#Hiroshima70Years. 3 Days till Nagasaki Anniversary

[United States Kingdom]

70 years ago, the world noticed the power of nuclear weapons in Hiroshima.3 days later, it will be 70 years till Nagaski celebration. I decided that I would create a thread to ask NSG users this? Do you believe that the Nagaski and Hiroshima attacks were necessary?

Opinion: Obviously, some of you know my position on it. I don't believe it was necessary. I used to believe it was, until I realized that it there is nothing that can justify what was happening. Fact of the matter is, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks did not influence the Japanese surrender. The notion that it did is refutable, and the people that state that are wrong. So NSG, what do you think about the attacks. Do you think that it was unjustified, or do you think that it was necessary>

[USS Monitor]

War is cruelty; you cannot refine it.

[Empire of Narnia]

Japan killed more people in China and Korea than the nukes killed. Japan had to be stopped. War is terrible but I think the Americans did what they had to do.

[Stormwrath]

IMO, the atomic bomb was dropped probably to stop the Soviet Union from eventually invading Japan proper, since the US wanted to be friends with Japan should the war end. Other reason is to hasten the end of the war so the Americans don't have to throw away their men in the invasion of the Japanese home islands.

[United States Kingdom]

Japan killed more people in China and Korea than the nukes killed. Japan had to be stopped. War is terrible but I think the Americans did what they had to do.

The British killed, terrorized, and enslaved much more people than the Japanese did. Fact of the matter is, that doesn't justify dropping a nuclear bomb on them. Additionally, the bomb was arguably based on poltical motivation due to the fact that the Americans wanted to show the Soviets the power they had acquired. In addition to that, USA had received peace calls from the Japanese as early as 1943, so peace could have been achieved without Hiroshima having occurred.

[Alyakia]

The target was larger than 3 miles (4.8 km) in diameter and was an important target in a large urban area.
"Any small and strictly military objective should be located in a much larger area subject to blast damage in order to avoid undue risks of the weapon being lost due to bad placing of the bomb."

daily reminder that anyone that says "t-they only aimed for military targets" is pretty much just wrong

[Stormwrath]

Japan killed more people in China and Korea than the nukes killed. Japan had to be stopped. War is terrible but I think the Americans did what they had to do.

The British killed, terrorized, and enslaved much more people than the Japanese did. Fact of the matter is, that doesn't justify dropping a nuclear bomb on them. Additionally, the bomb was arguably based on poltical motivation due to the fact that the Americans wanted to show the Soviets the power they had acquired. In addition to that, USA had received peace calls from the Japanese as early as 1943, so peace could have been achieved without Hiroshima having occurred.

Let's not get to the "X killed more than Y" argument.

Though if Japan did make peace with the US in 1943, Japan would still have its empire.

[The 502nd SS]

Dropping the bombs saved more lives than they killed.

[United States Kingdom]

The British killed, terrorized, and enslaved much more people than the Japanese did. Fact of the matter is, that doesn't justify dropping a nuclear bomb on them. Additionally, the bomb was arguably based on poltical motivation due to the fact that the Americans wanted to show the Soviets the power they had acquired. In addition to that, USA had received peace calls from the Japanese as early as 1943, so peace could have been achieved without Hiroshima having occurred.

Let's not get to the "X killed more than Y" argument.

Though if Japan did make peace with the US in 1943, Japan would still have its empire.

Firstly, I never started this "X killed more than Y" arguement. I am showing why his first sentence is wrong.

Secondly, I stated "USA received peace calls from the Japanese as early as 1943", giving the USA a large amount of time to take down the Japanese colonies, then when they are in a favorable position(the Allies were already in a favorable position in 1943), they can negotiate with Japan. What is wrong with that?

[Napkiraly]

While horrendous, they were the better alternative to Operation Downfall and Operation Starvation. My hope is that the survivors have been able to live as normal a life as possible after such an event.

[USS Monitor]

Japan killed more people in China and Korea than the nukes killed. Japan had to be stopped. War is terrible but I think the Americans did what they had to do.

The British killed, terrorized, and enslaved much more people than the Japanese did. Fact of the matter is, that doesn't justify dropping a nuclear bomb on them. Additionally, the bomb was arguably based on poltical motivation due to the fact that the Americans wanted to show the Soviets the power they had acquired. In addition to that, USA had received peace calls from the Japanese as early as 1943, so peace could have been achieved without Hiroshima having occurred.

Peace calls are not the same thing as surrender, and it's pretty normal for wars to drag on for years after the first attempt at peace talks.

[Stormwrath]

While horrendous, they were the better alternative to Operation Downfall and Operation Starvation. My hope is that the survivors have been able to live as normal a life as possible after such an event.

A Hiroshima atomic bomb survivor visited my school last year. He seemed to have been living a normal life. Since I was in a Christian school, many of us thought God spared him from the blast.

[Napkiraly]

Let's not get to the "X killed more than Y" argument.

Though if Japan did make peace with the US in 1943, Japan would still have its empire.

Firstly, I never started this "X killed more than Y" arguement. I am showing why his first sentence is wrong.

