あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]Rentington -1ポイント0ポイント  (9子コメント)

Furthermore, the US has never apologized for Hiroshima and Nagasaki, nor did the US give Japan 'industry' as a form of reparations.

In fact, prior attempts by the US to publicly apologize to Japan were preemptively stopped... by request of the Japanese government.

I love Killer Mike's enthusiasm but I doubt he has enough in-depth knowledge regarding whatever he's talking about when he's giving political commentary. He probably doesn't even know that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were strategic military targets, that some Japanese military tried to stage a coup to prevent the surrender after the 2nd bombing, or that the USSR had already invaded Japan and was moving toward invading the 4 main islands within months. The territory of Japan that was occupied by Soviet forces is now known as "North Korea." So no, Klller Mike, the strategic nuclear strikes are not comparable to the holocaust. It saved millions upon millions of Japanese lives and is directly responsible for the autonomy, security, and success Japan enjoys today.

EDIT: Please don't downvote facts because you can't handle your worldview being shattered. US has never apologized for Hiroshima. Obama tried and Japan told him not to. Here's a source for you:

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2011/10/12/141276162/wikileaks-japan-rebuffed-idea-of-u-s-apology-for-hiroshima

[–]seattlegrows 0ポイント1ポイント  (7子コメント)

How did fire-bombing civilian cities and than following that up with two nuclear bombs save million of Japanese lives? How is it responsible for 'autonomy, security and success'?

[–]HighestPrimate42 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

Because otherwise, the war would have continued.

[–]seattlegrows -3ポイント-2ポイント  (1子コメント)

How is the war continuing for the Japanese lead to any different outcomes, and how DO YOU KNOW?

[–]BigBossOfGondorHigh and Tight 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Historians and military planners at the time came to this conclusion largely from the Battle of Okinawa. It was some of the hardest fighting in the entire War in the Pacific. Japan essentially considered Okinawa part of the mainland. It had many civilians on it while the other islands in the campaign did not.

Some civilians fought back. Some civilians were used as shields or bait. It was estimated that an invasion of mainland Japan could extend the war another 2 years. It isn't like these numbers are literally impossible to estimate. Look at casualties in the other battles. You'll notice that the Americans had to kill literally every Japanese soldier occupying the small island to achieve victory.

[–]Rentington 3ポイント4ポイント  (3子コメント)

Full Disclosure: I am very pro-Japan and I used to live in Tokyo. It is full of humble, hardworking, and polite people and is a magnificent country. That being said, WW2 was a time full of harsh realities that are almost unfathomable in modern times, but they were what they were:

It saved lives because given the circumstances at the time, any alternative action would have resulted in more Japanese deaths.

If you think the two 1945 nuclear bombs cost a lot of lives, you would be shocked to find out what a joint land invasion from Soviet and US troops would do. Even if the US did NOTHING, said "lol let's go home you guys are allllright!" and just quit the war, USSR continues their invasion of Japan. The USSR had already refused to enter negotiations for conditional surrender. Also, the soviet soldiers are not reputed for showing discretion during WW2 when invading their enemies. The amount of rapes and murders in Germany are estimated to be so high that even the most generous estimates are incredible in scope.

The only way you can argue that the bombs did not end the war is if you accept the narrative that Japan was going to surrender. This is pure fantasy. Not only did Japan refuse to surrender after the 1st bomb, but former PM General Tojo advised the Emperor to persist in the war even after the 2nd. When the Emperor made his final radio address (first one, as well) to tell the people to surrender, there was an armed military resistence to take the recording to prevent it from being played so the war could continue. Japan showed no signs of imminent surrender and all those involved, both US and Japan, including the emperors own words in his radio address, say that the nuclear bombings were THE direct cause for the surrender of Japan. He could have been lying for no reason, but this is the case. Soviets made a separate war declaration against Japan and seeing the writing on the wall that they could not defend themselves having their steel and munitions manufacturing crippled by the strategic nuclear strikes, the Emperor made the choice to surrender to the US and pray for a merciful transition of power.

