Was Hiroshima an act of terrorism?

Eisenhower, Nimitz, and Leahy all opposed dropping nuclear bombs on civilian targets, but compared to JPP experts, what did they know? :dunno:

General Eisenhower opposed it, "Japan was already defeated. Dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary."

The Pacific Fleet commander Admiral Nimitz agreed: "The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in their defeat."

Admiral Leahy, President Truman's Chief of Staff, concurred: the atomic attacks were "of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already ready to surrender."



http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/phil-strongman-hiroshima-is-a-war-crime-that-haunts-my-family-67-years-on-8008821.html
 
Easy to say when the USA didn't really suffer any civilian casualties in WW1, WW2 and the Korean War.
We damned well could have. Nor did we declare war on Germany or Japan in WWII. Those nations chose war as their instrument of national policy, not us.

The legitimacy of the Korean War can be debated. Korea was arguably not a clear and Present danger.

Our attacks on civilian populations in Vietnam and Iraq were unconscienable acts because they were illegitimate and unconscienable wars.
 
^ No, because it's all supposition. It's the argument people make to defend the bombing.
Would you say the same had we fire bombed Hiroshima or Nagasaki instead? That would probably have caused comparable loss of life and I doubt we would be debating it due to the novelty of the nuclear bombs. They would be just another large Japanese cities that we destroyed during the course of the war.
 
Targeting civilians in order to terrorize them is terrorism.

It was terrorism when the Nazis did it, it was terrorism when we did it.
 
What a dumb argument. You think citizens have any say-so when their government wants to go to war?

Tell that to the Iraqi citizens and all the people in the world who opposed the Iraq war.
They sure as hell do. I might point out that there is a huge difference between say WWII and the Iraq war. Iraq was an illegitimate war based on lies. WWII was not and both Germany and Japan would have unquitionably killed large numbers of our civilians had they defeated us militarily.
 
They sure as hell do. I might point out that there is a huge difference between say WWII and the Iraq war. Iraq was an illegitimate war based on lies. WWII was not and both Germany and Japan would have unquitionably killed large numbers of our civilians had they defeated us militarily.

Prove it, Ohioan.

I'll understand if you can't.
 
We damned well could have. Nor did we declare war on Germany or Japan in WWII. Those nations chose war as their instrument of national policy, not us.

The legitimacy of the Korean War can be debated. Korea was arguably not a clear and Present danger.

Our attacks on civilian populations in Vietnam and Iraq were unconscienable acts because they were illegitimate and unconscienable wars.

The USA gave Japan little choice! This was written back in 2001 prior to the Iraq War.



Why Did Japan Attack Us?


Of all the days that will "live in infamy" in American history, two stand out: Sept. 11, 2001, and Dec. 7, 1941.

But why did Japan, with a 10th of our industrial power, launch a sneak attack on the U.S. fleet at Pearl Harbor, an act of state terror that must ignite a war to the death it could not win? Were they insane? No, the Japanese were desperate. To understand why Japan lashed out, we must go back to World War I. Japan had been our ally. But when she tried to collect her share of the booty at Versailles, she ran into an obdurate Woodrow Wilson.

Wilson rejected Japan's claim to German concessions in Shantung, home of Confucius, which Japan had captured at a price in blood. Tokyo threatened a walkout if denied what she had been promised by the British. "They are not bluffing," warned Wilson, as he capitulated. "We gave them what they should not have."

In 1921, at the Washington Naval Conference, the United States pressured the British to end their 20-year alliance with Japan. By appeasing the Americans, the British enraged and alienated a proud nation that had been a loyal friend.

Japan was now isolated, with Stalin's brooding empire to the north, a rising China to the east and, to the south, Western imperial powers that detested and distrusted her.
When civil war broke out in China, Japan in 1931 occupied Manchuria as a buffer state. This was the way the Europeans had collected their empires. Yet, the West was "shocked, shocked" that Japan would embark upon a course of "aggression." Said one Japanese diplomat, "Just when we learn how to play poker, they change the game to bridge."

Japan now decided to create in China what the British had in India – a vast colony to exploit that would place her among the world powers. In 1937, after a clash at Marco Polo Bridge near Peking, Japan invaded and, after four years of fighting, including the horrific Rape of Nanking, Japan controlled the coastal cities, but not the interior.

When France capitulated in June 1940, Japan moved into northern French Indochina. And though the United States had no interest there, we imposed an embargo on steel and scrap metal. After Hitler invaded Russia in June 1941, Japan moved into southern Indochina. FDR ordered all Japanese assets frozen.

But FDR did not want to cut off oil. As he told his Cabinet on July 18, an embargo meant war, for that would force oil-starved Japan to seize the oil fields of the Dutch East Indies. But a State Department lawyer named Dean Acheson drew up the sanctions in such a way as to block any Japanese purchases of U.S. oil. By the time FDR found out, in September, he could not back down.

