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

[ReallyTired]

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.

That's another way to look at it, which certainly puts a different perceptive on it: that the Hiroshima/Nagasaki A bombs saved thousands of lives

I'm a bit horrified at people using the actions of the Japanese military to justify the deaths of hundreds of thousands of women and children.
It was a war crime and yes so was the fire bombing of Dresden.

Yes it was awful - should it have been viewed as a war crime- i don't know, you are wrong to compare it to the Holocaust.

Easy to look back many years later. Japan started the war against the US - i find it harder to have as much sympathy when the aggressor gets a bloody nose - similar to Dresden if i'm honest. Of course we need sone kind of rules of warfare to try and keep the worst that can be done in check but i think when you have been fighting years of warfare with all it entails and fighting for survival - it all goes out the window. That's all out ugly warfare - i think it's a bit inevitable so best not to go to that kind of war.

I am very interested in hearing people's alternatives then. How would they have stopped the war?

JohnFarleys- if some of them had would the Hokocaust be justified?

I think that these bombings were a shameful crime and over the years more and more evidence has emerged to suggest that the traditional narrative surrounding the bombs and their necessity may be incorrect. Historians now are generally in agreement that Japan was fairly close to surrender. In late July they began attempts through the Soviets to try to broker a peace deal. They obviously wanted better terms than an unconditional surrender but were clearly reaching their limit.
That isn't to minimise the crimes of the Japanese during the war. Just like recognising Dresden as wrong doesn't mean someone thinks the Holocaust was ok.

I too am horrified that people keep equating the actions of the Japanese military with the entire Japanese race. It's ok to murder hundred of thousands of women and children, who did NOTHING to anyone because we had to stop the war?

If that's the case why don't we just bomb the fucking shit out of Syria right now? ISIS is causing so much trouble across the globe then let's just bomb the whole place and who gives a shit about the kids and innocent families...

Also, Japan seemed to have no problem making the civilians of other nations suffer hugely. I'm horrified by it and not glad it happened at all but it seens to have horrified enough people that no more such bombs have been dropped since.

Everydayanya - why would we want to bomb the shit out of Syria killing thousands of civilians? Are you really comparing a conflict in another country that hardly affects us to WW2?

Hiroshima wasn't the Holocaust, but it was something with a similar uniqueness. The use of nuclear weapons in that way changed warfare forever. There was no going back (of course there's the 'I have become destroyer of worlds' speech). There are reasons historians discuss WW2 as the end of history as we knew it.

The ripple effect of Hiroshima was huge: obviously there's illness caused by radiation, which is still a massive concern. Japanese life changed completely with demilitarisation and the long term presence of the U.S. army there. The Emperor Hirohito had to say, in a speech that was broadcast on the radio, that he was not a divine figure, not the descendant of deities - he was just a man who had failed. Old belief systems were taken apart.

I see the sense, sadly, in all arguments here - that the bombing had to happen to end the war, that it should be seen as a far, far worse war crime than it was. The French director Alain Resnais made two great films about WW2: Night and Fog (about the concentration camps) and Hiroshima mob amour (about Hiroshima). What both end up suggesting is that there is no sense to be made from what happened - we can go around in circles forever and we'll never come to terms with these events. Both films focus on the physical, human traces of events - the shoes piled up at the camps, the shadows of bodies left on concrete at Hiroshima. They were all human, perpetrators and victims and that, at the end of the day, is what is most devastating.

Ok so the Americans in the war were the same as the Nazis. Gotta love mumsnet.

Having lived in Japan for many years, I know that most Japanese feel as we all do - that their country underwent a terrible unprecedented tragedy. However, most know that this was an awful time under a military regime that insisted everyone die for their country. They were preparing for mass murder of their own children if there was an invasion. The Emperor has the opportunity to surrender several times - failed to take it - even after the first bomb was dropped.

But yes, all was great and lovely in Asia at the time. Those pesky interfering Americans.

Individually there were monstrous events that seem indefensible perpetrated by all sides in the Second World War. 60 million died, I find so much of it unimaginable.

The Holocaust was a massive industrial slaughter which killed around six million whilst the blast at Hiroshima was not aimed at obliterating a race but a war. I don't think their purpose was similar though their methodology in their usage of the next stage of war related technology was similar as was their acceptance of hugh civilian targets.
The first nuclear bomb killed around 100 000 which is appalling but the Japanese had already claimed over 3 times this number of deaths in Nanking and over 3 million largely civilian Chinese lives over time period of the second WW. The other holocaust was the Asian holocaust with over 10 million Asian lives lost because of Japanese aggression and civillian targeting.

