Interesting

[phreenet]

Do people in here also remember the war attrocities (sp?) that rivaled hitler's, done on to the chinesse people and american POWs during the war, by the Japan? These weren't very nice people to begin with.

[cybrsamurai]

I don’t think its right condemning an entire society based on the actions of few. If we were all held to that standard we would be thought of as baby raping brain eating murderers.

[MadDogMe]

Do people in here also remember the war attrocities (sp?) that rivaled hitler's, done on to the chinesse people and american POWs during the war, by the Japan? These weren't very nice people to begin with.

Do you remember Native Americans?, Slavery?, Opium trade?, The British boycotting Jews from Palistiene?, leaving them to die on boats after the war?, I was shocked and ashamed when I read about some of the things that happened to Jews after the war because of British boycotts...

I think you'll find that most people with the urge to rule are'nt fit, those who are want nothing to do with it, don't stain a whole people with their rulers sins...

[Skulemate]

Originally posted by bigben2k
It was no big secret (upcoming hostilities), and a tactical mistake on the part of the USA, to gather such a large group of ships in one single spot.

Interesting then that all of the carriers stationed at Pearl Harbor were at sea when the attack happened, eh? Also remember that most of the warships (Arizona being one of the absentees, naturally) were rebuilt within six months of the attack.

[airspirit]

*sigh*

MadDogMe, there is a fundamental difference between who the Japanese were at this time and the American people at any time during American history. This difference is both philosophical and cultural. The difference was that almost as a whole, the Japanese people stood behind their deity/emperor, believing both politically and religiously that his actions were pure and without reproach, and that anything he did HAD to be correct and right, and that mandate was passed down in almost a feudal manner to his representatives in the military. To NOT follow the mandates of the Emperor would be worse than treason, but it would dishonor both the individual and the individual's family.

I agree with you on one thing, though, that nearly everybody who has the ability to make it to the top of a political system such as ours is almost guaranteed to be unfit to lead. The nature of our election process, where the more money that is spent and the more you obfuscate your stand on issues in order to appeal to the greatest amount of people is absurd. It guarantees us politicians that are bought wholesale by the rich and powerful corporations, and leads to politicians that are incapable of positive action due to the fact that they are no more than puppets and vote whores.

I choose not to vote because every contest is a matter of choosing the lesser of two or three evils. If I found a candidate for any elected position who actually stood for something (not just saying they stood for everything good and against everything bad, wtf is that crap?), I would throw my every effort into helping that person get elected.

If every politician in the US would spontaneously combust, I'd be tickled pink, because it would mean that real people with real convictions would get to make decisions that might actually help us rather than sell us to the highest bidder. The politicians at the time of WW2 were probably the last of the true patriots that ever were in office. The fact that they could make these hard decisions is testimony to the fact that they could do what is right regardless of how it would appear in history books, and I wish we had more people in office like that today.

When I see losers like the Clintons, Dole, McCain, and some of the others that are up there selling us down the river for money, votes, and power while letting us go to hell in a handbasket, it makes me sick.

In America, while atrocities were committed against the natives, slaves, women, and just about any other group at one point or another, there was always a vocal opposition that could be considered innocent of the sins of the ones committing that crime. Similarly, we as a society have risen above those actions for the most part, and tried to atone for them in the best way we can. To justify ones actions by saying that somebody else had done it before is crazy. It would be like me saying that it is alright to rape and kill people because Ted Bundy did it. It wouldn't be unique to me, but it would be a horrible crime nonetheless.

If, for example, a foreign entity had stepped in to defend the natives against us, we would have got what we clearly deserved. Similarly, if by foreign mandate we were struck down for slavery, that would be justified. The difference in nuking one of our cities would be that in anyplace in the US there were vocal dissenters on all of the issues that plagued our society that worked to correct those wrongs, and to take them out as well would be heinous. When we bombed those cities, we bombed cities that were filled from the grass roots with people that wished to further the atrocities that the Japanese Empire was committing.

In Japan there weren't dissenters. As a cultural rule, there, it would be unthinkable to argue against their Emperor God.

It is easy to say that a populace is innocent because they couldn't control the actions of their government. That would be correct if even a small portion of the populace dissented against that rule, but in this case where the Japanese people stood wholeheartedly behind their govenment and strove to further the crimes it was committing, what you are saying is a fallacy.

[cybrsamurai]

Japan is extremely steeped in tradition and religions. Up until recently in Japan the lives of the common people were not worth anything to the ruling bodies. People were killed for looking at royalty or the servants of royalty. All crimes were punished by death and because of this people from the very beginning were very obedient. From there they took the traditional ways of the samurai and distorted them until people believed it was right to kamikaze their planes. Chances are there were many people who didn't agree but were afraid to do anything. I think you take your freedoms for granted and assume that every other country has the same freedoms as we to express how we feel. Sometimes opressive governments can warp the brains of their followers into believing things that a human wouldn't normally believe.

