objects. Indiscriminate killing in brutal, sick ways. Unit 731, the experiments on humans that were just as bad if not worse than the Nazis. The inhumane, barbaric treatment of US and Western POWs. That part of the world was much different than the civilized West culturally, in society, views on humanity, etc., and it was almost as if they lived in a totally different time, more of an ancient, eye for an eye world. They were also ready and were all for sacrificing their entire civilian population as suicide attackers using anything they could get their hands on, and the civilians were ready to die for a person they thought was half-god (that alone should tell you something about development). The Nazis had one similarity, they pretty much acted, thought, and ran things like they lived in the middle ages.
I absolutely agree. As the matter of fact I wanted to address that too, but I prefer simplicity and clear flow of minds. Bombs weren't retaliation - just means to avoid unnecessary loss of lives on both sides.
But your initial statment makes little sense. As others have pointed out in addition that civilian deaths due to the Japanese may well have exceeded those due to the Germans as well. Many of those that the Germans were responsible for were killed in an institutuanlised manor while the Japanese seem to have been more "personal" in their killings though both worked on orders from on high. Which was more brutal is a matter of how you define it but I don't see the number of victims on one side doesn't have much meaning by itself.
When quantity goes to the extreme the “quality” of the subject changes too. What the difference it makes if the murders were so numerous that the crimes became de-personalized?
When the density of crimes increases to such an extent as it did among the Axis nations, somehow the entire nations turn into nations of criminals. It is difficult to escape from the guilt if the number of murders committed per capita is so high. The bloodshed was so intense that it was impossible to isolate and point a finger towards an individual saying: “The Righteous!” They all have been involved, this way or another. If you ask me what do I think about what has happened to the Axis “civilians”, I just can say I don't give a stuff. They've tasted their own medicine.
On the other hand, president Truman had just very few options to end the war and to return as many American boys as possible to the safety. He chose the best alternative.
I get what your saying and I agree that numbers do not measure the catastrophic suffering on either side. Hence why I said the debate was "fruitless".
Well the Allied propaganda eg. claimed that Germans made lamps from human skin and soap from the dead. Both of which are proven false...and hardly any better than the Jap propaganda towards the Allies.
And my answer to the OPs question is of course, yes. Some of you know my stance from the now closed thread on this topic, so I don´t need to explain the "yes".
Any proposed alternative to using the atomic bombs would have very likely caused more deaths than using them. Workable alternatives, that is. The intent was to end the war as quickly as possible.
For those who care about accuracy, and I specifically EXCLUDE Bundesluftikus*, because he only cares about Schicklgruber propaganda!
There is no conclusive evidence that the Germans made lampshades out of human skin or soap out of human fat. But they started the rumor in the camps to terrorize the Jewish inmates. So the comparison is not valid, the Brits only took up a rumor the Germans had started.
* Don't even bother to answer
So, you are saying that it is a "war crime" to bomb soldiers now? That's a switch.