Atomic Bomb did not save lives

[John_Pascendi]

The simple fact was that American fire bombing could, and did, kill 100,000 people in Japan. In Europe, the USAAF was flying 1000 bomber raids. Back to Japan, the B-29 was coming into service. The P-80/F-80 jet fighter was coming into service.

Then the Russians entered the war against Japan. So an invasion was not required. Atomic bombs were not required.

Peace,
Ed

The whole issue is that Russia wanted a passage way thru asia and thus planted their agents in the FDR administration…Stimson,Hiss.Hopkins,etc…it was they who pushed for Japan to first be pushed into attacking the USA…then to turn china into a communist gulag. Russia never had a chance to do to Japan whatt Ike and Patton did to Berlin…re: allowing the russian troops to invade and rape thousands of defenseless women and then divide the nation. They ran up against our greatest general.>MacArthur…he refused to allow russian troops into japan thus saving that city but the traitors in washington had their way and tossed those atomic bombs.All they had to do is drop a bomb on one of the worthless little islands in the pacific but…no way. after the bombs were dropped work began to sell out china to the reds and with Marshalls and Trumans help it happened…and now for 50 years this most terrible of dictatorships has flooded out marketplace with their dangerous slave labor goods and presto…our recession is going full force…shhh,must not mention what I just said…too many of our public servents have stock in this once great nation…lets change Tigers name to Cheetah …or is that cheater??? Pas

 

[cthulhubryan]

It must be remembered that WWII was not just a war against some rogue nations, but rather was a war against evil itself. It is unfortunate that Roosevelt and Truman were soft on communism and allowed many communists in their administrations. Had we gone on strictly moral grounds we would have rearmed the wehrmacht (NOT Waffen SS units) and marched on Russia, even using atomics if required. We failed in the moment and as a result many more millions were killed by Stalin, who was always a much greater evil than Hitler, Mussolini or Japan.

Using atomic weapons upon Japan was morally offensive, but it was the least morally offensive option.

An invasion of the home islands would have killed many more Japanese as well as killing more Americans. Those Americans certainly didn’t deserve to die. While many of the Japanese who died were innocents, they did believe their emperor to be divine and allowed he and his generals to commit some of the worst atrocities ever committed by man.

Had we invaded the home islands, the Japanese race would likely have followed the dodo bird into extinction.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Edwest2,

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Would that it had some fact to back it up!

This effort at revisionist history on the 65 anniversary of the first atomic bomb being dropped on Japan is really sad, and truly counter-productive. This distortion needs to meet the realities of historical fact and then be dismissed for the cowardly statement it is.

The simple fact was that American fire bombing could, and did, kill 100,000 people in Japan. In Europe, the USAAF was flying 1000 bomber raids. Back to Japan, the B-29 was coming into service. The P-80/F-80 jet fighter was coming into service.

Then the Russians entered the war against Japan. So an invasion was not required. Atomic bombs were not required.

Peace,
Ed

Let’s look at three sets of facts:

1- During the early part of 1945, Japan was making dramatic efforts to stop the approaching US forces from coming closer to their homeland. Here is a link to give you the major historical events in chronological order. Japan had given every indication that it would fight to the last man - and battles like Iwo Jama proved this was not a vain boast.

2- The first atomic bomb was dropped on August 6, 1945.

3- Russia declared war on Japan on August 8, 1945.

Russia’s primary emphasis in declaring war on Japan was in securing territory and territorial waters. Virtually 90% of their efforts had been mobilized to fight Germany - there was little if anything to spare for fighting Japan. On April 30, Hitler kills himself and on May 8 Germany surrenders. Had Russia declared war on Japan then - you might have something to talk about - but, they were happy to gobble up as much territory as they could and let the US continue on with Japan.

