JavaScript is required to use Bungie.net

자유 게시판

자유롭게 대화를 나누어보세요.
작성자: Bigger Masshole 4/14/2015 10:05:27 PM
220

Were the atomic bombs dropped on Japan justified?

Great. This is just asking for trouble... Keep in mind I'm not asking whether the U.S. was a hero or villain, I'm asking whether it was justified or not. Now before you right something out of emotion, keep these things in mind: - The building of the atomic bomb was a response to the discovery that Germany was also developing nuclear weapons. The U.S. probably would've never built one if Albert Einstein didn't tell the U.S. government of Hitler's plan to develop and use. - For those who've never heard of The -blam!- of Nanking, you might want to look it up. The Imperial Japanese Army committed atrocious acts against the people of Nanking, China during a 6 week period being in December of 1937. An estimation of civilians who were killed is in the 200-300 thousands. Most women of most ages were -blam!-, not only by Japanese soldiers, but by sons, brothers, and fathers that were forced to do it by the Japanese. Men, women, and children of all ages were also slaughtered in most brutal of ways. Many suffered torture(too many types to name) before finally being killed. Most Japanese soldiers actually smiled and laughed while committing these atrocities. - Just like Germany, Japan was incredibly racist. They believed that they were the pure Asian race and saw people of non-Japanese descent as inferior (refer to The -blam!- of Nanking). Not only that, but they believed it was them who should own the Pacific, which is part of the reason why they bombed Pearl Harbor on December of 1941. At that point, America needed to act because of the attack on its own turf. - With the fall of the Axis Powers in Europe, the full attention was now turned to the Pacific. Unfortunately, FDR died of a stroke in April of 1945, while the atomic bomb was still in development. Harry Truman took office and was not aware of the Manhattan Project until he entered office. - The Japanese mentality of fighting was that of something never seen before. No surrender, fight until the very end, and suicide if all else fails. These guys were extreme radicals. They fought with an extreme passion for their country and Emperor. - Truman was a devout Christian. He had to make one of the hardest decisions a person could make. But here is some more background on the situation. • The scientists who developed the bomb had different views from one another. Some believed it needed to be dropped, while others thought a monster would become of this. Here is a famous quote by Einstein (a lifelong pacifist) regarding this; "Organized power can be opposed only by organized power. Much as I regret this, there is no other way." • Many generals of the U.S. also debated this. General Eisenhower believed it shouldn't be dropped because it would tarnish America's reputation. General Marshall believed it needed to be dropped because the only way to defeat the Japanese was with an unconditional surrender. When it came down to it, a peace agreement wasn't an option. • There was a plan to drop an atomic bomb near Japan so everyone in Japan could see it. However, this could not be done because if the Japanese knew they had atomic bombs and figured out what cities America would drop them on, then Japan would've moved their operations, factories, and people to different locations while moving in American POWs to be bombed instead. It needed to be a surprise. • There was an estimation of the cost of invading Japan. Now, cost in this instance means lives of human beings, not just money. Hundreds of thousands of lives were thought to be lossed, civilian and soldier alike. America also knew that Japan would prolong the war as long as possible, depleting them of money, resources, and lives. Dropping the atomic bomb was thought to bring a swift surrender, even though it would cost the lives of thousands. The estimation of the dropping of the bombs was in between 30 to 60 thousand. This wasn't the case, but no one could actually knew what the damage would've been. So, it seemed more sensible to drop the bombs. • Put yourself in Truman's shoes for a minute. He was a very humble and kind man. Now, he has to make a decision that no matter what would effect the course of humanity. He knows soldiers, sons and fathers, were still fighting in the Pacific. How do you look someone in the eyes when his or her son or father has been killed knowing you had the technology to end it several months or years earlier? At that point, it wasn't about how many lives would be lost, it was either America or Japan. Though this was the most unethical option, it was the only option... - Hiroshima and Nagasaki, though not direct military bases, were strategic for attack. The factories that created most of Japan's weaponry and munitions were located in those citites, making them vital target locations. Unfortunately, civilians also live in cities. American aircraft actually dropped flyers describing the atomic bomb a day before the bombing as a type of warning. Hiroshima, bombed on August 6th of 1945, witnessed the most destructive weapon mankind has ever built. The Japanese were hesitant to surrender. The Emperor was a weak leader, under control of General Tojo. The Japanese military and people were something new during this time. The only way to defeat this type of mentality of fighting to the very end, killing you self not to be taken by the enemy, fighting with an extreme passion, and never surrender in the eyes of many was to kill as many as possible. 3 days later, Nagasaki was bombed. - The Emperor couldn't stand to see his people suffer and die like this. He urged for a surrender. However, the military still had the last say and refused to. The Japanese government let the 2nd bomb happen. They could've prevented the 2nd bomb from happening, but let it be dropped on its own people to "test" the U.S.. Russia then got involved several days later by threatening to invade Japan. Japan knew they couldn't handle more atomic bombs and an invasion, and formally surrendered on September 2nd of 1945. - After it all, an estimated 200 thousand lives were lost to the dropping of those bombs and the Japanese economy was ruined. However, America didn't sit back and watch them suffer. America helped them rebuild their economy and country for 10 years after WW2, which resulted in Japan years later to be greatly prospering. To this day, the constitution for Japan is known as the MacArthur Constitution because he introduced many of the new policies for Japan during the reconstruction. I might be missed a few more important points, but these are definitely strong ones to think about. Just thought I'd do this because of my history class. Been awhile since I've done something worth talking about, might as well be this. Please keep it serious as we are talking about a sensitive topic. No arguments or bait for this one (maybe the next one).
English
#Offtopic

