Did Hirohito really say “four years” of war?
I can’t believe that, as the Japanese were in wartime much longer, 15 years all in all, started in China (which lead to a total embargo of the US etc. etc.).
this is a very interesting post: I have been reading it from the beginning and I want to add a few things, forst, this started with the word ‘test’ kidna funny that way.
no state has ever emerged morally unscathed from war, and WW2 was especually bad. So the idea of any country not doing ‘bad’ things to win is not realistic in the least.
as for the A-bomb, civilian bombing had become common place (sadly) during the war, germany and britain, the US too. If Japan had the ability to reach our borders they would have certainly bombed our civilians, actually they did! they sent thousands of ballon bombs over the pacific to try to hit American civilians, actually a person died, but there was a complete press blackout on the matter. I think you hVave to judge the past in terms of the contemporary time, the A-bomb was a military weapon, like asuper powerful incindiery bomb, the bombing of civilians had become an accepted form of warfare by ALL countries involved so how that realistically be questioned? the dropping is regretable for sure, but they were at war with Japan, a especually viscious opponent, (bataan death march, rape of nanking and many others) , Japan also swore she would never surrender, from a military point of view, you have this new weapon, could end the war, save your peoples lives, and end the bloodiest conflict in history. i think you do it, and i think nukes are deplorable.
and if the US didnt use the bomb that they spent a fortune building, could you explain that to the 200,00+ mothers, fathers, wives, brothers and sisters why the japanese civilians lives were more important than theirs? When Japan declared war on the US I believe it is correct for the US to place themselves first. and dont tell me that germany of japan wouldnt have used the A-bomb if they had it …… 100% sure they would have. more Chinese died at the rape of nanking than from both A-bombs put together, so gain some perspective, its not like 5 million japanese died.
all that said, i wish it hadnt been used, so regretable, but then again i wish WW2 hadnt happaned at all, but its not like the US was teh aggressor, we tried damn hard to stay out of it.
just some thoughts, im sure some are written incorrectly and will be torn apart but thats cool. im not saying im 100% right but try not to view things in the new post-modernism, truly analyze the WORLD AT WAR part of the game we all love to play.
thnx for your time
kevin
ps- only one person died at the japanese internment camps in the US, and that was from natural causes (old age).
one of those stupid Japanese balloons even managed to make it as far as Saskatchewan. Nice.
“Did Hirohito really say “four years” of war?
I can’t believe that, as the Japanese were in wartime much longer, 15 years all in all, started in China (which lead to a total embargo of the US etc. etc.).”
I think Hirohito was speaking of four years of war with America. Would you like me to post the entire surrender speech Hirhito broadcasted on radio?
“If Japan had the ability to reach our borders they would have certainly bombed our civilians, actually they did! they sent thousands of ballon bombs over the pacific to try to hit American civilians”
Sir KPwatkin, we must not forget that Japan often resorted to civilian bombing of the countries of China, the Philippines, Korea, and as far reaching as Australia during World War Two. Those may not have been American lives lost, but it was civilian lives lost all the same :cry:
Quote From FinsterniS " Same thing goes, on a lesser scale, for the us nuclear attack. You are trying to rationalize horribles crimes, but throwing two nuclear bomb on civilian was a terror attack. Remember that without the “unconditional reddition”, the two bomb would have maybe not been necessary. Sure we own a lot to Russia and the US, it is not a reason to be blind to their crime, i am happy the USA help to get the war to and end, but Nagasaki and Hiroshima were more political/emotional than rational desicion."
Like someone else pointed out, Japan wasn’t going to surrender.
Would you expect them to negotiate till both sides are happy?
“You just keep half of what you agressive, hostile military actions gained”
Satisfying bleeding heart liberals, like we saw in the Gulf war , and take a moral “lets not hurt anyone” attitude could have lead to a long drawn out conflict that may have cost many more American lives.
Does dropping an A-bomb make this a terrorist action.
Should they have just carpet bombed the two cities?
Just like every other major nation involved in the war did.
I just think some Europeans are sensitive when it comes to the" America Cowboy" bravado. :lol: and dont like their confident attitudes.
I dont think any Nazi was tried from bombing Allied cities.
I still believe that the bombing of Nagasaki was wrong. One of the remaining military targets, even if it would have been a city with civilians in it as well, would have been a better target in my opinion, because the aim is not to kill civilians intentionally but to wipe out a military base where civilians are casualties, which happens in war. I think Nagasaki was horrible, but Hiroshima was better because it had military value. If the US had told Japan that the next target would be a civilian target and Japan would have refuses to surrender, I might understand. But the US simply made civilians suffer for no reason.
