Viewing 25 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #29276
      Rattlesnake Charlie
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 152
      • Comments: 679
      • Overall: 831

      An interesting article. And, timely. There were protestors in the Los Alamos park when I went to the grocery store. Not many. Maybe 20, I doubt 30. My dad fought in Europe, and never went to the Pacific. I do remember Mom’s occasional comments on WWII in the Pacific. When the word “Japs” rolled off her lip’s, there was venom dripping. Today, it seems very distant with Japan being an ally. How things change.

      http://warfarehistorynetwork.com/daily/wwii/was-it-right-to-drop-the-atomic-bomb-on-hiroshima-nagasaki/

    • #29277
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      My opinion on the topic yes it was right to drop the bombs. The only mistake might have been we stopped a little bit early.

    • #29279
      GhostHawk
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 2
      • Comments: 258
      • Overall: 260

      In my opinion, yes. My dad was in the army rangers headed for jump school. If they had not dropped the bombs he would have been in one of the first waves.
      Things would have changed, I would likely not be here.

      Yes the loss of life was horrific. So was what the Japanese military did in China. 2 wrongs never make a right.
      But to pacify those islands with boots on ground and rifles would have cost many more lives on both sides.

      They were training Japanese wives to defend with kitchen knives. To take those islands by force the cost would have been 10 to 100 times as many dead, wounded on both sides. Plus who knows what the Japanese had hidden for use for defense? I know they did a lot of work on germ warfare in China.

      The deaths by starvation alone would have been greater than all those killed by the 2 bombs.

      My opinion is there should have been one on the imperial palace as well. But I’m just a farm boy who likes to read history.

    • #29280
      Wright Arms
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 8
      • Comments: 130
      • Overall: 138

      I didn’t read the link, so perhaps I’m covering old ground. If that be the case, pardon my redundancy.

      Was it RIGHT? I suppose it depends upon your perspective. It was the most advanced weapon of it’s time, used against a people completely unprepared for the ensuing consequences. Hell, the designers didn’t even fully understand the consequences at the time. It was the original ‘Shock and Awe’. And it certainly broke the will of the enemy.

      Was it RIGHT? If the bomb had been unavailable, a ground war would have likely ensued after a time. Based upon previous experience, the Japanese were prepared to fight to the last man. Given THAT scenario, the casualty count would have been even higher. MUCH higher.

      Was it RIGHT? From a moral standpoint, war is reprehensible. We, with our modern technologies, deal in death from afar as much as possible. Used to be, executions of those deemed guilty of crimes were public spectacles. Note crucifixion, public hangings and firing squads for example. Now we utilize ‘humane’ methods, done in secluded settings with as few witnesses as deemed necessary. And so, now we send in drones to do ‘the deed’. Dead men are still dead men. No matter if one sees the face of the men or not.

      Was it RIGHT? I submit to you all that, upon an examination of history, far darker pages exist., and from the look of things, soon will be paled in comparison.

      I hope I am incorrect.

    • #29282
      Larry Gibson
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 55
      • Comments: 507
      • Overall: 562
      • Gold

      Yes, it was right. That judgement should only be made in the context of then…..not now. What I find immoral is those who don’t know the reality of war who will sacrifice our soldiers to limit enemy casualties both combatant and non combatant.

      Larry Gibson

    • #29290
      Scharfschuetze
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 3
      • Comments: 190
      • Overall: 193

      What I find immoral is those who don’t know the reality of war who will sacrifice our soldiers to limit enemy casualties both combatant and non combatant.

      Amen to that. The military estimates of casualties from an actual invasion of the Home Islands is almost unbelievable. Dropping the bombs most likely saved many Japanese lives not to mention American lives.

    • #29291
      Daniel
      Participant
      • Bronze
      • Posts: 3
      • Comments: 25
      • Overall: 28

      We were absolutely right to bomb Japan. The idea that civilians are not fair targets in war is pure bull. The civilian population make it possible for the military to carry out operations. The Japanese ethic at the time permitted the utmost atrocities against the Allied service men. As a result, Japan deserved what they got and more.

