Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

About 2,000 American Citizens were killed in the bombing of Hiroshima

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Tiggeroshii Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 06:10 PM
Original message
About 2,000 American Citizens were killed in the bombing of Hiroshima
And several hundred unidentified allied POWs were killed as well.

http://everything2.com/title/Hiroshima+%2526+Nagasaki%253A+Was+it+justified%253F

This is news to me. Learning more about this makes it very difficult for me to keep my composure. This was an action that was unecessary and arguably at least justifiable of war crime charges.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ingac70 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 06:19 PM
Response to Original message
1. Lets dig up Truman and try him!
:freak:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tiggeroshii Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-09-09 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. was speaking in the past tense
...didn't mean to confuse
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
2. Japan exterminated 30 milllion civilians durring WWII.
Edited on Fri Aug-07-09 06:24 PM by Statistical
That is about 400,000 per month.

Delaying the end of the war a couple months would have resulted in millions more dead.

Prior to dropping the bomb Japan wanted to "surrender" but they wanted:
* No military disarmarment.
* Keep all occupied territory. This include China where Japan had already oversaw the genocide of 23 million Chinese civilians
* No occupation of Japan
* No war crimes trials (condoning executions of POW, rape camps, slave labor, medical experiments on civilians, intentional famine, genocide, massacare of Nanking, canibalism, and more)

Japan was not willing to consider anything less than that prior to the bomb.

So it was:
1) accept Japan terms a leave 100 million people under the boot of a racist, xenophobic empire who was the Chinese as less valuable than the land they were living on.
2) starve Japan via a blockade that would take months (remember 400,000 civilians killed each month).
3) invasion which would have resulted in hundreds of thousands of casualties plus bombings to "soften them up" and taken months to prepare (400,000 per month being exterminated, tick tock)
4) use the bomb and attempt to force a surrender in 2 weeks.

You choose. War sucks lets not do it again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
keep_it_real Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-09-09 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #2
14. Please provide reference for Japan exterminated 30 milllion civilians
I'm not defending if they did but I never heard of such.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 03:48 AM
Response to Reply #14
31. Here

China 10 Million to 20 Million.

Anything Asia is Japan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
keep_it_real Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #31
81. estimates the civilian victims of Japanese war crimes at 5,424,000
Japanese War Crimes
R. J. Rummel estimates the civilian victims of Japanese war crimes at 5,424,000.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-11-09 03:05 AM
Response to Reply #81
82. They started a war

Your count should also include all those who died because of actions of the Japanese army, including soldiers and civilians caught in the line of fire.

Since it was china and Japan, with no other countries in between, the count of 10 million to 20 million killed should be laid directly at the feet of Japan.

You are also selectively picking the count-

Werner Gruhl estimates the civilian victims of Japanese war crimes at 20,365,000.

I can read too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #14
72. i guess you never cracked a history book.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tiggeroshii Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 01:17 AM
Response to Reply #2
16. I too would like to see some kind of link to your claims.
Those numbers seem a bit high to me, and it is hard for me to find any other source with those numbers.

Thanks =)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 03:48 AM
Response to Reply #16
32. Here

China 10 Million to 20 Million

Asia, Japan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tiggeroshii Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 03:56 AM
Response to Reply #32
33. substantially less then what you claimed
Also, there is still nowhere I can find that shows Japan's terms were as demanding as you say. I've taken 3 history classes over the last 7 months and each professor stressed the terms Japan was asking and they were as I said. If you can help me find a more reliable source on the subject, I would definitely appreciate it. I found IHR, and am beginning to question it's credibility.

Thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 04:25 AM
Response to Reply #33
38. Not really

15 Million+ to 27 Million+ Leaving out India and the Soviet Union, two countries involved in the war with Japan also.

I've taken History classes, read books and watch shows ( mostly the history channel ) since I was about 10 years old. I'm now 40. Believe me when I say, they don't tell you everything. You only skim history in those classes.

They probably don't Tell you about US involvement in Cuba and the Philippines after the Spain-American war.

They don't tell you we are the reason for the term banana republic and why.

