Was it justified?
>>405077
It was just, but still a horrible thing
>>405077
yes
>>405077
The alternative would have been continuing to firebomb Japan, which killed more people and then invading it.
The allied planners expected an invasion of Japan to have so many casualties that we pre-made so many Purple Hearts, that same stock is still being issued today in the Iraq war.
Anyone who says "Japan was ready to surrender, they just wanted to keep their emprah" is forgetting that when the Emperor was about to surrender there was a fucking military coup from the last few fanatics trying to avoid surrender. Japan's willingness to surrender before the bombs wasn't a universal sentiment. There were factions fighting each other the entire time, trying to surrender or avoid surrender.
>>405077
No more or less than any other city bombing.
yes, we should have used the nuclear deterrent to get the commies out of europe and china too
>>405098
What if Japan was ready to surrender and the bombing was not necessary. What if they didn't care about keeping their empire as you say they do.
What if the bombs were merely to ward off Russia from influencing east asia.
>>405077
Yes. The bombs were terrible but the alternative was far worse. The alternative would have been a full out Invasion of Japan which would have killed far more than the bombs.
No.
But this is a primarily American board so the justifications will be unending (note: I am American myself)
For my case I propose a simple counter factual: if Japan had dropped bombs on American cities such as New York or Dallas would the U.S. population think of it as anything other than a horrific war crime that proved the moral bankruptcy of the Jap?
Think about it. Pearl Harbor but a 100 times worse. Those pitiless psycho samurai wannabes even chose targets so they could maximize civilian kill counts when they started indiscriminately targeting American women and children. Supposedly to show the U.S. how tough they are and break American fighting spirit.
>>405077
Couldn't they just have bombed some places where less people lived? You know, just to show that "you get one chance, the next one will be for real"?
I'm not a very educated man.
Not in hindsite. Let's say there was 30,000-80,000 projected combat casualties (60k-160k mutual casualties) with a mainland invasion, not even deaths.
That being said idk if they knew how many died in the first bombing.
Was the enola gay a fluke? Sending a b29 to go bomb shit without an escort?
>>405098
>>405098
Also as far as I know even on the day of the surrender the Japanese nation was expecting the emperor to issue a nation wide radio announcement asking everyone to commit sudoku.
He didn't in the end because he wasn't a psycho but still...certainly many would have followed through on it.
Why does anyone question the use of the atomic bombs and not the strategic bombing of civilians in general?
>>405273
Because le Germans were ebil
The whole american operation against Japanese was to kill as many civilian as possible. 60+ largest cities were fire bombed that killed so many civilians.
In the end, if this bomb caused the ending of the war, it would be a net positive on the war. However there are very real doubts that these bombs were the cause of japan's defeat and are merely technological demonstrations against the soviets. In this case, the bombing would be ambiguous. America never talks about its ambiguous past and will not want to see it come to light. Plausable deniability is there for sure, but reality came down more to geo-political maneuvering, imo.
>>405273
It's not terrorism if we aim for the production facilities!
>>405286
No, it was aimed at production cities, but i'm not gonna tell you that the civilians were considered a strategic bonus.
>>405232
>Couldn't they just have bombed some places where less people lived? You know, just to show that "you get one chance, the next one will be for real"?
They chose Hiroshima and Nagasaki because those were two large industrial cities, Hiroshima being where one of the major military bases was as well. Those targets were military targets, justified by the precedent of strategic bombing already.
For years the US had been dropping leaflets telling the Japanese civilians to get the fuck out before we turn you to ash. We did that for firebombings and there's evidence we did that for the atomic bombings as well. The response of the Japanese government was to execute anyone found with a leaflet.
Even during WWI, the US has always sort of adopted this philosophy of "People in totalitarian nations with no voice in their government are not liable for the actions of their governments. We might have to hurt you, but it's not a war against you."
>>405077
Politically, yes.
Morally, no.
It was far more to do with scaring the Ruskies that were preparing to invade than solely to end the war.
A month before the bombs, The Japs opened up negotiations to end the war with the Reds. Stalin said no, because he knew that they could take Japan and was willing to lose soldiers to do it. Truman knew very well that if Stalin ever took Japan the US would be strategically fucked.
>>405309
Yeah but you can't really consider the leaflets.
>Hey man run away from producing weapons in your country because there's a chance you could die.
>>405320
Its weak apologist nonsense.
>>405320
Even if the leaflets become a purely symbolic gesture, it at least demonstrates that the US didn't want to destroy the Japanese as a people. We just wanted to end the war with their psycho government.
Honestly, anyone who says no is a naive weeaboo apologist who doesn't believe in necessary evils.
