Poll: ?
Poll Options
View poll results: ?
Yes he was right
48 46%
No he was wrong
56 54%
Voters: 104.
Page 1 of 8
#1
I think he was because they only learn things the hard way. It was also for their greater benefit because look at them today.
Quote by jakesmellspoo
ooh look at me i'm ERIKLENSHERR and i work at fancy pants desk jobs and wear ties and ply barely legal girls with weed and booze i'm such a classy motherfucker.
#2
You can argue two different sides. Had he not, the casualties of a land invasion would have been far more significant.

On the flip side, the nukes were basically just giant balls of collateral damage.

Who knows how much longer the war could have gone on though?

But on the other hand, the people that died were innocent.


Basically, it's not a decision I'd have wanted to make.
Seattle Seahawks


Quote by chookiecookie
i feel like you have an obsession with aubrey plaza.


Quote by WCPhils
at least we can all agree SGstriker is the woooooooooooooooooooooorst
#4
I don't know, really. That's a tough one to ponder. What I do think my hope for the takeaway from them is the lesson to the rest of the world to never resort to using them again.
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
#5
don't know if I should go with erik's thing he's got going on and actually discuss this or just watch it unfold from a distance.

Quote by JustRooster
What I do think my hope for the takeaway from them is the lesson to the rest of the world to never resort to using them again.


in the meantime I'll just agree with this.
#7
Japan's plans for if America invaded:

Preparations for citizen's militias were in place. So were plans for mass suicide boat usage.

Plus a bunch of other stuff I vaguely remember reading about when taking a class on America's 21st century wars. Basically invasion would have led to a protracted bloodbath.
#8
it wasn't about saving lives, it was about doing it before the russians got there


Gozd in gora poj,
silen ženimo hrup,
uboga gmajna, le vpup, le vkup,
le vkup, le vkup z menoj,
staro pravdo v mrak tulimo,
da se pretulimo skozi to zimo
#9
Their intent was to take over the world eventually, not just to grab a little land, and they were just getting started. They would have sacrificed their own people in the war to this end, so I still believe it was necessary.

The book Imperial Cruise is a good read if you are interested in the Japanese culture and their motivations early on that led to the bombing. It doesn't concentrate solely on them but it is very insightful.
Quote by Pagan_Poetry
Sadly this is Ultimate-guitar, not Simple-guitar. We can't help you.


#11
Here's what I was referring to (raided my old lecture notes):

“Japan had [no] intention of surrendering. It had husbanded over 8,000 aircraft, many of them Kamikazes, hundreds of explosive-packed suicide boats, and over two million well equipped regular soldiers, backed by a huge citizen’s militia. When the Americans landed, the Japanese intended to hit them with everything they had, to impose on them casualties that might break their will.”

- Professor Duncan Anderson on what Japanese historians had discovered when looking back at the build up to the bombings.

How much of this did Truman know about? Probably a few details/estimations from military advisers.

I suppose all of this serves to somewhat justify his actions in hindsight. I think it depends on what question TS is asking. Was Truman right to ok the bombings given what he knew at the time OR in hindsight was this a justifiable move?

I guess by the standards of 'just war' what I have written at the top of this post probably doesn't cut it.
Last edited by USCENDONE BENE at May 23, 2015,
#12
I swear nowadays people are just making threads to open any can of worms they can and watch the fireworks.

On-topic, it probably was a political move to scare the Soviet Union. But looking over the expected casualties for both allied forces, the Japanese forces, and the militarized Japanese civilians if Operation Downfall had actually happened, it was a tactical one too. It wasn't good, but sometimes being a leader is about looking at a group of bad choices and choosing the one that's not as terrible as the rest. And, as said, with hindsight, it scared the rest of the world enough that nobody has nuked anybody since.
THE FORUM UPDATE KILLED THE GRADIENT STAR

Baltimore Orioles: 2014 AL Eastern Division Champions, 2017: 50-54
Baltimore Ravens: 2012 World Champions, 2017: 0-0
2017 NFL Pick 'Em: 0-0
#13
Quote by slipknot5678
okay **** it, big ass long post incoming.