They don't tell you that Japan was after a bomb, and that they knew what it was immediately after we dropped it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 07:37 AM
Response to Reply #38
41. 1920-1930 world population increased by about 210 million. 1930 to 1940
by about 230 million, & about the same 1940-1950.

so i seriously doubt the japanese killed 30 million people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #41
48. That is your evidence because the world population increased?
Edited on Mon Aug-10-09 08:53 AM by Statistical
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War

Japan killed 20 million people just in the Sino-Japan war which began before WWII became a "world war".

20 million just in one theater of operation.


Japan executed (not bombed, or accidentally killed) but executed 3 to 10 million civilians (6 million best estimate). Why is the amount so variable? Unlike Germany which used the orderly disposal of civilians Japan was more akin to something from the dark ages.

Troops would sweep into cities and towns and rape, pillage, and sack. Mass executions occurred routinely and without record. Farmlands were intentionally destroyed by fire resulting in manmade famine. Troops were awarded trophy kills and rape victims as rewards. Civilians were executed by retreating troops as "punishment" for the Chinese military succeeding.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes#Mass_killings

R. J. Rummel, a professor of political science at the University of Hawaii, states that between 1937 and 1945, the Japanese military murdered from nearly 3,000,000 to over 10,000,000 people, most likely 6,000,000 Chinese, Indonesians, Koreans, Filipinos, and Indochinese, among others, including Western prisoners of war. "This democide was due to a morally bankrupt political and military strategy, military expediency and custom, and national culture."<21> According to Rummel, in China alone, during 1937-45, approximately 3.9 million Chinese were killed, mostly civilians, as a direct result of the Japanese operations and 10.2 millions in the course of the war.

I incorrectly stated Japan killed 30 million civilians (mixing up total deaths w/ civilian deaths) but they most certainly ended 30 million + lives. Don't be fooled, the Japan of today is not the Japan of 1930-1950. The people were driven by as much "genetic superiority" as Hitler's Nazi were. Japan saw it's race as genetically superior to the Chinese trash occupying so much valuable colonial land. Japan wasn't interested in occupying China. Japan wanted to exterminate the Chinese so "true" Asians (Japanese) could inhabit the land.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #48
49. my evidence is that the rate of increase stayed roughly similar decade over
decade, despite the depression & war. though simple economic downturn reduces birthrate.

you claimed the japanese exterminated 30 million civilians.

my father in law was horse calvary in manchuria. two brothers were in pow camps in russia & china through the 50s.

soldiers there were no different from our soldiers in iraq today - despite your picture of them as universally driven by notions of racial superiority.

no, they were conscripts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #49
53. My sources are Wikipeida

and every history book I have read since I was 10 years old.

30 Million +.

Are you going to claim that the NAZIs didn't exterminate the other 30 million+ that died in the war?

They have a word for that you know.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #53
58. what are you babbling about?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #58
60. You responded to me

Then statistical jumped in.

Are you confused?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #49
57. Rape of Nanking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #57
59. 30 million died in the rape of nanking? gee, who knew?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #59
61. Responding to this sentence

Since you seem so confused.

"soldiers there were no different from our soldiers in iraq today - despite your picture of them as universally driven by notions of racial superiority."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #49
75. So 70 million people didn't die in WWII?
Edited on Mon Aug-10-09 01:40 PM by Statistical
I mean the population rate of increased stayed the same.

If pop rate staying the same if "proof" that Imperial Japan didn't kill 30 million people (including extermination of 10 million Chinese) then wouldn't the pop rate staying the same be "proof" WWII never even happened?

By the same logic the Holocaust never happened either. 11 million people should have changed the population rate, since it stayed the same the Holocaust never happened. You would find a lot of friends on Stormfront with theories like that.

If you want to stop being ingorant for a minute and learn something you might realize that not only could it happen it did happen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes

Japan wasn't fighting a war of conquest. The war between China & Japan started 9 years prior to the official start of WWII.
Japan didn't want the Chinese it just wanted the land they were living on. The Japanese people in 1920-1950 viewed non Japanese as less than human and the policies of the Imperial Army reflected that.

They were monsters, ever bit as bad as Hitler and the Nazi.

