Nagasaki

[Reader Nilus]

58 years ago today the USA used a weapon of Mass Destruction on the people of Japan. The USA has been the only nation ever to use atom bombs in a war.
Jeff the Finn

 

[ZiSunka]

Yep.

 

[TScott]

58 years ago today the USA used a weapon of Mass Destruction on the people of Japan. The USA has been the only nation ever to use atom bombs in a war.
Jeff the Finn

Using the bombs probably saved millions of lives.

Pretty ironic, huh?

 

[ZiSunka]

And that all the other nations learned about what a disaster nuclear weapons are by witnessing its devastation. I guess it's one of those instances where you can't come to grips with an awful truth until the awful truth stops being a theory and becomes a reality.

 

[foolsparade]

I wish we used the bomb on Hilter, but he looked to much like us. The Japanese were racialy different, just my opinion. Everyone was so hyped up on the attack on our own soil, yet Hilter killed over 7 million people. I suppose we felt we had no choice, either use the bomb or risk our country being taken over by Japs. Sounds to hard to believe doesn't it?

 

[foolsparade]

lambslove, to use a nuclear weapon to show the world a leason is horrible. are you really that clueless and cold?

 

[Wolseley]

If the United States had had to invade mainland Japan, the death rate would have made Hiroshima and Nagasaki---even with the postwar nuclear-syndrome deaths---look like a Sunday school picnic. Gen. George C. Marshall predicted that the invasion would cost, at a minimum, 1/4 of a million American lives, and possibly as much as a million or more.

The Pacific Command gave figures of 20,000 American dead and 75,000 wounded; the Joint Chiefs of Staff estimated that the casualty figures would surpass all existing casualty lists for both Europe and the Pacific combined.

Gen. Douglas MacArthur expected to take 50,000 casualites in just establishing a beachhead, and pessimistically warned that the Japanese might simply disband, take to the mountains, and carry on a guerilla war of attrition, the aim being to kill as many Americans as possible, a la' Peleliu and Okinawa. If this came to pass, he predicted a protracted ten-year war with no ceiling on American losses.

Any predicted body count for Japanese forces would surpass American losses by a ratio of ten-to-one. Ergo, ironically the atomic bomb took fewer lives than would have been lost if we hadn't used it.

My father thanked God for the atomic bomb practically every day of his life.

Why?

Because he was one of those G.I.s who was awaiting orders to prepare for a beachhead landing on mainland Japan----and he almost certainly would have been killed in the undoubtably savage resistance they would have encountered. The bomb ended the war, and he never had to go in on that invasion----and Yours Truly is here as a result.

I wish we used the bomb on Hilter, but he looked to much like us. The Japanese were racialy different, just my opinion. Everyone was so hyped up on the attack on our own soil, yet Hilter killed over 7 million people. I suppose we felt we had no choice, either use the bomb or risk our country being taken over by Japs. Sounds to hard to believe doesn't it?

Racism had absolutely nothing to do with the atomic bomb. The atomic bomb was intended to be dropped on Germany. The problem was that the first workable prototype wasn't tested until July 16, 1945---and Germany had surrendered two months earlier on May 7. Ergo, the bomb was simply re-routed to the United States' still-existing enemy, the Japanese Empire. If Germany had hung on until late July or August, history would have been very different....and race still wouldn't have had diddly-squat to do with it.

 

[retrogeek]

Wolsley just said everything I would have, and more eloquently too. I'll emphasize again that the charge of racism is completely off base. The firebombings of German cities like Desden caused equally large losses of life, even without the use of a (cue scary music) atomic bomb. We didn't drop the bombs on Germany (or Italy) because we didn't have them until after they'd surrendered. (The same reason, incidentally, why they didn't use them on the Allies.)

 

[Brimshack]

Wolsley's argument is incomplete:

It is simply a hypothetical scenario, with no assessment of the liklihood that such an invasion would haveoccured, or that such casualty assessments were the critical factors in the decision to drop the bomb. This does nothing to address any criticisms about the actual decision, or the actual reasons behind it

 

[Reader Nilus]

For all of our talk about WMD the US is still the only one ever to go nuclear in war. The Nagasaki bomb was overkill. Hiroshima's Bomb was dropped on the Feast of the Transfiguration! It indeed was a satanic transfiguration of the world we live in.
Jeff the Finn

 

[TScott]

Wolsley's argument is incomplete:

It is simply a hypothetical scenario, with no assessment of the liklihood that such an invasion would haveoccured, or that such casualty assessments were the critical factors in the decision to drop the bomb. This does nothing to address any criticisms about the actual decision, or the actual reasons behind it

The planning for Operation Olympic had reached an advanced stage by the time the decision was made to drop the bombs. In a last meeting attended by the leaders of the miltary, the president and cabinet members, Gen. George Marshall was in favor of using the nukes ahead of the advancing troops in an invasion. The Air Corps felt that they could beat Japan by continuing mass bombing of the cities. Admiral Leahy gave the president a grim picture of the invasion informing him that intellegence reported that we would be met by 30 million defenders, including 2.5 million regular army troops, 2 million other military defenders and over 25 million militia, all ready to fight to the death.

It most certainly was not a hypothetical scenario. It was a well documented planned invasion. The decision to drop the bombs did not stop the planning. The planning of the invasion only stopped after the surrender of Japan.

There are always attempts to revise history, but this is one case where the documented evidence of what actually took place is overwhelming and leaces all attempt at revision in the silly file. These facts have all been unclassified for years and many of the documents are easily obtained on the net. I suggest you do some real research.