biting right into erik's trap.

give me like ten-fifteen minutes

lol get a load of this guy




#14
Quote by necrosis1193
I swear nowadays people are just making threads to open any can of worms they can and watch the fireworks.

at first i was really excited about this trend but now i miss the times when i didnt weep for americans


Gozd in gora poj,
silen ženimo hrup,
uboga gmajna, le vpup, le vkup,
le vkup, le vkup z menoj,
staro pravdo v mrak tulimo,
da se pretulimo skozi to zimo
#15
The atomic bombings of Japan were not justified for a variety of reasons.

I would consider the use of a weapon of mass destruction of this type to be a war crime. The sheer horror of it parallels the worst crimes of the Axis powers. None of the Allied bombings on civilian targets- not just the atomic bombings by the US- were militarily necessary in any way and were essentially just mass murder.

Of course, this is the point where people would argue that I'm just being emotional. I'd argue that that's a perfectly valid stance to take. But even if we are to ignore the horror of the atomic bombings, the "realist" nature of them still indicates that they were not necessary at all to ending the war. The real motives, as many have pointed out, were to prevent the Soviet Union from having any influence on post-war Japan and to impose the "unconditional" will of the United States onto Japan, decisively bringing Japan under the United State's sphere of influence.

Before we even get into that, the justification of the bombings on the basis that an invasion would take more lives is not a good one, because that would not have been needed either. Even the alternative of running an expensive blockade and waiting for them to surrender would have never been needed. Japan's Supreme War Council was willing to surrender months earlier. They attempted to surrender to Roosevelt on almost the USA's exact terms aside from Japan's refusal to surrender the Emperor. When that failed, Japan attempted to establish friendly relations with the Soviet Union so that they could negotiate with the US to allow Japan to surrender on the US's exact terms with the exception of refusing to surrender the Emperor. The Soviet Union prolonged this process and basically manipulated Japan into keeping up their war effort just so they could invade them later so they too could enforce the terms of the unconditional surrender. So the Soviet Union's government shares guilt as well.

By the time of the Soviet invasion, the Supreme War Council was almost entirely prepared to surrender, with the exception of Emperor Hirohito (and Tojo too, I think but don't remember), who as we know now, were also on the verge of surrendering. It finally happened after the atomic bombings, but as we know now, the Soviet invasion is what really did it. Not just because the Soviet army was militarily powerful and were responsible for some pretty ****ed up things themselves, but because the surprise invasion destroyed any hope of a conditional surrender via Soviet negotiating.

Of course, the US government didn't know what was going on in those private meetings, but they did know about Japan's earlier attempts to surrender, and they probably didn't actually think that atomic bomb or invasion were their only two options. From a strategic standpoint purely, it could be argued that Truman did the right thing by preventing Soviet influence in Japan, but even then we don't know how likely that would have been (and it happened anyway hence North Korea being a thing). And the really ****ed up thing is that the Emperor still was never surrendered. Hirohito continued to ceremonially rule until 1989 and the entire royalty got off free while Tojo and his pals were being executed. So Japan's only demand in their conditional surrender was met anyway. wtf is this shit.

tl;dr: the USA and Soviet Union ****ed Japan over by demanding terms that were never really justified to begin with, and the whole thing could have been avoided no matter how you look at it.

Quote by MinterMan22
lol get a load of this guy


yeah not proud of this moment.

I mean sometimes I have self-control. and sometimes I don't but I'm not lame enough to point it out lol.
Last edited by slipknot5678 at May 23, 2015,
#16
Quote by slipknot5678
The atomic bombings of Japan were not justified for a variety of reasons.

I would consider the use of a weapon of mass destruction of this type to be a war crime. The sheer horror of it parallels the worst crimes of the Axis powers. None of the Allied bombings on civilian targets- not just the atomic bombings by the US- were militarily necessary in any way and were essentially just mass murder.

