56% of Americans still believe Hiroshima bombing was justified – poll

[VCheng]

I only believe an isolationist policy can give back the respect US had in its extremely formative stages

History shows us that isolationism as US policy lets tyrants loose on the rest of the world knowing that US is the only effective force to stop their plans.

 

[ahojunk]

200000 killed in the bombings of nagasaki and hiroshima and still justifications by the US and its people.
:
Who allowed the US to maintain and use the largest nuclear stockpile in the world?
:
US people are extremely arrogant and haughty I must say. They are willing to justify every illegal war their country fought. I only believe an isolationist policy can give back the respect US had in its extremely formative stages

History shows us that isolationism as US policy lets tyrants loose on the rest of the world knowing that US is the only effective force to stop their plans.

The points in both posts are valid.

The key is having the right balance!

 

[anon45]

It's a war crime.. It killed civilians not once but twice.. And millions suffered decades after..

Millions did not suffer decades after unless you are referring to people who lost relatives. You have to look up the effects of radiation, our understanding has come quite far.

Also the blast was an airburst, which left minimal radiation after a period of time, vs a ground blast which would have left the area uninhabitable for a significantly longer period.

Background radiation in hiroshima and nagasaki today is indistinguishable from normal background radiation.

Are Nagasaki And Hiroshima Still Radioactive?

Why Can People Live in Hiroshima and Nagasaki Now, But Not Chernobyl?

Ionizing Radiation | Radiation Hormesis | Low Dose Radiation

Hiroshima and Nagasaki Cast Long Shadows Over Radiation Science - NYTimes.com

Given RERF's fearful origins and the study's scale, its findings can seem confounding in their modesty, especially this central result: Out of the atomic survivors tracked by RERF -- nearly 100,000 people -- only 853 cases of cancerous tumors, so far, can be attributed to the bombs.

What was the necessity to bomb Nagasaki after three days ? If the war continued , It would'nt have because now it is well established that the imperial army was to surrender anyway..

Nagasaki was bombed because the Japanese has not surrendered,

Japan refused the Potsdam declaration.

After the emperor broadcast his acceptance of terms, a military coup was attempted by sections of the military... does that sound like it was 'well established' that the imperial army was willing to surrender?

Maybe a section of the military was willing to surrender, but other sections weren't, and overall that lack of a coherent decision cost them.

It would have mainly been combatants not civilians.

Now this is just stupid. Lets ignore that an invasion of Japan would have led to drastically greater casualties for both sides...Why should American soldiers have less value to American leaders than Japanese workers? This was a battle of countries, all the country were combatants, as it was everywhere else the war was being fought. The firebombings and raids from all sides should make this self-evident. This wasn't unique to the US despite what you've been taught.

 

[Sanchez]

It was a war crime. Not only were nuclear weapons used but they were used against civilian population which is unacceptable.

Was there a better way to use it？ On Tokyo, for instance, it was where Japanese war machines and criminals located. Is there a big difference between indiscriminated bombing and Atomic bombs?

 

[mike2000 is back]

Millions did not suffer decades after unless you are referring to people who lost relatives. You have to look up the effects of radiation, our understanding has come quite far.

Also the blast was an airburst, which left minimal radiation after a period of time, vs a ground blast which would have left the area uninhabitable for a significantly longer period.

Background radiation in hiroshima and nagasaki today is indistinguishable from normal background radiation.

Are Nagasaki And Hiroshima Still Radioactive?

Why Can People Live in Hiroshima and Nagasaki Now, But Not Chernobyl?

Ionizing Radiation | Radiation Hormesis | Low Dose Radiation

Hiroshima and Nagasaki Cast Long Shadows Over Radiation Science - NYTimes.com






Nagasaki was bombed because the Japanese has not surrendered,

Japan refused the Potsdam declaration.

After the emperor broadcast his acceptance of terms, a military coup was attempted by sections of the military... does that sound like it was 'well established' that the imperial army was willing to surrender?

Maybe a section of the military was willing to surrender, but other sections weren't, and overall that lack of a coherent decision cost them.



Now this is just stupid. Lets ignore that an invasion of Japan would have led to drastically greater casualties for both sides...Why should American soldiers have less value to American leaders than Japanese workers? This was a battle of countries, all the country were combatants, as it was everywhere else the war was being fought. The firebombings and raids from all sides should make this self-evident. This wasn't unique to the US despite what you've been taught.