I’m happy that the US saved American lives and ended the war quickly, but I still think there should have been an alternative to Nagasaki. You’re right in saying that all countries had bombed civilians, but two wrongs don’t make a right.
Launching nuclear bomb was essentialy a terror attack, it was not to undermine Japan’s productivity nor economy, it was not an attack against military infrastructure, it was an attack against civilians. While i do not doupt any minute that if Hitler had this kind of weapon in hand he would had use it, he is certainly not an exemple to follow.
Also the Japanese were already defeated, the “they would have not surrender”, is a very bad excuse…
The “Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender. … The use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan.”
Chief of staff to the president, Adm. William D. Leahy
“Japan was already defeated. …It wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing.”
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Japan would have surrender, only if they knew the Emperor would have stay in power, the Japanese people fear the “unconditional surrender” which threatened the Emperor. For a shintoist, the Emperor is like Jesus for Christian, i am sure to protect Jesus a lots of Christians would have done the same thing.
Launching nuclear bomb was essentialy a terror attack, it was not to undermine Japan’s productivity nor economy, it was not an attack against military infrastructure, it was an attack against civilians. While i do not doupt any minute that if Hitler had this kind of weapon in hand he would had use it, he is certainly not an exemple to follow.
Also the Japanese were already defeated, the “they would have not surrender”, is a very bad excuse…
The “Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender. … The use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan.”
Chief of staff to the president, Adm. William D. Leahy
“Japan was already defeated. …It wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing.”
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Japan would have surrender, only if they knew the Emperor would have stay in power, the Japanese people fear the “unconditional surrender” which threatened the Emperor. For a shintoist, the Emperor is like Jesus for Christian, i am sure to protect Jesus a lots of Christians would have done the same thing.
FinsterniS wrote,
“Also the Japanese were already defeated, the “they would have not surrender”, is a very bad excuse…”
No, it is a very GOOD excuse (though I wouldn’t call this an “excuse”). Let’s take a look at those, quotes you used shall we?
“The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender. … The use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan.”
This Chief of Staff seems to be contradicting others of the Allied Planners. First Hiroshima was a major military target, as stated by President himself. Hiroshima was a city of considerable military importance. It contained the 2nd Army Headquarters, which commanded the defense of all of southern Japan. The city was a communications center, a storage point, and an assembly area for troops. To quote a Japanese report, "Probably more than a thousand times since the beginning of the war did the Hiroshima citizens see off with cries of ‘Banzai’ the troops leaving from the harbor.
The city of Nagasaki had been one of the largest sea ports in southern Japan and was of great war-time importance because of its many and varied industries, including the production of ordnance, ships, military equipment, and other war materials. The narrow long strip attacked was of particular importance because of its industries. Nagasaki was the home to the very important Mitsubishi torpedo factory and Mitsubishi Steel and Arms Works.
Truman wanted the Atomic bomb to be a military weapon, not some weapon of malice to purposely spite the Japanese. Truman’s feelings that the bomb can be seen in his diary on 25 July 1945, in which he recorded that he had told “Sec. of War, Mr. Stimson, to use [the atomic bomb] so that military objectives and soldiers and sailors are the target and not women and children.”
“Japan was already defeated. …It wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing.”
The second comment is fruitless. It would take a damn fool to notice that Japan had not been defeated by 1944, some say right after Midway for that matter. However, there’s a difference between being defeated and actually admitting it (ie surrendering). Even a defeated Japan was not ready to give in that easily. The Japanese began the stockpiling of aircraft, amassed a giant conscripted military force, and commenced the creation of a civilian army. This awe-inspiring army included "so-called ‘Sherman Carpets,’ children with dynamite strapped to their bodies and trained to throw themselves under American tanks. The Allies would be faced with the enormous task of destroying an armed force of five million and five thousand suicide aircraft, belonging to a race that had already amply demonstrated its ability to fight literally to the death.
Also, FinsterniS suggested showing the power of the bombing by dropping it in a desolate area with international observers or the dropping of the bomb on an unpopulated area of Japan. This alternative was brought up twice, once on 31 May 1945 at the Interim Committee Lunch and again in the Frank Committee report on 11 June 1945. The recommendation by the Scientific Panel (presided over by the four principal physicists involved in the Manhattan Project–Fermi, Lawrence, Compton and Oppenheimer) was to use the bomb only in “direct military use.” This recommendation was collectively embraced by Stimson, Truman, Byrnes, and others because they feared that the bomb might turn out to be a “dud” and thus prove counterproductive toward intimidating the Japanese, and also because there was a severe limit to the materials on hand. Stimson later wrote “we had no bombs to waste.” Also logistical problems had to be overcome. Allied military and political advisors were not sure the Japanese observers would be allowed to report the demonstration to the Japanese Emperor accurately (which was virtually a hostage of the Japanese Military War Council).