Of course, this is the point where people would argue that I'm just being emotional. I'd argue that that's a perfectly valid stance to take. But even if we are to ignore the horror of the atomic bombings, the "realist" nature of them still indicates that they were not necessary at all to ending the war. The real motives, as many have pointed out, were to prevent the Soviet Union from having any influence on post-war Japan and to impose the "unconditional" will of the United States onto Japan, decisively bringing Japan under the United State's sphere of influence.

Before we even get into that, the justification of the bombings on the basis that an invasion would take more lives is not a good one, because that would not have been needed either. Even the alternative of running an expensive blockade and waiting for them to surrender would have never been needed. Japan's Supreme War Council was willing to surrender months earlier. They attempted to surrender to Roosevelt on almost the USA's exact terms aside from Japan's refusal to surrender the Emperor. When that failed, Japan attempted to establish friendly relations with the Soviet Union so that they could negotiate with the US to allow Japan to surrender on the US's exact terms with the exception of refusing to surrender the Emperor. The Soviet Union prolonged this process and basically manipulated Japan into keeping up their war effort just so they could invade them later so they too could enforce the terms of the unconditional surrender. So the Soviet Union's government shares guilt as well.

By the time of the Soviet invasion, the Supreme War Council was almost entirely prepared to surrender, with the exception of Emperor Hirohito (and Tojo too, I think but don't remember), who as we know now, were also on the verge of surrendering. It finally happened after the atomic bombings, but as we know now, the Soviet invasion is what really did it. Not just because the Soviet army was militarily powerful and were responsible for some pretty ****ed up things themselves, but because the surprise invasion destroyed any hope of a conditional surrender via Soviet negotiating.

Of course, the US government didn't know what was going on in those private meetings, but they did know about Japan's earlier attempts to surrender, and they probably didn't actually think that atomic bomb or invasion were their only two options. From a strategic standpoint purely, it could be argued that Truman did the right thing by preventing Soviet influence in Japan, but even then we don't know how likely that would have been (and it happened anyway). And the really ****ed up thing is that the Emperor still was never surrendered. Hirohito continued to ceremonially rule until 1989 and the entire royalty got off free while Tojo and his pals were being executed. So Japan's only demand in their conditional surrender was met anyway. wtf is this shit.

tl;dr: the USA and Soviet Union ****ed Japan over by demanding terms that were never really justified to begin with, and the whole thing could have been avoided no matter how you look at it.

lol get a load of this guy




#23
Damn these poll results speak for themselves, history's judgment is clear.
Quote by jakesmellspoo
ooh look at me i'm ERIKLENSHERR and i work at fancy pants desk jobs and wear ties and ply barely legal girls with weed and booze i'm such a classy motherfucker.
#24
Yes. It was the right descion.

As much as I love Japan. The war would have kept going and more lives would have been lost in the inevitable invasion of Japan than in the bombings.

Notice, they did not surrender after the first bomb. Which is why the second had to be dropped. While the first bomb was devastating, Japan was probably thinking "How long did it take to make it, how many do we have?"

These were reasonable questions. If we only had the one and it took several years to make, they could go on fighting as it would take awhile to make another.

Dropping the second showed we already had more than one. As far as Japan knew we might have had a dozen more. It also showed we had the capacity to continue to produce them. That is why they surrendered after the second bomb.


Yes, it was terrible. War usually is. At least, I've never seen a "pleasant" war.
Last edited by jugglingfreak at May 23, 2015,
#25
Quote by MeGaDeth2314
u bomb our military base?


lol ok we nuke all ur innocent civilians


nice try japan

and no one has bombed us since
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
#26
Slipknot, enough of this wringing of hands over America being the bad guy during the war. Thank Christ we had the bomb first. If the Nazi's were still fighting, we would have nuked them. And we should have nuked Stalin to stop his bullshit. Could have eliminated the cold war altogether.
#27
Quote by mikeya02
Slipknot, enough of this wringing of hands over America being the bad guy during the war. Thank Christ we had the bomb first. If the Nazi's were still fighting, we would have nuked them. And we should have nuked Stalin to stop his bullshit. Could have eliminated the cold war altogether.


