Fr Miscamble defending atomic bomb

  • Thread starter Thread starter CatholicAggie19
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Warfare is by nature profligate with death.

You can either be profligate toward the death of the enemy, or sit on your hands while the enemy is profligate with your death and death for your co-citizens and allies. I don’t see why the second is more meritorious than the first.

Nor do I accept the “don’t hurt women/don’t hurt children/don’t hurt nature” hymn of the postmodern generation. In modern war EVERYBODY is a potential combatant. And nature is far more resistant to damage than we are.

Although we can never compare numbers, we can safely say that starving Japan into submission, or watching the Russians invade, would both also have had a very high human cost.

ICXC NIKA
 
In general, I prefer my formulation. Consistent with achieving the objectives of the war.

Your conclusion is correct.
 
Japan was given the opportunity to surrender before the bomb was dropped. They declined.

The bombs were dropped for two reasons:
  1. To save the lives of U.S. servicemen, who would have had to defeat the Japanese on the 430 inhabited islands. For example, the Battle of Iwo Jima cost 6,800 American lives.
  2. To keep Stalin out of the war. Stalin declared war on Japan after the defeat of the Germans. His standard M.O. was to snatch any land where his forces defeated the enemy.
Dropping atom bombs on Japan was a tough choice. But the Japanese, driven by their belief in their racial superiority, killed as many as 14 million civilians. The atrocities were just as bad if not worse than those perpetrated by the Nazis.

Plus, Allied strategic bombing of Germany cost 410,000 civilian lives.

Allied Strategic bombing of Tokyo cost 100,000 civilian lives.

The number of deaths in Hiroshima (including later developing cancers) is estimated at 300,000.

I couldn’t pin down the numbers on the Nagasaki. But I would guess that 150,000 died (including subsequent cancers).
 
Last edited:
In general, this is sort of correct. At Potsdam, the Soviets agreed to enter the war on Japan 3 months after the Germans had surrendered. For a number of reasons, this was not considered as necessary or desirable, from the Allied point of view, by August 45.

And the US loss of life on Okinawa was 12.5 K plus. Not quite twice Iwo Jima.

All figures on the deaths, whether immediate post bomb or long term, are estimates, which vary widely. Sum totals might be 300K or might not.

I didn’t read GEddie’s post as suggesting the bombs shouldn’t have been used.
 
Last edited:
@GKMotley

Hi:
Thanks for your feedback.

I should have picked Okinawa as the battle with the heaviest U.S. losses. Iwo Jima just popped into my mind.

My Hiroshima number is an estimate, as I said. As you know, it’s hard to find good numbers because of the way they are listed – how many died in the blast, how many died of radiation sickness, etc.

So I went for the best totals I could find.

As you know, I tried to balance the convention bombing deaths with the A-bomb deaths. It was no party to die in a firestorm – whether in Dresden, Hamburg, or Tokyo.

I understand why the Allies went for the knockout – as ugly as it was.

BTW, my father served in the Army during WW II. He was an anti-aircraft artilleryman stationed in Panama (in case the Japanese bombed the canal).

Thanks again and God bless you.

Lisa
 
GEddie said:
Nor do I accept the “don’t hurt women/don’t hurt children/don’t hurt nature” hymn of the postmodern generation. In modern war EVERYBODY is a potential combatant. And nature is far more resistant to damage than we are.
Click to expand...
I agree however it’s not just in modern war that everyone is affected.

War has always affected everyone. It’s not an activity that only affects soldiers and women and children get to sit home safe while the war takes place in a land far away. That is the luxury that was afforded the United States and Canada during both world wars and today also Europe.

Other places can’t say the same thing.

You don’t have to live by the sword to die by the sword.
 
njlisa said:
But the Japanese, driven by their belief in their racial superiority, killed as many as 14 million civilians. The atrocities were just as bad if not worse than the those of perpetrated by the Nazis.
Click to expand...
The Nazis were themselves horrified by the atrocities committed by the Japanese. That’s telling a lot.

Until now, a lot of Japanese still believe they did nothing wrong during World War II.
 
Last edited:
You are very welcome, and feedback was what it was, not criticism. In essence, you were correct.

And you were quite correct on the difficulty one can get into, on estimating deaths. As to Hiroshima, for example, Richard Frank, in the best book on the subject I know of, gives a sample of how the best sources vary, over time, on how many were killed:

Manhattan Engineering District estimate, June 1946: 66, 000, US Strategic Bombing Survey, March 1947: 80,000, Japan Economic Stabilization Board, April 1949: 45,000, a joint Japanese/US Navy study, April 1966: 70,000. And others vary, likewise. Frank suggests that the USSBS figure is low by 15K or so, for an identifiable reason, and says, reasonably, that total deaths due to the bombs will never be known precisely. He suggests a range of 100,000-200,000 and calls whatever it might be huge. Hence, my figure.
 
@Sarcelle
The Nazis were themselves horrified by the atrocities committed by the Japanese. That’s telling a lot.

Until now, a lot of Japanese still believe they did nothing wrong during World War II.
Click to expand...
I had no idea that the Nazis were horrified. And I’ve heard about Japan’s revisionist history, though I don’t know much about it.
It’s insightful that you said: “You don’t have to live by the sword to die by the sword.”

As you know, Jesus instructed his disciples to carry swords.
Luke 22:36-38 New American Bible (NABRE)

36 He said to them, “But now one who has a money bag should take it, and likewise a sack, and one who does not have a sword should sell his cloak and buy one.
37 For I tell you that this scripture must be fulfilled in me, namely, ‘He was counted among the wicked’; and indeed what is written about me is coming to fulfillment.”
38 Then they said, “Lord, look, there are two swords here.” But he replied, “It is enough!”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Sarcelle said:
Until now, a lot of Japanese still believe they did nothing wrong during World War II.
Click to expand...
Actually, a very large number of Americans and other people who do not live in countries that were part of Japan’s “Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere” are very ignorant of what life under Japanese military occupation was like in the 1937-1945 era. I recently read a book called “Rampage” by James Scott about the Battle of (and Japanese atrocities in) Manila in 1945. The Japanese forces under Admiral Iwabuchi in and around Manila were beyond ruthless during that campaign, determined to fight to death and take as much of Manila with them.

The book is very grim reading. If you choose to check it out, just be warned: it is very detailed about atrocities, including rapes and mutilations, the murder of infants, mass executions, starvation, hostage taking etc. The extensive desecration of Catholic Churches is also covered. The reader might find certain sections are best skipped over.
 
Thank you for reminding me. That book was on my get-list, and I haven’t.
 
Canvas said:
Actually, a very large number of Americans and other people who do not live in countries that were part of Japan’s “Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere” are very ignorant of what life under Japanese military occupation was like in the 1937-1945 era.
Click to expand...
A pity really.

Because of this ignorance, a great many people think Japan was the innocent victim in WW II and not the aggressor who needed to be stopped.

More people remember the victims of the Holocaust than the victims of Japanese brutality.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top