President Truman did the right thing - and God bless him for the decision he made. His decision to use the atomic bomb saved thousands of US lives. It really is as simple and straightforward as this. Please recall that not only did Japan attack the US but it also attacked China and butchered its people. They also attacked the various countries of south-east Asia, murdering and enslaving its populations. The only thing that these butchers understood was raw power. And on 8/6/45 they had a dose of it they were totally unprepared to receive. Note: they did not surrender the next day!

Yes, there are consequences - but, do not think that this genii that was let out of the bottle on 8/6/45 would have forever remained imprisoned if we had not used the Atomic Bomb. German scientists were hard at work to prepare a similar bomb. Russians coming in to Germany were eager to capture as many German scientists as possible. Even without stealing the secrets via the Rosenbergs, Russia would have undoubtedly produced a nuclear device before long…but, that is just speculation.

God bless

 

[thegreypiper]

1. The Bomb sure as heck saved American lives. 2) Despite the modern lies, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both legitimate military targets. One was Imperial Navy HQ, the other was the primary shipyard. 3) Again,would you feel better if those people had been incinerated in a firebombing? Or shot in an invasion? 4) Dam right we wanted to keep the Russians out. Something wrong with that? Stalin murderer more people than Hitler. 5) Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind .

 

[tjm190]

1. Despite the modern lies, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both legitimate military targets. One was Imperial Navy HQ, the other was the primary shipyard.

I am always perplexed by this argument- DC is the head of our government and military, so if, shall we say the Taliban, were to manage the unthinkable and nuke/dirty bomb it, would you consider it a horrific act of terrorism or a legitimate military strike?

 

[Redratfish]

Atomic bombs could not possibly be required. The use of atomic weapons is always morally repugnant. It is a gravely evil act to deliberately target innocent civilians in the conduct of war. It can never be admitted, and is totally irreconcilable with the Just War theory.

The use of atomic weapons against civilians is nothing short of a war crime. The attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki are some of the worst crimes committed during the 20th century. It stuns me that anyone who calls themselves Catholic would defend these acts.

What everyone seems to forget is that these civillians were soldiers too. They were being taught by the government to shoot rifles, use bamboo stalks as swords, and toss themselves (loaded with explosives) under tanks. The “civillians” were as civillian as man threatening to shoot the president.

I will defend them because my grandfather was part of the group that would have invaded Japan had the bombs not worked. The civillians were just as ready as terrorist today are to kill themselves in what they considered to be a Holy War. The fact we only had to kill 100-150 thousands of them, vs every single one, is amazing. Anyone who thinks the bombs are foolish obviously need to read more about how Japan prepared for the invasion, and the fact that the Japanese did not surrender.

 

[bradleesargent]

Read the book by “If I Perish” by Ahn E. Sok, a famous Christian from Korea who was imprisoned for her faith by the Japanese who required Christians in Korea to bow down before a pagan idol before entering church or go to prison. After a long seriese of miraculous events, she prophesied before the Japanese Imperial court that if they did not put a stop to the persecution of Christians in Korea that God himself would rain down fire and brimstone on Japan! It was an amazing miraculous revelation to the Japanese Imperial Court to reveal to them what would happen. Ahn E. Sok was a pastor’s wife in southern California until she passed away some time ago.

amazon.com/If-I-Perish-Esther-Kim/dp/0802430791

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Tjm190,

Do not continue in perplexity!

The British saw DC in the same light - in 1814 - and did what they could do to destroy it during a declared war. It is our job to proctect our country and do all that we can to make sure that this does not happen.

We really are at war with the Taliban - and ultimately, we will do what we think is necessary to protect the lives of our citizens and shoulders. We have a trackrecord here.

Attacking the World Trade Center and the Pentegon were acts of terrorism - and a clear distinction needs to be made.

God bless

I am always perplexed by this argument- DC is the head of our government and military, so if, shall we say the Taliban, were to manage the unthinkable and nuke/dirty bomb it, would you consider it a horrific act of terrorism or a legitimate military strike?