Most war crimes by Nazi were done by a minority of the population (SS for example). On the other hand the Japanese had no special units to deal with the "Chinese problem" they simply had everyone participate in the raping, killing, and starving.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 08:45 AM
Response to Reply #16
47. I stand corrected.
I mixed up total casualties with civilian casualties.

The Japanese Imperial empire was responsible for approximately 30 million casualties in WWII.

Of those about 6 to 10 million were civilian executions (mass killings considered war crimes under Geneva convention).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes

Of course just counted "official WWII" casualties in inaccurate because WWII began in 1941 however Japan had already begun its reign of terror in China as of 1937.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War

Tack on and additional 3 million military and 17 million civilians for the Second Sino-Japnese War in which once again Japan was the belligerent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 07:40 AM
Response to Reply #2
42. since the japanese were pretty well confined to the japanese islands before we dropped the bomb,
you're saying they'd have started executing 400,000 of their own civilians every month if we hadn't bombed them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #42
45. Japan had 1.2 million imperial troops in China at the end of the war.
Edited on Mon Aug-10-09 08:31 AM by Statistical
It was actually quite a logistical challenge to get them all back to Japan and integrated into society.

Japan ability to engage in offensive combat was non existent.
Their ability to project power via sea and air was also anemic.
Their ability to exterminate "sub-humans" and wage bloody ground campaigns was not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #2
51. "War sucks lets not do it again": uh - iraq, afghanistan, plus pakistan
& half a dozen low-intensity or covert conflicts around the globe.

but, oooh, japanese are special monsters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #51
52. Yes, they were

No different, and just as bad as the NAZIs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #52
56. no, they weren't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #56
62. I have history and history books to back me up
Edited on Mon Aug-10-09 12:36 PM by Confusious
What do you have? your talking ass?

Rape of nanking
bataan death march.
Laha massacre
Banka Island massacre
Parit Sulong
Palawan massacre
SS Tjisalak massacre perpetrated by Japanese submarine I-8
Wake Island massacre-see Battle of Wake Island

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes

And many, many more...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WolverineDG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #62
71. You might as well give up
the apologists will never believe what you tell them.

dg
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #71
74. I know

I do it for the people who haven't sucked the bullshit down yet.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aint_no_life_nowhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #56
70. Good Lord, I can't believe this is even being debated here
The imperialist Japanese WERE special monsters. With the Nazis, they were the most murderous, racist, and genocidal monsters in human history, going by the number of people they killed and the way they killed them and the complete lack of empathy they showed for people they considered subhuman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
3. Do you have kin that were killed/injured in World War I? Training to invade Japan? I do on all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 03:45 AM
Response to Reply #3
30. I do too

Great-Grandpa was a Doc in WW 1

Grandpa was a seal in WW 2. Snuck into Japanese harbors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aint_no_life_nowhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 06:33 PM
Response to Original message
4. Didn't the conventional bombing of Tokyo kill more people?
I'm not certain of the numbers and I'm not sugesting that the fact that the conventional bombing of Japanese cities might have killed more people that it justifies the use of nuclear weapons. I just wonder if dead people are dead either way, that war is hell, and that whether people die from a nuclear bomb or a fire bomb that they don't care about the means utilized. I've read that the reason Japanese cities were fire bombed is because Japan deliberately moved their factories into the homes of people and kept them separated into small enterprises to try to avoid the destruction that Germany's factories were experiencing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ddeclue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
5. bullcrap... the Japanese killed tens of millions in Asia and the Pacific
and could have surrendered at any time but chose to fight on even after the first bomb was dropped.

I hate how ever year the uber pacifists show up at liberal websites to try and rewrite history.

:argh:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tiggeroshii Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Several hundred allied POWs were killed at the same time.
The Japanese were in the process of surrendering. What they wanted was to allow the Empereror to stick around, and not be killed. What we wanted was unconditional surrender. What ended up happening was us bombing them, they unconditionally surrendered, and we kept the empereror. Again, about 2,000 Japanese Americans were killed-these people were in Japan at the time and not allowed to leave the country due to governments of both sides worrying about potential espionage. So far only about two dozen American POWs were killed in the blast. At least 300 unidentified allied POWS went along with them. We killed ourselves in that blast. The Japaense did horrible things.But what were we punishing us for? Similar atrocities?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 03:44 AM
Response to Reply #7
29. They shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Were probably being used as slave labor, which was illegal under the Geneva Conventions.

