View Poll Results: Should the US have dropped the atomic bombs on Japan? Why or why not?

Voters
77. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    56 72.73%
  • No

    21 27.27%
Page 11 of 16 FirstFirst ... 2345678910111213141516 LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 226

Thread: "Thank God for the Atom Bomb"

  1. #151
    Regular
    Join Date
    05 Oct 07
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    59
    What about the long-term effects of the bombings?

    The Cancer? The pain and suffering of 100ks? Innocent civilians.

    It was wrong. And, although they did not know of it's later importance, we must remember that it helped to kick-start the cold war.
    I stand with Israel.

  2. #152
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    22,082
    Quote Originally Posted by RamHammer View Post
    What about the long-term effects of the bombings?

    The Cancer? The pain and suffering of 100ks? Innocent civilians.
    If we didn't drop them, millions of innocent civilians would certainly have died. Are you willing to second guess THAT decision?

    Quote Originally Posted by RamHammer View Post
    It was wrong. And, although they did not know of it's later importance, we must remember that it helped to kick-start the cold war.
    It was the right decision. And even if we didn't, the cold war was in the process already.

    Besides, if we didn't drop the bomb, the cold war might have turned hot in the 50s or 60s, with a real nuclear exchange between the US and USSR, simply because we didn't know what atomic weapons can do.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  3. #153
    OAF-Old Aggravating Fart Senior Contributor Shamus's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Apr 07
    Location
    Sebastian,Florida
    Posts
    4,059
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    If we didn't drop them, millions of innocent civilians would certainly have died. Are you willing to second guess THAT decision?



    It was the right decision. And even if we didn't, the cold war was in the process already.

    Besides, if we didn't drop the bomb, the cold war might have turned hot in the 50s or 60s, with a real nuclear exchange between the US and USSR, simply because we didn't know what atomic weapons can do.
    Right to the heart of the matter as usual bud ......What he said .On August 9th,even before they learned of the bombing of Nagasaki that same day,3 of the 6 men that controlled Japan's destiny at that point wanted continued resistance and made plans to pitch 2.3 million servicemen and 28 million male and female home guards into defense of the Home Islands.It took the second bomb falling on Nagasaki to convince them to surrender.Based on calculations from previous battles in the Pacific theater the estimated US casulties would have numbered around 500,000 for Operation Downfall.
    Last edited by Shamus; 30 Oct 07, at 01:52.
    "Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories." Thomas Jefferson

  4. #154
    Patron Enzo Ferrari's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 05
    Location
    Hong Kong, Hong Kong
    Posts
    273
    Last edited by Enzo Ferrari; 05 Nov 07, at 08:29.

  5. #155
    Registered User
    Join Date
    26 Jul 08
    Posts
    88
    do old grudges die hard???? to this day

    Japan still awaits a formal apology from the US for Hiroshima and Nagasaki

    the US still awaits a formal apology for pearl harbor.

  6. #156
    Battleship Enthusiast Defense Professional USSWisconsin's Avatar
    Join Date
    05 Dec 08
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    5,428
    The world was forever changed by the use of the Atomic bomb. In some ways we are more secure, now that world war is so terrible, wars are kept from spreading to World War proportions by this fact. But for the first time in human history, our very civilization's existance is threatened by something a few people can do in a single day. I beleive the use of nuclear weapons was inevitable once they were developed, it is unfortunate for Japan that it was the enemy when we aquired them. It is my hope that we have learned enough as a species not to use them against one another again. It is also significant that these weapons have grown and matured greatly since those first bombs were used -- the destructive capacity of modern nuclear weapons in hard to compare to the bombs used in 1945.

  7. #157
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    30 Apr 08
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    799
    For those that think the Japanese might have surrendered, prior to the bombs being dropped, when did the Japanese ever surrender? Maybe a few individuals did, but military units never did, even when completely beaten with no hope. There was no reason for Truman to think that they would.

    That being said, I would have waited longer to drop the second bomb, or maybe even exploded it on an island off the coast of Japan in plain view of the mainland so that the Japanese would have no doubt that we had more of the bombs.

  8. #158
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    11,551
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny W View Post
    For those that think the Japanese might have surrendered, prior to the bombs being dropped, when did the Japanese ever surrender? Maybe a few individuals did, but military units never did, even when completely beaten with no hope. There was no reason for Truman to think that they would.

    That being said, I would have waited longer to drop the second bomb, or maybe even exploded it on an island off the coast of Japan in plain view of the mainland so that the Japanese would have no doubt that we had more of the bombs.
    The Soviets were invading, time was of the essence. Not only did Hiroshima and Nagasaki save millions of lives in the path of the invasion, but millions more who might have ended up under Soviet domination.

  9. #159
    Patron
    Join Date
    06 Dec 08
    Posts
    218
    Does the U.S. Strategic bombing survey carry much weight?

    http://www.anesi.com/ussbs01.htm

    After interviewing most of the important protagonists on both sides came to the conclusion that.....

    ....There is little point in attempting precisely to impute Japan's unconditional surrender to any one of the numerous causes which jointly and cumulatively were responsible for Japan's disaster. The time lapse between military impotence and political acceptance of the inevitable might have been shorter had the political structure of Japan permitted a more rapid and decisive determination of national policies. Nevertheless, it seems clear that, even without the atomic bombing attacks, air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion.

    Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated......

    As the survey was done AFTER the war, it was no help at the time of the bombing, and the Americans thought the invasion would be necessary, so they went ahead and dropped them, fair enough, but ''if'' you believe the survey is correct in their findings, does the casualties in the invasion have any value as a reason for dropping the bombs from TODAYS posters?

