I’ve been researching France in World War 2 recently, and I stumbled upon this article on JSTOR:
Unfortunately, my regular free JSTOR account cannot access this.
Please let me know if you have access to this article in any way. Thank you!
Hiroshima visit, a missed op.
-
Honolulu was bombed on Dec 1941
And Japan still killed more deaths combined , than Americans caused for the war Japan caused. Bombing them was done to defeat the enemy that created so much harm. It is not in-itself the cause of suffering but rather that is directly Japans fault for starting the war in the first place.
And of course you tried to bring the Germans in this, which is totally separate.
-
@Imperious:
Honolulu was bombed on Dec 1941
And Japan still killed more deaths combined , than Americans caused for the war Japan caused. Bombing them was done to defeat the enemy that created so much harm. It is not in-itself the cause of suffering but rather that is directly Japans fault for starting the war in the first place.
And of course you tried to bring the Germans in this, which is totally separate.
You are wrong. The American government caused more civilian deaths during and immediately after WWII than did the Japanese government. Preventing harm to innocent civilians was never a priority to the plutocrats who controlled the American government.
You blame the Japanese government’s killing of civilians on Japan. You also blame the American government’s killing of civilians on Japan, saying that because Japan started the war our government’s killings were their fault, not the fault of the American plutocrat class.
There are several gaping holes in that argument, one of which I’ll point out here. During the months leading up to Pearl Harbor, the Japanese government had attempted to negotiate a cessation of the oil embargo, and other warlike measures the American government had instituted against Japan. FDR consistently refused to meet with the Japanese prime minister. One Japanese prime minister had staked his entire political career on negotiating a peaceful resolution with the U.S. He tried to get a meeting with FDR for months. His political career ended, due to his inability to get a meeting with FDR, or make any progress in negotiating an end to the crippling measures. His hawkish replacement also tried to get a meeting, and was also refused. FDR wanted war with Japan, and did everything he possibly could to provoke war. He doesn’t get to blame his own administration’s (very considerable) list of war crimes on Japan.
Finally, if you are claiming Japan bombed civilian targets in Hawaii, please provide a link.
-
You cant count deaths AFTER the war Japan caused. Otherwise, I will just add all the Chinese and Korean deaths starting in 1931 since you want to deal with outside the war period. And don’t blame Churchill for that with your neo nazi bogus history books.
-
Even if you add Japanese civilian killings starting in 1931, the American government still killed more civilians during and shortly after WWII than did the Japanese government.
As for the pictures you found: when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, the American military fired aa guns at Japanese aircraft. Some of those aa shells landed on Honolulu, causing some deaths, fires , and loss of property. The pictures you found are most likely related to that.
As for the war crimes committed by the British and American governments during and after the war: not once have I cited a neo-Nazi or other non-mainstream source in support of my statements. Your attempt to disparage my sources is, simply put, a lie. Why do you feel it necessary to tell lies in the course of this discussion?
-
Imperious Leader, why you always argue with KurtGodel7 over his beliefs… you gotta know you’re not going to change his mind… it’s like arguing with Hitler that Fascism is bad. :roll:
-
Well because facts from Nazi propaganda just don’t do it for me. At some point reality has to set in or less educated types might think that long winded circular posts might be mistaken for intelligent reasoning. Another thing is something like the saying “For evil to succeed good men must do nothing to confront it”. That kind of soapbox of ridiculousness he spouts has to have some counter argument based on commonly known information, lest the falsehoods may gain ascendancy because again nobody did anything to repel it.
Nobody else is doing anything.
Also, Kurt but no. the Japanese dropped bombs on various buildings indiscriminately including schools. Of course you blame the Americans for shooting AA fire from the action in the harbor. Typical. I thought it was common knowledge?
-
@Imperious:
At some point reality has to set in or less educated types might think that long winded circular posts might be mistaken for intelligent reasoning.
