The A bomb

[Drix D'Zanth]

I want to bring up this controversial topic for the sake of open debate and discussion. So please be civil here, insulting people isn't going to change their opinion.

This topic is about the Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Was it entirely justified? I know that alot of you anime lovers consider japan a second (or first) home! Do you think it was right that the US bombed these cities?

Please research your facts before posting, any one line run-on sentances are not welcome here. I'll post my opinion after a few posts.

[lea]

weeell..in my personal opinion, i dont think people should use bombs, A bomb or any, because it's too powerful for people to use (people are faulty as a whole, its kinda like playing god in a way, to use a bomb)
thats just my opinion, though ^^;

[Skyrose]

The Japanese soldiers (And even civilians, I think) had these codes they lived by. They were never to surrender, they'd die before they ever were to let themselves surrender... while that was honorable and all, it also killed way too many people.

Yes, the A bombs were awful o.o Very awful. But there is the possibility that they killed less people than the Japanese's codes would have.

We bombed one city (sorry, forgot which one), and waited 3 days for them to surrender. We bombed the other one when we got no response. They surrendered two days later. We only should have bombed one city, and actually *waited* for a response. It not like we got any aggressive one! They just needed two more days. Typically American? Maybe. It was still stupid to bomb both cities in such succession...


EDIT: Yes, I forgot something... Do you think it's possible to get a powerful bomb to scare the hell out of someone like we did, without those horrible radioactive leftovers? I'm no scientist...

[Luminaire]

[color=crimson]Personally, I believe the bomb never should have been created. Albert Einstein wrote the E=mc(2), but had no idea it would be used to make a bomb. Imagine how he must have felt. If you really do the research(I did several hours @_@), you see that the U.S. had other options. I think it was a matter of revenge though. It was after Pearl Harbor that it was decided to drop the bombs, not before. Before, no one had even considered using them. I wish war was still fought using swords, but it isn't.

~Lumi ^_^[/color]

[Raiha]

[COLOR=royalblue]I took a course in U.S. History, and we went into major depth about the A-bomb. But it's not right to talk about just the A-bomb. The stuff we have now is so much more powerful, the A-bomb is rather....out of date. Come on now people, hydrogen bombs, Mervs....

Anyways, back to the subject. The Japanese code was definetly illustrated by their never surrender, kamakazi trip. In theory, they would've never stopped attacking and the U.S. would've lost thousands if not millions of troops. The A-bomb stopped them in their tracks.

But before it was even considered, you must also know that the troops that were island hopping found Japanese plans involving the training of school children to fight and kill Americans. Their plan, in essense, was to fight to the last man, from house to house, if and when the Americans got to Japan or reasonably close.

I figure, rather than having to waste thousands of troops, this worked. I might question the morality, but it's history now. It's a lesser evil. Do we let them keep on killing us, or do we simply wipe a few of them out with both power and fear?

Allow me to quote Albert Einstein: "If I had known what my work was going to be used for, I would've become a watchmaker."[/COLOR]

[the The Boy]

We needed to drop both bombs because, as stated before, the Japanese would not have surrendered and even after the second bomb was dropped they only surrendered on the condition that the emperor wouldn't be put on trial for war crimes. Of course I don't think nukes should be used today because we now know the consequences of the blast.

[Semjaza]

I always find it interesting that everyone credits Einstein with nearly every aspect of these weapons, when really, Enrico Fermi is really the main catalyst in all of this.

[James]

[color=#707875]And it was an Australian scientist who was instrumental in the creation of the atom bomb (though I can't remember his name, even though I should -- my brother wrote an essay on him last year). That's quite a bittersweet thing, because the atomic bomb was both bad and good. Bad in terms of its unwanted affects, good in the sense that it provided a powerful deterrant for many years during the cold war.

My feeling is that the A-Bomb's use was necessary, although painful. It must have been a painful decision to drop it. But, as Raiha said...look at what Japan was doing at the time. Japan had conquered large parts of asia during WWII. Japan systematically attacked Papua New Guinea and then Australia (with attacks on both Darwin and Sydney Harbour).

Without the A-Bomb, I have to wonder how the war would have ended. I'm not so sure that Australia would be a free nation right now.

