Skip to main content
Skip to main navigation
Skip to talk navigation

Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 10 11

AIBU?

To think that those who dropped the bomb on Hiroshima were no better than the nazis who masscred the jews

254 replies

ReallyTired · 07/08/2015 01:03

The dropping of the the two bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were genocide. The bombs were diliberately intended to kill unarmed civilians. Neither target was military. There was no need for nuclear weapons as Japan was already on its knees.

OP posts:

Report

DamnBamboo · 07/08/2015 01:06

I agree completely re unarmed civilians.
And whilst these methods were harsh and unjustifiable, you probably need to learn about more about Japanese military mentality.

FuzzyWizard · 07/08/2015 01:11

Whilst I think it was morally wrong to drop the bombs I don't think it is morally equivalent to the Holocaust. I certainly don't think the pilots can be compared to people who ran concentration camps.
I do think it was a war crime though. Civilians were the primary targets and the dropping of another bomb just three days later before the enormity of what had happened had even sunk in was utterly wrong.
Unfortunately like most wars WW2 featured many hideous war crimes perpetrated by practically all sides.

TelephoneIgnoringMachine · 07/08/2015 01:14

I shouldn't imagine the pilots knew a great deal about exactly what they were dropping. But yes, it's probably comparable to the Holocaust. Industrialised genocide versus the murder of almost an entire city, then another 3 days later. Both unconscionable.

TelephoneIgnoringMachine · 07/08/2015 01:15

I meant to say, pilots of the first plane. Perhaps the pilots of the 2nd plane knew. Much worse.

Suefla62 · 07/08/2015 01:19

Investigate the whole situation first. There's no way the Japanese would have stopped fighting without the bomb. It probably saved thousands of allied lives. Educate yourself in what the Japanese did to the Britush service men before you start pontificating, then consider comparing them to the Nazis. What "the Bridge in the River Kwai" take away the movie glamour and see what they did. Total scum. My Uncle survived their treatment, and had intestinal problems for the rest of his life. He was 68 pounds when he came home.

70 years later you're looking through rose colored glasses.

FannyFifer · 07/08/2015 01:20

Yet America gets to store nuclear weapons 8 times more powerful in Scotland, oh and we get to pay for them as well, renewal will cost billions. Great eh.

So many hypocrite politicians today at memorials etc when we have Trident on our shores. Disgusting.

DioneTheDiabolist · 07/08/2015 01:22

Yes, they were genocide. In defense of the Americans it was a scenario where genocide and torture was happening. every. single day. to lots of different people.

YellowTulips · 07/08/2015 01:26

Then or now?

It's a great post with hindsight.

I guess you had no family who fought the war in the east. Or who died in inhuman prison camps.

TelephoneIgnoringMachine · 07/08/2015 01:29

Yup. This is why we need to get rid of Trident. What's it for, really. Posturing.

ReallyTired · 07/08/2015 01:31

Sue

There was a lot of American propaganda to justify the dropping of the bombs. Personally I do not think it was necessary. The Germans were very bit as determined to defend their land as the Japanese.

The torture of prisoners of war is not justification for dropping two bombs on civilians. The bombs were not even aimed at military targets. The diliberate aim was to kill women and children.

OP posts:

enviousllama · 07/08/2015 01:34

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

YellowTulips · 07/08/2015 01:38

I would suggest you might think very differently about it if your family had fought against the Japanese at that time and heard about their treatment in PoW camps.

mimishimmi · 07/08/2015 01:41

My grandfather thought so too. He fought the Japanese in SE Asia during WW2 and then was part of the occupation forces in Japan, going in a week after the bombs had been dropped. He was sent to Nagasaki, not Hiroshima. He took horrific photos which the family still has. Sadly He suffered from terrible PTSD and his opinion was that the same forces which funded and armed fascists in Europe (banking interests, corporations who wanted slave labour etc) were also the ones who enouraged Japan to militarise and then completely planned to bring it to it's knees . The Nazis had collaborators - also among the communities they targeted -we can't forget that.

YellowTulips · 07/08/2015 01:46

As to your post - yes.
That's exactly the intent. The Japanese refused to surrender against all odds.

The nuclear bomb was a last resort to end the war. It took 2 not 1.

ShadowsCollideCantLogInToMN · 07/08/2015 01:47

I have recently watched a documentary about this. The theory being that Truman dropped the bomb to scare off the Soviets. Apparently Japan were on the verge of surrender, but Truman rejected any agreement. He was wanting an excuse to bomb Japan. So as to test their atomic bombs.

I can't help but wonder how different things would be if Henry Wallace, instead of Truman, was FDR's last VP. Wallace seemed like a sensible peace maker.

YellowTulips · 07/08/2015 01:50

Are you a journalist OP?

What stake do you have in this?

ReallyTired · 07/08/2015 01:50

The women and children had nothing to do with the treatment of PoW. They were picked because they were an easy target. The bombs were indiscriminate. The bombs were dropped in the centre of cities to maximise civilian causualites. If they had been interested in military targets they would have dropped on the docks.

You cannot justify genocide because of the behaviour of a minority. Harry Truman did not give Japan a chance to respond and surrender before dropping the second bomb.

The dropping of the bombs were to terrify Russia as well as Japan.

OP posts:

CaoNiMa · 07/08/2015 01:54

YellowTulips - does somebody have to be a journalist to be interested in world history these days?

YellowTulips · 07/08/2015 01:54

I asked what your position was?

YellowTulips · 07/08/2015 01:56

No - it was the way the OP was framed.

littlehouseinthebigwoods · 07/08/2015 02:00

I was just reading about thus on the BBC and was shocked to discover that many people think Hiroshima was necessary and justified...so should we have nuked civilians in Germany??!! It's all very shocking. I know the Japanese committed war crimes too, but it wasn't the 10k.enter and children..

DioneTheDiabolist · 07/08/2015 02:03

Propoganda? Before or after the bombs were dropped?

DioneTheDiabolist · 07/08/2015 02:07

The Allies fire bombed Dresden. Is that so different?

YellowTulips · 07/08/2015 02:10

No propaganda in my side. My grandfather lived through it - just.

SmillasSenseOfSnow · 07/08/2015 02:12

No - it was the way the OP was framed.

I suspect it's just inspired by another thread where both events have been mentioned.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 10 11

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.