 

[sedonaman]

My understanding is that not only the atom bombs, but also conventional methods such as the firebombing and carpet bombing are all against Catholic moral teaching not because of the number of casualties they inflict but because of their indiscriminate nature.

 

[tjm190]

Hi, Tjm190,

Do not continue in perplexity!

The British saw DC in the same light - in 1814 - and did what they could do to destroy it during a declared war. It is our job to proctect our country and do all that we can to make sure that this does not happen.

We really are at war with the Taliban - and ultimately, we will do what we think is necessary to protect the lives of our citizens and shoulders. We have a trackrecord here.

Attacking the World Trade Center and the Pentegon were acts of terrorism - and a clear distinction needs to be made.

God bless

I’m not saying that it’s going to happen (and I picked the Taliban because, unlike Al Qaeda, they would be considered a legitimate entity that may licitly wage war), but by the previous poster’s definition a city with military value is a military target- so by his definition a nuke in DC would constitute a legitimate act of war, rather than a war crime.

 

[The_Old_Medic]

Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki had large military installations within and close to those cities. They were also major manufacturing centers, manufacturing war materials that the Japanese Armed Forces depended on.

Those factors alone made the legitimate military targets.

And you might want to consider that the total casualties from both Hiroshima AND Nagasaki did not equal those of Tokyo, which was only bomber with conventional weapons.

The estimates of the causalties from an invasion of Japan were approximately 500,00-1,000,000 of the invaders, and up to 20,000,00 Japanese. That would have been obscene.

I just love to see people look back, with all of the knowledge that we have today (including access to Japanese government documents that were NOT available prior to 1945) to justify their opinion that this bombing was not necessary. They are attempting to impose an obligation on the people of that era, for not having knowledge that was simply unavailable to them.

 

[sedonaman]

…
I just love to see people look back, with all of the knowledge that we have today (including access to Japanese government documents that were NOT available prior to 1945) to justify their opinion that this bombing was not necessary. They are attempting to impose an obligation on the people of that era, for not having knowledge that was simply unavailable to them.

 

[lutherlic]

Dr. Paul Kengor posted the following excellent piece today in Catholic Exchange:

When They Dropped the Bomb: Remembering August 1945

This week marks 65 years since the United States dropped the atomic bomb. On August 6, 1945, President Harry Truman delivered a “rain of ruin” upon Hiroshima, Japan, with Nagasaki hit three days later, killing 100,000 to 200,000.

Truman’s objective was to compel surrender from an intransigent enemy that refused to halt its naked aggression. The barbarous mentality of 1940s Japan was beyond belief. An entire nation lost its mind, consumed by a ferocious militarism and hell-bent on suicide. Facing such fanaticism, Truman felt no alternative but to use the bomb. As George C. Marshall put it, the Allies needed something extraordinary “to shock [the Japanese] into action.” Nothing else was working. Japan was committed to a downward death spiral, with no end in sight.

“We had to end the war,” said a desperate Marshall later. “We had to save American lives.”

Evidence shows the bomb achieved precisely that, saving millions of lives, not merely Americans but Japanese. The Japanese themselves acknowledged this, from the likes of Toshikazu Kase to Emperor Hirohito himself. Kase was among the high-level officials representing Japan at its formal surrender aboard the USS Missouri. “The capitulation of Japan,” Kase said definitively, “saved the lives of several million men.”

As we mark the anniversary of this period, we should first and foremost think about those boys-our fathers, grandfathers, great grandfathers, uncles, brothers, some now in their 80s and 90s-who lived lives of faith and freedom and family because of Truman’s decision. I’ve met many of them. Anytime I find myself in conversation with a World War II vet, I ask where he was when the first bomb hit.

“I’ll tell you where I was!” snapped George Oakes of Churchill, Pennsylvania. “I was a 22-year-old kid on a troop transport preparing to invade the Japanese mainland… We were sitting there as targets for kamikazes when they dropped the first one. All they told us was that there was a new weapon brought into the war that landed on Japan proper, and everything we were planning was on hold. A couple of days later, they dropped the other one.”

