Posted on 08/06/2023 11:59:32 AM PDT by Rummyfan
You started an illuminating thread, Rummyfan. Thanks.
Millions of Japs would have died due to a few fanatical leaders. Even after Hiroshima there were Jap generals who wanted to fight to the death. That’s why Nagasaki was bombed.
Yes the fallout was horrific for thousands of innocent civilians. But it would have been 10x worse with an invasion. And of course it deterred Stalin from further mischief.
Thanks for the Heads Up on this..
I have been a member of billwhittle.com for some time, and when looking for this Firewall episode, was told it was unavailable. I had seen it years ago and thought it should be considered the final word on the subject, as well presented as it had been, but there was apparently some kind of legal issue with Bill Whittle’s prior employer, who had closed down their video website so I couldn’t easily find it.
Nice to see it is generally available again. It was probably this one video that brought me directly into the Bill Whittle sphere of influence. I admire him greatly.
The bombs also saved over 100,000 POWs. Orders had already been disseminated to execute every single POW on August 22, 1945 in order to free up the troops guarding them for the anticipated invasion. That alone is enough justification, otherwise Japan would never have capitulated soon enough to save all of those POWs.
Right, so bombing of Britain was just in the spirit of war. Refusing to feed people in work camps until they died, spirit of war. Marching troops in the jungles and experimenting on them, it’s okay too? War, anything goes...just make sure you win.
Millions, arguably. The Japanese were on the cusp of mass starvation. It is not generally understood just how effective the US fleet submarine force was in taking out Japanese merchant shipping. They couldn’t feed themselves, and food simply wasn’t getting in.
It’s a sad statement, but that’s pretty much what war became. Just as Dresden became the spirit of war. Once the Axis started it, all was fair.
It certainly did if you compare it to the costs of an actual invasion.
But there was a third rote never tried (1 don’t use them at all, 2 use them as we did).
A demonstration or use on a strictly military target. It might have induced them to surrender but spared most of those civilians and prevented us from wearing the mantle of the only nation to have ever used nuclear weapons on cities.
We will never know.
For all intents and purposes I’m exist due to the bomb. My fathers unit was outside of Rome at the end of the European part of the war, they were in preparation for the invasion of the Japanese mainland when the bombs were dropped and the war finally ended. If my father had gone to Japan most likely “I” would not have been created or born. I’m ok with the bomb.
We are talking about the US and Japan
But you wrote “Just as Dresden became the spirit of war. Once the Axis started it, all was fair.”
The Rome-Berlin Axis was in Central Europe. The Japanese were in the Asia Pacific.
It is true that the Germans Started the bombing of cities, at Guernica, then Rotterdam and then the Blitz. The US and England retaliated, brutally.
But Japan did not bomb cities. In the war in the Pacific, we were the ones who did what the Germans did in Europe.
We started it it, and we were britual, up to and including the firebombing of Tokyo and the atomic bombs.
It is true that the Japanese and the Germans were allies, but their alliance was weak and there was very little connection politically, industrially or militarily.
When somebody says that the actions of the Germans imputed guilt to the Japanese, htus making it okay for us to fire-bomb Japanese cities, be careful. By that standard we were guilty for the conduct of our allies, and the countless murders and mass rapes of the Soviet Russian army in Eastern Europe and Germany. And unlike Japan and Germany, we were closely allied with the Soviet Union politically, industrially or militarily.
Also, up until the atomic bomb, we were unreasonably demanding Unconditional Surrender. It was only after the bombs were dropped that we considered and accepted a conditional surrender, one that included the retention of Emperor Hirohito.
Fianlly, it was suggested at the time, that Truman should have ordered a demonstration of the atomiuc bomb, and if there is any reasonable justification of his refusal to do os, I have never heard of it. Perhaps you can give one.
My father was on a minesweeper that would have been in Tokyo bay had the invasion gone forward. Sorry, but the atomic weapons saved his life. He was worth however many died as a result of using t h em.
Hey rlmorel, thanks for pointing me to Bill Whittle. He has a great way of explaining history. Very easy to listen to.
Looks like he was interrupted after the raid on Mar A lago last year and has only posted a few things since.
His March 2022 analysis gave background on Putin’s history and raise to power, but he predicted Putin would be out of power shortly thereafter. Any particular episode you can recommend?
Out and out lie.
We had in fact offered the Japanese terms which would have left the emperor in power. The Japanese took that as a sign we were weak and did not have the nerve to continue to fight. Since they were getting ready to release their weaponized version of Yersinia pestis on the world in the fall (twice tested in China and only controlled by firebombing the area) they saw no reason to surrender.
Fianlly, it was suggested at the time, that Truman should have ordered a demonstration of the atomiuc bomb, and if there is any reasonable justification of his refusal to do os, I have never heard of it. Perhaps you can give one.
Because the Japanese did not surrender even after they were hit with an actual Atomic Bomb.
They would not have surrendered after a demonstration.
And we only had three.
Truman understood the Japanese much better then you ever will.
And as to your claim that Japan did not bomb cities I might possibly gently suggest that you ask the Chinese about that.
And let's not even talk about what they did to the millions of Chinese POW's of which only fifty six survived the war. Or what they did in the Philippines.
I will quote history for your answer with background.
Curtis LeMay. Co-architect (with ‘bomber’ Harris, of the Dresden raid and leader of 8th Air Force in Europe until transfer to Pacific theater. Designer of low altitude B-29 raids and firebombing Japanese cities to kill civilians.
“Killing Japanese didn’t bother me very much at that time... I suppose if I had lost the war, I would have been tried as a war criminal.”
And this. “War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over.” W. T. Sherman
The Japanese were issued orders throughout the South Pacific, if they ran out of food, to use all resources. They ate POW. Where they had no refrigeration they would cut strips of meat off the living. They murdered, beat, raped, tortured, killed infants in front of mothers, and experimented on Chinese and POW’s and civilians. You cannot use the term war criminals at this point, their actions were so far beyond humanity they could only be destroyed.
That sums it up, yes the victors judged by standards present then, by people who know nothing of what the Japanese really did, see LeMay as a war criminal. I suspect, that had we had the information that LeMay had, most people would have made same decisions. The war needed to end, because it was horrible, and the faster the better.
Another source is the book by DM Giangreco, “Hell to Pay: Operation DOWNFALL and the invasion of Japan, 1945-1947” (2009, Naval Institute Press)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
