Posted on 08/03/2005 10:49:43 PM PDT by manny613
"Better to fail at originality than to succeed at imitation," wrote Herman Melville. Unfortunately, the wisdom of such an observation is lost on America's ceaseless critics and historical revisionists, notably the mediocre minds that dominate academia and the Mainstream Newsmedia, who consistently mistake iconoclasm and consensus for originality and succeed only at imitation.
That's a funny question. What particular moral are you questioning? Does it have a name? What EXACTLY would you accuse our nation of?
The way I see it, once somebody attacks you in a particularly immoral way, (sneak attack on unwary sailors who were serving during peacetime, while at the same time Japanese Ambassadors were in Washington D.C. talking peace), you are forced into a situation that requires an even deadlier response. Either that or you quiver and shake and surrender.
The Japanese were a brutal people, with a highly capable military machine. Before you talk about "morals", think about the 'Bataan Death March', (where the Japanese captured thousands of U.S. soldiers and tortured them, beheaded them, and executed them.
Think about the fact that one in three American POWs were executed by the Japanese in one way or another. Either beaten, worked, hacked or shot to death.
Think about what happened near the end of 1944, when as American warplanes were flying over the Philippines thousands of American POWs thought they were about to be rescued. But the Japanese herded them into 'hell ships', which the AMERICANS would eventually sink, unaware of the treachery the Japanese were up to. / The Shinyo Maru with 750 POWs was sunk on September 7, 1944. Next the Arisan Maru was sunk on October 24th; 1,785 American POWs died. When nearby Japanese destroyers saw the POWs in the water they pushed them away and let them drown. Then the Oryoku Maru was sunk on December 13th; 319 American POW's died.
Think about the 9,000 Japanese helium filled balloon bombs, (fugos), that were released towards America with the intent to kill thousands of American civilians and terrorize the nation. A family of six picnickers in Oregon were killed by a Japanese 'fugo', and it is believed that some of the forest fires in the West and Northwest were caused by these Japanes terror balloons.
As other FReepers have pointed out, the Japanese were told to fight to the death, and never surrender. At Okinawa 100,000 of them did just that, and they killed 21,000 U.S. soldiers in the process. Had we attacked the main Japanese Islands with conventional warfare, we would have seen far greater numbers of deaths on both sides. It was estimated by military commanders that up to one million Americans would have died in the bloody battles to capture the main Islands, and up to two million Japanese civilians would have died.
So when you consider the potential numbers of U.S. and Japanese deaths in a conventional attack, as President Truman did, it is crystal clear that he chose the 'moral' way to end the war. The A-bomb way was faster and far less deadly for both sides.
Also consider the fact that the Japanese had been given a warning before the first bomb dropped, (something they themselves were too contemptable to do = Pearl Harbor). After the first A-bomb struck they still refused to surrender. (This proves beyond any doubt they would have defended their islands to the last man, seeing millions of people die). Truman truly chose the 'moral' way to end that horrific war. It's just that today many Americans are too uninformed to understand any of this. And they are also too brainwashed by their liberal, commy educators to believe that America ever did anything right. Oh, and did I also mention that many Americans today are too priviledged and wimpy to understand that war is a kill-or-be-killed predicament?
Admiral Nimitz was so shocked by the bloodshed on Okinawa that he withdrew his support for an invasion of Japan, hoping that the country could be subdued by means of a blockade, naval gunfire, and bombing - conventional bombing since he knew almost nothing about the Manhattan project
Russia knew the end was near and simply entered the war against Japan to shore up its position for reparations after said war was over.
While largely helping the allies in Europe after the Nazis turned on Russia they did little in the Asian theatre.
In the plans for the invasion of the first island in Nov. '45.
All 6 Marine Divisions were slated to assault the beaches.
The initial battle plan estimates were that by D-Day +4 all 6 Marine Divisions would have been destroyed in combat.
My cousin was a POW on the Bataan Death March.
Its a pity we didn't kill more of the b*st*rds.
So 200K Japs got nuked, worth it to save 1-2 million Soldiers and Marines.
The fact is, our casualties would have been incredible with an invasion, and so would the Japanese casualties.
Yes. After Hiroshima, the Japanese military convinced themselves that we didn't have enough nuclear material for a second bomb, and they also convinced Hirohito. Thus Nagasaki.
I don't know if we had enough for a third or not, but the Japanese didn't want to take that chance, and that's what matters.
We'll never know for sure because Japan surrender a week later.
We do know the Russians were considerably less humane in war.
I have heard that leaflets were dropped over Hiroshima a few days before August 6, warning people to leave. Can anyone confirm or refute that information? Thanks.
So would have been the U.S. had we lost as many in the war as did Russia.
But then the U.S. didn't enter an agreement with Germany to start the war in the 1st p[lace.
Leaflets had been dropped on 11 Japanese cities on July 27, telling the citizens that America was "in possession of the most destructive explosive ever devised by man." There had been other warnings given to the Japanese during the preceding weeks, while the Twentieth Air Force's Superforts firebombed the country's principal industrial cities.Leaflets were dropped on many cities after Hiroshima that referenced the first bomb. Nagasaki leaflets not dropped til after bomb.
But then the U.S. didn't enter an agreement with Germany to start the war in the 1st place.
Yeppers. And imagine, the japanese were even more brutal than the Soviets.
You know, I understand and appreciate your question, but for my part, I think it's pretty supercilious to second guess a jury, let alone a Monday-morning-quarterback half a century removed...particularly when that quarterback (as a recognizable faction or class) has a demonstrated agenda (not that I'm saying you're the quarterback!).
I can think of nothing more self-congratulatory than judging history by contemporary standards.
People make decisions based on the sum total of what they have to work with at the time, even though somethings may get overlooked or ignored. To not respect that is as vain as claiming your favorite color is the 'best' color.
Is Israel clearing her throat? One hopes so.
And one is not enough; it took two for them to surrender. And even then they tried hard to push it.
We actually had enough material produced, it took a long time to produce it, for three bombs. One to test, two to use.
Turned out to be barely enough.
It was up to the Japanese government to say "enough". That they did so without we and the their people having to go through what the Russians and Germans endured in Berlin (desperate street to street suicidal fighting) on a scale that would have made Berlin look like a puny battle is due to the atomic bombings.
So, yes, in a parallel universe where America was a fanatical military dictatorship which had initiated the war for visions of world domination by invading all of its neighbors, intentionally killing vast numbers of civilians, enslaving entire populations, but after a few years been pushed back to our borders, had all of our major cities reduced to ash by conventional fire bombings, our industry destroyed, our people near famine, but our government insisting on sacrificing every man woman and child to defend every inch of soil against an invader who would (it turned out) reform us, feed us, democratize us, help us rebuild ourselves into the second largest industrial giant on earth after one generation, and stand ready to defend us from our enemies at little expense to ourselves then I can handle the sacrifice of Los Angeles and maybe even San Francisco (see, we still refused to surrender even after LA disappeared in a flash) to get the bastards in Washington who started it all to finally throw in the towel.
But that scene is a fantasy. In real life it wasn't any bastards in Washington who led us to the brink. They resided in Tokyo and Berlin.
Well, in the end the Japanese leadership is probably to blame. Still feeling uncomfortable... Dresden was different, because Germanys leadership finally surrendered when 90% of the territory was already occupied. Dresden didn´t save one life. War is hell. Btw, you wrote in a nice way, pleasant to read.
It's a shame that it needed to be done. However, remember that more people were probably killed in the months leading up to the dropping of the atomic bombs.
It's rediculous to have any guilt over this. The simple fact is that the Japanese military showed no sign of surrender or weakening resolve, and they needed to be defeated militarily in order to secure a real peace.
If there is any guilt to be laid down, it would be on the memory of emporer Hirohito and Tojo, as well as the military leaders of Japan.
While the loss of life was regretable, it's the sort of regret one would have in amputating a gangrenous limb. Sad, but important to save your life.
Mark
Not just our folks -- theirs, too. Since this was a divine war, justified by the God/Emperor, it meant that the only way to win was to take Japan, one foot at a time. The deaths would have been in the millions on both sides and the Japanese today would number the same as ethnic Olmecs.
Hiroshima/Nagasaki were the most humane war acts ever performed.
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.