“Japan would have surrender, only if they knew the Emperor would have stay in power, the Japanese people fear the “unconditional surrender” which threatened the Emperor. For a shintoist, the Emperor is like Jesus for Christian, i am sure to protect Jesus a lots of Christians would have done the same thing.”
Again this is pure speculation. This option was discussed by many American officials, such as Joseph Grew and Harry Hopkins, who both believed that Japan was already on the verge of defeat. Admiral Leahy recommenced to Truman on 18 June 1945 that the demand for unconditional surrender be modified. Truman commented that he would think it over. In the end Truman did not accept this recommendation mainly because he feared that such a modification might “embolden the Japanese to fight on for better terms.”
As mentioned I before, the Emperor was more of a dupe to the Japanese War Council. On July 25 1945, Japanese Premier Kantaro Suzuki announced to the Japanese press and the Emperor that the Potsdam declaration of “complete annihilation” was to be ignored. The Magic Summaries (highest levels of Japanese code) further revealed that throughout June and July 1945, Japan’s militarist leaders were adamantly determined that they would never surrender unconditionally to the British and the Americans.
The Emperor later admitted it himself a quote regarding to the stormy sessions with the war advisors right before Japan surrendered. “There was no prospect of agreement no matter how many discussions they had…I was given the opportunity to express my own free will for the first time.”
If Japan had agreed on a Conditional Surrender, would the Japanese War Council (which were the real rulers of Imperial Japan) be tried for war crimes or granted amnesty? Would the “conditional surrender” leave those in power responsible for Japanese atrocities committed since the start of the Sino-Japanese war in 1937?
CC wrote,
“2) I don’t know about other Christians, but if Jesus Christ acted as the emporer of Japan, i believe you’d find Christianity decline extremely quickly - if only for the sheer hypocracy. Also we would have little fear as to what might befall him if indeed he had subjected to unconditional surrender, but this is all pointless speculation. The fact is that the allies could not be assured that having that individual in place as head of state would not preclude another messy war. I’m guessing that’s one reason for the “unconditional surrender”.”
This is true. Many people forget that the Emperor was an instigator of the Sino-Japanese War that was the main cause the led up to all these terrible events. If you want to try the people who dropped the A-bombs for war crimes, shouldn’t he also be tried?
@TG:
Bill Gates ran around swindling and stealing other people’s stuff, then calling it his own.
Elaborate on that please. And please don’t say Windows, 'cuz that just isn’t true. :wink:
ah not again. Mose i don’t want to fight against your patriotism, i done that in “america did not loose at vietnam” and it was pointless… I will certainly not take the time to refute every argument you made, you say Hiroshima & Nagasaki were important cible, i think oterwise (how much non-cilivian causalities?), you think it was justify, i don’t and i also don’t think the unconditional surrender was a justify request, a 99% unconditional surrender but with the emperor remaining in power would have been enough for the Japanese. it is not as simple as “americans want to stop the war”, there was a bomb waiting to be launched, a bomb that cost a lot…
Also CC, your never said that every religion was in part true ? The emperor is maybe a god, like Jesus was the son of god ?
DOS, and Bill Gates did “steal” Windows (it’s just a copy of the Mac multi-tasking user interface)
You’ve gotta be kidding me, DOS? I did not steal DOS! He hired the creator of DOS onto Microsoft and then along with other Microsoft employees, they developed it into a sellable product.
And strike two. He didn’t steal Windows either. Mac didn’t have and probably never will (unless they dramatically change their business style) a substantial ground in the computer market. Windows is far from similar to the Mac OS, the only similiarties lie in the fact that they both utilize a GUI. I would even go as far as to say that they aren’t even in competition with one another…
SUD is right on about “unconditional surrender”. If the japanese could’ve reasonably expected their Emperor to retain his position, they MIGHT have surrendered. But would the American public have accepted this? NO WAY! It was a double-edged sword for Truman–no 2 ways about it. He just HAD to do what he did…
For once I agree w/ EmuGod–why did it have to be Nagasaki? On the one hand–civilians were gonna die w/ these attacks. On the other–it is particularly ironic that the home of the largest Christian population in Japan was targeted for the USAs most deadly weapon. Japanese Christians practiced their religion in secret for almost 400 years before being bombed to the f**(&(*&g stone age by the USA.
