Hello Guest, please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
Login with username, password and session length.

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Justified?  (Read 3575 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Justifi...
« on: April 15, 2008, 01:54:53 pm »
  • :D
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2418
Well I'm writing a paper on it, basically on the views and biases on both sides of the argument, so I thought I'd get a nice range of opinions here :P 

So uh... Discuss.
Logged
Re: Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Jus...
« Reply #1 on: April 15, 2008, 03:14:48 pm »
  • (y)(;>.<;)(y)
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3293
It worked. What more can be said, we're looking back on the past, we weren't there in the heat of the moment (so-to-speak). Do we really have the right to say if it was justified or not?
Logged
Re: Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Jus...
« Reply #2 on: April 15, 2008, 04:55:12 pm »
  • I murder your toys as well
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 1508
Jesus, could you have picked a harder topic?

That's such a complicated one.
Logged


This user is on indefinite hiatus.
  • Facebook - Jeremy Elliott
Re: Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Jus...
« Reply #3 on: April 15, 2008, 05:12:24 pm »
  • *whistle*
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2224
The use of weapons that caused widespread illness and cancer - which continues to this day - is difficult to condone in any circumstance. But by purposely attacking two civillian cities, in what was clearly the closing stages of the war, is nigh-on inexcusable.

I'll admit that using the weapons was maybe necessary in order to terrify the Japanese forces into surrendering - as they would've fought to the last man, leading to huge causalities for both forces involved - but perhaps a clear demonstration of the weapon at sea, on naval forces, where it would less long-term effects on a human population, would've been more appropriate.
Logged
Re: Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Jus...
« Reply #4 on: April 15, 2008, 05:46:18 pm »
  • (y)(;>.<;)(y)
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3293
A sea-demonstration could be said to have been too risky, you could claim they may not have believe they were willing to use such a weapon anywhere else.
Logged
Re: Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Jus...
« Reply #5 on: April 15, 2008, 07:21:52 pm »
  • *whistle*
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2224
Quote from: TheDarkJay on April 15, 2008, 05:46:18 pm
A sea-demonstration could be said to have been too risky, you could claim they may not have believe they were willing to use such a weapon anywhere else.

Then drop the second bomb on a military base. They had two, that's all they needed to make the Japanese believe they had more; using them on heavily populated civilian areas, with the intent to cause maximum damage and fear, is nothing short of terrorism.
Logged
Re: Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Jus...
« Reply #6 on: April 15, 2008, 07:34:58 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 5213
It wasn't justified. Not even by the Law of Armed Conflict. The law of armed conflict states that any operation or objective that puts civilian life in danger must be taken two ways.

1) if it causes too much civilian death/destruction, abandon the plan.
2) if not try to keep it a minimum.

Dropping two nukes on heavily populated civilian areas is not trying to keep such things to a minimum.

And as Pyru may know I'm usually quick to defend military actions, but this was pretty much just terrorism.
Logged
Re: Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Jus...
« Reply #7 on: April 15, 2008, 07:42:48 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +12/-2
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4849
Quote from: bertfallen on April 15, 2008, 07:34:58 pm
It wasn't justified. Not even by the Law of Armed Conflict. The law of armed conflict states that any operation or objective that puts civilian life in danger must be taken two ways.

1) if it causes too much civilian death/destruction, abandon the plan.
2) if not try to keep it a minimum.

Dropping two nukes on heavily populated civilian areas is not trying to keep such things to a minimum.

And as Pyru may know I'm usually quick to defend military actions, but this was pretty much just terrorism.
Yes but were those in place back then?  Let me bring up this issue: WHat if Japan had the atomic bomb before US did?  Could you imagine what would have happened then?  It may not be justified but it was what was needed to be done to end the war.IMO.
Logged
  • Super Fan Gamers!
Re: Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Jus...
« Reply #8 on: April 15, 2008, 07:46:26 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 5213
Quote from: Theforeshadower on April 15, 2008, 07:42:48 pm
Quote from: bertfallen on April 15, 2008, 07:34:58 pm
It wasn't justified. Not even by the Law of Armed Conflict. The law of armed conflict states that any operation or objective that puts civilian life in danger must be taken two ways.

1) if it causes too much civilian death/destruction, abandon the plan.
2) if not try to keep it a minimum.

Dropping two nukes on heavily populated civilian areas is not trying to keep such things to a minimum.

And as Pyru may know I'm usually quick to defend military actions, but this was pretty much just terrorism.
Yes but were those in place back then?  Let me bring up this issue: WHat if Japan had the atomic bomb before US did?  Could you imagine what would have happened then?  It may not be justified but it was what was needed to be done to end the war.IMO.

They've been in place since people rode horses to battle and killed people with swords. And no it wasn't if a countries got nukes the last thing you should do is take out civilian cities. You attack their silos, thats what Special Forces are for, well that and just about any other task under the sun.
Logged
Re: Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Jus...
« Reply #9 on: April 15, 2008, 08:10:58 pm »
  • *whistle*
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2224
Quote from: Theforeshadower on April 15, 2008, 07:42:48 pm
Yes but were those in place back then?

The Law of Armed Conflict is a combination of the Geneva and Hague Conventions.