>>405309
Would you trust an enemy who constantly views you as sub-humans in their propaganda and in the general mainstream thought? People are people regardless of where they come from and even throughout most of recorded history. The Japs, both common/elite, had a very reasonable doubt/suspicion of America and by extension, the west in general. The west had a view that every non-white were sub humans of various degrees. Even their ally, Nazi, considered them "honorary" white, not equal people. But they were only allies in pragmatic way, not ideological. In the 1919 Paris Peace Accord, the Japanese raised the racial equality issue. The US and British allies shot down the proposal.
"muh leaflets" would never have worked because deep distrust of US was already in place
A better question is why the b29 wasn't shot down by the Japanese air force.
>allowing a bomber size "scout" into your aerospace
>>405232
It wouldn't be a good idea. We only had 3 nukes in our aresnal. We used one at Trinity and the two in Japan. The others were coming online in late August, September, and October. 9 total. You don't want to risk using 9 fucking nukes when you think two will do.
>>405232
The japaneese millitary command did not want to surrender,even. After the two bombs were dropped.
It took the direct intervention of the emperor to get any talks of surrender started.
>>405363
They had shitty radar and often relied on actual eyes on the ground. Only had a few fighters that could reach the B29s altitude. They didn't bother with most bombing runs anyways, especially ones that small, because they were strapped for quality pilots and planes.
Welcome to /his/
>>405393
Nope.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan#Attempts_to_deal_with_the_Soviet_Union
>>405393
>The japaneese millitary command did not want to surrender
Right. Just like those literally psychopathic fanatics that ran Nazi Germany never surrendered and literally fought to the last man. Even using old men and children when they ran out of healthy fighting men. And what effective terrors those kids were.
>It took the direct intervention of the emperor
Oh what a coincidence. The Emperor is innocent yet again.
>>405077
at the time the US thought invading japan would be a nightmare that would wipe out huge numbers of people and destroy large portions of the country
and in hindsight I wouldn't change history if asked because the bombings showed just how powerful unleash nuclear weapons were
>>405411
Sigh.
The volksstrum's efforts in the Battle of Berlin were well documented in The Last Battle by Cornelius Ryan. Great read, do yourself a favor and grab a copy.
>>405077
>Was it justified?
That has nothing to do with it. Nobody gave a fuck about the Japanese people. Personally I'm glad it happened because my grandfather's company was selected to be part of the first wave of American invasion forces should the bombs not be used. In other words, he'd be fucking dead and most of my family would have never existed.
>>405098
>>405423
this
>>405273
>>405283
dresden looked like the moon when the allies were done with it
>>405273
Because they did nothing wrong bombing Dresden.
>>405077
The people who built and dropped it certainly justified it to themselves
>>405077
>The 20th Century was filled with instances of cities being bombed.
>For some reason only two of them are controversial.
>>405486
Nobody wants to admit they just like watching nukes go off.
>>405361
>The Japs, both common/elite, had a very reasonable doubt/suspicion of America and by extension, the west in general
Maybe if by 'reasonable doubt and suspicion' you mean they expected people to treat them the same way they'd been treating others. The Japs viewed everyone else as subhuman and actually acted on it as well.
>oy vey, remember muh pearl harbor
>>405486
Dresden is controversial as well, people just don't cry about it as much because its hard for leftists to put on as much faux moral indignation about whites getting incinerated and there's no communist apologist element you can inject into it.
>>405513
>remember muh 5 quadrillion
That applies a lot more to the other side of what you posted.
>>405503
The Japs were the one to bring about Racial Equality. The nationalism grew after the rejection from the west. The need to create a greater asian power to counter balance the western imperialism was the key drive. "The greater asian co-proseperity" was the term used by the Japs. The japs saw themselves as saviors/liberators of the asia.
>>405637
>The japs saw themselves as saviors/liberators of the asia.
That's how they tried to sell it, and they did find some people willing to buy it. But just ask the Chinese, the Koreans, the Filipinos, and any western civilian unlucky enough to find them in their hands how much they actually lived up to it.
>>405637
>The Japs were the one to bring about Racial Equality.
AHAHAHA. No.
Yes, some people disliked Japan for being Asian. But many disliked the country for being violators of a deal they were in.
The League of Nations pretty much stated NO MORE COLONIZING OTHER PEOPLE, ANYONE WITH COLONIES KEEP THEM. Japan. being a latecomer to the colonial game, went asshurt about this and pulled all sorts of shit, including the Race Card. WAAAH YOURE ONLY DOING THIS COZ IM YELLOW and all. They got so asshurt about it they became ultranationalist.