 

[TScott]

For all of our talk about WMD the US is still the only one ever to go nuclear in war. The Nagasaki bomb was overkill. Hiroshima's Bomb was dropped on the Feast of the Transfiguration! It indeed was a satanic transfiguration of the world we live in.
Jeff the Finn

Jeff, that is all fine but does not address the reality of the situation faced by the men who had to actually make these decisions. You are sitting here in the 21st century. You do not have the responsibility of sending a million young men into a meat grinder of an invasion. You have not just spent the last 4 years sending 8 million young men off to fight in a war that has seen the deaths of nearly 50 million people.

It is fine to mourn the losses of the people of Nagasaki, however you must understand that the people in the Japanese diet who were desperately trying to convince the Emperor and the military to surrender stated after the war that they were thankful for the atomic bombs because that was the catalyst that caused the Emperor to over-ride the military and call for the Japanese people to finally lay down their arms.

 

[ZiSunka]

lambslove, to use a nuclear weapon to show the world a leason is horrible. are you really that clueless and cold?

That's not the reason the weapon was used, and you know it. The horrible knowledge was a by-product of the bombing.

Are YOU really so clueless as to cast stones at me for pointing out what you didn't seem to understand? Are you so judgmental that you jumped to the conclusion that I am clueless and cold? Shame on you!

 

[ZiSunka]

I wish we used the bomb on Hilter, but he looked to much like us. The Japanese were racialy different, just my opinion. Everyone was so hyped up on the attack on our own soil, yet Hilter killed over 7 million people. I suppose we felt we had no choice, either use the bomb or risk our country being taken over by Japs. Sounds to hard to believe doesn't it?

Wait a minute! You make this statement, based on your personal beliefs, then call my observation clueless and cold?

 

[ZiSunka]

For all of our talk about WMD the US is still the only one ever to go nuclear in war. The Nagasaki bomb was overkill. Hiroshima's Bomb was dropped on the Feast of the Transfiguration! It indeed was a satanic transfiguration of the world we live in.
Jeff the Finn

War really IS hell, that's why Christians should do everything in their power to find other solutions to problems.

 

[Wolseley]

Wolsley's argument is incomplete:

It is simply a hypothetical scenario, with no assessment of the liklihood that such an invasion would haveoccured

Operation "Olympic": X-Day, 1 November 1945. Pincer assault on island of Kyushu, Japanese mainland, involving XI Army Corps, I Army Corps, and V Marine Amphibious Corps making amphibious beach landings at Ariake Bay, Miyazaki, and Kushiniko, respectively; preceeded by the 10th Infantry Division and the 158th Regimental Combat Team making an amphibious landing on the Koshiki Islands on X minus four, 28 October 1945.

Operation "Coronet": Y-Day, 1 March 1946. Pincer assualt on island of Honshu, Japanese mainland, involving 1st Army making amphibious beach landing at Kujukuri-hama and splitting into a trident front towards Tokyo, Choshi, and Sagami Bay; on Y plus 10, the 8th Army was to make an amphibious beach landing at Sagami Bay and drive north to Kumagaya and east to Tokyo and Yokohama.

Actual surrender date: 2 September 1945.

or that such casualty assessments were the critical factors in the decision to drop the bomb.

I might suggest the following resources for an in-depth context of Truman's decision:

Craig, William; The Fall of Japan. New York: Galahad Books, 1967.

Manchester, William; The Glory and the Dream. Boston: Little, Brown, & Company, 1974.

Allen, Thomas, and Norman Polmar; Code-Name DownFall. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995.

Rhodes, Richard; The Making of the Atomic Bomb. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995.

This does nothing to address any criticisms about the actual decision, or the actual reasons behind it

The one bomb drop at Hiroshima resulted in 80,000 dead. However, the conventional incendiary raids over Tokyo resulted in 225,000 dead---well more than double the number at Hiroshima. If morality is going to be applied to statistics, then the men who chose to employ two relatively small-yield atomic weapons against Japan were far from being the war's greatest criminals.

JMHO.

 

[Force]

Why not mention the fact, they didn't get a clue after the first bomb was dropped....they needed two. Come on. Life is not fair, yeah it sucked but why don't we include talking about the horrible atrocities brought about by the Japanese?! Why are they over looked? Huh........ oh thats why because everyone writes off America as horrible and changes history so that no one else looks like the bad guy. Because that would not be "PC", to place blame on anyone else. And don't say that bull because the Japanase government does not have their bad side written in the school books, and our own government long since covered it up as well so that they could establish relations again. How about the fact that we helped rebuild, apologized, payed reperations............But did our men or their allies recieve anything...even an apology????? NO! Never not once. But yet we have apologized a million times over, quite frankly I am sick of it. Even Germany apologized and paid reperations.........Give me a break study history IN WHOLE before you jump to simplistic conclusions.

Don't hit at all if it is honorable possible to avoid hitting; but never hit soft!
-Theodore Roosevelt

 

[Brimshack]

Extra detals, yes, but all of this still proceeds on the assumption that an invasion was the only alternative, or that key decisions (such as unconditional surrender) had not arbitrarily narrowed the range of options.

Yes, fire-bombing raids were every bit as horrible as the atomic bomb, if not more so.

 

[Force]

Extra detals, yes, but all of this still proceeds on the assumption that an invasion was the only alternative, or that key decisions (such as unconditional surrender) had not arbitrarily narrowed the range of options.

Yes, fire-bombing raids were every bit as horrible as the atomic bomb, if not more so.

How about the fact that they had ordered all civilian, American, and ally POW's to be put to death on Aug. 23 (thank goodness we made them surrender before.) Or the fact that 1000's upon 1000's of kamakazi pilots were ready to go before we met them with the strike. The war was far from over until they realized we were not afraid.

 

[Brimshack]

Force. You're still begging the same question. I'll wait for Wolsley's response if he cares to give one.