klauss said:
No... I'm trying to arrive to the conclusion (which I think is true - but can't prove) that dropping the A-bomb was wrong even in that era, but fear from one side, submission from another side, and pride in power from another side has made everyone shut up.
Sure, fear is exactly what prompted the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Fear that victory would come only with the complete destruction of the Japanese. And why did we think that? Was it because we'd spent 4 years fighting them to the last man in every engagment? Was it because US observation planes were photographing women and children learning how to use polearms?
No, you're right. We felt the need to show the world how strong we were after completely crushing both Nazi Germany and every off-island(and most of their home defenses) asset Japan had.
Or, we could prove the Japanese that further resistance was pointless. Not only did we not have to land troops to finish the job, we could prove our mastery of the atom over every japanese city and completely erase them from history.
The desired effects of the bomb were psychological, and in the end they were completely borne out. (This is why the crews of the bombers still say they would do it again)
Not at all. Radioactive fallout is killing people even today. It's not only far-reaching, but also long-lasting. Let me find references about it I can quote... later.
So is unexploded ordinance from every war we've used high explosives in.
(Case in point, they found unexploded mortar rounds in the downtown area of the city I live in, leftover unshipped munitions from WW2.)
And I just said it was wrong too.
I'm not going to debate the practice, as it was accepted by everyone involved at the time.
I don't know. I'm not in such a situation. Those situations are the kind that you can't predict: when the time comes, you make your decision, and it may surprise even yourself. I might be surprised, were I to find myself in such a position, to choose 'c' or even 'b'... who knows... none of them seem reasonable to me. I wouldn't have started the war in the first place.
But sure as hell, whatever my choice was, I wouldn't sleep at night.
See, on paper, in a very black and white sense, it's a very obvious choice.
A) Hundreds of thousands, if not millions of casualties(mostly KIA) on both sides. Likely the near total genocide of the Japanese.
B)Hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Japanese casualties. The only american loss for this one is the expenditure of industry making the munitions we use to erase them.
C) Tens of thousand dead, a week interval to allow surrender, and then tens of thousands again. No loss for the attacking force.
I may not be able to back my opinion with papers and formal stuff. But I know what I'm saying. I don't want to fight over this... but it's not just the act of dropping the bomb. It's later not caring about having done so... no remorse... what kind of people kills millions of lives without showing remorse? Well, that's the kind of people making most decisions around the world... during WW2, and presently. I don't like that.
In regards to my above assertion
The dropping of the atomic bomb is literally the only sensible thing to do. And the 'monsters' you presume to judge because they had the fortitude to unleash horrors every single one of them realized, and the willingness to do so again after having witnessed the result, saw it as the only real option as well.(And I respect every single one of them. God only knows the nightmares and terrors these men lived with. But they're horrible amoral monsters, I forgot)
And I could find plenty of papers and DOD documents and so forth if I felt like I needed to.
But the fact is, the popular thing to do is condemn the United States of America on every possible front. Things we do now, things we've done, things my grandchildren plan on doing. But it's usually coming from people who haven't really bothered themselves to learn more than that the US did something to someone somewhere and we can call them all sorts of terrible things for having done so.