I dont think some members here know what they are talking about.lool. Do they even know japanese resolve and indoctrination back then? The japanese people had been brainwashed(not different from delusional islamists jihadists today) by their leaders and their Emperor. They viewed the emperor as GOD himself and were ready to die for him and do anything their leaders told them. See the mass suicides committed by Okinawans civilians after their leaders told them to commit suicide rather than surrender to the U.S. That was just the tip of the iceberg compared to what was awaiting the U.S and allies had they attempted to invade Japan mainland by launching a ground invasion. Millions would have been killed on both sides and believe me many japanese cities would have been wiped out from the map. The atomic bombs instead saved millions of japanese lives and hundreds of thousands of U.S soldiers lives, bringing the war rapid end.


The Nuking Of Japan Was A Tactical And Moral Imperative - Forbes

If the Atomic Bomb Had Not Been Used - The Atlantic

How Hiroshima and Nagasaki Saved Millions of Lives | The Diplomat

The Nuking Of Japan Was A Tactical And Moral Imperative - Forbes

In geo politics, we have to always look at things from the big picture.

 

[Indian Patriot]

Chinese recognition? It was recognized by all nations. The video I've linked shows US state department publication in 1945 with map of China clearly including Tibet.

And yes after Dzungar Mongol's invasion in 1720 and Napel's invasion in 1791 into Tibet, where Dalai twice fled to Beijing begging for help and twice was restored to power by the Qing army, I have no issue with the Qing court finally deciding to annex the territory and permanently station troop there.

Cool story bro, so why are you complaining when the Japanese gave you chinese a taste of your own medicine?

Was there a better way to use it？ On Tokyo, for instance, it was where Japanese war machines and criminals located. Is there a big difference between indiscriminated bombing and Atomic bombs?

There was no need for bombing civilians atomic or otherwise. Frankly the opinion of you chinese don't count. The Tibetans would also like to see china nuked just as you chinese love that Japan was nuked.

Japan today is a peaceful and responsible country with a vibrant culture and glorious heritage. The world loves Japan whether you like it or not.

 

[mike2000 is back]

Anybody who still doubts usibg the bomb was justified and indeed was even better for Japan, should read "operation downfall" that was the name of the operation of the U.S/allied planned ground invasion of Japan. I will give you people a little important quote from the article about this operation:

"What did not happen as a result of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was “Operation Downfall,” a massive Allied (largely American) invasion of the Japanese home islands that was being actively planned. As Allied forces closed in on the home islands, the intentions of Japan’s senior military leaders ranged from “fighting to the last man” to inflicting sufficiently heavy losses on invading American ground forces that the United States would agree to a conditional peace. As U.S. strategists knew from having broken the Japanese military and diplomatic codes, there was virtually no inclination toward an unconditional surrender".

Operation Downfall - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So do people still think Japan would have been better off with operation downfall or the "little boy" bomb?? Lool

 

[xunzi]

They got lucky it was a A-bomb instead of a tsar bomba. That would kill 1/2 of the population in matter of second. This is why Russia is INVINCIBLE.

 

[mike2000 is back]

They got lucky it was a A-bomb instead of a tsar bomba. That would kill 1/2 of the population in matter of second. This is why Russia is INVINCIBLE.

Lool Russia got humiliated/ beaten badly by Japan in the first russo-Japanese war. If that is invicible , then i dont know what is vincible.

 

[xunzi]

Lool Russia got humiliated/ beaten badly by Japan in the first russo-Japanese war. If that is invicible , then i dont know what vincible.

Tsar Russia is no where near the level of Russia's power, let alone the industrial might of the Soviet Union.

 

[mike2000 is back]

Tsar Russia is no where near the level of Russia's power, let alone the industrial might of the Soviet Union.

But you just said tsar bomba.

Anyway think we should cut the crap about these hypothesis, since Russia never actually took part in Japans defeat. Its role in fighting IMPERIAL JAPAN was very limited , as they declared war on Japan when they were sure the U S and allies had already done all the hard work(last week of the war after the U.S dropped the little boy bombs).
Would have been interesting to see Russian performance against Imperial Japan one on one full scale war without U.S involvement. Not sure they would have been invicible. Lol Afterall, their Navy was almost non existent while Japan had the most powerful navy in the world along with the U.S Navy, British navy and German navy.

 

[xunzi]

But you just said tsar bomba.

