Poll: Was It Wrong To Drop The Atomic Bombs In Japan?

chstens

New member
Apr 14, 2009
993
0
0
Well, it was either the bombs or Chuck Norris, I think they chose the most humane option.
 

muffincakes

New member
Nov 20, 2008
191
0
0
Nihilism_Is_Bliss said:
i think one is justifiable.
sure, my history knowledge suxorz, but i don't see why they had to drop two.
You have to remember that this bomb was the first of its kind. No one had this much destructive power, and because of this it was a matter of calling bluffs. Since there had never been a bomb like this before it would be easy for the Japanese to think that there was only one. In their minds, something that powerful must have taken a lot of time and resources to create, and it isn't likely that that amount of effort would be put into creating another one, or they lacked the resources to build another one. Which means they would think that we were bluffing about the second one. Once we dropped it though, they realized that we did indeed have more of these bombs and that we weren't bluffing.

If they had just surrendered then we would have only dropped one, but they tried to call our bluff so we had to bring out our pocket aces. I think this quote sums it up nicely:

I know what you're thinking. "Did he fire six shots or only five?" Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But being as this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?
Japan just felt lucky that day.
 

surruk

New member
Mar 2, 2010
8
0
0
nagasaki was a munitions manufacturing area as I understand it, "Hiroshima was a city of considerable military importance, containing Japan's Second Army Headquarters, as well as being a communications center and storage depot."

actually both were chosen as they were located in valleys with mountains around them that would maximize the blast intensity. as a result kyoto was also marked for destruction.
 

Samurai Goomba

New member
Oct 7, 2008
3,679
0
0
Seems to me like scaring the crap out of everyone so nobody would ever screw around with nukes was more the focus than ensuring America was completely fair to its enemies.

You seen anyone drop a nuke on any human target since Nagasaki and Hiroshima? No? Thought so.

America sucks in lots of ways and has sucked in many more ways in the past, but a message was sent about nukes that day that no computer simulation or public demonstration could have matched.
 

Soluncreed

New member
Sep 24, 2009
482
0
0
I don't see it as wrong as many more people would have died had the bomb not been dropped. People suffered and were killed, but it was done to protect a greater number of people. They were a threat to our country. Is it not wrong to defend ourselves?
 

Mr Thin

New member
Apr 4, 2010
1,719
0
0
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/20/books/20garner.html

"The alligator people did not scream. Their mouths could not form the sounds. The noise they made was worse than screaming. They uttered a continuous murmur - like locusts on a midsummer night. One man, staggering on charred stumps of legs, was carrying a dead baby upside down."

Now tell me it was right. Tell me it was necessary.
 

[email protected]

New member
Oct 18, 2009
177
0
0
I'm half Japanese and going to high school in Japan and no I don't think it was wrong. It would have been another Stalingrad but in Tokyo.
However if you ask this to most Japanese 90% or more would say it was wrong. Because in Japanese schools in history class they don't teach you the Nanking rape, Stalingrad or Leningrad.
They really think that the Atomic Bomb was thee worst thing that happened in the war.
 

Ekonk

New member
Apr 21, 2009
3,120
0
0
Blowing up an entire city filled with actual civilians being vaporized, burned, torn to shreds and otherwise completely obliberated, sounds pretty damn wrong to me. I don't care about you assholes saying 'Oooh but it would have cost America a lot more men', sure it would have, but those are soldiers who know the risk of their "work". Without principles you are just as bad as the Nazis and the people in the Japanese experimentation camps, so screw you. That bomb was a big mistake and it shouldn't have been dropped.
 

katsabas

New member
Apr 23, 2008
1,515
0
0
The amounts of different depictions of the same fact (Japan ready to surrender, Japan would never surrender) are so clusterfuckyyyyy.....

I am not big on WWII history but as I understand it, the Russians were Allies right? Well, since Japan knew they were going to be flanked, why didn't they surrender? I mean, you are going up against not one but two of the biggest countries in the world while stranded on an island, without battleships or planes. What do YOU think it will happen? And according to what most people say here, they didn't contact during the 3 days deadline. Being proud is certainly something every man should be. Being TOO proud is going to get you in trouble.
You are basically dooming your entire population to non-existence because you are a god to the minds of your 'worshipers'. If you do have that kind of power, SAVE YOUR PEOPLE! DON'T STAND THERE LIKE A FUCKIN' PEZ DISPENSER! That is what the Emperor didn't seem to comprehend.

Also, I do not get why the US was trying to make a point to a country they are on the same side with but if they absolutely HAD to, did they really have to drop 2 bombs? And on cities? Generations of families had their bloodlines prematurely cut and the effects are felt even today. The second bomb was unnecessary while the picking of the cities was nothing if not malevolent IMO.

Then, why drop the bombs if the enemy is ready to give up? To swing your A-male cock? Good job. You made your point across by using a weapon that you didn't even fully know what consequences it would bring upon innocent people (hence today's teratogenesis).


They are both to blame. US with 2 bombs and Japan being too fucking proud.
 

Agrael

New member
Jul 16, 2009
376
0
0
Why the fuck did we invent those things in the first place ?
And yes, it was WRONG to drop the bombs.

Seriously... I mean, they were beat up in every possible way any who.
 

Snowpact

He is the Walrus
Oct 15, 2008
178
0
0
Mad Stalin said:
they shoulda saved one for russia. I'd love to see a nuclear war
Okay, but don't stand too close. Nuclear weapons can often lead to a sudden melting of the face.
 

Darkauthor81

New member
Feb 10, 2007
571
0
0
Eukaryote said:
Killing civilians in war is ALWAYS wrong, and despite all of the positive effects it had I will never argue it was a good thing.
Those civilians, and many more, would have died anyway. Civilian or soldier, they were honor bound to fight us which was seen in the southern islands we did manage to take. Which is why we used the bombs. There was no way we were setting foot on the main islands. We lost countless soldiers just taking the southern ones. I'm not a proponent of war, nukes, or a republican, but it really was the only way to send a message to the emperor and the weapon manufacturers who convinced him to go to war with us in the first place.
 

Vitor Goncalves

New member
Mar 22, 2010
1,157
0
0
reg42 said:
No, it wasn't.

The American's said
We're gonna drop this bomb on yo' ass and it's gonna really fuck your shit up, so surrender now
but Japan didn't do anything.
America dropped it and Japan got buggered up. Then America warned then that they would do it all again if they didn't surrender, and they still didn't. They got another bomb dropped on them. Then they surrendered. It was the fault of the stubborn Japanese emperor.
It was war. During war, you don't think of the other country, but your own.
They were trying to surrender, although with conditions, but neither US or Soviet Union were interested in accepting it until they carried their agenda. US wanted to finish the manhattan project testing the atomic bombs in a real war theatre. And the soviets wanted to secure the Kuril Islands to strenghten their access to the Pacific Ocean. Only after that was acomplished they accepted it.

So Japan was slow in reviweing its proposal because of their dumb code of honor (an specially the military fearing being deposed of their positions, stripped of their power) but the Allies were not interested in pressing it either. Real presure for surrender from US only came on the 12th of August onwards (3 days after the scond bomb). As for Russia, they kept on ignoring pretty much any diplomacy till middle September when they finally secured Kuril Islands and Northern Manchuria.
 

Ardna Xela

New member
May 28, 2009
184
0
0
Yes, it was wrong. Even the invention of something as annihilating as atomic weapons was wrong.
 

pearcinator

New member
Apr 8, 2009
1,212
0
0
sometimes drastic measures have to be taken...did it have to happen? No. BUT it was a world war and Japan refused to believe America had the Atomic Bomb.

Not only that, but after the 1st bomb America said they had another one and Japan didnt believe it! If Japan had bowed out of the war then neither of the 2 A-Bombs would have been dropped.

Of course, Japan thought America was bluffing the 1st time...but the 2nd time? I mean...thats risking a bit too much dont u think?

Im not Pro-American (im actually Australian and we pay out America all the time...for fun)but in the case of WW2 and the Atomic Bombs on Japan, America did the right thing. Think about it like this...if it werent for those bombs then we might as well have all been speaking Japanese for all we know!
 

Darkauthor81

New member
Feb 10, 2007
571
0
0
katsabas said:
The amounts of different depictions of the same fact (Japan ready to surrender, Japan would never surrender) are so clusterfuckyyyyy.....

I am not big on WWII history but as I understand it, the Russians were Allies right? Well, since Japan knew they were going to be flanked, why didn't they surrender? I mean, you are going up against not one but two of the biggest countries in the world while stranded on an island, without battleships or planes. What do YOU think it will happen? And according to what most people say here, they didn't contact during the 3 days deadline. Being proud is certainly something every man should be. Being TOO proud is going to get you in trouble.
You are basically dooming your entire population to non-existence because you are a god to the minds of your 'worshipers'. If you do have that kind of power, SAVE YOUR PEOPLE! DON'T STAND THERE LIKE A FUCKIN' PEZ DISPENSER! That is what the Emperor didn't seem to comprehend.

Also, I do not get why the US was trying to make a point to a country they are on the same side with but if they absolutely HAD to, did they really have to drop 2 bombs? And on cities? Generations of families had their bloodlines prematurely cut and the effects are felt even today. The second bomb was unnecessary while the picking of the cities was nothing if not malevolent IMO.

Then, why drop the bombs if the enemy is ready to give up? To swing your A-male cock? Good job. You made your point across by using a weapon that you didn't even fully know what consequences it would bring upon innocent people (hence today's teratogenesis).


They are both to blame. US with 2 bombs and Japan being too fucking proud.
Taking the lower islands was a mess. We lost countless soldiers. Soldiers that were captured by the other side were tortured so that their screams could be heard by our lines. It was horrific in ways no one who wasn't there could comprehend.

We could not have taken the main island. It was just that simple. And if it took 2 nukes to make the emperor rethink himself what do you think would have happened had we not dropped them? How many people on both sides would have had to have died in the streets before he re-thought himself?

It shouldn't have happened in the first place. It's a tragedy. It's horrific. But that's what war is.