[airspirit]

You're saying the same thing I am but in a different way. You're just clarifying the cultural reasons behind why I said it would be unthinkable for one of them to go against their emperor.

Whether brainwashed or by choice, or just because they didn't like American Disney movies, the Japanese people supported their government in the rank and file, and for that were complicit. The only innocents that died there were the children too young to know what was going on or the elderly too old to know any better any more. The rest of them would have gladly picked up a weapon in defense of their motherland, regardless of the rights or wrongs of the situation.

[cybrsamurai]

I think the difference may be that I think of a brainwashed person as an innocent. The only guilty parties involved were the ones manipulating the masses. I also don't believe it's right to make a broad generilization such as all but the very old and the very young would have fought.

[iroc409]

brainwashed or not, they would have struck back, and in either case, isn't that hostility?

wasn't it in the interest of the us to protect itself against such?

in another way, what if some twisted father taught his kid to handle weapons, and sent him in to attack your family at night, and started shooting at you? does that mean that this child is innocent because it is brainwashed, and thus we can not suppress this action? or we just let it go on because it is innocent?

[airspirit]

Can I get an Amen, mah bruthaz?

[cybrsamurai]

brainwashed or not, they would have struck back, and in either case, isn't that hostility?

Isn't this conjecture?

in another way, what if some twisted father taught his kid to handle weapons, and sent him in to attack your family at night, and started shooting at you? does that mean that this child is innocent because it is brainwashed, and thus we can not suppress this action? or we just let it go on because it is innocent?

Well this is all fine and dandy but a completely different scenario. And I would still feel bad if the cops blew the kid up along with the rest of his school to "suppress this action".

[cybrsamurai]

I think we better nuke em again its only a matter of time before they send the second wave... Now they have the technology to invade our country with wave after wave of killer robots! This is the real Japanese war mahcine!

http://www.aist.go.jp/aist_e/new_res.../20020919.html


Were screwed!

[iroc409]

it is conjecture, to a point. they were fighting us, were they not? based on their culture at the time, i think exemplifies that.

and to tie the parrallel in more, what if that school were filled with kids taught by twisted parents to do the shooting? would it still be wrong?

that thing reminds me of the crappy sony dog. although it's kinda cute, and fairly intelligent for a machine. aahh... the beginnings of AI, we're doomed

[MadDogMe]

Gee a~s you're so far right you must be falling off the east coast!! ...

I can't believe you'd still tarnish a whole people with thier rulers exploits, the Japanese never had any human rights, right of speach, anything. period. they would quite literaly loose their head for looking at the wrong people, or not falling to their knees when someone of a higher caste walked past,(they were not even allowed to ride animals/ponies cause it would make them 'higher' than nobles). as a people being ruled, they were cowed. is it any wonder they had a fearce pride and no fear of death considering their history?, to most japanese Death was Nirvana, life was a nesacary evil. they were'nt behind them, they were under them!...

It's like saying all the German nation were behind Hitler, my *Father was 'brought up' by a POW, who served in a tank regiment on the eastern front, the german footsloggers were scared, imagine seeing your friends disapearing for making jokes about the Reich?, he was glad when he was taken prisoner by Canadians!...

Saying that the people were behind their ruler 100% is a gross mistake, if fear = respect then sure they respected their rulers ass's off. have you been behind every presidant you've had 100%?...

*whos American father went home after the war, he brough me up too cause my father is a dropout , I still have his name: Reichert...

[winewood]

I applaud the care and conviction in which these posts were put together. I often find it amusing that most social judgements are dependent on completely unrelated and political arguements. I do want to take the time to lift up the arguements that uphold the mindset, culture, and scope of the people in that historical conflict.

I believe that regardless of a peoples brainwashing, or "innocence" in Japan, more lives were spared by those nukes. And from a purely humanistic view, the countryside of the entire country was not systematically destroyed and the children and elderly from each invading city were spared enormous suffering and destruction. (remember the children from Guadacanal??)

June 21 1945, The Pacific island of Okinawa is captured by the Allies. Japan has lost 160,000 men in fighting on the island; more than 12,500 Americans have died on Okinawa as well. Now take an easily comperable Japan with more resources, people, and indoctrination with a more personal stake to loose and recreate that scenario. Taking in consideration that 160k was MEN and not the women and children the loss of life is amazing and it's not even the homeland!

