Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
At the time my dad was sinking their ships in a submarine. The Japanese deserved that BOMB! They deserved the occupation too.
They bombed us because we the USA refused them OIL, and attacked with no Declaration of War!
Yeah the Democrat FDR had the idea they were coming, but not when and not where....
He was no prize either..... Today we are still in the mess he made over money....
67 years ago yesterday, Aug. 5, 1945 U.S. time, the first atomic bomb ever used in combat was dropped on Hiroshima, Japan. Three days later, on August 8, another was carried over Kokura, Japan. Kokura was found to be obscured by a 70% cloud cover, so the plane was diverted to Nagasaki, where the bomb was dropped. Approx. 200,000 Japanese, and zero Americans, were killed as a result of the two bombings.
Less than 2 weeks later, Japan surrendered, ending WWII. As a result, the planned Allied invasion of the Japanese homeland was called off. The half million American deaths that were expected, plus more than a million Japanese deaths, never happened as a result.
My Father was at Okinawa with the Marine Corps after having taken that island.
They were already told that in 6 to 8 weeks his Marine Division would be sent to invade mainland Japan.
Estimates of US casualties were in the 1 Million range if that had to be done.
My Dad always told me that if it wasn't for the A-Bomb, I probably wouldn't be alive today.
The bomb also SAVED millions of Japanese deaths.
He's likely correct.... The Marines got 1903 Springfield bolt action rifles, which should never have been, when the garand rifle was in the Army. I have never been able to understand that type of Govt thinking.
Furthermore despite the damage done by the two bombs, a conventional invasion would likely have resulted in far great loss of life to both sides. This is based on the level of ferocity with which the Japanese defended islands such as Iwo Jima and Okinawa. Imagine what they would have done on their homeland? Imagine the loss of life to women and children? The bomb was the most humane way to end the war. Which speaks volumes about the depravity of war.
The bomb was definitely more humane than the Bataan Death March and other such atrocities.
Bombing civilian populations was fairly common on both sides (beginning with Germany bombing London).
Japan was also working on a nuclear bomb and whoever had one first was going to use it.
I can't believe anyone would waste a day and even bother getting arrested over something that happened in history of which you didn't live through and don't know all the facts.
By adhering to the rules of civilized warfare. The West has striven to uphold high standards of conduct in war since St. Augustine enunciated the principles for a just war in the 5th century. See here and here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJGOAT
What is ones choice in terms of whether or not to engage in "total war" when the other side is the one who first engages?
In many cases it is true that for one side to engage in "total war", and the other side to adhere to more civilized rules, the more civilized belligerent is put at a disadvantage. But that's true in business, sports, and everything in life: moral scruples get in the way of "success". And yet we do not, therefore, toss out basic moral conduct because it puts us at a disadvantage.
One problem with the secular mentality in war is that God's favor is left out of the equation. George Washington acknowledged that victory was in God's hands, and that God's favor was dependent upon honorable conduct:
"The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of this army .... Let us therefore rely on the goodness of the cause and the aid of the Supreme Being, in whose hands victory is, to animate and encourage us to great and noble actions."
From Lepanto to the Cristeros, history is replete with examples of morally superior but vastly disadvantaged armies triumphing over more powerful but unscrupulous enemies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJGOAT
In the case of Japan, they organized something known as the "Patriotic Citizens Fighting Corps" aka Volunteer Fighting Corps. School attendance was suspended and teenaged boys and girls along with women were given combat training in the use of spears and grenades.
Spears, huh? I'm not impressed. This corps, which exempted children under 15, was intended to be a defensive force in the event of an invasion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJGOAT
These formations were engaged in battle at Okinawa and le Shima where their ranks were decimated completely by machine gun fire.
Sounds like they weren't so formidable after all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJGOAT
I'll ask again, what is morally reprehensible; killing a young woman or boy who is attacking you, or is the reprehensible act committed by the people who would arm and send the same into battle?
You're not paying attention. There is nothing morally reprehensible about killing anyone who is attacking you - women, children, or otherwise. That is not and never has been my argument. The Volunteer Fighting Corps, insofar as they constituted a serious threat, were a legitimate target. But it seems that they were: a) organized for defensive purposes; b) consisted of only 5 percent of the "combat ready" population in Japan which numbered about 28,000,000; and b) not a formidable threat anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJGOAT
When a nation chooses to engage in "total war" to the point of sending off their women and children to fight, how is a nation supposed to respond, if not by engaging in "total war" themselves?
Total war is evil. If we engage in total war, we lose everything that matters - we lose God's favor, and we lose a country worth defending in the first place.
Last edited by WesternPilgrim; 08-06-2012 at 05:11 PM..
As terrible as the numbers of casualties seem from the Atomic Bomb, many MORE Japanese died from the conventional bombings of Japan.
The only difference is that it took one plane and one bomb instead of many planes and many bombs.
Maximizing efficiencies, the American way.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
