To the Japanese people on this forum:

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: rl624
1. Japanese started the war with US by bombing Pearl Harbor.
2. Nanjin bloodshed by Japanese to innocent Chinese people during WWII.

I don't feel sorry for the Japanese.

We (the U.S.) has been right most of the time, and we've been horribly wrong in some of the battles we've chosen to enter. There's no dispute over going to war against both Japan and Germany in WW II.

That said, I feel for all civilian non-pariticipants killed or wounded during any war. When we get to the point where we don't feel for them, we've become the evil we always say we're trying to defeat. 🙁

Feel sorry for Japanese who didn't support the war but suffered from it, yes, but apologize for using Atomic bomb, I don't think so. Apologize means you made a mistake, but using atomic bomb was the right decision at the time, and IMHO saved more people then it killed, on both side.

So I don't think there is a need to apologize. Plus if Japan still have not apologize to the Chinese and the rest of the world for the atrocities they commited, why should anyone else apologize for the death during WW2. Even today, Japanese people, including their Prime Minister still worship those who commited atrocities by paying visit to the war shrine. Japanese government has often try to "soften" the language in their text books to portray their war criminals and the horrible acts they commited in better light.

If there is anyone would should apologize, like the OP proposed, it should be the Japanese people, and idiots like the OP.

 

[IvanAndreevich]

Originally posted by: rchiu
Apologize means you made a mistake, but using atomic bomb was the right decision at the time, and IMHO saved more people then it killed, on both side.

You are very right and very wrong. Using the atomic bomb was a correct decision. The WAY it was used was a VERY wrong one. Care to argue against that?

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: IvanAndreevich

Originally posted by: rchiu
Apologize means you made a mistake, but using atomic bomb was the right decision at the time, and IMHO saved more people then it killed, on both side.

You are very right and very wrong. Using the atomic bomb was a correct decision. The WAY it was used was a VERY wrong one. Care to argue against that?

I am not sure what you mean by the WAY it was used was a very wrong one. Was American suppose to just show it to the Japanese and expect them to surrender? How else would you use it other then dropping it, and causing sizeable damage that introduce enough shock to demoralize the Japanese and speed up their surrender?

If you have any suggestion, I am all ears.

 

[Gl4di4tor]

I believe the United States had the right to drop the bomb but they did not have to drop another one in a few hours w/o even giving Japan a chance to officially surrender.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Gl4di4tor
I believe the United States had the right to drop the bomb but they did not have to drop another one in a few hours w/o even giving Japan a chance to officially surrender.

As others stated, what should have been the time span between the two drops.

Japan had radio technology in order to communicate, they did not have to rely on foot messenger. The military leadership was still convinced that they could win. They felt that saving face was critical.

The first bomb was equivalent to a warning shot. If they did not listen, then the next one would be to the body to incapitate.

The Japanese military did not want an unconditional surrender, talks were already opened.

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Gl4di4tor
I believe the United States had the right to drop the bomb but they did not have to drop another one in a few hours w/o even giving Japan a chance to officially surrender.

The first atomic bomb was dropped on Aug. 6 1945, and the second atomic bomb was droped on Aug. 9, 1945. Japan offered to surrender on Aug. 10, 1945.

Link

It was more then 72 hours between the 2 bombings, not a few. Japan had plenty of chance to officially surrender before and right after the Hiroshima bombing.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: IvanAndreevich

Originally posted by: rchiu
Apologize means you made a mistake, but using atomic bomb was the right decision at the time, and IMHO saved more people then it killed, on both side.

You are very right and very wrong. Using the atomic bomb was a correct decision. The WAY it was used was a VERY wrong one. Care to argue against that?

Care to elaborate on your point?

 

[EyeMNathan]

Quite frankly, people here don't seem to realize an important fact:

Before the late 20th century, mass civilian casualities were considered a sad fact of war. There were no "smart" bombs, and the only way to fight a war was to hurl bombs in the general direction of the enemy, who were usually in populated cities.

Armchair Generals and Admirals on this forum would like to think theres a huge area where only civilians are, and a huge area where only military guys are. This is not the case

Judging the nuking of Japan in WW2 with the same standards we use in the 21st century makes _no_ sense. The fact of the matter is, the nukes wouldn't have forced the surrender of the Japanese if they blew up 50 soldiers in some remote outpost.

If a nuke blows up in the woods and no one is around to see it, will anyone care? There weren't 24/7 news coverage and scientists who can go on TV and say "Wow, the weapon the US has is cataclysmic! We should surrender now."

A real demonstration, with real consequences was required.

Because of the nuking of Japan, another nuke has not been used in war since.

The world is better off because of it.

Japan is better off because of it. They are now a world economic power thanks to US friendship after the war. If they hadnt surrendered, you can bet China or Russia would have occupied them, and they'd be a poverty stricken Communist nation today.

