Posted on 08/08/2020 9:47:50 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
My DILs parents also were there.
This is the money quote.
Once civilians are accepted as a legitimate target, any argument of how their demise is brought about is a waste of time.
Wrong question.
Was it wrong NOT to drop the bomb on the democrat party.
No...there is no morality in war.
No...there is no morality in war.
“I don’t care what all these words say.... My FIL was a first lieutenant on a ship headed for Japan.... He was to be in the first wave in the invasion... Then the bombs were dropped.... My ex wife and my children would not exist if not for the bombombs.. I cannot be convinced otherwise”
my father joined the navy when he turned 18 right at the end of the war, so little doubt he would have been sent as part of the invasion of Japan, and i might not be here today if the bombs hadn’t ended the war when they did ...
The short answer is NO.
It would have been immoral not to
https://www.americanheritage.com/biggest-decision-why-we-had-drop-atomic-bomb#1
For all your sophistry, you do not make clear what your judgement is on the morality and wisdom of dropping the bombs.
Please enlighten us.
Three words: Iwo Jima, Okinawa.
If a decision about dropping atomic bombs on Japan in 1945 is vindicated by the existence and well-being of specific Americans in 2020, then what about all the people who don’t exist in 2020 because of military decisions that cost AMERICAN lives in World War II? Does your life matter more than, say, the hypothetical grandson of a U.S. Marine who lost his life in the Battle or Okinawa, Iwo Jima, etc.? For that matter, why don’t we go back and ask the same question about the morality of the Battle of Gettysburg, or even the American Revolution?
i’ve met MANY other asses who were from the Greatest Generation who were soldiers in WWII who told me the same thing about their survival vis-a-vis the bomb obviating the necessity of them having to invade Japan, given that estimates were that a million additional U.S. casualties were expected from such an invasion ...
The United States was going to defeat Japan by simply burning it to the ground, the ethics of the act be damned and arguing about whether atomic bombs were justified is nothing more than a distraction. People were burned to death for months before these bombs were dropped and how that could be acceptable because conventional weapons were used is simply absurd.
Answer: No. My father was on Okinawa. My uncle died there. Dad faced going into Japan, until the bomb was dropped.
What’s your point cap? It was total war. Atomic solution or otherwise.
Is any aspect of war moral?
Morality isn’t the real issue - FReedom is the issue and anything that furthers FReedom is moral.
The question is like asking if it would be moral to enforce the laws of the land and tout the anarchists out...I vote yes.
“Science has no moral code—unlike religion...we shouldn’t have used it on a city-—the first one should have been on a military site...” [Forward the Light Brigade, posts 101, 102, 103]
You are arguing in favor of a targeting scheme that did not exist in Japan at the time.
There were no cities without military targets.
There were no “pure” military targets away from cities, save a small number of subterranean manufacturing and storage facilities - which the Allies did know of until after the war. Air reconnaissance had limitations.
“...As it was, the bombing of Japan required two very specially modified Boeing B-29 Superfortress bombers that were modified and tested at the last minute. [Robert357, post 111]
An incorrect statement.
Every B-29 assigned to 509CG was modified to carry and drop special weapons. They were modified in the USA, in some cases months earlier.
I get this.
My point is with the revisionists who engage in various contortions to try to make the case that the bombing campaign against Japan was one where the US simply had no other choice than to target population centers, or that the destruction caused to the population centers was actually unintended. It was clear that before the Americans even entered the war that we considered the Japanese civilians a fair target, and that we were simply going ignore the principles of just war that the West had embraced for centuries.
(It was those "Japs" and "Krauts" who committed the war crimes, you see. And the idea that the American citizen-soldier who fought in WWII was just as capable of committing murder on a large scale is just too much for some to handle.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.