Oakes, who served with the Army combat engineers, didn’t want to die. “I was engaged to an absolutely beautiful girl named Virginia. All I knew was that I wanted to go home.”

George remembered the U.S. military’s frustration in striking Japan mercilessly in conventional bombing raids. In one case, Allied bombs killed 100,000 people in Tokyo in one night. As George Marshall noted, “It had seemingly no effect whatsoever… [Japanese] morale was affected, so far as we could tell, not at all.”

George Oakes saw that firsthand. “We were bombing the hell out of Japan with B-29s. Every Japanese soldier and person was ready to die for the Emperor. And they weren’t surrendering.”

No, they weren’t. In fact, even after both atomic bombs, the Japanese War Cabinet remained deadlocked on whether to give up. The Emperor broke the stalemate.

“Boy, were we thrilled,” recalled George when they got the news on their boat. They were spared an apocalyptic invasion that would have made Normandy look like a picnic at the beach.

When I asked George if he felt gratitude toward President Truman, he responded with some colorful imagery: “Am I thankful? If Harry Truman walked down my street right now, I’d kiss his bare rear-end.”

Instead of storming Japan with guns and grenades and flamethrowers, dodging kamikazes, shooting and stabbing and slicing and dicing not only Japanese men but screaming women-and-children-turned-combatants, George went home-to peace. He became a charter member of East Pittsburgh VFW Post 5008, and worked for Westinghouse for 44 years. He served as scoutmaster for Boy Scout Troop 98 and was a founding member, Eucharistic minister, and greeter at St. John Fisher Church. He was a frequent caller to Pittsburgh radio talk-shows and contributor to “Letters to the Editor” sections, which is where he caught my attention when I tracked him down in August 1995.

Oh-and he married Virginia.

George Oakes of Churchill died on Dec. 12, 2001, at age 78, an extra half-century after Harry Truman dropped the bomb, and arguably because Harry Truman dropped the bomb. For George and Virginia, married 55 years, that meant the added gift of life to three sons. He was buried with honors amid loved ones-not ripped to bloody, smoldering chunks of flesh on the death-strewn soil of Imperial Japan.

George Oakes was far from alone. There were countless American boys-turned-men, husbands and dads and granddads, in the same boat.

 

[GKC]

The subject was covered pretty extensively in this thread:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=242594&highlight=Atomic+Bomb+in+WW+II

Thanks for posting that link. I spent a lot of time in that thread, the subject of the atomic bombs being a hobby of mine. I was wondering if the same sort of lack historical knowledge would occur again, as the anniversary of the end of the war approached. I see it did.

I won’t get into it again(it’s pointless), beyond saying that the use of the bombs, historically, was the less costly method to en the war of any that could have been used. As I have done many times, I suggest a reading of Frank’ DOWNFALL, the best overall history of what happened and why, for a start to comprehend why that’s so. And also one might Newman’s TRUMAN AND THE HIROSHIMA CULT and ENOLA GAY AND THE COURT OF HISTORY Gruhl’s IMPERIAL JAPAN’S WORLD WAR TWO:1931-1945, Maddox’s WEAPONS FOR VICTORY: THE HIROSHIMA DECISION. A book edited by Maddox, HIROSHIMA IN HISTORY: THE MYTHS OF REVISIONISM is especially good, but DOWNFALL is essential.

History is complicated and what I have been expounding for so long is not an argument against the RC position on weapons of mass destruction. It’s the actual history of what happened and what was most likely to follow, given the best info available. I’ve been studying this for around 10 years. Much of what I might say is in that lengthy thread linked above but I doubt many will follow it through.

GKC

 

[GKC]

This subject was extensively debated in several previous threads, including this one. For a historical review of why the bombs were used and why they had to be, see these books which were recommended by poster GKC several times, including the post quoted below:

“On that last question above, see Wilcox’s JAPAN’S SECRET WAR. Not sure I believe all of it, but it is interesting.