I think if he ever does, it’s going to take a long number of years for him to grow up…
For what its worth, I agree the Allies were on the right side of history… but you already know that. I’d drop the bomb on the Japs a million times over… what most people don’t realize, is dropping the bomb on Japan not only saved American lives, it almost assuredly saved millions of Japanese lives. Japan and the Kurts of the world, will never admit that… even though its the truth.
-
Exactly, Operation Olympic would mean at least 1 million more Japanese deaths, plus Americans
-
Imperious Leader, why you always argue with KurtGodel7 over his beliefs… you gotta know you’re not going to change his mind… it’s like arguing with Hitler that Fascism is bad. :roll:
The reason he’s not going to change my beliefs is because he is lying, he knows that he is lying, and he knows that I know he’s lying. Take his claim that I’ve cited neo-Nazi sources. I know that I haven’t done so, he knows that I haven’t done so. But he also knows that no third party is going to look through my posts to see whether his claim is accurate.
His goal in responding to me is always to derail and confuse the issue. I am not the intended audience for that. You are.
-
Imperious Leader, why you always argue with KurtGodel7 over his beliefs… you gotta know you’re not going to change his mind… it’s like arguing with Hitler that Fascism is bad. :roll:
The reason he’s not going to change my beliefs is because he is lying, he knows that he is lying, and he knows that I know he’s lying. Take his claim that I’ve cited neo-Nazi sources. I know that I haven’t done so, he knows that I haven’t done so. But he also knows that no third party is going to look through my posts to see whether his claim is accurate.
His goal in responding to me is always to derail and confuse the issue. I am not the intended audience for that. You are.
Nor have you been to Germany neither…
-
Nor have you been to Germany neither…
He’s not German. More like wannabe German… and don’t think for a second his name is “Kurt” either.
http://www.historyplace.com/worldhistory/genocide/nanking.htm
Right Kurt– I’ll keep lying… Japan never attacked Honolulu, pictures don’t matter and Japan did cause way more deaths than what Americans caused Japan.
Take his claim that I’ve cited neo-Nazi sources.
The claim is YOUR the neo nazi and you read nothing but rubbish that pollutes the mind. You probably go online and find reading material that confirms your ridiculous ideas, then buy those books. Probably have a whole library of sordid junk books to look at.
-
In the big picture the nukes likely saved lives. A prolonged conflict would have seen unimaginable suffering bestowed upon Japan and it’s inhabitants, and cost thousands of American and Allied lives.
Civilian populations all over Japanese occupied asia would have been decimated.
If the bombs hadn’t been dropped then the argument would be that prolonging the war was an act of genocide and a war crime of it’s own.
War is Crime.
-
I’ve seen and read many accounts of the massive preparations Japan was taking to defend the Japanese home islands. Thousands of Kamikaze aircraft and subs were held back for homeland defense… All the Kamikaze attacks from Leyte to Okinawa were but a drop in the bucket compared to what Japan was prepared to launch to defend the home islands… women and schoolchildren were being taught to attack with sharpened sticks and to charge Allied lines with them… there would have been slaughter on both sides on such a grand scale to astound the mind.
Everyone… from Americans and especially the Japanese should be glad the bomb was dropped… it shocked Japan out of their suicidal state… Japan would have seen such death and destruction on a scale that scars the mind. War is hell, but the bombs did the best thing that could have happened, and that’s end the war before a ground invasion of Japan became a reality… which would have killed WAY more people than the two bombs combined did… Japanese and American.
-
it shocked Japan out of their suicidal state.
Shock was indeed part of it, but it also helped that the A-bombs provided some of Japan’s leaders (including Hirohito, who specifically referred to them in his broadcasted surrender message) with a face-saving excuse to end the war. It wasn’t really the scale of the destruction which the A-bombs caused at Hiroshima and Nagasaki which provided that shock in and of itself, since comparable damage was done by the B-29 fire-bombing campaigns against Tokyo and other large cities; the difference came from the fact that the destruction was done in each case by a single bomb dropped by a single plane. Because they were an exponential leap in destructive power, and because two of them were dropped unexpectedly and in rapid succession, they constituted a special case which could be invoked by the Japanese leadership in a way that could never be done with the long, gradually intensifying conventional strategic bombing campaign which Japan had learned to endure. Hirohito used this excuse to full advantage in his broadcast; his phrase…
“Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should We continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization.”