Now lets bring up China, which was invaded by Japan. 8 Million casualties. If the allies would have had to also weed out the Japaneese from everywhere in which it had captured, the loss of life would have been quite staggering. If someone said that peace could have been achieved with positive results with only 100k of lives (regardless of whose side it was on) the pricetag seems cheap in retrospect. I thank God that this option was avaliable to us. Lets not judge the past with our current 15 second moralities.

This war could have gone either way, and I believe that our good God spared us enormous suffering and pain overall. The Allies were blessed with an expedient meathod of peace that was truly remarkable when you count the cost of the battles that were on the horizon.

Good posts guys!

[golovko]

...his name has also been altered to protect his identity.

Elyk Tinneb...nice, lol

[airspirit]

Winewood, your post sums up evereything I've been trying to say. Okinawa has hardly the population of the main islands, and look at the death toll there. It is harly conjecture to estimate the death toll of a mainland invasion would be exponentially higher had we invaded rather than bombed. We managed to end the war with minimal loss of life in comparison to what would have happend had we stormed the beaches.

Like you said, it is nice to try to play with modern morals when considering this question, but let me ask this: is 100K deaths worse than millions? I wouldn't be surprised if the end death toll was well over 2.5 MILLION if we had invaded and pushed this to an endgame with traditional war methods. What we did was both a just and honorable means to end the war.

Don't think that the US would have had horrific death tolls upon invasion. Most of the Japanese forces were off the mainland, and it would have been primarily militia that would have fought on the lines, supported by light amounts of Japanese regulars. Our death tolls wouldn't have been near that of most of the other major conflicts because the opposition would have been poorly equipped and trained to handle such a conflict. The death toll to the Japanese would have been horrific beyond compare in any conflict ever fought.

Question these things with a humanitarian end if you wish, but keep in mind, those who believe that the bombs shouldn't have been dropped, that if your way of ending the war was followed then, the amount of suffering by that nation would have been such that they would be ravaged still up to this day, and there wouldn't be single person alive in that country that wouldn't have lost multiple relatives to that conflict. In doing things your way, we would have killed over ten or twenty times more than the way we did it.

Weep for the lost, but look at the forest through the trees: we saved millions of lives. Are those lives worth nothing? Even though their nation commited a heinous act against us, we had the restraint to prevent their utter destruction by conventional war. That is something for you to mull over when cursing the actions of the brave men that made that decision.

[airspirit]

Oh, and MadDogMe, I avoid the East Coast like the plague. There is too much liberal hypocracy there for me to deal with. It's funny how liberals posit themselves as crusaders for the common man when the ones in charge sit fat and wealthy taking more corporate kickbacks and getting more cash from the wealthy than the conservatives ever do, while saying that the Republicans are just whores for corporate America. That is the same reason that I could never live in Seattle or SF either: too many red diaper doper babies for my liking. Now Oregon wants to turn itself into a completely socialist state ... it looks like the midwest is the last bastion of reason that this country will have.

[bigben2k]

Here here.

The USA lost over 300'000 soldiers in WW2. Truman was also under pressure because the people were concerned about this toll for a war that didn't directly affect them.

It was a hard decision, and had to be looked at from many, many points of view. Wether as an individual, or as a representative of the human race, it can look quite different.

Let's not exclude one for the other: it can be considered cruel and life-saving, at the same time. It's another case of "the lesser of two evils", as that's what it was, IMO.

Now let's hope that it doesn't happen again. I'd have hated to be in JFK's shoes during the Cuban missile crisis.

[MadDogMe]

Oh, and MadDogMe, I avoid the East Coast like the plague. There is too much liberal hypocracy there for me to deal with

Twas a joke a~s!, I know you're a commie realy cause you live in Moscow ...

I don't subscribe to any political body mainly cause I've never seen one that works, is'nt in it for themselves, is'nt corrupt and wont to change faster than the tide!. each person is entitaled to their own though, people born into money are liable to be conservative, people without: to the left, middle class: liberal. each and every faction has their raving lunatics, ranging from the right~wing 'national service for the unemployed'~'deportation to aliens'~'segregation of blacks and whites', to left wing lunacy you yourself mention...

The way I see it though is you have to accept that there is a place for each of these factions, would'nt you rather have a place/state for each of them in America?, at least you can choose to live amongst your own then, instead of having to live alongside people that(it looks to me anyway) you hate...

[cybrsamurai]

would'nt you rather have a place/state for each of them in America?

I think that would be bad... We would probably destroy any nationalist sentiment left and we would end up at war with each other

[Blackeagle]

I have studied the history of the second world war a good deal. And I'd like to mention just a couple other things the Japanese did in that war that shows the type of mind set.

1.) The Bataan death march, during which the Japanese soldiers beat to death and bayoneted numerous surendered and disarmed prisoners of war because they had, DISHONORED THEMSELVES BY SURENDERING ! !