And boy did they try a lot of tricks to get colonies, starting with supporting Warlords in China. But those were inept and in the end they invaded themselves, beginning first in Manchuria. Starting the series of events that led up to the 2nd Sino-Japanese War and their eventual embargoment.
Also for liberators of Asia, they sure had a racist rhetoric going on against the Chinese and other Asians. For liberators of Asia they sure attacked sovereign Asian republics like ROC. Why not make a beeline for French Indochina? Or British Malaya? Oh wait, they just wanted colonies in the end. Dont bother.
WWII Nips are just sore latecomer colonialists. No bones about it.
>>405646
That doesn't show how they viewed everyone as sub humans. They were a growing empire and conquest/subjugation local people were the typical empire thing.
>>405662
Where was this master plan to eliminate all other race?
>>405663
No question about their imperial ambitions. But that doesn't disprove the fact that they brought up racial equality and the west turned it down. League of Nations was doomed to failure because it couldn't get over the "muh european exceptionalism" and "muh colonies". Unequal treaties with China/Japan and the rest of asia were common theme with the League of Nations. In 1919, Japan had no colonies or very little if any claim. They wouldn't have cared about colonies to begin with. The occupation of Manchu/China was a very late game course of action.
>>405077
>Use consistent and perpetual threats of violence and occasionally act on said threats to exploit a fledgling and divided nation
>act surprised when said nation imitates this behavior once they grow strong enough to do so
Americans really don't know the definition of "blowback", do they?
>>405690
We do, but we won't admit it. Its a running theme with former colonizers and its partners.
>>405696
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes
So you're saying America wants to wipe out every other race?
Show proof that there was a master plan to wipe out all other race.
>>405077
don't pick a fight you can't finish
>>405718
This doesn't show how the Japanese wanted to wipe out all other race. It doesn't even show how they wanted to wipe out all Chinese for that matter. If you want to say Japanese killing of Chinese civilians shows how they wanted to wipe out Chinese, then you should apply the same to all other forces that have used the same tactics of killing civilians.
Once again, show proof that states Japan wanted to wipe out all races. Or even trace events of Japanese superiority over all other race.
>>405341
See, this shit is why we are in the situations we are in today.
(Sigh) Yes, the Imperial military did some disgusting shit. Just like every single fucking military in the war, both allies and axis. Both sides are guilty of treating their opponents as filthy demonic subhumans with no conscious. Hell, we rounded up OUR OWN AMERICAN CITIZENS WITH NO DISCERNIBLE TIES TO ANY FOREIGN POWER, just because their great-grandpa Micky was an immigrant, and put them all in "internment zones" (i.e., concentration camps in all but name). '
I will say this again. The IJA was run by some pretty sick fucks. But anyone who is willing to even attempt to justify the things that happened in the war is a fucking hypocrite. American, Japanese, German, British, i don't give a fuck.
Also
>Necessary evil
absolute faggotry
>>405771
What would you have done, Mr. Right?
Sometimes there are no right answers, especially in War.
Do I think that they picked the least wrong one, yes.
>>405790
Any historians or history enthusiasts should try to understand the situation to the best of knowledge without letting their emotional leading them.
There were shitty/"evil" japs. There were shitty/evil nazis. There were shitty/evil brits/murricans/russians/etc.
You don't have to deny one to affirm one. You can affirm both. You don't need to use propaganda to describe one another and should instead approach history in a overhead view instead of a narrow view. A better perspective would be to combine both and understand where the bias/propaganda lies and find the truth.
>>405513
God I hate Americans who keep bringing up Pearl Harbor everytime they here the word Japan.
>>405813
I can't blame them without that attack there wouldn't be that shitty movie with Ben Affleck
>>405813
This, I can name off several worse atrocities committed by Japan.
>>405077
The first was justified however the second was not by any means. The First was a demonstration of power by the USA to the Japanese. without such a devastating attack the japs would have carried on fighting and caused a lot of bloodshed. The second was a demonstration of power to the soviets who had recently began their advance into Japan. the imperial government was already in peace talks with the USA out of fear of a soviet take over. the relationship between the USA and the USSR had already began to break down and both Britain and the USA didn't want the soviets to control any more land like they had done in Europe.
>>405790
Well, for starters, i would have cleared up the fact that the Japanese people as a whole wasn't the real enemy, but rather the corrupt as fuck military bureaucracy.
>The people in these warring countries are not the ones who want to do us harm, rather the real enemy is the tyrannical governments that are pushing their luck and treating everyone around them like shit and pushing massive propaganda campaigns to brainwash the masses. We must liberate these peoples from the yoke of tyrrany. Except the Japanese, fuck them.