Now, I am an atheist, but I still find it extremely ironic considering the religious arguments many are using here that Nagasaki was the 2nd target. Why? Cold strategy…
And as far as the Emperor’s religious position–yes, as mentioned, he to the Japanese was like a Jesus figure to Christians–a bridge between God(s) & Man. And yes, if you were a pious 1945 Japanese, you WOULD feel like fighting to the death to prevent his defeat & humiliation. But Japanese were (& are) just as pragmatic as the rest of us. They felt profoundly BETRAYED when the Emperor made his “not a God” speech–many, many Japanese wanted to eliminate the office of Emperor when this happened. In fact, it was mainly due to US manipulation that the Emperor (incidentally; politically the weakest monarch in the world) even retains the title today…
Is that ironic or what?
Ozone27
@TM:
I think Hirohito was speaking of four years of war with America. Would you like me to post the entire surrender speech Hirhito broadcasted on radio?
No need to. I could look that up if i was really interested in what he said exactly :)
And strike two. He didn’t steal Windows either. Mac didn’t have and probably never will (unless they dramatically change their business style) a substantial ground in the computer market. Windows is far from similar to the Mac OS, the only similiarties lie in the fact that they both utilize a GUI. I would even go as far as to say that they aren’t even in competition with one another…
Do you need “competition” and “substantial ground” to make it stealing?
If i stole say 5 Dollars from you, then it would be “no competition”, as i can’t use the money here without exchanging it into local currency first, and it’s not a substantial amount …. so would you consider that as “not stealing”?
Windows/Dos,
From what I heard Bill Gates stole DOS (for a pittance from its creator), Tim Patterson and David Kildorf for $50,000. If you did a print test on the first IBM computer’s with Microsoft operating systems, you would have seen David Kildorf’s name
Both Apple and Microsoft borrowed the concept for Windows and Mac OS from Xerox’s Palo Alto Research Center.
“ah not again. Mose i don’t want to fight against your patriotism, i done that in “america did not loose at vietnam” and it was pointless… I will certainly not take the time to refute every argument you made, you say Hiroshima & Nagasaki were important cible, i think oterwise (how much non-cilivian causalities?), you think it was justify, i don’t and i also don’t think the unconditional surrender was a justify request, a 99% unconditional surrender but with the emperor remaining in power would have been enough for the Japanese. it is not as simple as “americans want to stop the war”, there was a bomb waiting to be launched, a bomb that cost a lot…”
Who says anything about patriotism? I’m certainly not glad that America dropped atomic bombs on Japan, but at that time, they thought it had to be done. I don’t care if I was from Peru, America did what it could to end the war and not risk anymore lives. What do you mean by Non-Cilivian causalities? What about factory workers that built the weapons to furnish the Japanese war machine? Should they be considered of less importance? Also, you can’t control a where a bomb lands. Bombs often landed miles apart from their intended targets. However, for the most part, those bombs were targeted toward military and industrial centers.
The bomb cost a lot (2 billion dollars for the whole project), but I hope Truman didn’t drop the bomb because “hey we built the darn thing, might as well drop it.” At the end of the war billions of dollars of US equipment, weapons, vehicles, ships, and aircraft would go unused. Should we also think, “We might as well use this military hardware instead of letting it go to waste?” The dropping was also a political move. I would find anybody hard pressed to deny it. But there were other factors too: military, domestic, and diplomatic. Should Truman have been tried for war crimes based on his decision?
Also how can we be sure that this would be correct with the unconditional surrender? How would we have known that the Japanese high council would agree to these terms? What if they thought it was just a clever “trick” by the Allies to lure them into surrender and then take advantage of them by altering the agreement (much liked what had happened to the Central Powers after WWI)? Remember, the Japanese at the time were very distrustful of “Westerners.”
“For once I agree w/ EmuGod–why did it have to be Nagasaki?”
Ozone, read by post on why Nagasaki was a chosen target. However, it’s intresting that Nagasaki wasn’t the first target for the dropping of “Fat Man.” It was originally Kyushu, though bad weather, AA fire, Japanese fighters, and smoke from the fires below. Very ironic that (if what Ozone said is correct) the largest Christian population in Japan. Which side is God really on?
Hey F_alk, you’re completely missing my point. Although you criticize my argument, you fail to explain how Mr. Gates “stole” Windows. Maybe it’s because you can’t explain it. You want to know why you can’t explain it? Becuase he didn’t steal it! Microsoft developed Windows ON THEIR OWN.
Moses, explain to me please how it’s stealing when Microsoft paid the creators $50,000. Sounds to me like a legitimate sale.