게시물 작성 언어:

 

다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

  • My guess is it was payback from Pearl Harbor x10

    게시물 작성 언어:

     

    다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

    1 답변
    • 작성자: Fr33-StuF-pl0x 4/15/2015 7:05:39 AM
      Yes. The Japanese needed to know what it was like being on the other side of the spectrum of an attack. They felt that it was ok to kill, -blam!-, and torture other Asians because they thought they were the superior Asian race. They bombed a country choosing to stay out of the war, and not threatening them in any way. If you throw a rock at America you get a boulder thrown back, it's that simple. If youre willing to start a war, you better be willing to face the consequences of what happens during and after it. Whether it was a show of force or not, it saved countless lives, civilian and military, saved tons of resources, and ended the war much quicker than a full scale invasion of Japan would have.

      게시물 작성 언어:

       

      다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

      1 답변
      • Well for US it was a smart but messed up move we couldn't have warned them about it or they would have prepared for it but if we went to their homeland we would have lost more men, more money, more armor/weapons and they would have suffered more deaths and destruction. From Japanese point of view they kinda had that coming but getting 2 city's vaporized really strikes fear into your people and your troops. Now from a European stand point going from losing a war to winning then nuking the people who are already losing has no honor. But it made sense it's 2v1 you need to burst one down sooner or later.

        게시물 작성 언어:

         

        다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

      • TL;DR

        게시물 작성 언어:

         

        다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

      • Yes, it was.

        게시물 작성 언어:

         

        다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

      • Yes No one gave a slightest of -blam!- about Jap lives back then. Pic explains it all

        게시물 작성 언어:

         

        다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

        3 답변
        • I will always say no.

          게시물 작성 언어:

           

          다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

          2 답변
          • Yes. It was better than killing the entire Japanese population

            게시물 작성 언어:

             

            다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

          • 작성자: ShpadoinkleBeks 4/15/2015 4:38:39 PM
            Put yourself in a marines boondockers or army infantryman on Okinawa. They knew the next target was Japan and they knew how fanatical the Japanese would be. Imagine fighting arguably the toughest and most barbaric fighting of the war. And then picture that multiplied on the Japanese mainland. These men saw the reason Japan would be a bloodbath if invaded. Towards the end of the war starting with places like Iwo and Pelelieu, the Japanese abandoned bonzais and stuck to holding out and dying till the last man. This resulted in 70 or so days of fighting on islands that were tiny. Barbaric and hellish fighting went on for weeks on a small ridge called bloody nose alone. This kind of tactic would cause huge losses and drag the war on for a year or two longer if an invasion happened. What happened on Saipan is testament to how fanatical even the civilians were. They would rather die than be an american POW. So many instances of how evil and barbaric the Japanese could be convinced Truman among may other reasons to drop the bombs. Look up unit 731 it was a camp that could be compared to [url=http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law]-godwinslaw!-[/url] experiments almost. Like all history so many different reasons come together to make a decision. Blaming it on one or two things is not how history works. [spoiler]I wonder how that summer would have played out if FDR was still alive, it would make for some good historical fiction[/spoiler][quote][/quote]

            게시물 작성 언어:

             

            다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

          • It was completely justified. What wasn't justified, is that the president at that time did;nt allow us to go father in and knock out all of the communists (i think it was the communists). This is a silly thread. As though letting all of the ticked off people to voice their opinion as though its going got change it.