…gives the impression that Japan is ending the war both out of self-interest (to prevent its own destruction) and out of international altruism (to prevent the world from being destroyed by the Americans). The broadcast only makes a vague reference to the fact that Japan was crumbling militarily and economically (“the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan’s advantage”), and the broadcast doesn’t actually make any explicit reference to surrender; it simply said that Japan was accepting the Potsadam Declaration, a formulation which caused great puzzlement to many Japanese citizens as they listened to their radios.
-
Nice post cwo marc!
-
Your perspective is different from mine.
During WWII, the United States engaged in a massive bombing campaign against Japanese cities, even though Japan never bombed American cities. Our illegal bombing campaign was capped off by the use of nuclear weapons against Japanese cities. This, months after Japan had offered us their conditional surrender. During WWII, more Japanese died due to American war crimes (such as our bombing of their cities) than Americans died due to Japanese war crimes.
Did we drag our nation’s name through the mud after WWII? No! We proclaimed that to have been the so-called “Greatest Generation,” even while starving millions of innocent Germans to death after the war. (JCS 1067, aka the Morgenthau Plan.) if we never atoned for the war crimes we committed during and after WWII, why should Japan? Is the example of Germany’s postwar shame and collective guilt really so wonderful that other nations should be encouraged to follow suit?
Oh sigh….
I think it’s weird and nonsensical when people get wound up about US/UK WWII bombing of cities. “BUT IT’S CIVILIANS!”
Yeah, so what? Civilians pay taxes, they get drafted, they work in factories, they have kids that get drafted, they are the back on which enemy militaries rest. THEY ARE LEGITIMATE TARGETS! No question.
I guess you can get into the vagaries of if a country’s citizens really support the regime and all, and thus you shouldn’t bomb them if they are more like slaves than supporters. But that wasn’t really an issue in WWII.
As for the dropping of the A Bomb… Come on man, get with it. Japan was fighting tooth and nail until the end and held large amounts of territory. As a leader of a nation at total war, you are going to seriously try to superintend or second guess what your enemies may or may not do, i.e give up, when your people are dying en mass… like the 50K US casualties in Okinawa.
Hell no. Peddle to metal. Drop that bomb and let 'em know what’s coming. It’s up to them to give up, not for you give them breathing space and HOPE they come to their senses.
The prevailing attitude about the “horrors” of bombing civilians and nuclear weapons is kind of joke… actually it’s just a joke. We haven’t had a real war since WWII, i.e. a war between world powers. Why? Because the real powers of the world know such a conflict would be catastrophic. But since one side has that ability, you have to have it too, or be in the camp of the side that does. This is just a fact. Maybe a despairing one, but it has prevented a real war from erupting for over 70 years. Let’s hope more.
-
illegal bombing campaign
OH yeah? How is it illegal? Like Congress outlawed? No. Like it is part of “International law?” – that is a joke, how can it be law when there is no international sovereign to enforce it.
Sorry to rail on this. It’s just the whole “war is mean and if you’re not nice then you are evil” stuff is just dumb. It is just dumb. Winners write the law, and that’s all that matters. You have to win. That’s it. And if it means incinerating your enemies then so much the better.
-
It’s illegal because Kurt wanted Germany and japan to win the war since the Allies were the “REAL” criminals according to his study.
-
@Imperious:
He’s not German. More like wannabe German… and don’t think for a second his name is “Kurt” either.
http://www.historyplace.com/worldhistory/genocide/nanking.htm
Right Kurt– I’ll keep lying… Japan never attacked Honolulu, pictures don’t matter and Japan did cause way more deaths than what Americans caused Japan.
Take his claim that I’ve cited neo-Nazi sources.
The claim is YOUR [sic] the neo nazi and you read nothing but rubbish that pollutes the mind. You probably go online and find reading material that confirms your ridiculous ideas, then buy those books. Probably have a whole library of sordid junk books to look at.
Your earlier claim was that I’d cited neo-Nazi sources. None of the sources I’d cited were neo-Nazi, and your earlier claim was a lie. Anyone who reads this thread will see your earlier claim. Your new claim–that I’m a neo-Nazi–is not a justification for you having lied about my sources.
Your quoted post contains a link, and you seem to be implying that the link supports your claim that the Japanese engaged in civilian bombing at Honolulu. The link doesn’t mention Honolulu or Hawaii. It describes the rape of Nanking. The fact that Japan did engage in atrocities in Nanking does not give you the license to invent fictitious Japanese bombing raids.
-
Oh sigh….
I think it’s weird and nonsensical when people get wound up about US/UK WWII bombing of cities. “BUT IT’S CIVILIANS!”
Yeah, so what? Civilians pay taxes, they get drafted, they work in factories, they have kids that get drafted, they are the back on which enemy militaries rest. THEY ARE LEGITIMATE TARGETS! No question.
I guess you can get into the vagaries of if a country’s citizens really support the regime and all, and thus you shouldn’t bomb them if they are more like slaves than supporters. But that wasn’t really an issue in WWII.
As for the dropping of the A Bomb… Come on man, get with it. Japan was fighting tooth and nail until the end and held large amounts of territory. As a leader of a nation at total war, you are going to seriously try to superintend or second guess what your enemies may or may not do, i.e give up, when your people are dying en mass… like the 50K US casualties in Okinawa.
Hell no. Peddle to metal. Drop that bomb and let 'em know what’s coming. It’s up to them to give up, not for you give them breathing space and HOPE they come to their senses.
The prevailing attitude about the “horrors” of bombing civilians and nuclear weapons is kind of joke… actually it’s just a joke. We haven’t had a real war since WWII, i.e. a war between world powers. Why? Because the real powers of the world know such a conflict would be catastrophic. But since one side has that ability, you have to have it too, or be in the camp of the side that does. This is just a fact. Maybe a despairing one, but it has prevented a real war from erupting for over 70 years. Let’s hope more.
You’ve made a very interesting claim–that it’s legal to exterminate civilian populations, as long as those populations are supporting the enemy war effort. Based on your own interpretation of legality and the laws of war, let me ask you this question. Suppose that the Nazi government found that the Jews living within German-held territory opposed the Nazi war effort, and were doing everything they possibly could to thwart it. Would you feel the Nazi government had a legal right to exterminate this Jewish population every bit as vigorously as the Allies were working to exterminate the German people?
If you don’t feel that such an act would have been legal, then please explain why the Allies were allowed to target and exterminate civilians, and why the Axis wasn’t allowed to do so.
As for the atomic bombing of Japan: the Japanese government had agreed to a conditional surrender months before the bomb was dropped. The bomb was not necessary for the U.S. to win the war–we’d done that already. The only reason the bomb was “necessary” was because “unconditional surrender” made better propaganda than the phrase “we let them surrender with some dignity.”
According to international treaties, artillery bombardment of an enemy city is legal if the following three conditions are met.
- The city must be a defended city, not an open city. A military presence makes it a defended city.
- The bombardment must be part of a good faith effort to capture the city. This means your own army must be physically near the city, or else rapidly approaching it.
- In bombarding the city, you must make a good faith effort to focus your fire on the military presence in the city, while minimizing collateral damage to civilians. Some collateral damage to civilians is expected, but you are not allowed to make them your true target.
In the postwar era, a Japanese court correctly found that the atomic bombings had been illegal, because conditions 2) and 3) had not been met.
Suggested Topics
