Was Hiroshima an act of terrorism?

[cancel2 2022]

That is incorrect. Nagasaki was because Japan was still refusing to surrender.



Hiroshima and Kokura Arsenal were both the very definition of a viable military target.



If they thought that, why didn't they speak up and say it during the war?



If they thought that, they should have spoken out against it during the war. For some reason they didn't.



Japan had a choice. They could have chosen to stop committing genocide.

It was perfectly reasonable for us to not sell our oil to people who were using that oil to commit genocide.



Truman was correct. Hiroshima was a major military target.



That is incorrect. The A-bomb killed 20,000 soldiers and flattened the military headquarters.



LeMay did not speak publicly about the A-bombs when they were still top secret.

Lemay did not refer to the A-bombs in the past tense before they were used.

Lemay did not oppose the use of the A-bombs before they were used.



Then they should have done so instead of waiting for us to nuke them twice.



That is incorrect. The motive was to reduce Japan's ability to resist our invasion.

Oh I forgot to mention that Truman wanted to stop Stalin from attacking Japan when it was at its weakest. Japan at that stage had no oil, no navy or air force and the military was in total disarray. The US also had plans to drop yet another bomb a week later and a further six in September and October. They had no intentions of invading Japan, that's a canard invented to justify the nuclear attacks.

 

[Anvil Kasseri]

Oh I forgot to mention that Truman wanted to stop Stalin from attacking Japan when it was at its weakest. Japan at that stage had no oil, no navy or air force. The US also had plans to drop yet another bomb a week later and a further six in September and October.

Japan still had a large number of soldiers willing to fight to the death against our invasion. They also had thousands of Kamikazes waiting to take out troop transports.

Truman's feelings on Russia were mixed. Stalin had started showing his evilness by that point and there was good reason for keeping the Soviets out of Japan. On the other hand, the invasion plans were daunting, and if the Soviets invaded Hokkaido at the same time we invaded Kyushu that could make things easier for us.

The US also had plans to drop yet another bomb a week later and a further six in September and October.

At some point they would have started saving them up so we could use them all at once to clear away concentrations of troops when we invaded.

 

[Anvil Kasseri]

They had no intentions of invading Japan, that's a canard invented to justify the nuclear attacks.

That is incorrect. Had Japan kept refusing to surrender, we had every intention of invading first Kyushu, then the Tokyo Plain. Both invasions would have rivaled the bloodbath of D-day.

 

[Anvil Kasseri]

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.

We did not target civilians. The A-bombs were dropped on military targets.

The decision whether or not to go to war isn't made by civilians.

It is in democracies. Although I concede that imperial Japan was not a democracy.

I would have listened to my generals and not dropped the bomb.

Not one general or admiral advised Truman not to drop the A-bombs.

 

[Anvil Kasseri]

Since Tom has been annoyed with me for ignoring his precious link, I will give him this. While I defend the use of the atomic bombs against Japan, and feel that the war could not have ended otherwise except through a prolonged invasion (something none of the generals/secretaries could prove would have been avoided), I am surprised that Truman went ahead with the strikes in the face of opposition from his brass. Had I been president in 1945, and the most accomplished corps of generals and admirals in US history were all telling me not to proceed, there is no way I would have sent Paul Tibbets out on that mission. I still believe it would have proven disastrous for myself and the troops, and probably cost me the 1948 election that Truman ultimately prevailed in.

Truman did not receive any opposition during the war regarding the use of the A-bombs. Not from his brass, and not from anyone else.

Nuclear power plants (as well as the numerous health hazards brought about by military nuclear testing during the 1950s) have got nothing to do with the use atomic bombs in WWII. Yes, we are all aware that there were lingering effects on Japan from the fallout for many years after, as well.

There are lingering effects that can be measured with scientific instruments. But the effects were never strong enough to be a danger to people. Virtually all of the radiation injuries were sustained in the first second of the explosions.

Yes, we entered the war with Japan because of Pearl Harbor but that was a military strike on a military base. It didn't justify our dropping the bomb on civilians only.

We didn't drop the A-bombs on civilians only.

We dropped the A-bombs on military targets.

 

[cancel2 2022]

We did not target civilians. The A-bombs were dropped on military targets.



It is in democracies. Although I concede that imperial Japan was not a democracy.



Not one general or admiral advised Truman not to drop the A-bombs.

Nagasaki wasn't even a primary target, the plutonium bomb intended for Kokura was changed to Nagaski at the last moment, due to bad visibility. So your rhetoric regarding Kokura Arsenal is just bullshit. Bockscar attempted three failed bombing runs before heading for Nagasaki.

 

[moon]

Pretty straightforward question. Thoughts?