 

[botd4u]

Originally posted by: jumpr
I am sorry.

I can't speak for the rest of my countrymen, and I certainly wasn't alive during the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But I can see the hurt and the sorrow on the faces of the mourners at the remembrance ceremonies in Japan this week. What America did to Japan was Japan's 9/11. American bombers targeted civilians and relentlessly pounded Tokyo even before we dropped nukes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The bombings ended the war; sure, that's a good thing. But they also ended hundreds of thousands of lives, and prevented millions of lives from even forming in the first place. I can't fathom the destruction that American bombs imparted on Japan, and I don't think I ever want to. Speaking as an American, I am deeply shamed.

You have my deepest apologies.

loL obviously you don't know that Japanese did hella war crime,

Number 1: The NanQing Massacre, they killed about 300,000 chinese civilians, men's head cut off by katana, women the same after being raped, some people were burried alive ALIVE i say... they would even stack up the human heads as if it were a trophy and took pictures of it, lol if they didn't we wouldn't have so much evidence.

Number 2: Germ warefare, they tested new developed Germs on live people like it or not they killed alot of civilians with this shi7 too. Even today after 60 years of the war, a lot of old soldiers still suffer from the Germ's diseases because there is no cure, the other day I saw an old dude whose legs still bleeds out water and he has to wrap bandages to soak it everyday and his legs appears to be blackish/yellow until he dies

Number 3: Rapeing of women, ever heard of COMFORT WOMEN? Well I have, they would ship car loads of chinese, korean, what ever other women in trunksloads to the military camp to "COMFORT" the soldiers, mass rapeing, that's just wrong isn't it?

Number 4: They build a TEMPLE to honor their so call soldiers or what ever in world war 2 yes they honor them, they honor murderers and rapeist of the past.

Number 5: THey still won't admit some of the war crimes and aplogize for what they did,cause dumb AS$ Japs are stubborn just like that, one day it'll get them killed when world war 3 comes with mushroom clouds everywhere.

The bombs did a good job of owning them once and for all. The interesting thing is they don't teach any of that in the history text books for their children, iz like as if nothing happened during world war 2 hahhaha. Talk about alterations

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: Mursilis
BTW, a great, great book on this subject is "Downfall" by Richard B. Frank. The book won the 2000 Truman Book Award, and Mr. Frank just had a recent piece published in the Weekly Standard regarding this same topic.

There's a similarly titled book from 1995 where I got most of my information from.

Thomas B. Allen and Norman Polmar, Code-Name Downfall: The Secret Plan to Invade Japan and why Truman Dropped the Bomb (New York, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995)

Too many people have responded to my posts and i don't have much time...so...

1) To Spencer278: The signing of surrender documents is different from the actual decision to surrend. It's not B.S., read the above book.

2) To K1052: Can you give me some books to read about this? Where did you get your info? Thanks.

3) To Mursilis: When the President himself (among countless others involved in the project) voices moral concerns over using the bomb in his diary, that is pretty strong evidence that the dropping of the bomb was a moral issue, much different than any other killing in the War.

4) To Harvey: Thanks for the book, i'll try to read it when i get some time. Looks like some interesting stuff.

 

[inveterate]

FUK u u Freaking Jap,,, Try apologizing for the Rape of Nanking first and the catastrophes u commited in CHINA,,, FCUK YOU u FKIng Jap, ,A good way to start would be to stop lieing to ur children about the Inhuman things ur people did. U commit crimes then u wuss out and lie about it, wheres ur "Samurai" crap now,, Bushido my ass!! It's based off homosexuality anyway.

 

Originally posted by: inveterate
FUK u u Freaking Jap,,, Try apologizing for the Rape of Nanking first and the catastrophes u commited in CHINA,,, FCUK YOU u FKIng Jap, ,A good way to start would be to stop lieing to ur children about the Inhuman things ur people did. U commit crimes then u wuss out and lie about it, wheres ur "Samurai" crap now,, Bushido my ass!! It's based off homosexuality anyway.

Well at least you're being rational about the whole thing.

 

[firefaux]

OMG, how old are you guys? your reasons/arguments are the most childish things i've ever heard. i hope to god you guys are just teenagers. it would be sad if you were adults.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: jumpr
I am sorry.

I can't speak for the rest of my countrymen, and I certainly wasn't alive during the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But I can see the hurt and the sorrow on the faces of the mourners at the remembrance ceremonies in Japan this week. What America did to Japan was Japan's 9/11. American bombers targeted civilians and relentlessly pounded Tokyo even before we dropped nukes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The bombings ended the war; sure, that's a good thing. But they also ended hundreds of thousands of lives, and prevented millions of lives from even forming in the first place. I can't fathom the destruction that American bombs imparted on Japan, and I don't think I ever want to. Speaking as an American, I am deeply shamed.