Anyway think we should cut the crap about these hypothesis, since Russia never actually took part in Japans defeat. Its role in fighting IMPERIAL JAPAN was very limited , as they declared war on Japan when they were sure the U S and allies had already done all the hard work(last week of the war after the U.S dropped the little boy bombs).
Would have been interesting to see Russian performance against Imperial Japan one on one full scale war without U.S involvement. Not sure they would have been invicible. Lol Afterall, their Navy was almost non existent while Japan had the most powerful navy in the world along with the U.S Navy, British navy and German navy.

Mikey, let not try to play dumb, can we? Everyone knows what Tsar Bomba is. Tsar Bomba - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wouldn't say the Battle of Khalkhin Gol and the annihilation of the Kwantung Army is small contribution, my friend if I were you, Mikey friend. LOL You have to understand the Soviet got their hand full dealing with the powerful Wehrmacht at the time. So it's logically Russia didn't start attacking Japan until they crushed the Nazi.

 

[mike2000 is back]

Mikey, let not try to play dumb, can we? Everyone knows what Tsar Bomba is. Tsar Bomba - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wouldn't say the Battle of Khalkhin Gol and the annihilation of the Kwantung Army is small contribution, my friend if I were you, Mikey friend. LOL You have to understand the Soviet got their hand full dealing with the powerful Wehrmacht at the time. So it's logically Russia didn't start attacking Japan until they crushed the Nazi.

Doesnt matter. If Russia was so invicible as you said, it would have still attacked/declare war on Japan irregardless of fighting the Germans. Afterall, the U.S/U.K were also fighting the Germans and Japanese at the same time. So could the 'invincible' Russians. lool Afterall invicible means you cant be defeated no matter what, isn't it mr confucius?

 

[xunzi]

Doesnt matter. If Russia was so invicible as you said, it would have still attacked/declare war on Japan irregardless of fighting the Germans. Afterall, the U.S/U.K were also fighting the Germans and Japanese at the same time. So could the 'invincible' Russians. lool Afterall invicible means you cant be defeated no matter what, isn't it mr confucius?

If you were Russia leader at that time, would you attack and war with Imperial Japan while you had your hand full fighting the Wehrmacht? Even the Imperial Japan are not that stupid to fight a two front war with China and Russia. That's why the non-aggression pact was made. The UK didn't fight a major land war with Japan . In fact didn't put all their effort into fighting Japan because the Nazi Germany offensive on the little island. For the US, that is a different story. They entered the war much later. Fresh and didn't face the offensive firepower of the Wehrmacht like Russia did. I said Russia was invincible after the Tsar Bomba. Get your fact straight. Post-WWII SU was INVINCIBLE and still is today.

 

[mike2000 is back]

If you were Russia leader at that time, would you attack and war with Imperial Japan while you had your hand full fighting the Wehrmacht? Even the Imperial Japan are not that stupid to fight a two front war with China and Russia. That's why the non-aggression pact was made. The UK didn't fight a major land war with Japan . In fact didn't put all their effort into fighting Japan because the Nazi Germany offensive on the little island. For the US, that is a different story. They entered the war much later. Fresh and didn't face the offensive firepower of the Wehrmacht like Russia did. I said Russia was invincible after the Tsar Bomba. Get your fact straight. Post-WWII SU was INVINCIBLE and still is today.

But you just said Russia is INVICIBLE. So that means it can NEVER be defeated in a war no matter what. So obviously if i knew my country was INVICIBLE i will attack any country i want at any time , which means YES i will have attacked nazi germany and imperial Japan at the same time , so it will show the world how INVICIBLE i am.lool

Except if i know im not invicible, in which case i will be more level headed/rational and focus on one ennemy at a time like Russia did. So i guess you need to take out the word invicible from Russia(they couldnt defeat the talibans in afghanistan as well). In short NO COUNTRY IS INVICIBLE, not even your lovely Russians. I know you chinese here hate Japan to the core,but that doesnt means you should be blinded by your hatred. Afterall you are both asian brothers i thought. Loool. How come you are leaning more towards the Russian white man instead of your own yellow japanese brother? @ChineseTiger1986 seems we can also play the race card on Xunzi? Loool


Nah just joking. Lo. Anyway i dont think Russia could have defeated Japan like the U.S did. even for the U.S navy iand allies it was tough and would have been tougher had they invaded japan mainlands proper. A littlee quote from a military article of the U S army.:

"A study done for Secretary of War Henry Stimson's staff by William Shockley estimated that conquering Japan would cost 1.7–4 million American casualties, including 400,000–800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese fatalities. The key assumption was large-scale participation by civilians in the defense of Japan."

So good luck to russia defeating and invading Japan with its non existent navy.