    • #29292
      Rattlesnake Charlie
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 152
      • Comments: 679
      • Overall: 831

      Who read the article before posting? It contained some interesting items. Especially the one that the Americans expected the war to be over by the end of the year just due to conventional bombing and the cutting off of oil and food. But, they wanted to demonstrate the bomb before the war ended. I suspect that was to impress the Russians. The Russians, however; had a spy inside of the Manhattan Project from almost the beginning. I too believe dropping the bombs was the right thing to do.

    • #29293
      Doc Highwall
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 8
      • Comments: 123
      • Overall: 131

      The incendiary bombs that we dropped on Japan killed far more people then the two atomic bombs combined. Dropping the two atomic bombs saved by estimates over a million lives.

    • #29294
      Larry Gibson
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 55
      • Comments: 507
      • Overall: 562
      • Gold

      Oh, I read the article alright. It struck me as a sterling example of conclusions I’ve heard for years….mostly from pilots of just about anyone’s airforce……

      The rewrite of history or in this case the rewrite to justify new assumptions is obvious. The authors very last sentence is exactly what all his assumptions with the cherry picked facts purport to prove. All airforce pilots are indoctrinated to believe that “air superiority” over an enemy will lead to their surrender. The history of our own warfare the last 66 years has not proven that to be the case. Air power, even superiority, has not and does not win wars nor lead to surrender. That is especialy the case if unconditional surrender is the goal as it became in WWII against the Axis power.

      The authors article may have gotten him a C as an essay from my old junior high school history teacher.

      Larry Gibson

    • #29299
      WCM
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 30
      • Comments: 368
      • Overall: 398

      I just finished reading the book Command and Control by Eric Schlosser. A really powerful and well documented book about the history of Nuclear weapons,the Damascus accident and the illusion of safety.

      It made me have a lot more respect for both Eisenhower and Kennedy.

      It is a very scary book.

    • #29301
      popper
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 1
      • Comments: 293
      • Overall: 294

      Like Larry said, gets a C. Most of the article is factual, Truman ‘approved’ the plan. Remember this was the first war with major aircraft support, techniques had not really been worked out.As to the firebombng of cities, Dresden didn’t end the German war machine even though it did rattle the people. All the bombs the allies dropped didn’t ‘end’ the war as so many were ineffective. Civilian casualties have never been considered as a factor in any wars (except by the Doves). Was the A bomb dropped as a real wartime experiment? You betcha. Was it to be a warning to Russia, Yup, China too. Chiang Kai-shek was worried about the commies. Should it have been dropped? Definite yes. Was Truman reluctant? According to my G.P.s who knew him and a guy Mom refers to as ‘Burgess’, yes. The real reason it needed to be dropped was the really crappy intelligence and planning that occur during war. Chosin was another example, as was Cuba. Eisenhower was put in command as the previous allied leaders were always fighting for notoriety. Don’t ask my opinion of Kennedy.

    • #29302
      WCM
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 30
      • Comments: 368
      • Overall: 398

      I think a better question is should the bomb ever been created to start with?
      The theory is that it saved lives overall, but we haven’t seen the final chapter of the book yet.

      Read Schlosser’s book and answer the question for yourself.

      The scary thing today is that both Pakistan and India have nukes and they hate each other.
      Iran will have one soon,and North Korea is testing.

      The good news is what they have is rather weak compared to the Hydrogen bombs that the US, Russia, and China have.

      I believe Einstein understood the magnitude of what his theories might unleash on the world.

      But .. back to the original question..

      Since we did have the bomb..and the cat was out of the bag
      Dropping it on Japan at that giving time in history was the correct thing to do.

      Most American don’t realize how close we came to a nuclear holocaust during the Cold war years..

      Breathtakingly close..

    • #29305
      Anonymous
      Inactive
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 34
      • Comments: 109
      • Overall: 143

      Larry Gibson;n8602 wrote: Yes, it was right. That judgement should only be made in the context of then…..not now. What I find immoral is those who don’t know the reality of war who will sacrifice our soldiers to limit enemy casualties both combatant and non combatant.

      Larry Gibson

      Amen to that!!

    • #29306
      Scharfschuetze
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 3
      • Comments: 190
      • Overall: 193

      Read the article? Sure did.

      Remember that the Japanese military did not surrender after Hiroshima. Remember that they were against surrender after Nagasaki. The Emperor finally surrendered only after a plot to stop him by his military staff from doing so was stopped. It is also felt that the surrender was finally prompted by the Russians finally invading Manchuria at this time and causing even more fear in the Empire than the bombs.

      If we had invaded with conventional forces, how many of our grandfathers and fathers would have fallen. If they had fallen, I’m sure that many members here today would not be here today.

      I think a better question is should the bomb ever been created to start with?
      The theory is that it saved lives overall, but we haven’t seen the final chapter of the book yet.

      Read Schlosser’s book and answer the question for yourself.

      What if the bomb hadn’t been invented? What if the wheel, or electricity, or computers hadn’t been invented? It’s probably best to live with the reality of today and not dream of a perfect past.

    • #29311
      Goodsteel
      Keymaster
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 208
      • Comments: 2452
      • Overall: 2660

      Both my grandfathers went through the war. Grandpa Jack Malcolm was pretty torn up about it. So was grandpa on moms side (who BTW was a bombardier on a B-17).
      Their opinion was it was right, timely, and nesissary.

    • #29316
      lar45
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 21
      • Comments: 224
      • Overall: 245

      I think it’s good to remember that we were not the aggressors in this situation. They hit us first, we hit back harder.

    • #29317
      WCM
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 30
      • Comments: 368
      • Overall: 398

      The book Command and Control doesn’t have a political agenda other than to make safety a top priority.
      It documents facts about the history of nuclear weapons, the cold war,and today.
      Accidents that happened and near misses.

      If they had not dropped the bomb in Japan, I most likely wouldn’t exist.

      I agree it was the right call.

      Once they decided to go through with the Manhattan Project, the Russians had spies infiltrate the compound at Los Alamos

      So that is how the USSR came up with the bomb design.

    • #29342
      Harter
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 76
      • Comments: 807
      • Overall: 883

      Has every war time decision been a good one by victors or the defeated? I very much doubt it.
      Having had Uncles and grandparents as well as removed cousins in every conflict from day 1 except the Gulf War and Vietnam ranging from the trenches and artillery to CIC and knowing so many that were hip deep in WWII I believe that the bombs dropped in Japan were not the only solution. They were probably not the cleanest solution. They however were the the fastest and most deliberate display of the desire to end the conflict with the last combatant nation .
      If you find a copy ,”Our Enemy Japan” is a good book it cleared up some time line issues that I had never considered and made very clear the the mindset of the Japanese social structure.

      My grandfather was at Pearl Harbor but had done his service time in the USN from 36-39 and a that time was Civil Service. His sister was a nurse and had triage set up in her living room that morning.
      An adopted uncle landed 3 beaches , Iwo Jima was 1 of them . I don’t believe that I ever heard any of those 4 ever say Jap in a derogatory way . Uncle Bingo never said I killed Japs in on the beach . He said killing the first man was hell but by 10 or 12 I decide that seeing how many posts I could get in a piles was the way to do it. He was a combat Marine.
      My mom has a Japanese Chop Suey sweet and sour pork , and Chow mein recipe that came from prewar Hawaii and was written down from a Japanese woman’s recipe translation from her grandmothersrecipe box . Which was written in in imperialised Japanese.

      Did the Bomb save lives ? Probably. Did 8t bring a swifter end to the war absolutely. I have no doubt that in the civilized world it has been a grave deterrent to gross rampant war for 70 yrs .

      Should we use it ,should it be used ever again ? We have have 1 home 1 world to call home and in the last 70 yr we’ve done 1 hell of a job on it with information gained by ?a king and using it . This is a stupid question.
      Peace through superior fire power , the fear of extinction by world domination plans ,is the only reason to keep it.
      That fear however is gone from those that would conquer the world and remains only in those that still know the cost of such things.