They were not surrendering. The vote even after the bomb was 3 to 3. The emperor had to break the tie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #7
76. Not true.
Detailed reports of the unprecedented scale of the destruction at Hiroshima were received in Tokyo, but two days passed before the government met to consider the changed situation. At 04:00 on August 9, word reached Tokyo that the Soviet Union had broken the Neutrality Pact, declared war on Japan and launched an invasion of Manchuria.

These "twin shocks"—the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and the Soviet entry—had immediate profound effects on Prime Minister Suzuki and Foreign Minister Tōgō Shigenori, who concurred that the government must end the war at once. However, the senior leadership of the Japanese Army took the news in stride, grossly underestimating the scale of the attack. They did start preparations to impose martial law on the nation, with the support of Minister of War Anami, to stop anyone attempting to make peace. Hirohito told Kido to "quickly control the situation" because "the Soviet Union has declared war and today began hostilities against us."

The Supreme Council met at 10:30. Suzuki, who had just come from a meeting with the Emperor, said it was impossible to continue the war. Tōgō Shigenori said that they could accept the terms of the Potsdam Declaration, but they needed a guarantee of the Emperor's position. Navy Minister Yonai said that they had to make some diplomatic proposal—they could no longer afford to wait for better circumstances.

In the middle of the meeting, shortly after 11:00, news arrived that Nagasaki, on the west coast of Kyūshū, had been hit by a second atomic bomb (called "Fat Man" by the Americans). By the time the meeting ended, the Big Six had split 3–3. Suzuki, Tōgō, and Admiral Yonai favored Tōgō's one additional condition to Potsdam, while Generals Anami, Umezu, and Admiral Toyoda insisted on three further terms that modified Potsdam: that Japan handle her own disarmament, that Japan deal with any Japanese war criminals, and that there be no occupation of Japan.


Note this is AFTER both atomic bombs were dropped AND Russia entered the war and the war council was STILL split on conditions for surrender. Prior to the ATOMIC bomb only a single member of the council believed surrender w/ condition for Emperor was acceptable.

Your revisionist version of history notwithstanding Japan was not willing to surrender until the combination of Atomic bombs, and Russia entering the war (Japan was losing against current Allies Russia would seal the deal) convinced them even statemate wasn't an option. Even then the council was divided. They did agree to drop conditions for keeping occupied territory but still insisted on 4 conditions (3 + emperor).

It took 4 more days plus Emperor stepping in to decide on a surrender. When Emperor did that there was a military coup to prevent people of Japan from finding out.

Lie all you want in thread after thread but there is no evidence (no security council minutes, no offical policy by Japan, no copies of diplomatic messages, no testimony from diplomats or envoys, nothing to indicate Japan was willing to surrender w/ just a condition for Emperor PRIOR to the atomic bombs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AnOhioan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 06:55 PM
Response to Original message
6. Although it is hard to tell here on DU sometimes
There are folks who agree with you.

Did the use of atomic weaponry save lives? Debatable.

Would Japan have eventually surrendered? Without a doubt.

The reason they were used, in my opinion, was to send a msg to Stalin and the Soviet Union.
Also...There was probably some sense of "We built it, let's not let it go to waste."

Our use of atomic weapons to destroy two cities ranks right up there with the deplorable way we treated Native Americans earlier in our history. Both are examples of actions we should try and learn from so the same mistakes are not repeated.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alarimer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-09-09 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. What disgusts me the most is the idea that it was right because WE did it.
If someone else had done it to us, of course it would have been wrong. The idea that all of our actions in that war were the correct ones. We committed a lot of war crimes in ever single war we have ever been in. The atomic bombs and the firebombing were the worst, in my opinion. It was wrong to do regardless of whatever atrocities any of out enemies might have done.