Secondly, I stated "USA received peace calls from the Japanese as early as 1943", giving the USA a large amount of time to take down the Japanese colonies, then when they are in a favorable position(the Allies were already in a favorable position in 1943), they can negotiate with Japan. What is wrong with that?

The fact that nobody wanted a negotiated surrender on the American side and that the Japanese government was still heavily split in 1945 over how to begin the negotiation process, let alone in 1943 when the tide had just begun to turn.

[Costa Fierro]

While horrendous, they were the better alternative to Operation Downfall and Operation Starvation. My hope is that the survivors have been able to live as normal a life as possible after such an event.

Considering the thousands of observed effects of the radiation from the detonation, including cases of nails being replaced with large painful growths that bled profusely if broken, I'd say those that survived are still scarred.

[Napkiraly]

While horrendous, they were the better alternative to Operation Downfall and Operation Starvation. My hope is that the survivors have been able to live as normal a life as possible after such an event.

Considering the thousands of observed effects of the radiation from the detonation, including cases of nails being replaced with large painful growths that bled profusely if broken, I'd say those that survived are still scarred.

Hence why I said as normal a life as possible given the circumstances of the event.

[Armacor]

As I can guarentee that I would not be alive today if not for the use of the nukes, I absolutely support the use of them.

I had one grandfather in Changi and on the Thai Burma Railway who was in the medical corp with Sir Weary, and the other was in training exercises for the invasion plans - and was an officer commanding one of the first wave landing ships in the drills. As neither parent was alive yet, I wouldn't be here.

In response to the "It was a civilian target", i agree that it was... BUT as both sides in the war were engaging in total war, and actively targetting civilians with airstrikes this is no different that Dresden, Coventry, London, Tokyo, etc etc etc... I agree that the radiation stuff was -- unfortunate -- but did those who used the bombs (or those who built them) know about the medium-long term effects (hell did they know about the short term (say 1h+) ones really?

All governments/nations engaged in horrific actions against civilian/unarmed populations but it was deemed regrettable/nessessary by the Allies (who I grant wrote the history books) and the actions of an... evil?... regime for the Axis powers.

[United facist States of America]

Well while I consider it bad that it was a civilian target ist probably caused less deaths than would have occurred if the Japanese home islands would have been invaded. It was also likely better for the population since if it hadn't an American and Soviet invasion would have inevitably occurred.

[Helltank]

It was an effective way to immediately destroy the Japanese spirit and assert American dominance.

This is war, not a tea party. Protecting yourself is your first priority. Killing your opponent is your second priority. I don't know where "protecting your opponent" ranks, but it's far, far down the list.

[Hyfling]

It was horrible, but it was also the least bad option.

A full scale Allied invasion of the Japanese Islands would have been far more costly in human lives, for both sides.

[Hyfling]

Japan killed more people in China and Korea than the nukes killed. Japan had to be stopped. War is terrible but I think the Americans did what they had to do.

The British killed, terrorized, and enslaved much more people than the Japanese did. Fact of the matter is, that doesn't justify dropping a nuclear bomb on them. Additionally, the bomb was arguably based on poltical motivation due to the fact that the Americans wanted to show the Soviets the power they had acquired. In addition to that, USA had received peace calls from the Japanese as early as 1943, so peace could have been achieved without Hiroshima having occurred.

But wasn't it on the condition that:

I) Japan was allowed to keep its Empire
II) The Emperor was allowed to remain in power.

It'd be like Nazi Germany offering peace, providing it could keep control of France, Poland, Austria and Czechoslovakia while Hitler was allowed to stay the leader.

If it was that simple, countries could ask for peace with essentially no real downside. That's why an 'unconditional surrender' was the objective of the War.

[L Ron Cupboard]

It was deliberately targeted at the centre of the civilian population, rather than over a military target, and as such was a war crime. We all down play our own war crimes, the Japanese do, we do in the UK about Dresden, and the US does about this.

[Napkiraly]

It was horrible, but it was also the least bad option.

A full scale Allied invasion of the Japanese Islands would have been far more costly in human lives, for both sides.

Even just keeping up the with the air raids with greater and greater numbers of B-29's mixed with the naval blockade would have probably killed just as much if not more but without all the "awe power".

[Hyfling]

It was horrible, but it was also the least bad option.

A full scale Allied invasion of the Japanese Islands would have been far more costly in human lives, for both sides.

Even just keeping up the with the air raids with greater and greater numbers of B-29's mixed with the naval blockade would have probably killed just as much if not more but without all the "awe power".

Certainly.

The Firebombing of Tokyo alone killed nearly as many (if not more) than both bombs combined.

Meanwhile, a naval siege would have been disastrous for the Japanese population.

[Kilobugya]

Japan was already on the verge of capitulating. Hiroshima and Nagazaki bombings were not to end the war with Japan - they were to show the world US power and to scare USSR. Killing hundred of thousands of civilians in horrible conditions just to scare a rival is one of the most monstrous acts of terrorism in human history.

[Infected Mushroom]

Not necessary.

Life could have gone on without the nuclear attacks. It wasn't a Must Do or else the world is going to end.