Were the European death camps acts of terrorism ? Both were the product of the same, sick, mindset.
Different flags. Same assholes.

 

[Anvil Kasseri]

US demands for Japanese unconditional surrender were always unrealistic – and deliberately so. This intentionally prolonged the war for the sole purpose of testing the atomic bomb on real cities. These attacks killed thousands, as did delaying the peace.

Truman backed down from unconditional surrender when he issued the Potsdam Proclamation, which was a list of generous surrender terms.

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

Ike's wartime opposition was so feeble it was virtually unnoticeable.

Ike only expressed his opposition to a single person (Stimson).

When Stimson reacted by calling him an idiot, Ike decided to keep quiet and not tell anyone else.

Even if Ike had managed to somehow be convincing, he was too late anyway. Stimson had sent the final orders to drop the A-bombs out to the military and then departed the Potsdam conference on July 25. When Ike voiced his opposition in Frankfort on July 27 it was just hours before Stimson departed Europe for home. Truman was still at sea aboard the Augusta when Hiroshima was bombed, and had not been in the same room with Stimson since July 25.

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."

How come Nimitz never spoke out against using the A-bombs during the war?

And why didn't anyone help him out with a calendar? Japan first sued for peace on August 10. The A-bombs were dropped on August 6 and August 9.

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."

How come Leahy never spoke out against using the A-bombs during 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.

Except, we didn't do it.

The A-bombs were dropped on military targets.

 

[moon]

Except, we didn't do it.

The A-bombs were dropped on military targets.

You're a shameless liar.


You'll fit in well among the JPP misfits and trolls.

 

[Anvil Kasseri]

You're a shameless liar.

The truth isn't a lie. Hiroshima was a major military center with tens of thousands of Japanese soldiers awaiting deployment to resist our invasion, and was the military headquarters in charge of repelling that invasion.

Kokura Arsenal was a massive (4100 feet by 2000 feet) arms production complex.

 

[Earl]

Bombs dropped on Japan saved millions of lives

"War is horrible. People are killed, maimed, emotionally destroyed. Property is destroyed, wealth is consumed. Even the winners lose in protracted wars. In war, the best way to lessen the suffering is to end the war quickly.

This is why the United States and Japan should celebrate the anniversaries of August 6 and 9, 1945. The atomic bombs we dropped on those dates quickly brought WWII to an end saving many millions of lives.

WWII in the Pacific was particularly savage. The Japanese believed in death before dishonor, and surrender was considered dishonorable.

In the battles on island after island thousands of Japanese fought to the death, typically taking one American life for every 4 to 5 Japanese soldier deaths. Typically fewer than 5 percent of Japanese soldiers were captured, usually only those too sick or weak to fight or commit suicide. Many Japanese civilians on these islands died helping their soldiers or committed suicide; the videos of Japanese adults and children jumping off cliffs to their deaths are heartbreaking.

The 73 million Japanese prepared to defend their almost 146,000 square mile homeland to the last man, woman, and child. Everyone who could fight was being trained and armed; children were taught to fight with spears. The death toll promised to be horrendous.

The atomic bombs convinced the Japanese to surrender before the invasion.

While the death toll from the atomic bombs was high, Hiroshima 80,000 and Nagasaki 40,000, they were not extreme in WWII. For example, the March 9-10, 1945 bombing raid on Tokyo took about 100,000 lives, the raids on Hamburg took about 42,000 lives, the raids on London took perhaps 50,000 lives.
LISTEN: This Day In History

Compared to the perhaps 60-70 million Japanese that might have died in the invasion of Japan, the death toll from the atomic bombs was low and a small price to pay for the lives saved.

The quick Japanese surrender provided other benefits. Had the Soviet Union joined the invasion as planned, Japan may have been divided into US and Soviet sectors, like Germany, and changed the whole post-war history in Asia.

Perhaps more importantly the world saw the destructiveness of these primitive bombs. These convinced the civilized world to avoid use of atomic, now nuclear, weapons.

There are at least 150,000 American soldiers and perhaps a few million descendants of those soldiers who lived because President Truman dropped the atomic bombs on Japan. The Japanese people have even more reason to celebrate August 6 and 9, 1945 because nearly every Japanese citizen that lived or was born after WWII owes their lives to those bombs."
https://www.fosters.com/news/2017080...lions-of-lives

 

[Anvil Kasseri]

Nagasaki wasn't even a primary target, the plutonium bomb intended for Kokura was changed to Nagaski at the last moment, due to bad visibility.

There was a lot of bad luck on that mission. The first alternate Niigata was out of range because of the failed fuel pump, and then Nagasaki was clouded over too.

 

[Matt Dillon]

No, it was war and it beat trying to invade Japan.