Tokyo was now split between a War Party and a Peace Party, with the latter in power. Prime Minister Konoye called in Ambassador Joseph Grew and secretly offered to meet FDR in Juneau or anywhere in the Pacific. According to Grew, Konoye was willing to give up Indochina and China, except a buffer region in the north to protect her from Stalin, in return for the U.S. brokering a peace with China and opening up the oil pipeline. Konoye told Grew that Emperor Hirohito knew of his initiative and was ready to give the order for Japan's retreat.

Fearful of a "second Munich," America spurned the offer. Konoye fell from power and was replaced by Hideki Tojo. Still, war was not inevitable. U.S. diplomats prepared to offer Japan a "modus vivendi." If Japan withdrew from southern Indochina, the United States would partially lift the oil embargo. But Chiang Kai-shek became "hysterical," and his American adviser, one Owen Lattimore, intervened to abort the proposal.

Facing a choice between death of the empire or fighting for its life, Japan decided to seize the oil fields of the Indies. And the only force capable of interfering was the U.S. fleet that FDR had conveniently moved from San Diego out to Honolulu.

And so Japan attacked. And so she was crushed and forced out of Vietnam, out of China, out of Manchuria. And so they fell to Stalin, Mao and Ho Chi Minh. And so it was that American boys, not Japanese boys, would die fighting Koreans, Chinese and Vietnamese to try to block the aggressions of a barbaric Asian communism.

Now Japan is disarmed and China is an Asian giant whose military boasts of pushing the Americans back across the Pacific. Had FDR met Prince Konoye, there might have been no Pearl Harbor, no Pacific war, no Hiroshima, no Nagasaki, no Korea, no Vietnam. How many of our fathers and uncles, brothers and friends, might still be alive?

"For of all sad words of tongue or pen, the saddest are these: 'It might have been.'" A few thoughts as the War Party pounds the drum for an all-out American war on Iraq and radical Islam.

http://www.theamericancause.org/patwhydidjapan.htm
 
Would you say the same had we fire bombed Hiroshima or Nagasaki instead? That would probably have caused comparable loss of life and I doubt we would be debating it due to the novelty of the nuclear bombs. They would be just another large Japanese cities that we destroyed during the course of the war.

I'm saying nobody could have accurately predicted what would happen if we didn't drop the bomb because there were too many variables to take into account.

And no, I don't defend the fire-bombing either. But when you read the records of how the US wanted to test its new toy, and how civilians were deliberately targeted, that makes us no better than the people we were fighting.
 
the argument of this being that once they were done with the rest of the world the axis would have left america alone right?

More fortune-telling? It started to go downhill for the Germans after Stalingrad and that was 1942. Some sources say it was even earlier.
 
I'm saying nobody could have accurately predicted what would happen if we didn't drop the bomb because there were too many variables to take into account.

And no, I don't defend the fire-bombing either. But when you read the records of how the US wanted to test its new toy, and how civilians were deliberately targeted, that makes us no better than the people we were fighting.
I do not agree. The Japanese Empire (Greater East Asia co-prosperity sphere) was an evil enslavement of China and Indochina.
Do not forget Pearl Harbor, it's not like we were imperialists - they were. We didn't want the war, we were dragged into it by events.
 
More fortune-telling? It started to go downhill for the Germans after Stalingrad and that was 1942. Some sources say it was even earlier.

Again, it's too easy to second guess this far removed from the events. Fortunately, it's difficult for us to conceive of war on the scale of WWI or WWII. Not to in anyway minimize casualties in the Gulf war, Iraq, Afghanistan or even Viet Nam, but they were nothing compared to the casualty rate in either of the Big Wars.

With all the supposition that has gone on in thread, take a minute to suppose that you might advocate ANYTHING to end it. Maybe Japan would have gone through with the promise to surrender...well, a nuke would guarantee it.
 
I do not agree. The Japanese Empire (Greater East Asia co-prosperity sphere) was an evil enslavement of China and Indochina.
Do not forget Pearl Harbor, it's not like we were imperialists - they were. We didn't want the war, we were dragged into it by events.

We were imperialists, too. Our Pacific possessions were grabbed. We did what Japan wanted to do.
 
Mott - I understand your general premise that war is hell, and that once you engage in it, you open up the Pandora's Box of potential atrocities.

But frankly, it's a bit of a cop-out. What your essentially arguing is that there should be no rules of engagement, because what's the point? No Geneva convention, no limits on chemical weapons or treatment of non-combatants, nothing.

I am not on the same page as that.
 
Again, it's too easy to second guess this far removed from the events.

Were Eisenhower, Nimitz, and Leahy far removed from the events, lol?

General Eisenhower opposed it, "Japan was already defeated. Dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary."

The Pacific Fleet commander Admiral Nimitz agreed: "The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in their defeat."

Admiral Leahy, President Truman's Chief of Staff, concurred: the atomic attacks were "of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already ready to surrender."



http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/phil-strongman-hiroshima-is-a-war-crime-that-haunts-my-family-67-years-on-8008821.html
 
Back
Top