The original estimated ratio of us to them, on Kyushu, based on best intelligence around Jun 45 was a 3-1 superiority in our favor, about what is minimum for a successful opposed landing. By late July, ULTRA intercepts showed the actual ratio was to be around 1 to 1, a recipe for disaster. See Drea’s MACARTHUR’S ULTRA.And, the United States had broken some of the Japanese codes and we knew from reading their radio communications that the Japanese military had figured out which beaches we would be landing on, and had heavily reinforced their defending forces. So, that instead of our landings being merely difficult, our landings would be heavily opposed.
So far, we’re still hearing that using the atomic bomb would be immoral. So we’re hearing what we should not do (or have done). But we’re not hearing what the United States should do / have done.
We’re waiting.
Yes, according to Catholic theology as I understand it to be, the bombing of Dresden was morally wrong as was the dropping of the A-Bomb on Japan. they were both contrary to God’s law.As well as the conventional bombing of Japanese cities. Which was more wrong?
OK, but it wasn’t just Dresden. Allied bombing of Japan was, as far as I know, pretty much all designed to start widespread fires in the cities built chiefly of wooden structures. There was no precision bombing. Germany had more “military” targets available, but there was no precision bombing there either.Yes, according to Catholic theology as I understand it to be, the bombing of Dresden was morally wrong as was the dropping of the A-Bomb on Japan. they were both contrary to God’s law.
Now you ask the question as to which was more wrong. That’s like asking, someting like:: If a man kills his wife with a knife and his son with a shotgun, which was more wrong - to kill his wife with a knife or to kill his son with a shotgun? Is there really a decent answer to such a question? For such a question, which really does not deserve an answer, I would guess that the one which caused the most damage and the most suffering would be the most wrong?
You are correct. Lemay took over from the previous commander of what became 20th AF, to improve the bombing stats. He used extreme low level drops and saturation with napalm incendiaries. He basically destroyed the 5 cities he concentrated on, with the firebombings of Tokyo causing more deaths than the nuclear bombs.OK, but it wasn’t just Dresden. Allied bombing of Japan was, as far as I know, pretty much all designed to start widespread fires in the cities built chiefly of wooden structures. There was no precision bombing. Germany had more “military” targets available, but there was no precision bombing there either.
On the Catholic theory of the just war doctrine, I think that CAF has a pretty good discussion of what is and what is not allowed.OK, but it wasn’t just Dresden. Allied bombing of Japan was, as far as I know, pretty much all designed to start widespread fires in the cities built chiefly of wooden structures. There was no precision bombing. Germany had more “military” targets available, but there was no precision bombing there either.
Well, I’m not saying you are wrong about Catholic moral theology. (I find it hard to see why people get worked up by wars such as Vietnam and Iraq when they are far more limited in scope and tactics and goals than was WW-II) I’m just noting what actually happened. It seems that once the war started there were not a lot of good choices.On the Catholic theory of the just war doctrine, I think that CAF has a pretty good discussion of what is and what is not allowed.
catholic.com/library/just_war_doctrine_1.asp
Any deliberate attempt by a government to put pressure on enemy governments by attacking civilian targets is morally wrong, whaterver the means used, according to my understanding of Catholic teachings.
Well that is there opinion isn’t it.And all we have to do is to take a look at what Catholic theologians have declared on the issue: The dropping of the A-Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was contrary to God’s Law.
As Paul Fussell wrote, in a short article, “Thank God for the Atomic Bomb”.Well that is there opinion isn’t it.
I have known a few WWII veterans that are elated that these theologians and catechism pontificators were not the ones making the decisions in 1945. And these gentlemen never once waxed remorseful regarding their own opinions crying crocodile tears for the poor Japanese old men women and children and America’s loss of honor and shame for nuking the Japanese. They wanted the war finished; with or without an invasion of Japans Home Island and without was a whole lot better. If that meant the bomb that was too bad for Japanese, after all they started the war. What it meant for these veterans they were going home with their lives and all their body parts intact.
Regarding the catechism, just war theory, and the pontifications of any pope these men I did know couldn’t care a whole lot. They had a very practical attitude…what ever it took to stay alive was necessary to do so; you did it as long as the code of military justice would leave you alone. And yes they were very Roman Catholic up to the day they died. You see just war wasn’t just a theory to these guys they were at the bayonet point and didn’t like it one bit. Most of these fellows waited to be drafted. They loved their country enough to obey the laws and pay taxes but they were not the type to run out and volunteer to get killed. Fighting and having to shoot somebody didn’t motivate them at all but they did want to stay alive and were willing to be conscripted for Uncle Sam. And here friends is the rub…they expected Uncle Sam to do whatever was necessary to keep them alive. If they were going to let Uncle Sam put them in a situation where they could get killed reciprocity meant Uncle Sam needed to do everything he could do to keep that from happening. They said they had accepted death as a very possible reality given the job Uncle Sam assigned them to do and they saw a lot of corpses of very young boys so by heaven Uncle Sam was expected to move mountains if necessary to keep the possibility of their own dieing to a minimum.
My knowledge is not from a large survey it comes from listening to the stories and table talk of my father his brothers and my mother’s brothers. And I am, also thankful they did get home in one piece to have lived and fallen in love and raise yet another generation. If that was evil then so be it.