On the issue of the bombs, generally, I’m not interested in starting the debate again, either. I did enough of it before, here, and am not likely to do it again, in detail. But if you want the reasons why the bombs were used, and why they had to be, without the revisionist slant of someone like Alperovitz, the best read is Frank’s DOWNFALL. And also HIROSHIMA IN HISTORY: THE MYTHS OF REVISIONISM (ed. Maddux), Maddux’s WEAPONS FOR VICTORY and Newman’s TRUMAN AND THE HIROSHIMA CULT are both excellent. For the relevance of Okinawa to the idea of defeating Japan, and the use of the bombs, read Feifer’s TENNOZAN. Or read it anyway; it’s the best single book on fighting the Japanese in the Pacific that I know of. For revisionist mythology, Alperovitz is the place.

BTW, I never argue against a RC accepting and affirming what the RCC says on this matter. But historical facts are historical facts.

GKC”

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=302370&highlight=hiroshima

Well, here I am, being quoted. Some of my favorite titles, plus Alperovitz

Thanks.

GKC

 

[GKC]

How much damage did conventional fire bombing cause to Tokyo? In Europe, there were thousand bomber raids. It may seem wrong, but the same could have been done over Japan. Once the Russians were done in Europe, they began to move onto Japanese claimed territory. The Japanese were not going to win a two front war.

God bless,
Ed

The same was done over Japan. Repeatedly. I gave many of the stats in the thread linked to in a previous post, done 2 years ago; things done, things that were about to be done. These things never change; that is, historical knowledge is still at a premium in such discussions.

GKC

 

[GKC]

deleted. I replied to an antique post.

GKC

 

[GKC]

Well, here I am, being quoted. Some of my favorite titles, plus Alperovitz

Thanks.

GKC

Also, thanks for the link to that thread, too, JimG. That was two years I did the same arguments. Never stops.

GKC

 

[thegreypiper]

I am always perplexed by this argument [Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both legitimate military targets. ]- DC is the head of our government and military, so if, shall we say the Taliban, were to manage the unthinkable and nuke/dirty bomb it, would you consider it a horrific act of terrorism or a legitimate military strike?

First, the nature of the attack, nuclear or otherwise, is irrelevant, whether a ‘dirty bomb’ or a jihadist with a dynamite vest. Second, the Taliban is* per se* a terrorist organisation, no different than Hezbullah, the IRA, or the FALN. Therefore, any attack by the Taliban on US territory or personnel is a terrorist strike. In contrast, if during WW2 Germany or Japan had managed to attack our capitol, yes, that would have been a ‘legitimate’ military strike.

Finally, why are you ‘perplexed’ at the proposition that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were military targets? Do you deny that entirely, or do you not understand the assertions? They were military targets, just as Pearl Harbor was. Period.

Next?

 

[thegreypiper]

A brief follow-up:

GKC: I believe you stated this in last year’s thread:

*According to Frank (pp. 17-18), prior to 10 March 1945, air raids on Tokyo had totaled 1292 deaths. In the single night of 9-10 March, the deaths were a minimum of 79,466, by count. Which includes only identified, buried, cremated or claimed bodies. *

It is perhaps relevant to note that the difference in casualties and effectiveness of the B-29 bombing raids were due directly to Gen. LeMay’s drastic change in strategy; from high-altitude conventional bombing to low-altitude incendiary bombing.

It seems the B-29s were just not that good at high-altitude night-time bombing, but mercilessly effective in spreading incendiaries in a city built of wood and paper.

It is also interesting to note that in these last several months of the war, the Japanese Air Force was virtually obliterated, and actual bombing of cities would be preceded by Allied leafleting – Japanese would actually be told that their city was going to be bombed in a matter of days, and that they should evacuate, and further, that the war was directed not at them, but at the military and the ruling military junta. It is difficult to imagine a more considerate bombing campaign.