2.) The rape of Nanking, China. Where the Japanese troops literaly did rape every woman they could while murdering unarmed innocents by the tens of thousands.

3.) During the last hours of fighting on Okinawa American troops watched in horror as the woman, often leading or carrying children, leaped off a cliff into the sea, rather than to dishonor their dieing soldier husbands by living in a area overtaken and held by American forces. I've forgotten the name of that town, but this wasn't a handfull of ladies, it was over a hundred. And how many little innocent children did those same ladies "save" ? ? And remember this wasn't a large or important location, just that they prefered death to capture.

4.) At the end of the war in harbors in various areas of the home islands a strange type of torpedo was found. They had a single very cramped little compartment added. So they could be used as a guided torpedo that would not miss. Used at night they would have taken a terrible toll. And the man piloting this torpedo would have died in glory for the Imperor! !

5.) Last I'd like to mention the "Orca". This was a rocket plane of VERY small size that carried a 1.000 lb. warhead in the nose. Range? 8-14 miles depending on the trajectory chosen. A one way ride to glory, to die for the Emporer was to, LIVE FOREVER ! ! This small aircraft did lack a few things. Landing gear, armor or cannon/machine guns. They could however reach unheard of speeds of nearly 580 mph. They would have been a nearly impossible thing to defend aginst.

This is not a complete list by any means, just some highlights that I thought were worth mentioning. Please note items #4&5 above, while not available in large enough numbers to prevent invasion on thier own, they show very clearly to me that the Japanese were not convinced to surrender. They were still seeking the right "divine wind" to save the situation for them as the storm that wreaked the mongols invasion fleet did on the eve of the very day in which the mongols had finally breached the defenses and would, on the following day have begun to land in large numbers.

Those who have done a fine job of trying hard to explain the reasons for the dropping of the bombs have pretty well covered it. Only thing I'll add is what was at "groung zero" for both those weapons. These targets were choosen with extreme care to do the maximum amount of damage to the continuing Japanese war effort. The first weapon detonated near and was aimed at the ball bearing factory that produced ALL the main bearings for Japanese aircraft, as well as for other weapons as well. The second struck the larget torpedo factory in the whole WORLD.

While never proven, I have read that the forth and last bomb, had it been dropped, was to be targetted on the Imperial palace in Tokyo. The idea being that if the first three could not deter continued fighting by the Japanese, perhaps the death of the Imperor himself would. This was of concern to some however that it could harden the resolve of the Japanese to never give up.

I'm glad no more were dropped than were, but have no sorrow over those that were. It was and remains the right choice.

[MadDogMe]

Does it make it OK to commit inhuman acts against civilians because their military have commited inhuman acts?, while in Rome et al, eh?, would we have been justified in gassing millions of Germans after we took power of their country?...

I think those woman did what they did through fear, fear of some of the same that their military gave, they were a result of their society though IMO, they were ruled inhumainly, how long have the western powers ruled humainly?, 50 years?, 100?, ever?, ask the African&Native~American if he thinks America has a long history of Sainthood!, or the Irish famine victims or 'Empire' satilites about British democracy, we seem to have very short memorys and a bloated view of our own integrety ...

I have sorrow for nearly everything mankind has done...

[bigben2k]

Originally posted by MadDogMe
Does it make it OK to commit inhuman acts against civilians because their military have commited inhuman acts?, while in Rome et al, eh?, would we have been justified in gassing millions of Germans after we took power of their country?...
.

I have sorrow for nearly everything mankind has done...

Interesting.

I think that the only rule of war (or war ethic) at the time was that civilians couldn't be deliberate targets, so they became marginal casualties.

Things were a lot different in WW2, in terms of technology. The bombing of Japan solved one major problem, which was landing troops on Japan soil: an amphibious assault was (and still is, to a lesser extent) 100 times more complicated than a simple border war, and a very high number of casualties was very likely.

If one thinks about much older battles, like the conquests of Genghis Khan, where civilians were deliberately assassinated AFTER an area was conquered (to instill fear, and impose authority), then we can see that there has been an evolution in how civilized armed combats have become.

It is never the less, always a sad thing, when a human being takes the life of another human being. Accountability was lacking then, but not anymore, since the creation of the war crimes tribunal.

In the spirit of Christmas, I suggest that we pray that we can all live peacefully, and that we won't have to resort to armed conflicts to solve the problems of the world.

[winewood]

It is never the less, always a sad thing, when a human being takes the life of another human being. Accountability was lacking then, but not anymore, since the creation of the war crimes tribunal.

Unfortunately the WCTibunal only gets them after the fact... And its powers are quite limited. Mens justice never can be what God's is. IMO men will continue to grind each other to the ground until a Soverign God steps in.