probably not serious but still lmfao I never once implied that America was "the bad guy" jfc you guys get so overly defensive over America's image I bet brad's gonna come in here to remind me again that "UK does bad stuff too!" even though I already went out of my way to include them lol.

love you brad.
#28
for real though, I'm honestly indifferent. Yeah it sucked for Japan and the 300k or so people that it wrecked. But it was war :shrug:

and I mean that in two ways. One being the obvious "we will win if they are flattened scorch marks"
the second being "we gotta bring the fight to them otherwise massive Japanese invasion pls no"

And has been pointed out, they did have ample time to surrender before the second bomb.


anyway, now we know that nukes are stupid powerful and dangerous and we'll end up dying in some massive nuke sesh.
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
#29
also just gon say that most of my knowledge on anything is like 95% assumption and construction
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
#31
Quote by Baby Joel


And has been pointed out, they did have ample time to surrender before the second bomb.



if anything I'd argue that the second bombing especially was completely unnecessary.

I mean if we're following that logic they should have bombed another city on the 12th.

I'd also like to add that though that of course certain people on the war council share guilt in bringing about Japan's own destruction (e.g. Hirohito/Tojo vetoing decision to unconditionally surrender up until the 12th might be off on these details though tbh) however I maintain that the Allies never should have demanded unconditional surrender in both Germany and Japan but especially Japan (actually could be wrong but I think the UK and even most of the US war leaders opposed the unconditional surrender terms).
#33
Quote by MeGaDeth2314
fwiw Japan has historically been one of the most cruel nations in terms of warfare tactics


yeah but when people bring that up as a defence of the atomic bomb they're just deflecting/making excuses. it goes without saying that Japan had committed huge atrocities before and during the war and that we're glad they didn't "win".

it also goes along with that whole "dehumanisation" thing where people basically stereotype the Japanese to try to justify it. "they were all so militarised so it wasn't really civilian deaths" which can be said about basically every participant in WWII. not that that means there isn't truth to the really ****ed up reality of Imperial Japan's militaristic society (ignoring that could also be deflecting in a different discussion) but that doesn't excuse the Allies doing some things that could rival them.

edit: I'm fully aware of all those and they're seriously horrifying. but the nuclear bomb isn't some humane death since many of those people slowly died over the course of weeks/months. if we're just comparing human suffering, I used to think an atomic bomb just incinerated everyone in like a second but the reality is that the pain inflicted by that for lots of people was probably comparable to slowly being cut open alive.
Last edited by slipknot5678 at May 23, 2015,
#34
Quote by Fat Lard
Harry Truman shouldve just nuked himself, since he was such a garb president

Sounds like you're a yiffing hater who needs to get bent.
Quote by jakesmellspoo
ooh look at me i'm ERIKLENSHERR and i work at fancy pants desk jobs and wear ties and ply barely legal girls with weed and booze i'm such a classy motherfucker.
#35
idk this is what I know

it happened, we can't do anything about it.
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
#36
Quote by necrosis1193
I swear nowadays people are just making threads to open any can of worms they can and watch the fireworks.



This was the Pit circa 2006-2008. Honestly, I liked best like this. As long as people argue ideas rather than the person, discussions are pretty fun. The whole community tends to get better educated.

Way better than the last couple years of who-can-out-troll-who threads.
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
#37
Quote by Baby Joel

it happened, we can't do anything about it.



this is why history repeats itself.


because of you, baby joel.
#38
Quote by Baby Joel
idk this is what I know

it happened, we can't do anything about it.


yeah which is really why justrooster's post was all this thread needed.

plus that way erik would not get the satisfaction of watching idiots like me post long ass posts as if we're just blindly going with it.
#39
sorry for history repeating itself
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
#40
>none of the allied bombings were necessary

lmao
Eat your pheasant
Drink your wine
Your days are numbered, bourgeois swine!