Skip to comments.The Atomic Attacks on Japan: Justified or Not?
Posted on 08/03/2020 7:06:21 AM PDT by Kaslin
It is August, 2020, now seventy-five years since the end of America's World War II hostilities with the nation then known as the Empire of Japan. August 6 and 9 are the historic anniversary dates of the first and only use of nuclear weapons in warfare. In the ensuing three quarters of a century, the attacks of 1945 on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki their usefulness and their rectitude have been the subject of vigorous debate over their military, scientific, political, historic, and moral significance.
Schools of thought regarding yes-or-no justification generally break down as follows:
Yes. The European and Pacific wars were already too costly in lives and property. A quick end was mandatory.
No. The European war was already over, and the Pacific conflict was winding down. The Soviet Union, free from battling Germany, was soon to engage in hostile action against Japan.
Yes. There were no good options. This was the least bad alternative.
No. Regardless of military considerations, the attacks were a crime against humanity for the massive carnage of Japan's innocent civilian population, and Japan was presumably about to capitulate. America should apologize to Japan.
Yes. Western notions of chivalry, honor, and humane treatment of vanquished opponents were alien to Japan's ruthless, barbarous, and sadistic military culture. A powerful checkmate was required, and Japan should apologize to the world.
The atomic attacks by the United States Army Air Force on the two Japanese cities undeniably were horrific tragedies. Abstracted from historical context, by themselves, they do suggest extravagant cruelty in a purely vengeful act by this nation. And they provide ready ammunition for the "Shame America" movement, now in high gear over America's history of slavery, accusations of endemic racism, and other assorted offenses.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Possibly the greatest humanitarian act is history. Saved over a million lives. Mostly Japanese.
If they weren’t justified, are we going to somehow take them back? Good high school debate subject, I guess.
“If they werent justified, are we going to somehow take them back?”
Well, they aren’t black, so they don’t matter as much.
Served great purposes.
- Ended the war without 1,000,000 estimated American casualties and up to 25,000,000 Japanese. Estimates from Operation Coronet.
- Kept the Soviets out of any Japanese territory.
- Showed the world major powers could no longer engage in unrestrained warfare against one another.
- Launched the atomic age for civilian and naval purposes.
Here we go again. Why do we do this every August?
Impossible to answer to everyone’s satisfaction. Many Japanese felt it was appropriate. Others hate us for it.
Same with the shutdown in this country in the spring.
Trump was told millions would die if he didn’t do it. Yet, he is criticized for it.
Justification for what amounts to bringing a victorious end to the worst war ever fought? My daddy came home. Yes, it was worth it.
Absolutely justified. Saved many lives.
What puzzles me is the demand by progressives that we judge the past by their standards (that is, if one can consider their standards to be anything other than double ones).
Progressives, suck and blow at the same time. Mostly to each other.
May the flies of a thousand camels have sex in their drugs.
The fire-bombings actually resulted in more Japanese casualties, and overall wrought more destruction, but then at least we wouldn't still be wasting time debating this topic 75 years later.
As it was taught to me we had a few choices:
1. Starve out the Japs. This would have taken a long time, and cost millions of Jap lives—mostly women and children. It would have been impossible to govern them after capitulation.
2. Invade. This would have cost millions of Jap lives and millions of American/Allied lives. The end result would have been years more of war that would bankrupt us and allow the Russians to move into the East. Governing after the war was over would be near impossible due to deep hatred of each other.
3. Drop the bomb. It cost tens of thousands of Jap lives. It left the country devastated, but rebuild-able. The people were in such awe that capitulation followed and the Japanese people were much more governable. It also halted Russian intentions in the East (Korea, China, etc.). Obviously it allowed us to move forward quickly and with minimal loss of American life and military material.
Seems to me that all of the equations for life, politics, and strategic action pointed to the Bomb as the best alternative.
I really don’t understand why this becomes so difficult for people today to grasp.
The fire bombing raid on Tokyo killed more civilians than the atomic bombs did. That raid was non-nuclear.
I never see another reason listed as why the bombs were dropped. We had developed a bomb that was a city killer. We also knew that the Soviets were our next enemy. So what to do? Most of the world would not believe there was one bomb, one killed city. So to remove doubt and prove American superiority drop the bomb, kill a city, show the world America is the most powerful country in the world by a large amount.
I dont get the handwringing over the use of the atomic bombs on japan during the war. If it was ok to use conventional bombs on them, then it was ok to use the atomic bombs. If its not ok that we dropped atomic bombs on japan, then its not ok that we dropped conventional bombs on them either.
My Dad was on the troop ships headed to the invasion. I thank God we ended the war before he landed on the Japanese shores.
The Japanese got what was due to them. It’s as simple as that.
War is hell.
The object is to make the other side cry Uncle.
What ever it takes.
(my father was on a ship that would have been involved in the invasion)
No question that they were necessary and proper. One might argue over whether they could have been used on a military target but I don’t know the logistics.
Same question and same story every year.
Think of the young men who didn’t get killed in the invasion of Japan.
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.