You have my deepest apologies.

what the fvck are you apologizing for? you weren't there.

 

[IvanAndreevich]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: IvanAndreevich

Originally posted by: rchiu
Apologize means you made a mistake, but using atomic bomb was the right decision at the time, and IMHO saved more people then it killed, on both side.

You are very right and very wrong. Using the atomic bomb was a correct decision. The WAY it was used was a VERY wrong one. Care to argue against that?

Care to elaborate on your point?

I agree with the fact that the atom bomb use was beneficial. However, it could have been done with much less than 200,000 civilian casualties. How about blowing up a military base, a smaller town with military in it, etc etc? No, USA wanted revenge. Bloodthirsty bastards 🙁

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy

Originally posted by: jumpr
I am sorry.

I can't speak for the rest of my countrymen, and I certainly wasn't alive during the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But I can see the hurt and the sorrow on the faces of the mourners at the remembrance ceremonies in Japan this week. What America did to Japan was Japan's 9/11. American bombers targeted civilians and relentlessly pounded Tokyo even before we dropped nukes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The bombings ended the war; sure, that's a good thing. But they also ended hundreds of thousands of lives, and prevented millions of lives from even forming in the first place. I can't fathom the destruction that American bombs imparted on Japan, and I don't think I ever want to. Speaking as an American, I am deeply shamed.

You have my deepest apologies.

Go back and restudy your history. It was not their 9/11 and to suggest so is an insult to those who died on that day. They started a vicious war, including sneak attacks that killed thousands of people and they got their butts kicked.

That war is over. Get over it.

Have a nice day. 🙂

And when Japan didn't surrender completely enough, we killed another 100,000 people.

Nice persuasion techniques.

What do you mean surrender enough? What the cheese are you talking about? You mean we killed 100k more people after they signed on the dotted line on the USS Arizona?

it was the USS Missouri 😉

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: randumb
Hiroshima is not as clearly right or wrong as any of you guys are making it out to be. Sure, it expedited the end of the war, but we killed innocent civilians to reach that end. So why are you whining about the Japan's atrocities during the war (Rape of Nanking, etc.), when we engaged in the exact same tactics? It's a question of whether targeting civilians is morally justifiable in the face of utilitarian motives.

Is it to0 much to grasp the fact that MORE civilians would have died if we were forced to invade to end the war? Is is that hard???


:roll:

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: IvanAndreevich

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: IvanAndreevich

Originally posted by: rchiu
Apologize means you made a mistake, but using atomic bomb was the right decision at the time, and IMHO saved more people then it killed, on both side.

You are very right and very wrong. Using the atomic bomb was a correct decision. The WAY it was used was a VERY wrong one. Care to argue against that?

Care to elaborate on your point?

I agree with the fact that the atom bomb use was beneficial. However, it could have been done with much less than 200,000 civilian casualties. How about blowing up a military base, a smaller town with military in it, etc etc? No, USA wanted revenge. Bloodthirsty bastards 🙁

I think the town size was selected based on the estimated yeild of the bomb being used (just my opinion, I didn't read that anyplace). They wanted to gather information on it's destructivness, effectivness, etc.

 

[IvanAndreevich]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: IvanAndreevich

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: IvanAndreevich

Originally posted by: rchiu
Apologize means you made a mistake, but using atomic bomb was the right decision at the time, and IMHO saved more people then it killed, on both side.

You are very right and very wrong. Using the atomic bomb was a correct decision. The WAY it was used was a VERY wrong one. Care to argue against that?

Care to elaborate on your point?

I agree with the fact that the atom bomb use was beneficial. However, it could have been done with much less than 200,000 civilian casualties. How about blowing up a military base, a smaller town with military in it, etc etc? No, USA wanted revenge. Bloodthirsty bastards 🙁

I think the town size was selected based on the estimated yeild of the bomb being used (just my opinion, I didn't read that anyplace). They wanted to gather information on it's destructivness, effectivness, etc.

I agree that this may have been a factor. Testing a weapon on people.. sounds like US

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: IvanAndreevich

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: IvanAndreevich

Originally posted by: rchiu
Apologize means you made a mistake, but using atomic bomb was the right decision at the time, and IMHO saved more people then it killed, on both side.

You are very right and very wrong. Using the atomic bomb was a correct decision. The WAY it was used was a VERY wrong one. Care to argue against that?

Care to elaborate on your point?

I agree with the fact that the atom bomb use was beneficial. However, it could have been done with much less than 200,000 civilian casualties. How about blowing up a military base, a smaller town with military in it, etc etc? No, USA wanted revenge. Bloodthirsty bastards 🙁

Do you know that American dropped 1667 tons of napalm and oil bombs on Tokyo in Japan, killing 84,000, injuring 102,000 during the nights between March 9~10? If that wasn't enough show of force to make Japan surrender, what makes you think blowing up a military base or a small tiny town would make any difference.