            게시물 작성 언어:

             

            다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

          • Simply no, unless the axis had the equivalent or close to. Of course, it did en the war quickly. Who's to say less lives were lost if the bombs had not been dropped...but then it would have been more honorable no?

            게시물 작성 언어:

             

            다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

            2 답변
            • TL;DR But all I'm saying is that we warned them.

              게시물 작성 언어:

               

              다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

            • No. It was a display of power. Japan already wanted to surrender at that point.

              게시물 작성 언어:

               

              다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

              23 답변
              • 1Million white guys or 300k Asians.....

                게시물 작성 언어:

                 

                다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

              • Si compadre

                게시물 작성 언어:

                 

                다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

              • 작성자: Regret 4/15/2015 9:44:23 AM
                Ridiculous, ending innocent lives to protect those that were innocent? Japan sure was fuked up but... Urgh

                게시물 작성 언어:

                 

                다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

                2 답변
                • Oh, I thought they dropped your mom.

                  게시물 작성 언어:

                   

                  다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

                • Justified? [x] Rekt[x]

                  게시물 작성 언어:

                   

                  다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

                • Your mum

                  게시물 작성 언어:

                   

                  다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

                • Yes simply because it ended the war, if Japan had not been bombed more people would have died on both sides in an invasion. Twice as many people died in the Tokio firestorm compared to Hiroshima. Nagasaki however, not sure.

                  게시물 작성 언어:

                   

                  다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

                • Invading Japan would have made more casualties on both sides! But its a tricky one since a lot of civilians died. Guess we will never know for sure!

                  게시물 작성 언어:

                   

                  다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

                • Necessary? No. Justified? That's a matter of perspective. If you look at it as a form of revenge or sticking it to someone who's already down, no, it wasn't justified. It was a [b]colossally [/b] dick move. If you look at it as a message to the world that America (and her allies) wouldn't tolerate another war on this scale and Japan just happened to be in a really bad position that made them a convenient choice for whipping boy, then it could be argued that it was a justifiable decision. As much as "mutually ensured destruction" is frowned upon, the Cold War did not break into WWIII and it would take another 60+ years after WWII for the lives lost in combat to equal the lives lost in WWII itself. TL;DR as an aggressive act = not justifiable as a message = arguably justifiable

                  게시물 작성 언어:

                   

                  다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

                • No, it wasn't. If they'd been used to decimate a military base instead of a civilian area (which the Japanese were decent enough to do, at least), then maybe we could call it justified.

                  게시물 작성 언어:

                   

                  다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

                  8 답변
                  • The bomb was the lesser if the two evils.

                    게시물 작성 언어:

                     

                    다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

                  • Justified? I'd say yes. Effective? Very. Japan is very, very different from what they used to be. Advocating for peace and not getting involved with war, the Japanese acknowledge and agree that they basically, "had it coming" and learned from it. I've heard from many that visiting Japan, they experience something of a culture shock because everything about japan is so radically different.

                    게시물 작성 언어:

                     

                    다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

                  • "Genocide is not defendable" is the common saying. Yet they refuse to look at how the Japanese distracted us from Hitler. And I would consider NOT dropping the nuke to be a greater genocide. Either blow up a city and military target, or have hundreds and hundreds of thousands more die on BOTH sides.

                    게시물 작성 언어:

                     

                    다른 사용자들을 존중해주세요. 게시물을 제출하기 전에 한 숨 돌리고 운영 정책을 검토하세요. 취소 수정 화력팀 생성하기 게시

                    3 답변
                    3 4 5 6 7 8 9
                    회원님은 해당 콘텐츠를 볼 수 없습니다.
                    ;
                    preload icon
                    preload icon
                    preload icon