If you think they were wrong in their considered opinions then just remember this the people who make the decisions live in the fallen world where nothing is ever clear and for every decision made the pros and cons must be weighted and outcomes are not completely known and you’ll be damned if you do and damned if you don’t….well we have to muddle through it all don’t we and in the end just hope for mercy.
Sorry for the rant but it seems some folks get way to theoretical.
But as GKC has asked, repeatedly, HOW!I admire how nice and neat death is packaged here is. Well, if we didn’t nuke em, we would have starved em to death anyway. Good luck with finding this fact. No one really will know what could have happened, had we tried an alternative, will we?
Pushing a button is a monkey’s job, human beings are supposed to be on a higher level than that.
I don’t believe the only options left to the U.S consisted of : How should we kill them? We were not going to lose the war. Japan was not going to win the war and we both knew that. Maybe with a blockade, they would slowly come to the realization that defeat was imminent, before starving. At least it would be by their own decision. War does not and should not include win at any cost, by including the intentional killing of innocent elderly and children, which by the way is a big no according to the Geneva Convention. This could have been handled differently, and that is the only message from me.
And they would have been in possession of Manchuria and lots of other tropical paradises, and their attendent native populations . As also, in SE Asia, around 350,000-400,000 POWS (the bridge on the River Kwai guys). Who were scheduled to be wiped out when the Brits began their land push into the area, starting in early Sep.But as GKC has asked, repeatedly, HOW!
The a-bombs can only be seen as immoral if there was a better alternative. Most people who’ve studied the issue believe that any alternative strategy (invasion, blockade, continued conventional bombing) would have lead to MORE deaths, both U.S> and Japanese.
Let’s say, for example, the U.S. decided to do nothing after Okinawa. Just sit on our ships and leave the Japanese alone. No bombing, nothing.
We know the Japanese leadership had no intention of surrendering (the U.S. was reading their codes). The Japanese would have been left on their islands, completely unable to produce enough food to support themselves.
Slowly, over a year or two, tens of millions of Japanese would have starved to death. The old, sick and children would have gone first, as the Japanese would have diverted food stuffs to the military.
Is that better than the a-bombs?
God Bless
This is false. at least according to Catholic teaching.The a-bombs can only be seen as immoral if there was a better alternative.
Yes, that’s basically what I thought. People who were targetting civilians and destroying civilian areas did not care one iota about the morality of doing such. Of course, such a thing is contrary to God’s law, and it is the law of God that is important and pre-eminent in my opinion, and not the law of man.Regarding the catechism, just war theory, and the pontifications of any pope these men I did know couldn’t care a whole lot. .
That is one theologians opinion, it doesn’t even state who.This is false. at least according to Catholic teaching.
If you would take the time to read the CAF discussion on the just war, you would see that the use of the A-Bomb was wrong, not on the grounds that there was a better alternative, but on the grounds that it is wrong to target civilians.
catholic.com/library/just_war_doctrine_1.asp
The question, then, is if the atomic bombings were “indiscriminate”. Notice, the Catechism doesn’t condemn all bombing of cities or all use of atomic weapons.2314 "Every act of war directed to the indiscriminate destruction of whole cities or vast areas with their inhabitants is a crime against God and man, which merits firm and unequivocal condemnation."110 A danger of modern warfare is that it provides the opportunity to those who possess modern scientific weapons especially atomic, biological, or chemical weapons - to commit such crimes.
Yes. That’s why I gave a link to the article on How Japan tried to surrender:Rear Admral Ellis Zacharias.wrote in Look Mag…May 23,1950 that the Jap govenment were trying to get word out that they wanted to surrender…they contacted Pius X11 and Pius contacted Washington but it was spiked…
Forrestal wasn’t mysteriously found dead. He jumped from a hospital window.Rear Admral Ellis Zacharias.wrote in Look Mag…May 23,1950 that the Jap govenment were trying to get word out that they wanted to surrender…they contacted Pius X11 and Pius contacted Washington but it was spiked…Sec.of the Navy Forrestal was also notified but the insiders hated him for his anti-communism and he was rebuffed.the OSS took it seriously…but again forces inside the demoncrat party had other plans…a very distubing testament by the Admiral…this article is also in the book .".The church in the world"Forrestal was mysteriously found dead a short time later…a convenient suicide (!)…THe Reds only entered the pacific war a few days before Japan gave up…and then demanded half of Japan as they did in Germany and Berlin.but there they met up with the great MacArthur who said no way…and he kept the Russians out of Japan…later as military gov.he led Japan into the 20th century…unions,women right to vote,education for all etc…he is revered to this day by the Japanese and hated to this day by the left in america…At least the Gipper destroyed the evil empire…what is happening in Georgia is just smoke and mirrors…there is peace in our time…tomorrow I am going on a picnic with the tooth fairy…
Sure. And RCs worship Mary and “The Death Cookie” is a cogent critic of the Holy Eucharist.Yes. That’s why I gave a link to the article on How Japan tried to surrender:
rense.com/general72/jee.htm
And it was proven that no one helped him jump?Forrestal wasn’t mysteriously found dead. He jumped from a hospital window.
I would not agree that RC’s worship Mary. Although Catholics do pray to Mary, she is venerated by Catholics, but not worshiped.Sure. And RCs worship Mary and “The Death Cookie” is a cogent critic of the Holy Eucharist.
Oh, dear.I would not agree that RC’s worship Mary. Although Catholics do pray to Mary, she is venerated by Catholics, but not worshiped.