Prior to the atomic bombing, there was the Tokyo bombing in March, there was the invasion of Okinawa in April, and after the battle of Okinawa, which resulted 100,000+ Japanese death, there was the Potsdam conference to outline the condition for Japan surrender. Japanese government headed by thier Minister of War and the heads of Army and Navny still want to wait until invasion of Japan to begin. Their plan was to inflict more casulties on the Allies so that Japan can negotiate a better deals. They hold that position, even after the Hiroshima bombing.

Even after the Nagasaki bombing, the Imperial council voted 3-3 on surrender. It was only until the emperor stepped in and broke the tie, that Japanese government decided to surrender.

Now that I presented the facts that back up my arguement that without both Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombing, Japan would not have surrendered. What is your argument that blowing up a military base, or a military target in a smaller town (assuming there are such targets, and Japanese military is dumb enough to position their base in a wide open non-civilan area to make it easy for Allies to bomb) would be sufficient enough to make Japan surrender?

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: IvanAndreevich

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: IvanAndreevich

Originally posted by: rchiu
Apologize means you made a mistake, but using atomic bomb was the right decision at the time, and IMHO saved more people then it killed, on both side.

You are very right and very wrong. Using the atomic bomb was a correct decision. The WAY it was used was a VERY wrong one. Care to argue against that?

Care to elaborate on your point?

I agree with the fact that the atom bomb use was beneficial. However, it could have been done with much less than 200,000 civilian casualties. How about blowing up a military base, a smaller town with military in it, etc etc? No, USA wanted revenge. Bloodthirsty bastards 🙁

Do you know that American dropped 1667 tons of napalm and oil bombs on Tokyo in Japan, killing 84,000, injuring 102,000 during the nights between March 9~10? If that wasn't enough show of force to make Japan surrender, what makes you think blowing up a military base or a small tiny town would make any difference.

Prior to the atomic bombing, there was the Tokyo bombing in March, there was the invasion of Okinawa in April, and after the battle of Okinawa, which resulted 100,000+ Japanese death, there was the Potsdam conference to outline the condition for Japan surrender. Japanese government headed by thier Minister of War and the heads of Army and Navny still want to wait until invasion of Japan to begin. Their plan was to inflict more casulties on the Allies so that Japan can negotiate a better deals. They hold that position, even after the Hiroshima bombing.

Even after the Nagasaki bombing, the Imperial council voted 3-3 on surrender. It was only until the emperor stepped in and broke the tie, that Japanese government decided to surrender.

Now that I presented the facts that back up my arguement that without both Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombing, Japan would not have surrendered. What is your argument that blowing up a military base, or a military target in a smaller town (assuming there are such targets, and Japanese military is dumb enough to position their base in a wide open non-civilan area to make it easy for Allies to bomb) would be sufficient enough to make Japan surrender?

:thumbsup:

 

[botd4u]

ALL JAPS DESERVE TO DIE until they do a formal apoligy for Nan Qing massacre and the other attrocities, and actually admitting they did it. If not they deserve to die.

 

[IvanAndreevich]

Originally posted by: botd4u
ALL JAPS DESERVE TO DIE until they do a formal apoligy for Nan Qing massacre and the other attrocities, and actually admitting they did it. If not they deserve to die.

ALL AMERICANS DESERVE TO DIE until they do a formal apology for Vietnam, Iraq, Hiroshima + Nagasaki and other atrocities, and actually admitting they did it. If not they deserve to die.

 

[EyeMNathan]

Originally posted by: IvanAndreevich

Originally posted by: botd4u
ALL JAPS DESERVE TO DIE until they do a formal apoligy for Nan Qing massacre and the other attrocities, and actually admitting they did it. If not they deserve to die.

ALL AMERICANS DESERVE TO DIE until they do a formal apology for Vietnam, Iraq, Hiroshima + Nagasaki and other atrocities, and actually admitting they did it. If not they deserve to die.

Are you a complete imbecile? Don't feed the trolls by playing along with them.

 

[inveterate]

Originally posted by: EyeMNathan

Originally posted by: IvanAndreevich

Originally posted by: botd4u
ALL JAPS DESERVE TO DIE until they do a formal apoligy for Nan Qing massacre and the other attrocities, and actually admitting they did it. If not they deserve to die.

ALL AMERICANS DESERVE TO DIE until they do a formal apology for Vietnam, Iraq, Hiroshima + Nagasaki and other atrocities, and actually admitting they did it. If not they deserve to die.

Are you a complete imbecile? Don't feed the trolls by playing along with them.

U deserve to Die for not recognizing the seriousness of what has been said