What ordinary men can do: The bombing of Hiroshima

Except the nations the Allies bombed could fight back by shooting down the planes. Bit of a difference to rounding up civilians and executing them. The Allies weren't angels but I would love to hear of any widespread atrocities commited by the western Allies (not USSR)during the occupation of Germany/Japan.
 
Zardnaar said:
Except the nations the Allies bombed could fight back by shooting down the planes. Bit of a difference to rounding up civilians and executing them. The Allies weren't angels but I would love to hear of any widespread atrocities commited by the western Allies (not USSR)during the occupation of Germany/Japan.

Occupation was correct. But I am not talking about the occupation.
 
I saw a documentry once that showed how Japan wanted America to invade so there could be a great climatic battle that would kill so many Americans that they would lose there nerve and agree to Japan's terms of surrender.

And if that didn't work then everyone would just had to die in suicide attacks or face death at the hands of their own troops.

Very much like what happened during the invasion Okinawa. The battle for that island was the BLOODIEST for Americans and Japanese in the entire war!

So I don't blame the American one bit for not wanting to invade Japan and instead use the A-bombs.

It did save lives in when you look at the alternatives.
 
Winner said:
Well, your reaction is EXACTLY what I am talking about.

You admit you did things which are exactly as terrible as your enemy?
NO, I DO NOT.

We didn't kill people in modified showers for the crime of being the wrong ethnic group. We didn't bulldoze a big chunk of the Far East in order to plant flags on it. And we didn't start the whole catastrophe to begin with.

Germany and Japan did things a lot more terrible than we did. They were the bad guys, that cannot be questioned.

Have I made myself perfectly clear??? :mad:
 
BasketCase said:
NO, I DO NOT.

We didn't kill people in modified showers for the crime of being the wrong ethnic group.

No, you've killed them with incendiary bombs and atomic fire, because they belonged to a wrong nation. That surely makes a huge difference :rolleyes:

We didn't bulldoze a big chunk of the Far East in order to plant flags on it.

No, you were satisfied with bulldozing a smaller part of the Far East ;)

And we didn't start the whole catastrophe to begin with.

So what? They attacked a military target in United States. Your revenge consisted of fire/atomic bombings of civilian targets in Japan. If you wanted to show them you are more civilized, you've failed.

Germany and Japan did things a lot more terrible than we did. They were the bad guys, that cannot be questioned.

So the crimes of bad guys allows you to do the same thing and then say it was right? Nice...

Have I made myself perfectly clear??? :mad:

Unfortunately, you have.
 
Tale of two cities:

http://www.archive.org/details/TaleofTw1946

Nice piece of US propaganda bull****. That guy is so excited by the atomic destruction, that he forgets there were people living in those cities. But of course, US authorities confiscated video footage and photos of terribly burned and dying people to hide it from the public...
 
Few pictures of the victims, just to know what about are we talking here:

BoyWithBurnedBack.jpg


WomanWithHorriblyBurnedFace.jpg


victim1.jpg
victim2.jpg


49.jpg
51.jpg

50.jpg
53.jpg
 
von_Seydlitz said:
This point of view implies that there is little difference between the Nazis and the US. Bit astonishing to me...

"We had our orders..." .. "We just did what we were told to.." .. "We were doing it because we were ordered to and thought it would be for the benefit of..."
That's all the same arguments Nazis like Eichmann gave for his crimes.

You may not like it, but when anyone fights a war, they fight to win, not to see how nice they can be. War is war, not a tea party. The idea of "war crimes" is incomprehensible to me, as the whole concept of war is to kill as many fellow human beings as possible. You should remember, Hitler and Stalin were human the same as everyone else. Deep down, humanity is cruel and merciless. Civilization is simply a coat of paint, the cruelty remains and sometimes it comes to the surface.
 
ie, The original target was the remainder Japanese Fleet in anchor at Truk.

Many in the American high command, including MacArthur argued strongly against a civilian target.
 
Marla_Singer said:
After all, Germans have sneak attacked Belgium in World War 1. That makes suddenly the Versailles Treaty justified. :rolleyes:

That's news to me... the attack of Belgium was illegal, of course, but sneak attack? They gave them the choice to let german troops pass, and if not, to be attacked. That's no excuse, but I don't think this is called a "sneak attack". And I do think that the Versailles Treaty is a bit more problematic than you put it here.
 
Bugfatty300 said:
ie, The original target was the remainder Japanese Fleet in anchor at Truk.

Many in the American high command, including MacArthur argued strongly against a civilian target.

Either way, the US and Britain had already killed 1 million people in Japan and Germany with conventional bombs.

The A-bombs wheren't any different than say a 500 B-29 napalm Raid on Tokyo that were already happening and killing hundreds of thousands.

The difference being that it didn't take 500 bombers. It just took one.

And the Japanese realized they were out of luck and out of time.

Its stupid to single out the 2 A-bombs
 
Evil Tyrant said:
The idea of "war crimes" is incomprehensible to me, as the whole concept of war is to kill as many fellow human beings as possible.
I'm not sure i agree with that statement. I'm pretty sure that the concept of war is to gain control, otherwise why bother to have prisoners of war?
 
feline_dacat said:
I'm not sure i agree with that statement. I'm pretty sure that the concept of war is to gain control, otherwise why bother to have prisoners of war?