 

[Earl]

"There are at least 150,000 American soldiers and perhaps a few million descendants of those soldiers who lived because President Truman dropped the atomic bombs on Japan. The Japanese people have even more reason to celebrate August 6 and 9, 1945 because nearly every Japanese citizen that lived or was born after WWII owes their lives to those bombs."

"The 73 million Japanese prepared to defend their almost 146,000 square mile homeland to the last man, woman, and child. Everyone who could fight was being trained and armed; children were taught to fight with spears. The death toll promised to be horrendous."

 

[cancel2 2022]

Bombs dropped on Japan saved millions of lives

"War is horrible. People are killed, maimed, emotionally destroyed. Property is destroyed, wealth is consumed. Even the winners lose in protracted wars. In war, the best way to lessen the suffering is to end the war quickly.

This is why the United States and Japan should celebrate the anniversaries of August 6 and 9, 1945. The atomic bombs we dropped on those dates quickly brought WWII to an end saving many millions of lives.

WWII in the Pacific was particularly savage. The Japanese believed in death before dishonor, and surrender was considered dishonorable.

In the battles on island after island thousands of Japanese fought to the death, typically taking one American life for every 4 to 5 Japanese soldier deaths. Typically fewer than 5 percent of Japanese soldiers were captured, usually only those too sick or weak to fight or commit suicide. Many Japanese civilians on these islands died helping their soldiers or committed suicide; the videos of Japanese adults and children jumping off cliffs to their deaths are heartbreaking.

The 73 million Japanese prepared to defend their almost 146,000 square mile homeland to the last man, woman, and child. Everyone who could fight was being trained and armed; children were taught to fight with spears. The death toll promised to be horrendous.

The atomic bombs convinced the Japanese to surrender before the invasion.

While the death toll from the atomic bombs was high, Hiroshima 80,000 and Nagasaki 40,000, they were not extreme in WWII. For example, the March 9-10, 1945 bombing raid on Tokyo took about 100,000 lives, the raids on Hamburg took about 42,000 lives, the raids on London took perhaps 50,000 lives.
LISTEN: This Day In History

Compared to the perhaps 60-70 million Japanese that might have died in the invasion of Japan, the death toll from the atomic bombs was low and a small price to pay for the lives saved.

The quick Japanese surrender provided other benefits. Had the Soviet Union joined the invasion as planned, Japan may have been divided into US and Soviet sectors, like Germany, and changed the whole post-war history in Asia.

Perhaps more importantly the world saw the destructiveness of these primitive bombs. These convinced the civilized world to avoid use of atomic, now nuclear, weapons.

There are at least 150,000 American soldiers and perhaps a few million descendants of those soldiers who lived because President Truman dropped the atomic bombs on Japan. The Japanese people have even more reason to celebrate August 6 and 9, 1945 because nearly every Japanese citizen that lived or was born after WWII owes their lives to those bombs."
https://www.fosters.com/news/2017080...lions-of-lives

The US military had three bombs available for deployment immediately. Two were used but another was being prepared for Kokura the primary target missed on the 9th August. They also had six in the pipeline and planned for September and October. I do not believe at any time was there any serious intention to invade Japan. If they had used a total of nine bombs then there wouldn't have been much left of the island of Honshu.

 

[cancel2 2022]

There was a lot of bad luck on that mission. The first alternate Niigata was out of range because of the failed fuel pump, and then Nagasaki was clouded over too.

So you were wrong in saying Kokura Arsenal was bombed on the 9th August.

 

[Into the Night]

Yes, Japan was never informed that the US had a new weapon when the warned Japan of total destruction.

Irrelevant. Japan was at war with the United States.

The Emporer was planning to surrender,

That is spelled 'Emperor'. No, he was not planning to surrender. He was planning to try to bargain his way out of losing while continuing the war.

he only asked for immunity for the royal family and that they have the right to rule to maintain the rule of law in Japan.

That is not surrender. The citizens of the United States that fought in this war and supported U.S. efforts in the war would not accept anything less than unconditional surrender.

 

[Into the Night]

Were the European death camps acts of terrorism ? Both were the product of the same, sick, mindset.
Different flags. Same assholes.

No. They were war crimes.

 

[Into the Night]

Truman backed down from unconditional surrender when he issued the Potsdam Proclamation, which was a list of generous surrender terms.

The Potsdam Declaration demanded unconditional surrender. It was not 'backing down' anything.

 

[Anvil Kasseri]

I do not believe at any time was there any serious intention to invade Japan.

There was. Had Japan kept refusing to surrender, we would have invaded.

So you were wrong in saying Kokura Arsenal was bombed on the 9th August.

Where did I say that?