Also, on that note, treating the citizens of an opposing force as demonic subhuman trash with no souls, BIG no-no.
And again, I would not randomly lock up my own fucking citizens because of no real reason other than the color of their skin. EO 9066 was a fucking stupid notion.
>>405813
>Fukushima was God's punishment for Pearl Harbor
>>405865
>And again, I would not randomly lock up my own fucking citizens because of no real reason other than the color of their skin. EO 9066 was a fucking stupid notion.
I understand why they did it, and I understand the suspicion the Japanese faced and with my modern sentiments and values I personally wouldn't either. But if I was FDR, I'd make an exception for the Nisei who bled and sacrificed for our country in the military. The most decorated unit in WWII was a Japanese unit whose families were interned by their own homeland. Kind of fucked up.
>>405865
> treating the citizens of an opposing force as demonic subhuman trash with no souls
People are naturally inclined to do this. Especially if said citizens are of a different race/religion.
>>405080
Nailed it on the first post.
It was justified but horrific nonetheless. The birth of the atomic age is a terrifying thing.
>>405889
Which is why i brought up clearing up the fact that the Japanese government/military regime was the enemy, and not the common people, who are being manipulated and lied to. Did you not read the rest of my post?
>>405217
> if Japan had dropped bombs on American cities such as New York or Dallas would the U.S. population think of it as anything other than a horrific war crime that proved the moral bankruptcy of the Jap?
If you use the "golden rule" here (do unto others like you want to have done onto yourself), in a total war scenario the US would essentially have to be nuked to be stopped. Or in other words, if the US tried invading Russia, failed to do so, and pushed back into North America, the USSR would have to completely destroy _every_ US city or else the war would just continue. A ground invasion wouldn't work either.
If you want to talk about "moral bankruptcy", in the US you defend the Republic to the death. We expected exactly the same out of the Japanese so we dropped what we had on them. They chose surrender instead of continuing to fight.
Or in other words, had US cities been bombed you'd just get more intense war with whoever the enemy was. Nobody here in the US would be feeling sorry for ourselves, we'd be getting guns and digging trenches in preparation for a ground war while the government cooked up more nukes and war gas. This is exactly what happened in the 1950s but with the USSR instead of Japan.
>>405841
And ultimately, bombing Nagasaki showed the USSR not to fuck with us. The end result was that Japan remained unified and not touched by communism. Given the massive economic transformation Japan made thanks to America in the 1950s up to the '91 Nikkei collapse (especially compared to China which had the largest famine in history at the time along with multiple purges), giving up a second city was absolutely worth it in the long run.
>>405911
I did. I'm saying that while the Americans could do that for the whites they considered closer to them, they couldn't for those evil nips. See: any political cartoon of that time with a Japanese person in it.
Pearl Harbor didn't help.
>>405637
>The japs saw themselves as saviors/liberators of the asia.
Which at best makes them terribly delusional and at worst liars. The "Co-prosperity Sphere" was about as beneficial to other Asians as Russian "Pan-Slavism" from the turn of the century was to other slavic peoples.
>>405936
So, in other words, Americans were racist little shits that needed to learn that segregation and ostracization were inherently wrong? My point exactly.
>>406044
>were
Many people in still are, just towards Arabs and Muslims this time.
>>406044
Can you point out a place that wasn't racist in 1945 or has a mixed race population with no racial tension today?
>>406088
Many Americans (and a large part of Westerners in general) are against Muslims now. Not just the white ones.
>>405259
The projected casualties numbered in the millions.
>>405303
>it was aimed at production cities
No, it wasn't. By this point in the war Japan had long since moved the majority of its production under-ground and away from cities, and the Americans knew this. Just like with the firebombings it was a strategy built around targeting civilians to destroy Japan's morale.
>>405315
Actually Japan approached the Americans in January offering almost the same terms of surrender they were given after the bombs fell. As you said the purpose was to guarantee that Japan fell under the American sphere and keep Russia out. Of course on that note it was mostly pointless considering Stalin already knew about the bomb.
>>405514
>muh leftists
Or maybe its because the atom bombs are broadcast so much more due to it being more historically significant, leading to people being ignorant about what happened?
>>405118
Implying historical discussion don't belong on /his/
>>406088
>only white people hate muslims
getting tired of this meme.
it was necessary because we needed to break them so they wouldn't do the whole "empire" thing again in the 60's, but without making the same mistakes
you faggots all look at wartime military decisions through the eyes of a peacetime civilian who has never faced hardship.