So I guess I have to mirror what Raiha has said to an extent. The A-Bomb did cause a lot of unwanted suffering. But it was also the action that effectively ended the war with Japan. Japan would never have stopped if the A-Bomb had not been deployed. [/color]

[Drix D'Zanth]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Luminaire [/i]
[B][color=crimson] Albert Einstein wrote the E=mc(2), but had no idea it would be used to make a bomb.
[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

I Just want to clarify something. Albert Einstein wrote E=mc^2 but that is the literall formula for the speed of light, not the Atomic bomb. No offense. I just belive you were slightly mistaken there. However Albert Einstein did help invent the Atomic Bomb.

I agree with the dropping of the Atomic Bomb, and in my opinion it was justified. If you look at casualty rates, more people died in the Firebombing of tokyo than the two atomic bombs combigned. Even after the firebombing, Japan didn't flinch. It was estimated that more than 1 million american soldiers would have died in a full scale invasion of Japan. Many more Japanese would have died as a result of that, and their code (as adressed earlier). I think the Atomic bomb was nessicary to shake Japan up enough to end this war, saving the lives of many more Americans and Japonese.

As Gen. Patton once said (I belive): " The object of war isn't to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his."

[DeathKnight]

[color=crimson]Heh. Australia helped in greater ways in WW2 than that.

The estimated casualties on an assult upon the Japanese islands was set at 550,000 thousand. This did not include any Japanese casulties or damages to the infastructure. The problem with that being that, in general, the estimations were much lower than the actuality.

It could have been much worse, really. If the Japanese hadn't of surrendered after the first 2 attacks, then there were plans in the works for up to 7 more [note: UP TO] to be dropped- intill they decided the war wasnt worth it anymore.

One big reason they dropped the bombs [b]when[/b] they did was the Soviet Union's eyes- they were upon the Japanese assets in China, Manchuria and the homeland- if they didnt end the war, the million man red army would. More than likely that would have lead to another Communist leadership or another occurance of what had happened in Berlin when the Red Army 'mingled' with the female populace.

So alot of factors were added in.. the best decison in their mind was made. I cant really say what would have happened if they decided to not do it. Thankfully, thats the only time its been dropped in a war.. maybe it will stay that way, at least a bit longer.[/color]

[Kwai]

...I'm not exactly that thrilled that the U.S. dropped the bomb on us. But as many people pointed out, we probably would have fought to the last man, woman, and child. The casualty may have been higher or lower without the A bomb, but thats up to guessing now. I still frankly find it annoying when people start talking about "More people would have died if U.S. didn't drop the bomb..." crap. People died, and some people today still suffer from the radiation. Regardless of the estimates, I still think it was a horrible day to end the war. People can talk all they want about estimates, estimates, and estimates, but I still think that it was the worst way out. Go to the memorial in Hiroshima.

[stardust]

I disapprove of any use of any weapon for any purpose at all. The thing about bombs is you kill millions of innocent people. People who had nothing to do with it. And the president can say sorry all he wants about that,but you kill just one person you touch the lives of hundreds more. It's just sad and patetic people have to turn to weapons to solve their problems,but it will never change.

[Shinmaru]

What a lot of people don't realize is that the decision to drop the Atomic Bomb was not an automatic decision. Harry Truman agonized for a long time over this and even after he made the decision to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki, he still wasn't sure that it was the right decision.

Personally, I have to agree with what Raiha said about it being the lesser of two evils. The Japanese were willing to risk everything they had in the hopes of winning WWII. Something had to be done and, unfortunately, dropping the A-Bomb was it. Regrettable but inevitable.

[tabmow]

It is nice to look at things in hindsight. At the time we knew the bomb was powerful, but there was a lot about it we did not know. So remember in justifying the dropping of the bomb the powers that were did not have all of our current knowledge that we have now. In scanning through the responses I see that another reason for ending the war quoickly was not addressed. We were not just in competition with the Japanese ,but also with the Russians. Seeing that things were going badly for the Japanese they began to grab as much land as they could before the Japanese surrender. The argument to drop the second bomb was just as much to help contain Russian gains against the faltering Japanese Army by getting the Japanese to surrender ASAP. Had there been an American invasion of Japan from the South there was the Threat of Soviet invasion from the north. We had East and West Germany for years, luckily we did not have North and South Japan. The Korean People might have hoped the war might have ended a little earlier.

[Harry]

The only reason they dropped the A-bombs is to show off to Russia. Russia was already have talks with Japan to get them to surrender and they were very close to making a treaty. All this "die till the last man" stuff is ******** honestly.