If thats true, why are soldiers carrying rifles instead of tazers? Gaining contol is the ultimate goal, but killing people is the only way to do it.
 
Evil Tyrant said:
If thats true, why are soldiers carrying rifles instead of tazers? Gaining contol is the ultimate goal, but killing people is the only way to do it.

Because tasers are not useful to take an enemy army out.
Killing the army might be the way to do it. But citizens?
You've got a really disgusting opinion, really.
 
BasketCase said:
We didn't kill people in modified showers for the crime of being the wrong ethnic group. We didn't bulldoze a big chunk of the Far East in order to plant flags on it. And we didn't start the whole catastrophe to begin with.

Germany and Japan did things a lot more terrible than we did. They were the bad guys, that cannot be questioned.

If the US administration didn't kill based on ethnicity, then tell me, why were Japanese-americans placed in camps? Why where they discriminated against. Why was the loyalty of high German-American generals never questioned? Why were japanese portrayed as inferior beasts? Why were 178 square miles of urban settlement destroyed in Japan in 6 months, and only 79 square miles of urban settlement destroyed in Germany.

If Japan had managed to launch these chemical weapons people speak of, and they had killed some hundred thousand yanks, and the americans had called it quits and accepted a peace where Japan had kept its sovereignity, whoudl you have considdered those attacks justified? They too would have *saved* lives.
 
Monks walk atomic flame to Trinity Site
By Laura Hunt, Staff Writer
Jul 27, 2005, 12:57 pm

Buddhist monks carrying a lantern lit by embers of the world’s first atomic bomb, which destroyed Hiroshima on the morning of Aug. 6, 1945, are on their way to the birthplace of atomic weapons — Trinity Site, New Mexico.

The Japanese monks, joined by other peace protesters and supporters, started walking on July 16, the 60th anniversary of the test at Trinity Site. They have already carried the “atomic flame” from San Francisco, through southern California and part of Nevada.

After a 25-day, 1,600-mile walk, the flame will be extinguished at the Trinity Site on Aug. 9, the 60th anniversary of the Nagasaki bombing. The ceremony will take place during a television broadcast calling for world peace and an end to nuclear proliferation, said Matt Taylor, Global Nuclear Disarmament Fund co-executive director.

Some Alamogordo residents were unaware of the monks’ journey. One resident, William Meadows, was angered by the news.

“I’m a veteran of World War II, and I don’t think that these monks got any business coming over here,” he said, “because if it hadn’t been for the A-bomb, there would have been millions of people killed on both sides over there.”

After learning about the monks’ plan, Meadows immediately called Congressman Steve Pearce and left a message with someone in his office.

“Since when are the Japanese allowed to come down to Trinity Site? That’s what I’m asking the congressman, if he would stop them,” he said to the person on the other line.

However, other residents were supportive of the monks.

“I certainly understand the feelings of anybody who’s experienced that, like the Japanese,” said Walter Miller. “I’m not really fond of nuclear weapons proliferation myself, and I’d like to see them all stopped... It’s an admirable thing that they’re making that kind of trip.”

James Haynes, Alamogordo resident, said the peace protest falls under freedom of speech.

“Everyone is entitled to their own opinion,” he said. “You should do what you feel is right, and if these people feel the need to protest, they should be able to.”

However, Taylor said the ceremony isn’t political, but humanitarian.

“It’s not an anti-war thing,” he said, “and it’s not even an argument as to whether (the atomic bomb) should or shouldn’t have been used. It’s about ending a cycle and starting a new era.”

In Zen culture, 60 years is the end of a cycle, Taylor said.

“They believe that everything good and bad happens in circles,” he said. “The atomic bomb was born at Trinity Site, then used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. For 60 years, the world has been living in fear that Nagasaki wouldn’t be the last place it was used. Now we’re living with nuclear terrorism every day, so in order to close this circle in a peaceful way, and not to end it in a destructive way, we’re walking it back to where it was born.”

Buddhist monks have taken the flame on many peace walks around the globe, Taylor said, and now, the monks will finally extinguish the flame and end the cycle that started in 1945.

“I think it’s really wonderful that Trinity Site will finally be connected to all of humanity,” Taylor said.
http://www.alamogordonews.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=585&num=8681

William Meadows, the WW2 vet in the article, repeats the illogical nonsense so many people accept without ever really stopping to think about it: 'genocide saves lives'. In other words 'If so many people hadnt been killed, many people would have been killed' :confused: It would be funny if it wasnt such a tragic subject. It makes somewhat more sense when people say that commiting genocide against Japanese civilians is acceptable because it prevented the deaths of US servicemen who would have had to invade. That begs the question: how many Japanese women and children are worth one US soldier? Ten, twenty, a thousand? Is there any limit at all?
 
superisis said:
If the US administration didn't kill based on ethnicity, then tell me, why were Japanese-americans placed in camps?

Thats still not genocide or killing because of ethnicity. Its pure discrimination and definetly an injustice none the less.

And America has apologized and offered compensations. Has Japan done the same for their Korean slaves?

superisis said:
Why where they discriminated against. Why was the loyalty of high German-American generals never questioned

Germans and Italians were also put in internment camps and those who weren't were heavily watched and sometimes, just like the Japanese.
 
Back
Top Bottom