Was the atomic bombs necessary to end the war with Japan?

Was the atomic bombs necessary to end the war with Japan?

  • Yes, it was necessary.

  • No, it was not necessary.

Results are only viewable after voting.
As others have said, it wasn't "necessary" to "end" the war. But it sure did help speed up the process. I mean technically the war would have ended at some point without the bombs.
 
Strychnine said:
Yes.

I was stationed on Okinawa for four years and the Okinawans there were told that Americans would drink their blood and eat their children. Remember that there was no internet back then, radio was very localized, and you weren't going to get the New York Times sent to your mailbox easily.

Remember, the Emperor is a divine being and he can never be wrong...

The schoolgirls of Japan (children/elderly, etc) were told and given instruction on making spears out of bamboo to stop the invading Allied troops. Conservative estimates totaled casualties in the 250K+ range.

Was dropping the bombs good or bad? Way above my pay grade, but yet, here we are, and I'm just an old fart on the interwebs...
Click to expand...

So you fought in WWII? If that's so amazing. Is it true that the Japanese threw Filipino babies up in the air and killed them with their bayonets?
 
Last edited:
bushman505 said:
After the Chinese bombed Pearl Harbor we didn’t really have much choice.
Click to expand...

VapidLoathsomeCirriped-small.gif
 
Double Dragon said:
Well the theory that America knew about the imminent attack on Pearl Harbor has its own wikipedia page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor_advance-knowledge_conspiracy_theory

and there is a lot of evidence to suggest the Japanese "ruling elite" weren't even bothered about the attack

https://nationalpost.com/news/did-the-atomic-bombings-of-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-really-end-the-war

The minutes to Japanese war meetings barely mention the bombings
For his 2011 book Hiroshima Nagasaki, Australian historian Paul Ham pored over the minutes of high-level Japanese meetings and discovered that the country’s ruling military elite had a shocking indifference toward the atomic bombings. On Aug. 9, Japan’s six-member supreme war council was meeting in a bunker under Tokyo when word was first received that Nagasaki had been destroyed. Engrossed in discussions about the Soviet invasion, the assembled men did not seem to care. “A runner comes in and says ‘Sir, we’ve lost Nagasaki, it’s been destroyed by a new ‘special’ bomb’ … and the sort of six Samurai sort of said, ‘thank you, and run along,’

Why is that? perhaps it's because they knew the 2 bombs were coming and there wouldn't be any others. Who wouldn't shit a brick in that situation especially if you have no clue when and where the next bombs are going to drop?

Silly theory I know, but it has some legs if you believe some of the many different accounts from that time
Click to expand...

Oh god... Scynther... That you?
 
Pugilistic said:
There were too many of factors at play to really know for sure.
The military and civilian government of Japan were not in agreement. The military leadership was ready sacrifice every single japanese and fight to the literal end. Some elements of the Japanese government wanted to surrender before the bombs. Some wanted to fight after the bombs. Some people argue that the soviets entering the war pushed Japan to surrender in contrast to the usual narrative that the atomic bombs pushed them to surrender. It seems to me it was a combination of everything.

Korea definitely benefited from it. I don't know much anything but if the atomic bombs made the Soviets think twice about making moves, it was perhaps a necessary evil.
Click to expand...

One important thing about understanding Japan's military mindset is that they planned to get invaded. They saw getting into an attrition-war with the US on their home islands as the most effective way for them to force out a peace-deal favourable to them. The US demanded unconditional surrender (which happened). The Generals of Japan knew that losing 500.000 American lives fighting chaotic street battles in Japan would put pressure on the US home-front. Americans would say, "give them a conditional peace and let's get the heck out of there. It isn't worth it". That's the thing about fighting a Democracy. You don't necessarily have to beat the Army. You just have to make the war so ugly that the population demands it stops.

A battle of attrition was essential for Japan to achieve it's war-aims (survive as an Emperor-lead Empire). The nukes denied them that opportunity. Suddenly, it was clear to the military government that they couldn't just street-fight themselves out of this.
 
well if it abruptly ended the war with minimal american casualties, i am all for it
 
They showed the atomic bombings of Japan in movie theaters in the United States. No joke. Former porn theaters showed it. Audiences flocked to them with popcorn and laughed their asses off.

American servicemen also raped massive numbers Japanese women during the occupation.
 
Mass murder and the desolation of entire cities, as well as the damage done from radiation to the next generations is a way to fight only a bitch would use, its a very feminine weapon, so it wasnt
 
Maybe not necessary but given the alternative, it is the option anyone would have chosen.
 
Japanese got no quit in them. I got into a fistfight with one outside a bar in Bangkok and it wasn't long before I was hoping for someone to drop a nuke on him
 
MXZT said:
So you fought in WWII? If that's so amazing. Is it true that the Japanese threw Filipino babies up in the air and killed them with their bayonets?
Click to expand...

I was stationed there from 2006 to 2010. I'm old, but I'm not THAT old.

Yeah, the Japanese did some horrible atrocities.
 
Jaeger Imperator said:
Mass murder and the desolation of entire cities, as well as the damage done from radiation to the next generations is a way to fight only a bitch would use, its a very feminine weapon, so it wasnt
Click to expand...

Yeah USA shoulda just fire bombed Tokyo some more, like proper gentlemen would.
 
Wrath of Foamy said:
I didn't know that the Japanese civilians, women and children were directly responsible for Pearl Harbor and the atrocities of their military and government.
Click to expand...

Yeah, neither did German women and children during WWII.
 
No but it was a quick way to end the war and at the same time, show a display of power to the entire world.

As sad as it was, in hindsight, it was almost a good thing for history because everyone is terrified of nukes now and it seems like that one line that no one is willing to cross anymore.
 
Senzo Tanaka said:
No but it was a quick way to end the war and at the same time, show a display of power to the entire world.

As sad as it was, in hindsight, it was almost a good thing for history because everyone is terrified of nukes now and it seems like that one line that no one is willing to cross anymore.
Click to expand...
100%
 
Aegon Spengler said:
They showed the atomic bombings of Japan in movie theaters in the United States. No joke. Former porn theaters showed it. Audiences flocked to them with popcorn and laughed their asses off.

American servicemen also raped massive numbers Japanese women during the occupation.
Click to expand...

And in your mind, somehow any of this is related to the question of the thread?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,641
Messages
55,431,458
Members
174,776
Latest member
kilgorevontrouty

Share this page

Back
Top