It was most likely a display of our power to the Soviets, more than anything else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 03:40 AM
Response to Reply #12
28. If we started a war

and killed 30 million+ people, we deserve whatever ass kicking we get.

We followed the rules of the Geneva convention.

We treated the Japanese prisoners and civilians with kindness, While or soldiers where starved and beaten and beheaded.

We treated them fairly after the war, spending our money and doctors to rebuild and heal a country after the war. We would not have gotten the same if the Japanese had won.

But we drop a bomb to end the war, that they started, and because they would not surrender, to some we are monsters.

Even a Japanese man who was in the attack on pearl harbor told tibetts, the man who dropped the bomb "you did the right thing"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 02:29 AM
Response to Reply #6
21. While the message to Stalin was probably part of it
I doubt that was the primary motivation. If it had been Truman would've dropped a few more bombs on Russia because it's clear that Stalin didn't get the message.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
8. I'm sure our president authorized it for kicks
Edited on Fri Aug-07-09 07:41 PM by stray cat
:sarcasm: there may be other things about it that is news to you as well. The real question is if you would sacrifice your life for one of those killed as you were probably not serving in the Pacific in World War II where you could really say the life on an innocent japanese civilian was more important than your own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-09-09 04:35 PM
Response to Original message
10. Thank you but I am going to have to stay out of these threads
I am beyond stunned to see the numerous threads justifying the war crime committed in our name on August 6, 1941.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tiggeroshii Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-09-09 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. Agreed.
Edited on Sun Aug-09-09 09:31 PM by Tiggeroshii
Truly amazing.

Thank you as well =)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 03:30 AM
Response to Reply #10
26. And I am stunned

By the number of people defending the fascist state of the empire of Japan, and the 30 Million + they killed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 07:26 AM
Response to Reply #26
39. Condemning the use of nuclear bombs is not the same as defending Japan's war crimes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #39
55. We did not drop a nuclear bomb on japan
Edited on Mon Aug-10-09 12:28 PM by Confusious
We dropped an atomic bomb.

Not as bad as a "nuclear bomb"

It seems to me, that most people around here defend japan itself without knowing what they did. They act like Japan was innocent.

They started a war, we ended it.

You don't pet a rabid dog. You put it down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #26
73. You don't understand the "straw man" fallacy, do you?
Perhaps you should look it up. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spider Jerusalem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #10
43. ...
Would you have found a prolonged and bloody invasion of Japan a better option?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scheming daemons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-09-09 04:44 PM
Response to Original message
11. Multiply by 250, and that's how many Americans would've been killed if we DIDN'T do it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tiggeroshii Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-09-09 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. ...because the Japanese hadn't already given a conditional surrender?
Edited on Sun Aug-09-09 06:16 PM by Tiggeroshii
The condition being to keep the emperor? A condition which we rejected even though after their unconditional surrender, we decided it would be better to keep the emperor around anyways for stability reasons? Even Ike conceded they were on the brink of surrendering and we didn't need to use "that awful thing on them."

He's right. We didn't need to use it on them. Let alone twice. Think about this. Look it up. And then reconsider again how many American citizens and allied POWs were killed from the blast of the Hiroshima bomb.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proteus_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 01:26 AM
Response to Reply #13
18. They wanted to keep more then their Emperor.
They wanted to keep their Imperial system of government and they were trying to keep some occupied territories like Korea. Anything but unconditional surrender was not an option.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tiggeroshii Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 03:30 AM
Response to Reply #18
25. Not according to a memo received by FDR at the Yalta conference(Jan 1945)
Edited on Mon Aug-10-09 03:33 AM by Tiggeroshii
The terms were as follows:

* Complete surrender of all Japanese forces and arms, at home, on island possessions, and in occupied countries.
* Occupation of Japan and its possessions by Allied troops under American direction.
* Japanese relinquishment of all territory seized during the war, as well as Manchuria, Korea and Taiwan.
* Regulation of Japanese industry to halt production of any weapons and other tools of war.
* Release of all prisoners of war and internees.
* Surrender of designated war criminals.

Winter 1985-86 Journal, pp. 508-512

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n3p-4_Weber.html

Please share your sources for the claims you are making. If you read further, this memo was identified as Authentic by MacArthur(of whom delivered it).

