Hassun

So, the day is almost upon us. This Saturday sixty years ago Hiroshima was leveled by "Little Boy" and
next Tuesday sixty years ago Nagasaki suffered a similar fate.

I think some thoughts from the AO members would be in order. This would be a good
chance for some of us to show we do have something called intellect.

It is a broad subject, we can talk about the effects of the bombs(s) (both physical, psychological, cold war etc.),
the start of the nuclear era (although it had already started by then of course), radiation, anime/manga/films and much more.



[I am aware that this could turn into a debate but because I'm not sure I'll just post it here...]

__________________

LenMiyata

Grumble Grumbe... (smells smoke!!!) Grumble!!!

Moving to the Debate Forum...

__________________

Dreadhawk

I think it sucked, I mean, when I went to Japan, I wisited the memorial center they had there, and the reproductions and models they had were amazing, but really showed how devestating the bombings were. There was a model of two school children, almost seemingly melting, i couldn't stand to look at it, it looked so real. I don't think they deserved to be hit with a a-bomb, but I can't say we could have just sat and done nothing after they bombed Pearl Harbor...

__________________

narrator

I'm still of the opinon that the bombings were some of America's darkest moments in time, not being around during that era i obviously can't say much about the state of mind everyone had following the events. But i know alot of people here felt terrible about what we did and that showed when we sent our boys over there to help rebuild and share cultures ect. It isn't an incident that you can just simply say "i'm sorry" to but i do think that time heals all wounds and that Japan and the U.S. are doing alot better with eachother.

__________________

Metsuki Anba

I don't think that everyone is over it. My grandma (lives in Japan) was around when that happened and said it was probably to saddest day of her life, and she lost a few friends. She's still angry about it and doesn't like the fact that I came to live in America, because I lived with her for 5 years when I was a kid. I don't think that America made the right choice when dropping the bombs, there were other ways to get back at them that weren't as devastating. The U.S. wanted a quick solution to a problem that could be solved just as well with a little more time and effort.

__________________

Hassun

How many lives do you think it would have taken to invade Japan?
Many more than the amount of lives te atomic bombs took.

Many military leaders in Japan were all for fighting 'till the very last person.
The destruction would have been total.

On top of that, it is likely that the Soviets would have attacked Japan from the other side as well. Picture what happened to Germany also happening to Japan.

__________________

Metsuki Anba

So you think that the atomic bombs were a better solution than invasion of Japan? I think you have flawed logic. You could never have known how many people would have died in an invasion unless it had actually happened. Things like that are never predictable.

__________________

Hokuro

We have been invading Japan before the A-bomb was dropped because they joined allies with Germany, & thus they attacked Pearl Harbor, giving us permission to set flight to the Anola Gay which dropped the bomb.

__________________
AO is my home, & always will be.

Silverskater145

I fully understand what you mean, and I give you my condolences. However, "little more time and effort" means thousands of more American lives at stake. Granted, America choose the easy way out to save more Americans, but it's war, what do you expect?

__________________

Hassun

Have you ever seen the geographical structure of Japan?

Of course I can not know how many would have died but as a reference, check how many casualties it took to conquer Okinawa, and then multiply it a couple of times.

So yes, I am pretty convinced that an invasion of Japan itself would have cost alot more human lives than the two a-bombs combined. Not to mention the damage of the country.

__________________

LenMiyata

Grumble Grumble Grumble

There is simply no doubt, that had the planned invasion of Japan had taken place, the casualties on both side would have been horrendous. Just before the announced surrender of Japan, the local Civil Defence had high school and grade school children practicing to stab the enemy with bamboo spears, and to wear explosive satchel charges to become 'human bombs'

Now as far as the actual motivations for the use of the Bomb. At this point in WWII, because of the goverment propaganda used by both sides, the popular justification at the time was a race war, plain and simple. The idea of 'Not using the bomb' for humanitarian reasons was seriously considered. Also, at the time, the long term effects of radiation and nuclear fallout was unknown by the military and never considered a factor in the use of the Bomb.

It is obvious from the historical records that the use of the bomb was rushed. The 'Little Boy' bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima was a enriched Uranium based bomb, while the 'Fat Man' bomb used on Nagasaki was a Plutonium implosion device. But only one bomb was tested at the Trinity site, which was the implosion device. This means that the first bomb dropped on Hiroshima was a design THAT WAS NEVER TESTED!!! Now when the Manhatten Projected was started, it was budgeted as the most expensive military project in the history of the world. During WWII, the only military project to exceed the Manhatten project in costs was the 'Euro Bomber' development which led to the development of the B-29 (which dropped the bomb) and the backup B-32. So what was the motivation for deploying untested, the most expensive weapon of the war??? The general thoughts are...

1. To get Japan to surrender before Russia entered the war against Japan, and keep it from capturing Japanese occupied territory. (This was unsuccessful, as Russia did declare war against Japan in the closing weeks of the war, and seized a lot of territory)

2. To influence Russia on the strength of US military power. At the time, in negotiations for control of the captured territories in Europe, Russia was already consolidating control of Eastern Europe, and setting up the boundries that would later be known as the 'Iron Curtain'

__________________