Ever Been Nuked By the AI?

[etj4Eagle]

Originally posted by gugalpm
Sorry, but the japanese didn't surrender because of the american terrorist nukes...
They already surrendered, the americans launched the nukes to show USSR their "power"
And it's quite normal the AI countering your nukes...

Besides the other things that people pointed out, you may want to research some the actual bombing raids done against Japan. The nukes killed less people than our fire bombing raids of Tokyo. Additionally if it had not been for nukes, Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the other nuke target cities would have already been bombed by a dozen or so fire bombing raids. They had been spared to emphasize the strength of the nuclear bomb. Getting hit by nuclear bombs probably actually saved lives there! (being spared the regular raids).

But back to the topic.

Yep I have been involved in nuclear wars. I have been lucky on the receiving side, only having my capital succesfully nuked once. Of course I try to postpone any possible wars with nuclear powers till after I get the SDI. There has also been the occasional civ that has really pissed me off, that I decided to make their country a glowing one (was the same game where I got a GL from killing a traitorous worker). Nukes work really well for taking out resources (get all the improvements in a wide area).

 

[Bretwalda]

You are right in all points (as much as 'what if' things can be right in history) however IMHO it was a gesture of show of power to the USSR to have them see the awesome destructive power of the Bomb. Or to say the least the Soviets understood it that way... (because that would have been their main reason!)

Originally posted by Mad Bomber
Adlots;

You are misinformed on your history. Midway occured in 1942, the bombs were dropped in 1945 and the Japanese fleet was already destroyed. Japan was already defeated, Hirohito refused to surrender until he was told that Tokyo would be the next target. Japan had offered conditional surrenders, this is true, but these were unacceptable even if we did not have the bomb. We only had two options to end the war. Nuke Japan or invade Japan. Strangely as this may sound, Nuking Japan saved not only American lives, but Japanese lives as well.

 

[Mad Bomber]

Bretwalda:

It may be seen as a show of power by the US in Russia and in other parts of the world, but this was not in fact the reason we dropped it. Roosevelt said "speak softly and carry a big stick" We had the biggest stick and the Ruskies knew it, there was no need for the show of power, it was needed to end the war.

 

[wohmongarinf00l]

re: japan
that surrender wasn't entirely unconditional.
if america did not promise to leave the emperor alone they'd have gone on fighting to the last man. remember iwo jima.

 

[Mad Bomber]

Originally posted by wohmongarinf00l
re: japan
that surrender wasn't entirely unconditional.
if america did not promise to leave the emperor alone they'd have gone on fighting to the last man. remember iwo jima.

True, but the terms of surrender were acceptable to the US. In the conditions attatched to a surrender before Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not, as it would have left complete soverignty to Japan, no occupation, or government change. It also would have left Japanese troops in possession of Korean and Chinese lands. These terms were completely unacceptable to the US.

 

[Sultan Bhargash]

Somehow this thread has been partially jakked into an argument about America using atomic bombs (not even an option in Civ3) on Japan.

Many of you repeat the accepted wisdom that Japan would have fought to the last man and that we "did them a favor" by dropping atomic bombs on them.

Others of you cite never confirmed but tactically useful arguments that the Japanese bombing was a demonstration of our power to the Soviets inflicted on a near-defeated foe.

I would caution the former that as history is written by the victors, we can never be so sure about that, and that, regardless of what you think may have happened in terms of human life costs on the ground, it was never a NECESSITY that we drop the bomb on them, and the consequences at any rate go beyond body count (in my opinion this was the announcement of the American Superpower and its loss of moral authority).

I would caution the latter that I have found out the hard way that when you are going to argue against the status quo wisdom in these forums it is wise to come armed with sources better than AFAIK, otherwise you are simply telling a folktale version of history which must be judged solely on statistical number of believers in, which the old explanation of Hiroshima/Nagasaki has already won.

 

[gugalpm]

Please... are you guys so drunk of the american spirit that you can't see things that are clear?
I'm not some guesser... I'm a history student... I have meetings with university teachers, even with my little age...
And there was no "we did it to end the war"... the war was over... one of the biggest countries in the world against an early-imperialist country... The japanese army was dilacerated, with no allies, no resources... come on, and use your brain, not your historical guesses based on some book that has the cover on red and white stripes...

 

[gugalpm]

And more... US only defeated USSR because of the bombs... the USSR army was substancially larger... the only way to stop USSR was the atomic power, so the balance could be mantained...
Do you think that exterminating 2 cities, full of innocent people, causing a nuclear disaster, with impacts that appear until today is saving japanese lives? The holocaust, the unhealable scars... is this saving lives? The humiliation caused on such brave people is sparing them? I don't think so!

 

[etj4Eagle]

For anyone really interested in understanding the issue, I suggest that they take a time to study the issue instead of just stating their belief. A good first book to read is "Hiroshima's Shadow" edited by By Kai Bird and Lawrence Lifschultz. This book includes the text of the original Smithsonian exhibit (which was killed by both sides of the debate).

Before you can make a judgement decision or the dropping of the bomb you need to understand the full context of the situation and the mindset at the time. How the fighting had degenerated into total war on both sides. Yes we the war was mostly over, but the mop up phase is not without casualties. Also we were already bombing civilian population centers. The only difference with the bomb was that it was one device, not a sky full of bombers. And that the target was pristine (but that was because they had saved it, so as to maximize the shock factor).

If using the bomb was immoral then where is all the outrage over our firebombing of Japanese cities?

And actually far more weighing than any attempt to impress the soviets would have been the very real need in the mind of anyone connected with the project to use the device. Remember they had devoted massive amounts of resources during a major war to this program, and should it prove to have been a waste heads would roll when congress began looking into it.

 

[Silverflame]

About the bomb on Japan:

Sure, I believe that using the bomb was immoral, but what other alternative was there? The Japanese would rather die than surrender. Think of Iwo Jima and the Kamikazees. If the Allies made a D-Day landing at Japan, it would result in far more casulties on both sides.

Plus, despite this mass destruction, the military generals still wanted to fight the US. It was the emperor, for the first time, who forced Japan to surrender.

Enough about Japan in WWII, we should get back on topic

 

[Sultan Bhargash]

yes, somebody give us up the bomb!

 

[wohmongarinf00l]

i suppose u have this image of the emperor whimsically telling his generals "enough is enough" and going ahead with the surrender announcement despite their objections. don't worry, i used to have it too.
the truth is, terms of surrender had already been negotiated. the japanese would lay down their arms in exchange for leaving the emperor alone. to explain why ALL nazi leaders were held accountable and the emperor was not, there has been an accepted doctrine that japanese military-industrial leaders secretly planned and executed the war without the emperor being really privy to the details. this is a fallacy. the emperor always knew what was going on.

Originally posted by Silverflame
About the bomb on Japan:
Plus, despite this mass destruction, the military generals still wanted to fight the US. It was the emperor, for the first time, who forced Japan to surrender.

Enough about Japan in WWII, we should get back on topic

 

[Praetorian]

Had the *&^%#$&*^%$ nuked out of me simultaneously by five other civs . And all I did was to slightly violate a ROP and a MPP by accidently dropping 17 nukes on Germany.



The AI can be so sensitive and unreasonable sometimes

 

[Sultan Bhargash]

THOSE OF YOU WHO WANT TO CONTINUE DEBATING THE A-BOMBInG OF JAPAN: I have just opened a thread in the Colloseum/World History Forum on this topic. Please by all means continue this debate there and from here forward let this thread be about Civ3 nuclear attack stories.

 

[gugalpm]

Allright, Great Sultan... I will do Allah's will!
Been nuked by the AI is quite imprudent, since in these times you should maintain the best diplomatic relations possible...

 

[hbdragon88]

On topic:

Yes, I have, but only once. I had altered gonzo_for_civ's tip for a peaceful war in his War Academy download thing. He said to do MPPs with everyone, but I only did it with everyone but the civ I wanted to attack.

I didn't know about ROP rape then. So I was moving in workers (someone said that the AI can't resist capturing workers) and Modern Armor, trying to get Cleopatra pissed off so much as to declare war on me.

She came up to me after two times and demanded that I remove my troops from her territory. When I attempted to leave "That's it. Goodbye, Cleopatra" I was forced to declare war on her or agree on a ROP. Instantly that turn she released her whole arsonal (three) of nukes on my former capital.

I was furious that she did that on me and launched all of my nukes that turn on her cities. Hee hee.

 

[FionnMcCumhall]

your a scary person to do a nuclear war against

 

[dayfax]

I've never been first striked. If that ever happens, I will die from laughter.

First time I played through, I was building tact nukes in a couple of cities for the helluva it. Then I got ICBMs and have to admit ... when the unit is selected and you see that red grid that covers the _entire_ map ... well, it was just too tempting.

Of course, everyone declared war on me + somebody else in the world had an ICBM ready which they promptly dropped on my capitol. The missle came in too fast and I could never figure out who it was, but I suspect it was India (the most powerful AI at the time).

On Japan -- it wasn't ten days between dropping of the bombs. It was five (Aug 6, and Aug 11 afaik). The US demanded unconditional surrender from Japan. The Japanese thought this meant that their Emperor would be deposed. Remember that the Emperor at the time had a _huge_ cultural and religious significance to the Japanese people. He was literally believed to be decended from the Sun God. So they couldn't do that.

Also, from a cultural standpoint, surrender would have meant worse than death to the Japanese in a lot of ways. When General Tojo informed his staff of the surrender, he explained it by saying something along the lines of "Well .. the war hasn't gone the way we expected." He never used the word 'surrender' in his speech. (Another oddity: after the surrender, a lot of those generals committed ritual suicide -- hara-kiri -- but Tojo didn't. He shot himself in the chest right before he was captured. The US revived him, saved his life, then put him on trial for war crimes + had him executed).

On Truman : there was a political/social risk there too. If he decided to invade Japan, hold back on the bomb, and it cost the estimated 1M American lives, and then _afterwards_ the public became aware that the US military had a weapon that could have ended the war before that, what do you think would have happened?

On Stalin: He knew about the US bomb plans/capabilites long before Potsdam. There were guys at Los Altos that were passing info to the Soviets the entire time.

 

[Chairman Yang]

When the enemy is stupid enough to stack his entire army at one section of the front (which they often do...atleast most of it) I might use a few tactical nukes to get an advantage, only problem is then i have the entire world against me...and their nukes, so if i use one tactical one turn, then all my cities could be hit the next.

Some nuclear-capable nation should declare war on the us, then nuke, and then say; we saved many of our own as well as americans since we refarained from invading, i wonder how Mad Bomber would feel... But then, im a rotten comi-b@stard so my view could be a bit twisted, in comparance with the truth-seeing and completely neutral americans. Freedom-lovers...phew.

 

[Photi]

practically unprovoked first strike nuclear attack by the bablyonians led to the near destruction of seven of my cities (didn't have sdi yet).

yes, mad bomber and all the rest--the americans needed to a-bomb japan, the israelis are only defending themselves agaist the people they stole the land from, bush the elder never had a secret relationship with saddam hussain or al-qaida (back then the holy warriors liberating themselves from the evil communists), the shah of iran was a benevolent king and its too bad khomeni the pious took control of such a great country, and egypt and saudi arabia are moderate arab states. ha!

schizophrenia is bliss!