[Drix D'Zanth]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Harry [/i]
[B]The only reason they dropped the A-bombs is to show off to Russia. Russia was already have talks with Japan to get them to surrender and they were very close to making a treaty. All this "die till the last man" stuff is ******** honestly. [/B][/QUOTE]

You are entitled to your opinon, I'm entitled to disagree. Honestly if the "die thill the last man stuff" were bs, why were there kamakazi? Why did japanese kill themselves instead of turning over prisoners? Why did the japanese force civilians to fight with pitchforks and cooking knives when the Marines invaded Okinawa (read the letters to home book for reference)? I'm sure russia had SOMETHING to do with it, but I doubt Japan would have surrendered. Remember it took TWO bombs before Japan swallowed their pride and gave up, the Russians didn't give quite the same insentive ;) .

[InuyashaDeamon]

How things are weigh out is if we have to destroy one city to save 100 cities then it logical to sacrifice that one city. When the us planned to drop the A Bombs it was wiegh against a invasion that would of be great then the D-Day invasion. They weigh the casulaties of both the Us and Japan to decieced. logicaly it was the best decision.

[Harry]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Drix D'Zanth [/i]
[B]You are entitled to your opinon, I'm entitled to disagree. Honestly if the "die thill the last man stuff" were bs, why were there kamakazi? Why did japanese kill themselves instead of turning over prisoners? Why did the japanese force civilians to fight with pitchforks and cooking knives when the Marines invaded Okinawa (read the letters to home book for reference)? [/B][/QUOTE]
Under this idea they would've kept fighting even after 5 more atomic bombs. Sure they were willing to fight to the end when the war was going on, but as soon the as the Emporer said "We signed a treaty" they would've stopped, which somewhat happened.

[Drix D'Zanth]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Harry [/i]
[B]Under this idea they would've kept fighting even after 5 more atomic bombs. Sure they were willing to fight to the end when the war was going on, but as soon the as the Emporer said "We signed a treaty" they would've stopped, which somewhat happened. [/B][/QUOTE]


No, under their mentality, despite how stubborn they were, it (luckily) only took two bombs. What's funny is even after the emporer signed the treaty there were accounts of many japanese taking the war upon themselves and still fighting. I'm sure that's what you mean by "somewhat happened", right?

[Harry]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Drix D'Zanth [/i]
[B]No, under their mentality, despite how stubborn they were, it (luckily) only took two bombs. What's funny is even after the emporer signed the treaty there were accounts of many japanese taking the war upon themselves and still fighting. [/B][/QUOTE]
So what's to say the same thing wouldn't happen if Russia just got them to sign a peace treaty?

[Drix D'Zanth]

Good point. I guess there are just too many "what if's" . I mean we could have invaded. Russia could have invaded. There could have been a LOT of casualties on both sides. Perhaps more than the A-Bomb rate, possibly less. Speculating what Russia could or would have done is irrelivent at this point.

[Guest Tical]

NO NO NO NO! THAT NEVER SHOULDA HAPPENED TO THE BEUTIFUL COUNTRY OF JAPAN!!!!!!!!!

[Drix D'Zanth]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Tical [/i]
[B]NO NO NO NO! THAT NEVER SHOULDA HAPPENED TO THE BEUTIFUL COUNTRY OF JAPAN!!!!!!!!! [/B][/QUOTE]

What stunning post quality. And you substantiated your answer! Well I guess i should give my rebuttle. I don't consider Japan all that beautiful, some areas are nice, and the blossom trees are gorgeous, but the urban areas are UGH. I've been there, so don't consider me talking out my ***.

[Turkey]

One thing I believe the US should have done is announce the launching of the bomb 2 days before it was done. That would've given the civilians time to evacuate, and many casualties would have been avoided.

[SpikeSpiegel]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Turkey [/i]
[B]One thing I believe the US should have done is announce the launching of the bomb 2 days before it was done. That would've given the civilians time to evacuate, and many casualties would have been avoided. [/B][/QUOTE]

although it would have been a freidly justure, strategicly it would have been retarted. think of what kind of anit-aircraft guns they would have positioned to shoot us down. and we did give them a "warning" if you think about it. i am not positive on how it went but we did tell them if they did not surrender we would unleash a devestating attack. i think thats how it went.