IF the war persists, USSR will continue their invasion. If war persists, the mass starvation of Japanese children continues even if both sides were to refuse to invade for some reason. And, anything other than unconditional surrender means war within 10 years like what we saw in Korea.

So, that's how they saved lives. It was total war. Every action meant deaths and you are responsible for the lives of thousands of people for every little thing you do. Shooting a man in peace time is evil, but shooting a man in war time to save the lives of 20 other men is the kind of decisions that WW2 leaders were faced with every single day the war persists.

And on a side note, the "Ready to Surrender" argument is worthless, because so what if Japan was ready to surrender... they still had not surrendered. They were warned that the nuclear test was successful and they would be using the weapons on mainland Japan to cripple the war infrastructure. But, they didn't surrender... so the war goes on. And, if you are Truman and the lives of millions of young American men hang in the balance, how do you look a mother who lost her young teen son in the eyes and say "we could have ended the war months ago virtually in an instant, but Japan was totes ready to surrender!" It was the only responsible action... end the war ASAP or face a land invasion and an eventual proxy war with a new antagonistic Socialist Japanese state.

Obviously, the power of nukes today is so strong and what we know about nuclear radiation, it is not acceptable to use them anymore. They exist as a deterant. And a powerful one, at that. So far, few inventions have saved more lives than nuclear bombs. They prevented WW3... but clearly they are so powerful that they have the destructive potential to be our undoing as a race. They should never be used... but at that time? Their use saved the lives of millions by taking away Japans ability to even pretend to be able to fight, even if their will remained iron.

TL:DR: Sometimes there are harsh truths. The fact nuclear bombs saved lives is a testament to how horrifically fucked up the whole war was, but the facts are facts.

[–]TotesMessenger 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)

[–]seattlegrows 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

It seems you are quite versed in the history of that era, than if you've done your homework, you wouldn't be so sure of your position, or at the very least honestly admit that there is another camp who firmly believes that Japan was ready to surrender and have evidence to prove their point that the bombings were largely a power play against the Russians.

This was in fact the dominant narrative around the 70s, and than the neo-cons came and started revisiting some of our history.

I'm in the camp that follows Robert McNamara, who himself says it was a dumb decision that was completely unnecessary and was a war crime, and he was as key of a figure as you can get in the war, so I'll go ahead and take his word for it.

[–]Rentington 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm not sure if it would be a war crime, even if you didn't like it.

Here is the Emperor's final radio address. In it, he talks about how difficult it was to surrender when virtually 100% of his military advisors were urging him to continue with the war until the end of the Japan. He directly says the bombs were why he had no choice but to surrender, and he's not nice about it, either.

Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should We continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyokuon-h%C5%8Ds%C5%8D

Among those urging him to continue the war was Former PM General Hideki Tojo: a loyal and honorable man but a bit of a delusional fanatic. He was the Eisenhower of Japan. The top military leader. In his diary, he is explicit that he wanted the war to continue. These are his personal words in his personal diary. Despite McNamara being a 'key' figure in your eyes, he's American. Tojo eventually was tried and sentenced to death as being tantamount to the military dictator of Japan. Not only did he lead the military, until he resigned from office in 1944, he was the Prime Minister as well.

Source: http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2008/08/13/diary_of_tojo_details_hope_for_world_war_ii_to_go_on/

Beyond that, there was an attempted coup led by Major Kenji Hatanaka to overthrow the emperor and continue the war after the 2nd bombing. He tried to prevent the recording of the Emperor's radio address from being broadcasted at the NHK. But ultimately, men risked their lives to hide this record.

http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2008/08/13/diary_of_tojo_details_hope_for_world_war_ii_to_go_on/

It was recently made into a movie. (A remake form a 60's movie) Called "Japan's Longest Day" (my translation) Here's a promotional piece on it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7Xll3YwcxU

Anyway, that doesn't sound so 'ready to surrender' to me... And I personally will believe the Emperor of Japan and his military leaders, as well as their actions, when deciding the mentality of Japan in regard to it's willingness to surrender.

Not saying McNamara doesn't know the Japanese mentality better than the actual Japanese leaders of the country, but I doubt it.