Thanks! =)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 04:03 AM
Response to Reply #25
35. Nice website, where did you ever find it?
The Institute for Historical Review (IHR), founded in 1978, is an American organization that describes itself as a "public-interest educational, research and publishing center dedicated to promoting greater public awareness of history." Critics have accused it of being an antisemitic "pseudo-scholarly body"<1> with links to neo-Nazi organizations, and assert that its primary focus is denying key facts of Nazism and the genocide of Jews and others.<2> <3><4><5><6> It has been described as the "world's leading Holocaust denial organization."<7> <8> IHR published the non-peer-reviewed Journal of Historical Review.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 04:06 AM
Response to Reply #25
37. Not peer reviewed means non-scientific
Edited on Mon Aug-10-09 04:07 AM by Confusious
I'm not going to take their word for anything historical, and they are neo-NAZI's and have to make America look bad i.e. WW2( not that it usually needs much help )
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #25
44. fyi: know your source.
"The Institute for Historical Review (IHR), founded in 1978, is an American organization that describes itself as a "public-interest educational, research and publishing center dedicated to promoting greater public awareness of history."

Critics have accused it of being an antisemitic "pseudo-scholarly body"<1> with links to neo-Nazi organizations, and assert that its primary focus is denying key facts of Nazism and the genocide of Jews and others.<2> <3><4><5><6> It has been described as the "world's leading Holocaust denial organization."<7> <8> IHR published the non-peer-reviewed Journal of Historical Review."




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tiggeroshii Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #44
78. Yeah I saw that after I posted
Didn't know my source. My bad. I stated such in the other link where I posted this as well, which Confuscious received. Funny how he still takes the time to try and chastise me for it :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 08:26 AM
Response to Reply #25
46. The IHR are a bunch of holocaust deniers...
you're not really helping your argument by linking to them.

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proteus_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #25
50. I got my info from Edwin Hoyt.
In his book Japan's War. Which is a helluva lot more reliable then the neo-nazi ihr.

Would care to supply a link from a site that doesn't deny the Holocaust or it that something you're also interested in?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 03:27 AM
Response to Reply #13
24. They had given no such thing
Edited on Mon Aug-10-09 03:28 AM by Confusious
They had sent out people who had no real power to agree to anything, so they could not be taken seriously.

100,000+ killed by the bomb, 1,000,000+ killed by conventional bombing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tiggeroshii Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 03:35 AM
Response to Reply #24
27. Again, MacArthur delivered the memo. He identified the memo as reported by Trohan as authentic.
Edited on Mon Aug-10-09 03:57 AM by Tiggeroshii
Please read and consider the source(Institute of Historical Review) before rejecting. Again, the Japanese were trying to surrender. The bomb was not necessary.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n3p-4_Weber.html

Can you please provide a link, or substance that might support your claim?

ON edit: actually not sure about the reliablility of this link. If you can help me find some good sources, I'd appreciate it. Thanks! =)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 04:04 AM
Response to Reply #27
36. Again,
The Institute for Historical Review (IHR), founded in 1978, is an American organization that describes itself as a "public-interest educational, research and publishing center dedicated to promoting greater public awareness of history." Critics have accused it of being an antisemitic "pseudo-scholarly body"<1> with links to neo-Nazi organizations, and assert that its primary focus is denying key facts of Nazism and the genocide of Jews and others.<2> <3><4><5><6> It has been described as the "world's leading Holocaust denial organization."<7> <8> IHR published the non-peer-reviewed Journal of Historical Review.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tiggeroshii Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #36
80. As I said
If you can direct me to links that are credible, instead of having me rely on your word of your "credible sources," I would appreciate it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-11-09 03:08 AM
Response to Reply #80
83. Try wikipedia to start

As someone who has read extensively about WW2 I find they are pretty much spot on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proteus_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 01:24 AM
Response to Original message
17. I knew about them and still agree with the bombings.
Far more Allied and Japanese lives would have been lost in the other options besides the bombs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tkmorris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 01:40 AM
Response to Original message
19. 100,000+ PEOPLE died at Hiroshima
The nationality of those people means less to me than how many were left-handed, or how many were allergic to bees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ConsAreLiars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 02:19 AM
Response to Original message
20. Eisenhower said this slaughter had nothing to do with ending that war.
See: http://www.doug-long.com/quotes.htm

"...in 1945... Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. ...the Secretary, upon giving me the news of the successful bomb test in New Mexico, and of the plan for using it, asked for my reaction, apparently expecting a vigorous assent.

