A 20/20 on the 'bay!

[Denis]

In 1984 I took a University Studies course in college. It was called "Peace and War in the Nuclear Age" and was one of the most interesting classes I ever took. We had two instructors. One concentrated on weapons and strategy, the other concentrated on the political aspects.

One day a discussion came up and the weapons instructor asked if we were right to drop atomic bombs on Japan in 1945, especially the second one on Nagasaki.
Some students said it was a horrible thing to do and morally and ethically wrong.

I argued that, as bad as it was, it was the right thing to do for several reasons (and I didn't even mention how it saved many thousands of US troops' lives because we didn't have to invade Japan).
1. Only the US had them available and was the only country capable of delivering them.
2. It was the only time in history where a limited number could be dropped without risking an all out nuclear war.
3. As large as the blasts were at the time, they were tiny in comparison to those developed even a couple of years later. They served the purpose of showing the world how terrible and devastating they were and to this day, no government has ever been so foolish as to risk using one in a conflict.

[uwe]

I don't see Hiroshima as a crime against humanity - it was a cruel military act, but WW II was full of those. Nagasaki was a bit "Let's see if "Fat Man" works as well as "Little Boy" (it would have been worse had it not exploded at too high an altitude), the Japs haven't capitulated yet ..." - the war would have ended after Hiroshima too. OTOH I have absolutely no doubt that the military clique in Tokyo would not have hesitated to nuke NYC and LA (not to conquer the US, but to force it into an armistice leaving much of the Pacific as a sphere of lasting Japanese hegemonial influence) had the Japanese had such weapons available.

I'm with you that the sacrifices of the Japanese people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki set an example that influences the military weighing of options to this day and has prevented use of nuclear bombs by any sensible power which has them at its disposal. Let's just hope that works in the Ukraine as well as it did in the past.

You can even bring the cynical argument that the nucear bombs over Japan killed mostly women and children and old men which were more dispensable for rebuilding Japan than the Japanese soldiers saved by early capitulation and not dying in the field. Horrible, even vile thought, but if bringing a defeated country "up to speed" quickly to have a counterpoint to Red China is your top priority ...

[patman]

My Dad was on a boat outside Tokyo harbor after Okinawa...they were told not to even think of making it home, that they were going to do hand to hand combat throughout Tokyo.  Dad always thought Harry Truman was a God...didn't much care for FDR, but Truman was a God because he ordered the bomb to be dropped, and Dad didn't have to invade Japan.

[TBird1958]

Sheese, I wasn't reding this thread because we were discussing boat paddles.........WTF happened! 



The bombs were the right option!

As for Pearl Harbor, I think the US Navy lucked out ( even tho it was a tragedy by any account) in that it wasn't the full-scale fleet action they were planning for. That kind of meeting would have been a disaster for the U.S., the Imperial Navy was likely the best in the world at that point. 

[uwe]

Sheese, I wasn't reding this thread because we were discussing boat paddles.........WTF happened! 

Dunno, I innocently wanted to develop the thread on to slide bass playing, but Dave said better not be led astairway or I'll zep you and you'll be trampled underfoot! 



It was dy'er, mak'er for me, so we had to change subject.

Does anybody remember laughter?

[Aussie Mark]

You can even bring the cynical argument that the nucear bombs over Japan killed mostly women and children and old men which were more dispensable for rebuilding Japan than the Japanese soldiers saved by early capitulation and not dying in the field. Horrible, even vile thought, but if bringing a defeated country "up to speed" quickly to have a counterpoint to Red China is your top priority ...

Like they said after Japan's enormous economic resurgence by the 1960s - "Japan didn't lose the war, they threw it"

[Highlander]

Dunno, I innocently wanted to develop the thread on to slide bass playing, but Dave said better not be led astairway or I'll zep you and you'll be trampled underfoot! 
It was dy'er, mak'er for me, so we had to change subject.
Does anybody remember laughter?

Dave will take no quarter for that...

[uwe]

Like they said after Japan's enormous economic resurgence by the 1960s - "Japan didn't lose the war, they threw it"

Not bringing your former enemies up to speed quickly economically can backfire badly - the Versailles Treaty effect. The US had learned a lesson from the post-WW I scenario. And of course they did not want to leave Asia to Red China (just like West Germanny profited from being a border state and the enticing "window of the west").

The inability of Japanese administrations to say a wholehearted sorry for the unspeakable (and militarily unnecessary) crimes militaristic Japan of old did confounds me. No, they don't have to apologize for Pearl Harbor, that was a military operation to surprise-deliver one crippling blow to the enemy (the best-laid plans ...), but they sure as hell could for the Rape of Nanking and Death March to name just two.

[Denis]

The inability of Japanese administrations to say a wholehearted sorry for the unspeakable (and militarily unnecessary) crimes militaristic Japan of old did confounds me. No, they don't have to apologize for Pearl Harbor, that was a military operation to surprise-deliver one crippling blow to the enemy (the best-laid plans ...), but they sure as hell could for the Rape of Nanking and Death March to name just two.

The inability of the Japanese to understand the cause and effect idea (the idea that attacking Pearl would result in the bomb being used on them) confounds me.

[uwe]

When Pearl Harbor took place, the Japanese did not even dream that in a few years there would be a US four engine bomber (the Superfortress) with a huge range and a flight altitude well out of range of their best fighters, much less that it would drop something as lethal as an atomic bomb on them. Even more than Germany, the Empire saw the airforce as a tactical force supporting their army and navy. The innovation power of a capitalist system and its ability to quickly adapt to wartime requirements within only a few months took them by surprise.

The Japanese never believed they could win the Pacifc War in the sense of conquering America, but they believed that the US was a meek, fumbling democracy that would never pay the blood tribute of an extended war with them. They hoped for a short sharp shock effect, Pearl Harbor and a couple of victorious (for them) sea battles, lots of US POWs on the Pacific islands they took which could be exchanged in an armistice dictated by them with a bruised US, and an isolationist US public led by a President who couldn't even walk right.

It was a shambolic plan, not at all taking a "wake the sleeping giant"-scenario into account. They believed the US would be like Czarist Russia, big mistake. (Just like Hitler underestimated the Soviet Union, thinking they'd be as easy prey as Czarist Russia had been in WW I.) But then Japan had little other choice, their fuel devouring monster of a military machine was on its last drops. They had to do something quickly or give up their Empire building via military force.

[uwe]

The inability of the Japanese to understand the cause and effect idea (the idea that attacking Pearl would result in the bomb being used on them) confounds me.

I think that the conventional wisdom in Japan is that, yes, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the storm reaped for sowing the wind of war, but that at the same time those two incidents punished them enough for all their previous sins. Hiroshima and Nagasaki are supposed to equalize everything, but what did the comfort women, the dead US POWs and the slaughtered Chinese in Nanking have to do with nuked Japanese cities? There is no bartering between the two.

[gearHed289]

[uwe]

That is an interesting take on it, Godzilla as a Fukushima rather than a Hiroshima allegory. I might want to see that.

Emmerich's Godzilla remake was a cinematic disaster in all respects except for the animation of the beast itself - unfortunately Emmerich had forgotten its soul and that is really key to understanding Godzilla.