'justified' or not, it's meaningless talk. empty words. unimportant shit for weaklings to argue about.
what matters is that it was effective. plain and simple. compare it to the alternatives and see for yourself:
>firebomb japan like britain did germany, burning down entire cities and killing hundreds of thousands of civilians before achieving a surrender
>nuke japan, razing entire cities to the ground and killing hundreds of thousands of civilians before achieving a surrender
>launch a ground invasion, prolonging the war and sending hundreds of thousands of our own men into death before achieving a surrender
if you kids want to actually understand history then you'll have to stop applying your 21st century faglord feelings to military decisions.
I'm mostly curious that they didn't nuke the Germans as well for some reason. Was it because the Japanese were easier to dehumanize?
>>409022
I'm pretty sure Germany gave up a while before the nuke was ready for civilian use.
>>405514
>people I dislike are all leftist
Senpai u need help
>>408827
This really is /thread
If the Japanese are going to cry about their people dying maybe they shouldnt start shit in the first place.
>>405077
It was the simplest, quickest way to end the war. Justified of not, it doesn't really matter. When Truman made the decision he made the decision he thought would preserve the most American lives and end the war fastest(which in turn is preserving more Japanese lives as well).
WWII was full of atrocities committed by both sides. Only the losers had to even remotely answer for their crimes, although many would argue that the sentencing of war criminals after the war was really pretty lax. It's really hard to put people on trial and look like a good guy in the face of public opinion for something you were doing too.
>>405077
Yes
>>408044
If I'm not mistaken one was an important port city and one was a major military rallying city. They weren't targeted just because they were populous.
>>408827
But what you're saying are justifications, because apperently it was the least worst option
And it's just as unimportant as any discussion on 4chan
>>408827
You forgot the bit about a ground invasion leading to the deaths of millions of Japanese.
Also, take it down a notch. You aren't wrong but you don't have to douse your post with thick slathering of edginess. You sound like a child with all that chest beating.
>>408591
Hiroshima was bombed August 6th, 1945. Any meaningful resistance Germany was putting up ended in January.
>>405315
>Implying Stalin gave a shit about the bombs
Truman was a little bitch who thought he could whip his dick out and expect Stalin to fear him.
His strategy failed miserably and undid any good diplomacy that had been done before him, and ushered in a new era of fear mongering and unnecessary hate.
>>405077
Meh, who cares.
>War is winding down.
>But, but, we just got these new toys.
>Looks at each other.
>*KABOOM*
inb4
>Prager
http://youtu.be/BmIBbcxseXM
>>405077
All is fair in love and war, but I will say that the guy who ordered that nuking deserves to burn in hell, even though I don't believe there is a hell anyone goes to.
>>405080
this
completely 100% justified and I will defend it to the death
that being said
it was the most horrible thing in human existence and we are better off making sure it's the last time we ever use it
it was horrific but necessary
>>405283
Germans were the fucking ones who started the bombing of civilians
you forget Rotterdam?
besides not a single person was put on trial for strategic bombing, no one was convicted over Rotterdam, nor the Blitz or the other times Germans completely leveled cities
>>406044
name one group of people in 1945 that were not racist
No it was just a show of power
>>408827
this
Of course it was justified, or would you rather the US bombed Tokyo like Dresden. Then invade.
Strategic bombings of production centers (IE any fucking population center that might reasonably be expected to contain factories within the huge bombing radius) went on throughout the entire latter half of the war and killed hundreds of thousands of people on all sides. The alternative to forcing capitulation by shock and awe, with the nukes, was continuing to pound Japan with firebombings. By deploying the bombs we hastened the end of the war and saved the lives of millions of people by incinerating a few hundred thousand. Was it moral? I don't know. Was it logical, and with reasonable precedent? Yes, emphatically.
>>410829
firebombing of Tokyo was literally 10x worse than dresden
Was the Japanese imperial palace really attacked by Japanese forces when the Emperor Hirohito tried to surrender?
>>410899
you mean the attempted coup by high ranking Japanese? Yes
>>406044
>muh racism
fuck off kike
>>405077
>killing civilians
>justified
>>405080
/thread
>>405118
>a legitimate question as to whether it was more moral to use nukes and end the war quickly or invade Japan and potentially have to kill every man on the entire Island
>your response is lol not even a question ur just /pol/
I hate those edgelords, but this is a legit question and you're just fucking retarded.
>>409476
One contained the Japanese Second Army. Seconds seconds after the bomb exploded, there was no more Japanese Second Army.
>>412968
We would have had to kill way more people during a ground invasion, and would have suffered at least 1,000,000 ground casualties ourselves. It was still terrible, but it was the right call.