"During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of 'face'. The Secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude..."

- Dwight Eisenhower, Mandate For Change, pg. 380



The deniers are just repeating the "if my tribe did it, it is justified and I am bound to believe that" BS.

See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sheldon-drobny/the-myth-o...

For example, an April 30, 1946 study by the War Department's Military Intelligence Division concluded, "The war would almost certainly have terminated when Russia entered the war against Japan."<3>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 03:24 AM
Response to Reply #20
23. Great Study very timely!

If only they had gotten it there a little sooner, then they could have told Truman it wasn't needed!

And I always love these quotes people have from generals and people not in the Pacific theater about the atomic bomb, which only the president and scientists knew about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #20
77. Key words "It was my belief". He was wrong.
Historical records prove that.

One would think Japan would be adamant about how they were willing to surrender but US bombed them anyways but they have been strangely silent on the issue.

Japan wasn't willing to surrender. Eisenhower was not involved in diplomatic talks. He was working on his unfounded belief that Japan was willing to surrender. Had he got his way his actions could have resulted in even more lives loss. Of course then we would have an annual thread calling Eisenhower a monster on the anniversary of the invasion each year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 03:21 AM
Response to Original message
22. Yes and those American citizens and POW's

Were probably being used as slave labor, which was illegal under the Geneva Conventions. They shouldn't have been there in the first place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 04:02 AM
Response to Original message
34. Certainly none of those prisoners would have been harmed had we invaded Japan conventionally
K&U for guilt-trip revisionism.

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spider Jerusalem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 07:32 AM
Response to Original message
40. People die in wars. More would have died without the bombs, probably.
The Japanese maintained their resolve to fight, and all indications are that had the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs not been dropped, an invasion of the Japanese home islands would have been necessary, which would have been extremely bloody and would have required millions of Allied troops.

WWII was a total war. And Hiroshima was a legitimate target due to the presence of war industry in the city.

More people died in the firebombings of Tokyo, Hamburg and Dresden than in Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Including Allied POWs. War is not a nice business; people get killed. And the Japanese and Germans were far less circumspect in their treatment of civilian populations in conquered territories than the Allies were (the Americans and British weren't rounding up people and shipping them off to forced labour camps or using them for questionable medical experiments, just for a start).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strong Atheist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:25 PM
Response to Original message
54. Yeah, we get it. America = evil, Japan =
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #54
63. whereas in your book, it's us good, japan evil. same book.
germ warfare, medical experiments on civilians, prisoners & mentally retarded, war crimes, invasion & colonization...etc.

the us never does *anything* like that. snort.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anonymous171 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #63
66. Nobody wins in war. Demonizing one side over the other is stupid. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Confusious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #63
67. At least we face our demons and deal with them

Japan never has.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strong Atheist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #63
68. Ya start a war of aggression and then whine when it goes against
you...

To bad, so sad...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anonymous171 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
64. I know. Japan was just sitting there minding its own business when the evil capitalist Truman
came in and decided to use Hiroshima as his personal testing ground for the government's newest atomic toy. The poor japanese never knew what hit them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VMI Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
65. I completely support the bombings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
69. More unnecessary "collateral damage" in an unnecessary atrocity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-10-09 02:23 PM
Response to Original message
79. war is hell.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurska Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-11-09 03:37 AM
Response to Original message
84. After starting a war that killed 30 million people and attacking us without a declaration of war.
Edited on Tue Aug-11-09 04:10 AM by Kurska
Japan is lucky we didn't kick them out of some of their islands and hand them over to the Koreans or the Chinese, like what Russia did to Germany's province of Prussia.
Japan did things on par with some of the very worst of the concentration camps http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731 .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 06:00 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC