The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - Justified?

[Tarabonius]

Misuse? His whole statement is there is no such thing as war crime but only measurements that require to achieve goal - if murdering everyone is necessary part to achieve such goal, then there is nothing about it.

Perhaps you should, at times, read what Carl von Clausewitz actually wrote. He was a Prussian soldier, and not a Chechen warlord or some kind of internet-troll that's fond of massacres and war crimes.

[Tarabonius]

Sure the usa committed war crime everyone commits war crimes in war, it is impossible to wage wars without committing war crimes. War itself is a crime...

That's one of the "best" relativizations I've ever heard.

So murdering hundreds of thousands of civilians is "ok", as 'everyone' commits war crimes anyhow?!? That seems to me being morbid sarcasm at it's best.

[frozenprince]

FFS go to the VV and look through the 100 other threads we already have on this.

[Tarabonius]

FFS go to the VV and look through the 100 other threads we already have on this.

FFS why do you imply to shut down an ongoing, vital debate were an option for the administrators?

[frozenprince]

Because this is A) in the wrong subforum, and B) has been beaten like a dead horse. Nothing in this thread is new, or hasn't been said before. This is something we really should just have a compendium thread for because we've discussed it to death.

[Tarabonius]

Because this is A) in the wrong subforum,

I posted this thread in 'Ethos, Mores et Monastica' as it's not a current issue, and this subforum 'discusses ethics, morals, religion and philosophy'. I fail to see, how this could be the wrong subforum.

and B) has been beaten like a dead horse. Nothing in this thread is new, or hasn't been said before. This is something we really should just have a compendium thread for because we've discussed it to death.

Then please now link all the threads that started in the last few weeks and that discuss the exact same issue.

If you have a personal issue with the thread's theme or me, then please don't let it obscure this thread/debate.


EDIT: For folks new to this thread please view the OP and the following posts. Thanks.

[Erebus Pasha]

This subject has been discussed on quite a few occasions so I thought it would be best if we moved over to the VV and merged it to this thread.

[RubiconDecision]

If you're an American, as I am, then rather than fall into the same old, "It's evil and should never have happened" or "It saved countless lives" camps, try this. If you were Japanese and you launched two nuclear weapons on American soil would you feel differently? Or if you were American and the Japanese attacked two American cities with nuclear weapons, how would you feel about it? Because that's really the best way to look at it objectively and not fall into the same old rhetoric.

I seriously doubt the Japanese had any strength left by the time the weapons were at a point of being dropped. Then not waiting very long and dropping a second one seems extreme.

If you put yourself into the role of having the bombs dropped on your cities, I doubt you'll feel grateful for saved lives no matter what. But if you put yourself in the position of using atomic weapons then it isn't a tough decision to use them, and simultaneously make the Soviets take notice of it (despite their own atomic experiments). It was hardly a surprise.

If the bombs had been dropped on American soil, even had the war ended, the USA would likely have fought back and continued to fight back rivaling something akin to the Cold War with the Soviets. Think of the outrage of Pearl Harbor and multiply that x 1000. Is it any wonder then that the Japanese feel strongly about Hiroshima and Nagasaki given the devastation of the fire bombing that had already happened there?

[Tarabonius]

This subject has been discussed on quite a few occasions so I thought it would be best if we moved over to the VV and merged it to this thread.

I never realised the VV-subforum 'till now.

Yup, this is a good/better place for my [merged] thread.

Thanks for moving it, Erebus Pasha!

May I repost me OP of the former thread?

I've actually done it already, but I guess that's conform with the rules.


PS: @frozenprince: You were right about the issue already having being discussed. Your win there! Kudos.


PPS: Below is a repost of my original OP:

---

REPOST:


Did also the USA commit war crimes during WW2? I'd say they did. We all know - or should know - about the war crimes of eg. Germany and Japan, which are (esp. the German) unequalled and far far worse than any war crime the USA and other 'Allied' countries conducted. But does that imply that the USA didn't conduct war crimes or mass murder? I'd say no. In war even the USA 'stretch' what is righteous...


The use of an atomic bomb by the USA...


Prelude:

The United States strategic bombing of Japan took place between 1942 and 1945. In the last seven months of the campaign, a change to firebombing resulted in great destruction of 67 Japanese cities, as many as 500,000 Japanese deaths and some 5 million more made homeless.

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strateg...panese_bombing

The bombing of Tokyo and other cities in Japan during World War II caused widespread destruction and hundreds of thousands of deaths. For example, Toyama, an urban area of 128,000, was nearly fully destroyed, and incendiary attacks on Tokyo claimed the lives of 100,000 people. There were no such air raids in Hiroshima. However, the threat was certainly there and to protect against potential firebombings in Hiroshima, students (between 11–14 years) were mobilized to demolish houses and create firebreaks.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirosh...atomic_bombing


The Bombing:

On Monday, August 6, 1945, at 8:15 a.m., the Atomic Bomb "Little Boy" was dropped on Hiroshima by an American B-29 bomber, the Enola Gay, flown by Paul Tibbets, directly killing an estimated 80,000 people. By the end of the year, injury and radiation brought total casualties to 90,000–140,000. The population before the bombing was around 340,000 to 350,000. Approximately 69% of the city's buildings were completely destroyed, and another 7% severely damaged.

Research about the effects of the attack was restricted during the occupation of Japan, and information censored until the signing of the San Francisco Peace Treaty in 1951, restoring control to the Japanese.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirosh...atomic_bombing

Enola Gay's crew on 6 August 1945, consisted of 12 men. The crew was:

• Colonel Paul W. Tibbets, Jr. – pilot and aircraft commander
• Captain Robert A. Lewis – Co-pilot; Enola Gay's regularly assigned aircraft commander*
• Major Thomas Ferebee – bombardier
• Captain Theodore "Dutch" Van Kirk – navigator
• Captain William S. Parsons, USN – weaponeer and mission commander.
• First Lieutenant Jacob Beser – radar countermeasures (also the only man to fly on both of the nuclear bombing aircraft)
• Second Lieutenant Morris R. Jeppson – assistant weaponeer
• Technical Sergeant George R. "Bob" Caron – tail gunner*
• Technical Sergeant Wyatt E. Duzenbury – flight engineer*
• Sergeant Joe S. Stiborik – radar operator*
• Sergeant Robert H. Shumard – assistant flight engineer*
• Private First Class Richard H. Nelson – VHF radio operator*

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enola_Gay

The release at 08:15 (Hiroshima time) went as planned, and the gravity bomb known as "Little Boy", a gun-type fission weapon with about 64 kg (140 lb) of uranium-235, took 43 seconds to fall from the aircraft flying at 31,060 feet (9,470 m) to the predetermined detonation height about 1,968 feet (600 m) above the city. The Enola Gay traveled 11.5 mi (18.5 km) before it felt the shock waves from the blast.

(...)

Some 70,000–80,000 people, or some 30% of the population of Hiroshima, were killed by the blast and resultant firestorm, and another 70,000 injured. Over 90% of the doctors and 93% of the nurses in Hiroshima were killed or injured—most had been in the downtown area which received the greatest damage. Out of some 70,000-80,000 people killed, 20,000 were soldiers. Most elements of the Japanese 2nd General Army were at physical training on the grounds of Hiroshima Castle when the bomb exploded. Barely 900 yards from the explosion's epicenter, the castle and its residents were vaporized. The bomb also killed 12 American airmen who were imprisoned at the Chugoku Military Police Headquarters located about 1,300 feet (400 meters) from the epicenter of the blast. All died in less than a second.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic...ki#The_bombing






PS: A Japanese anime featuring Japan at the end of WW2: Grave of the Fireflies / original trailer

[Vanoi]

If you're an American, as I am, then rather than fall into the same old, "It's evil and should never have happened" or "It saved countless lives" camps, try this. If you were Japanese and you launched two nuclear weapons on American soil would you feel differently? Or if you were American and the Japanese attacked two American cities with nuclear weapons, how would you feel about it? Because that's really the best way to look at it objectively and not fall into the same old rhetoric.

Depends. Did my country start a war that cost the lives of millions of people, and was my country refusing to surrender in the face of defeat while continuing to hold thousands of nearly-starved prisoners, while continuing to kill thousands in the countries i still occupied? Then it was probably justified.

[Rijul.J.Ballal]

That's one of the "best" relativizations I've ever heard.

So murdering hundreds of thousands of civilians is "ok", as 'everyone' commits war crimes anyhow?!? That seems to me being morbid sarcasm at it's best.

No No you misunderstand, i was ranting against all wars!I meant to say all wars are wrong and we should avoid them!

[Chukada1]

No No you misunderstand, i was ranting against all wars!I meant to say all wars are wrong and we should avoid them!

All wars are not wrong. All wars suck big time though.

[Tarabonius]

No No you misunderstand, i was ranting against all wars!I meant to say all wars are wrong and we should avoid them!

Sorry, my bad - rijul2222. Please excuse me?

[hellheaven1987]

Perhaps you should, at times, read what Carl von Clausewitz actually wrote. He was a Prussian soldier, and not a Chechen warlord or some kind of internet-troll that's fond of massacres and war crimes.

Cry me two rivers then, Clausewitz actually wrote like a professional military personal would think about - it is the cost vs gain, not about moral issue.

[Ludicus]

All wars are not wrong

Indeed. Here are two excellent examples-Jihads and crusades.

[hellheaven1987]

Indeed. Here are two excellent examples-Jihads and crusades.

Funny enough Urban II's intention of Crusade was to export all the murderers in Europe to Muslim world so:

1. Europe would have less murderers, hence less violence.

2. Church could gain some lands.

Bonus: Byzantium might be saved.

It is basically like how Spain exported Conquistador all around the world.

[Scruff Dog]

I think more people would have been killed by conventional explosives had an invasion taken place. And the Soviets would probably have captured the northern half of Japan.

[RubiconDecision]

Depends. Did my country start a war that cost the lives of millions of people, and was my country refusing to surrender in the face of defeat while continuing to hold thousands of nearly-starved prisoners, while continuing to kill thousands in the countries i still occupied? Then it was probably justified.

This is why the citizens of the USA routinely ignore their own war crimes but only notice others as having the ability to commit them. Wake up and look at Iraq and the loss of civilian lives. Look at the atomic and fire bombing and ignore the loss of life either directly or indirectly. One can easily justify weapons of mass destruction and think "Only we have the right to have and use them."

By that kind of logic, then the USA should be accused of war crimes and our soldiers punished, for we have in history caused genocide as well.

So if we feel moral outrage as to the wrongness of another nation, or another nation feels that they have moral outrage against the history of American war crimes, then using weapons of mass destruction is perfectly justified on civilian populations. This kind of thinking is precisely why terrorists have no qualms about blowing up innocent civilians.

[hellheaven1987]

Depends how "innocent" civilians are though; actively fund and contribute to your national war effort really do not make you innocent be honest, regardless you are willing or not (there is technically no such thing as unwilling act in a democratic country however).

[RubiconDecision]

Depends how "innocent" civilians are though; actively fund and contribute to your national war effort really do not make you innocent be honest, regardless you are willing or not (there is technically no such thing as unwilling act in a democratic country however).

Well then, because the innocent civilians of the USA fund the war in Iraq, then Iran or North Korea could justify using an EMP weapon over the USA then?

A group of the atomic scientists felt that a demonstration off the shore of Japan would indicate the awesome power of the atomic weapons with zero causalities. Pres. Truman said no.