The Hague conventions were established between 1899 and 1907, and the first Geneva convention was in place from 1864. They establish the treatment of prisoners, enemy combatants and civilians during armed conflict. I'm not certain, but I assume they were ratified by the United States by 1945.

Quote from: Theforeshadower on April 15, 2008, 07:42:48 pm
Let me bring up this issue: WHat if Japan had the atomic bomb before US did?  Could you imagine what would have happened then?  It may not be justified but it was what was needed to be done to end the war.IMO.

The Germans nearly had nukes before the end of the war. It's just as well they didn't, but I don't think it's a lot better that the United States used their research to help develop nuclear weapons.
Logged
Re: Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Jus...
« Reply #10 on: April 16, 2008, 06:16:47 am »
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 223
i think it was the appropriate thing to do in the situation, seeing as if we hadnt used them someone would of used them on us.
but i also think it wasnt justified, if that made any sense at all. i mean they had several arms treaties and such afterwards prohibiting the use of nuclear warfare.
Logged
xbox live: kirkking look me up!

your Romanian Captain Kirk speaking....yes i said Romanian....
dang it doesn't sound near as impressive on a worldwide board, than in a class of all Oklahomans, lol

-The non DJ Jordan.

When life gives you lemons, THROW THEM BACK AND DEMAND LIMES!"
thomas combs
Re: Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Jus...
« Reply #11 on: April 16, 2008, 08:09:47 am »
  • *
  • Reputation: +9/-1
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4654
Things were different back then. This was in retaliation for Pearl Harbor, The US military wanted to teach the japanese a lesson, possibly all the other countries, not to mess with the US. Maybe it was fueled by the emotion of what was happening around them. They proved that they weren't above killing innocent civilians in a time of war.
Logged


Re: Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Jus...
« Reply #12 on: April 16, 2008, 11:11:02 pm »
  • Don't Worry Sir, I'm From The Internet.
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2339
I don't think it was justified, but it HAS caused good in the long run. If the bombs hadn't been dropped, it might have been during the cold war where atomic bombs were dropped, and their scope and destruction might have been underestimated. Something possibly much worse MAY have happened. But still, it was inexusable that they chose to drop the bombs on the most populated cities. Was America too blind with revenge, or just wanted the war to be over too much.

By the way, it seems that the Japanese have gotten over the atomic bombs dropping, but will America ever get over Pearl Harbour, or 911? I suppose its not as easily comparable because 911 and Pearl Harbour were flat out acts of starting a war, whereas the atomic bomb was more in retaliation. Not that America hasn't done its own share of unreasoned attacking.
Logged
Grimace is the demiurge, the creator. From him all things in McDonaldland have sprung. He is not a sin, he's not a menu item, he's just Grimace. He exists. He rolls his lidless eyes and flaps his lipless mouth, formless and terrible, a protean idiot thing from the depths of pre-history.

Mamoruanime

@Mamoruanime
Re: Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Jus...
« Reply #13 on: April 16, 2008, 11:17:34 pm »
  • ^Not actually me.
  • *
  • Reputation: +9/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 9786
While the loss of the innocent was not a good thing, it was very justified, and they should have expected it after deciding to join in on the war. It was an unusual war against an enemy that was ruthless enough to sacrifice their own soldiers for their fight. I don't really think they thought the gaijin were capable of causing any major damage to them with Germany on their side, and I honestly think the war would have had a much different outcome if we hadn't dropped the bombs.
Logged
Re: Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Jus...
« Reply #14 on: April 17, 2008, 04:08:37 pm »
  • (y)(;>.<;)(y)
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3293
I'd like to play devil's advocate if you please.

War is not a place for honour or equality, but a place for cunning. Why shouldn't we bomb the enemies field hospitals?
Logged
Re: Atomic bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki-- Jus...
« Reply #15 on: April 17, 2008, 04:26:43 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 775
This wasnt war for wars sake, except for Japan, and at first Dritte Reich (but diminished during 1944, as they were losing)
Either way, dropping it on 2 major cities, destroying so much, and what came after even worse...
Here's probably what you didn't know:
There are recordings, and interviews where pretty much everyone stated the same thing: What have we done
The thing is, noone knew what the extent of what was going to happen fully, while some might not have cared initially, they did after.. :P
Those who survive the actual bomb die (probably) the most painful death unimaginable... Radiation poisoning

I have to ammend, the part where they/we didn't know is probably why it was used twice, and not once -
Yea, they probably would have used it. Read the materials, and as stated before, what they knew then and what we know now makes opinions in this thread void.
They made an invasion assessment that scaled much higher than what the lives the bombs eventually took were,
and considering those are the only two choices that would have ended the war, the stories in the books could be much worse
Japan could be many years behind what it is now (poor country), it could be taken the way Germany was, or free and much more hostile than it is now.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2008, 04:51:11 pm by Gonzo »
Logged

My Child Is Student of The Month at Neverland Ranch!
  • SSEdit
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »

 


Contact Us | Legal | Advertise Here
2013 © ZFGC, All Rights Reserved


Page created in 0.043 seconds with 65 queries.

anything