    • #29350
      WCM
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 30
      • Comments: 368
      • Overall: 398

      Harter;n8680 wrote:
      Peace through superior fire power , the fear of extinction by world domination plans ,is the only reason to keep it.
      That fear however is gone from those that would conquer the world and remains only in those that still know the cost of such things.

      Correct, and I think the greatest danger now is a Terrorist group like ISIS getting their hand on a bomb.
      The nukes that Pakistan have are stored near the Afghanistan border.

      I have never though of it this way before, but during the cold war time, the Vietnam war was probably a deterrent to a Nuclear war.

      If Kennedy had lived who knows how the and game would have played out.
      I can remember the Cuban Missile crisis ,and how frightened my mother was.
      She prayed every day that our country would not be attacked.

      I will always believe that Kennedy was killed by the Soviets.
      He humiliated Kruschev .

      I am thankful for Kennedys leadership during that time.

      I also wondered why we put men on the moon.
      After reading Command and Control, it was obviously to prove to the USSR that we had rocket power beyond anything they could imagine.

      Another deterrent to them launching a Nuclear attack..

    • #29359
      seaboltm
      Participant
      • Bronze
      • Posts: 8
      • Comments: 64
      • Overall: 72

      Of course it is easy to Monday morning quarter back these things. Could the war have been won without the bomb? Sure. Were American lives saved by dropping the bomb? Sure. Maybe not a million, but a significant number of lives were saved and injuries were prevented. Put into perspective that by 1944 the US public was very war-weary. The Germans surrendered in early 45, and the public desire to end the war quickly was surely an issue. Plus, at the time, there was no love lost on the Japanese. They attacked first. They slaughtered prisoners (so did the Germans, but they surrendered first). Somebody was going to get nuked. Germany had the good sense/luck to surrender first. So yes, given historical context, it was the right thing to do.

    • #29360
      popper
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 1
      • Comments: 293
      • Overall: 294

      If Kennedy had lived who knows how the and game would have played out.
      I can remember the Cuban Missile crisis ,and how frightened my mother was.
      She prayed every day that our country would not be attacked.

      I also wondered why we put men on the moon.
      After reading Command and Control, it was obviously to prove to the USSR that we had rocket power beyond anything they could imagine.

      Cuba was always about BAD intel. Period. Well, that and the sorry State Dept.who thinks they can play global politics and are Very POOR at it, as normal
      Kennedy was embarrassed about Sputnik, thy have always had better rockets than us, NASA has forces us to use ‘our’ design.

      US has always been ‘war-wary’, just recovering from Civil War, then WWI, then WWII, just as families were getting into autos, housing, ‘the good life’. Roos had to ‘trick’ us to get us involved.,

    • #29361
      Harter
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 76
      • Comments: 807
      • Overall: 883

      Don’t forget we fought Spain and Mexico off and on from 1836-1910.
      I’m beginning awe might not have ever not been in a scrap with sombody.

    • #29364
      WCM
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 30
      • Comments: 368
      • Overall: 398

      The 60’s Cold War was more of a mind game, a test of wills, and a supposition of what the other side had.
      In reality neither side had what the other side lead them to believe ,or the ability to carry it out with true efficiency.

    • #29378
      WCM
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 30
      • Comments: 368
      • Overall: 398

      Legend has it that Russia now has this in place.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Hand_(nuclear_war)

    • #29407
      Craig
      Participant
      • Bronze
      • Posts: 0
      • Comments: 8
      • Overall: 8

      Larry Gibson;n8602 wrote: Yes, it was right. That judgement should only be made in the context of then…..not now. What I find immoral is those who don’t know the reality of war who will sacrifice our soldiers to limit enemy casualties both combatant and non combatant.

      Larry Gibson

      Great response!!

Viewing 25 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 2017 Goodsteel Forum. Designed by Covalent Designs, LLC.