As an action The nuclear blasts combined killed fewer than the chemical and biological weapons the Japanese used against Chinese civilians, rhe other holocaust was caused by the Japanese. It probably did shorten the war, it probably did reduce deaths, it probably did reduce the scope and power of the Soviet Union but it rightly still repels as an action.

I think we engage with it because of what it represents it's so horrific a concept with such obvious disregard for life in the short and long term. I am appalled by it but appalled by what made it an option too. I dislike our nuclear power and would say get rid too as I think fewer nuclear weapons is a good thing but who knows with the increased availability of this technology to aggressive and motivated countries and states thst choice could leave us in trouble.

That's clearly not what people are arguing.
And you didn't answer my question... Exactly what crimes would Jews have had to commit to make the Holocaust justified in your eyes? You implied in a previous post that the holocaust was wrong because the Jews hadn't done what the Japanese had... Would it have been ok for the U.S. to set up Auschwitz style concentration camps in Japan?
Essentially you are saying that if your enemy is "bad" then the murder of hundreds of thousand of civilians can be justified. I say it can't. It doesn't mean I'm saying the Americans were as bad as the Nazis ffs. I'm actually a big Harry Truman fan. He did an awful lot of good in his time as president. Dropping those bombs was however not his finest hour.

Gawd, these threads are so annoying.

I am no expert on WW1 or 2 - HENCE I don't spout forth about British war crimes or genocide (except the Jews/ gypsies etc in the concentration camps which obviously was)

But others feel free to condemn on a smidgen of true knowledge (let alone experience).

I do know that during the Blitz the German bombs rained on Londond for 56 consecutive days - but obviously not a war crime there, eh? just a bit of friendly fun.
And I do know that the Chinese were instructed not to boo the Japanese at the Olympics - as memories of the rape of Nanking are STILL ripe all these years later.
You can't take one event out of years of war, it needs to be seen in historical context. Just do a bit of research before bleating.

Its the argument in the op.

Nothing would have made the holocaust justifiable in my eyes.

The dropping of the atomic bomb was hideous. Terrible. Devastating and we must all work to stop it happening again. In the context of war - I think there was little alternative. People think it was dropped because the Japanese were a bit cruel to POWS? Really. They should spend some time with the millions in China and Korea under terrible occupation.

No one has answered my question. How would they have stopped the war?

The women and children had nothing to do with the treatment of PoW.

You need to educate yourself. Look at what happened as the US forces invaded the Southern Japanese islands like Okinawa in the run up to an assault on the mainland. The Japanese women fought in toe to toe combat with the US army street by street, attacking with kitchen knives, knowing they would die but not caring. Thousands of women took their children and threw themselves off the cliffs holding their babies, rather than being captured. 30,000 US soldiers died and countless more Japanese women and kids because they refused to surrender.

Had the Americans not dropped the bomb, the allies would still be fighting their way thru mainland Japan today. They never would have given in, and tens of millions of Japanese women and children would have died. Literally tens of millions.

Everything that befell those poor souls in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the fault of the japanese military and the emperor. The dropping of the 2 bombs probably saved more lives than any other single act in human history.

When you're fighting a brutal war against fanantical opposition, it's not a choice of killing and not killing, it's choosing the option that will kill the fewest people. The bomb was that option. Millions of lives saved.

Only the Americans and the Nazis killed innocent civilians? Is that the story now? Blimey.

JohnFarley- who said that?

And Mrs Devere I do agree with much of your post but would extend the Orientalism to the Japanese victims- lots of people have cited Japanese cruelty to POWs rather than their mass murder of 10 million plus Asians.

No one said it directly. It's implied.

But if the bomb hadn't been dropped who knows how many would have been slaughtered by conquering Japanese. They were/are reknownedly ruthless. They would now rule all of Australasia and the far east probably. And they believed they were a superior race (maybe still do) so it wouldn't have boded too well for those they colonised.

20 million Russians died in the second world war, probably mostly civilians - just to throw in some stats, so thousands of Japanese is a few deaths, compared to that, to gain world peace.

But littlebluecar, 10 million massacred Chinese and Koreans aren't important at all.

In answer to your question the Japanese began trying to negotiate a peace in July 18th.