    On the other hand, if you think the survey got it all wrong, and the Japanese still wouldn't have surrendered, then I guess we're back to square one, and those posts will keep on coming.

  10. #160
    Patron
    Join Date
    06 Dec 08
    Posts
    218
    As well as the question above..........

    Could I also put this question to you guys........

    If the Japanese didn't surrender, why was it imperative for the invasion to go ahead. The blockade and fire bombing would eventually bring them to their knees for minimal U.S. casualties, so why invade and suffer those massive casualties?

  11. #161
    Military Professional HazeGrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 06
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by ANZAC View Post
    As well as the question above..........

    Could I also put this question to you guys........

    If the Japanese didn't surrender, why was it imperative for the invasion to go ahead. The blockade and fire bombing would eventually bring them to their knees for minimal U.S. casualties, so why invade and suffer those massive casualties?
    Firebombing and blockade would be time consuming. Dropping at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was quick. The U.S. and allied forces had been through enough.
    Last edited by HazeGrey; 27 Dec 08, at 09:27.

  12. #162
    tankie Military Professional tankie's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Nov 06
    Location
    Barrow in Furness, United Kingdom
    Posts
    11,673
    Quote Originally Posted by ANZAC View Post
    Does the U.S. Strategic bombing survey carry much weight?



    Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated......

    .
    It was done IMO to show the world who was the worlds master ,and still is (like it or lump it ) ,showed the power of A bombs , and stopped Russia from :as has been said: ,coming to a nuclear conflict .

    But the coming few months in 2009 may prove that wrong .


    "When England was a kingdom, we had a king.
    When we were an empire, we had an emperor.
    Now we're a country

  13. #163
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    23,987
    Quote Originally Posted by ANZAC View Post
    On the other hand, if you think the survey got it all wrong, and the Japanese still wouldn't have surrendered, then I guess we're back to square one, and those posts will keep on coming.
    The survey is irrevelent. If the Emperor was determined, then so was Japan. I remind you that there was a coup against him when he surrendered.
    Chimo

  14. #164
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    23,987
    Quote Originally Posted by ANZAC View Post
    If the Japanese didn't surrender, why was it imperative for the invasion to go ahead. The blockade and fire bombing would eventually bring them to their knees for minimal U.S. casualties, so why invade and suffer those massive casualties?
    Would it? The Japanese paid the butchers' bill even with civilian lives in Okinawa and Saipan. There was never once a case of mercy asked nor given by them. Why should have the allies expected any different?
    Chimo

  15. #165
    Patron
    Join Date
    06 Dec 08
    Posts
    218
    Quote Originally Posted by HazeGrey View Post
    Firebombing and blockade would be time consuming. Dropping at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was quick. The U.S. and allied forces had been through enough.
    Didn't explain myself too well, I meant if the Nukes didn't bring about surrender, what would you do then if you were C in C, the slow option of
    firebombing and blockade or the quicker solution of invasion?


    Quote Originally Posted by tankie View Post
    It was done IMO to show the world who was the worlds master ,and still is (like it or lump it ) ,showed the power of A bombs , and stopped Russia from :as has been said: ,coming to a nuclear conflict .

    But the coming few months in 2009 may prove that wrong .
    You could be on the ball there tankie.
    But cripes, what do you know that I don't with your last remark.

    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    The survey is irrevelent. If the Emperor was determined, then so was Japan. I remind you that there was a coup against him when he surrendered.
    Well I guess you think the survey got it all wrong, and the Japanese still wouldn't have surrendered, so the need to drop the bombs were the way to go, fair enough.

    Personally I think the survey was pretty much on the money, wasn't Hirohito determined to end the war, but the sticking point was guaranteeing the imperial line.

    On the attempted coup, it's amazing the power one man [or God] has over his people isn't it?
    When he ordered the military to quit the fight, they did almost to a man, out of 2 million men under arms in Japan, [100,000 in the Tokyo district,] plus millions more throughout the Pacific and the mainland, all chucked it in on his order, except for a few dozen renegades.


    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Would it? The Japanese paid the butchers' bill even with civilian lives in Okinawa and Saipan. There was never once a case of mercy asked nor given by them. Why should have the allies expected any different?
    Not too sure what you mean, Hirohito surrendered to spare Japan any more devastation or Soviet occupation, [without guarantee for the Emperor] which is what Japan would have been facing in the next few months, mass starvation by blockade, and devastation by fire bombing, or Soviet occupation.

    Think he would have called it quits before the invasion date, without the nukes.

    But lets say they didn't surrender by the invasion date, why not just continue the blockade and bombing, for as long as it took, the last series of bombing raids cost the USAAF a casualty rate of 0.03% vs an invasion casualty bill of one million.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Should members of the Church of God go to war?
    By Ray in forum World Affairs Board Pub
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 08 Jan 09,, 01:49
  2. Iraq isn't Hitler's Third Reich
    By Gun Grape in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 17 Jul 07,, 02:48
  3. Treasury MPs oppose adultery under PPC
    By Ray in forum International Politics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04 Sep 06,, 20:23
  4. Parting kiss sparks Sharia law furore
    By troung in forum International Politics
    Replies: 140
    Last Post: 15 Oct 05,, 19:34
  5. Sermon #2 -From the speeches of Federico Garcia
    By Jonathan Locke in forum World Affairs Board Pub
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 17 Jun 05,, 20:31

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •