Was it a war crime when US nuked Hiroshima & Nagasaki?

@McGentrix,

I worked with those a-bombs in the late 1950s with the USAF in California, Morocco and New Mexico.

0 Replies

@camlok,

Might I ask a personal question, without you taking offence?

Were you born stupid?

Imagine a fleet of angry aliens attacking humanity - They don't give a gerbil about the geneva gerbiling convention.
YOU CAN'T LIMIT GERBILING WAR!

Alas - You can, easily, LIMIT the mindset of the tools you utilise as weapons of war.

If they told you that smiling and hopping on one leg, scares off enemies - You'd die, Quickly, while happyhopping.

0 Replies

At this point, the preponderance of evidence indicates that a reasonable person should view the use of the two A bombs as a war crime. Japan had no capacity to continue the war after Okinawa fell.

3 Replies

@gungasnake,

Nonsense. The Japanese were going to fight to the death of the last person standing. Continuing a conventional war would have been a stupid thing to do and the A-bombs ended up saving millions of lives despite the taking of so many.

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

At this point, the preponderance of evidence indicates that a reasonable person should view the use of the two A bombs as a war crime. Japan had no capacity to continue the war after Okinawa fell.

The war always continues until the enemy surrenders. And they had chosen to not surrender yet.

They also had a couple million well-armed soldiers waiting to fight to the death when we invaded.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Nob ody would have invaded Japan after the fight at Okinawa. All we had to do was sit there and wait for them to get really good and hungry, which wouldn't have taken more than another couple of months.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

I do not believe whether Japan was ready to fight until the last "man" standing, but Japan was already weak from four years of the war. They don't have any raw materials in their own country, and must import them from other countries. Their expansion into Asia was for that purpose; to have access to raw materials. The US established a blockade against Japan's aggression, and the dropping of the atom bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki will be subjects for discussion for many decades to come. I personally believe Truman made the right decision, and my ancestors are from Hiroshima. In 1982, my wife and I visited my relatives in Hiroshima, but our Japanese language skills were lacking.

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

Nobody would have invaded Japan after the fight at Okinawa. All we had to do was sit there and wait for them to get really good and hungry, which wouldn't have taken more than another couple of months.

Perhaps. But there was no guarantee. The war continues until the enemy chooses to surrender.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

The Japanese were looking for ways to surrender at the time. Their navy and merchant marine had been annihilated, there were 20 million people walking around in forests because their cities no longer existed, and food was on the edge of becoming a gigantic problem. If Truman had thought about it hard enough, he might have saved the two bombs for Mecca and Medina.

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

The Japanese were looking for ways to surrender at the time.

Yes, but they weren't actually surrendering. When you are in one of those cage match fights, you don't read your opponent's mind to learn the moment he decides to surrender. You learn that he surrenders when he tells you by tapping three times. Until your opponent actually informs you that he surrenders, the fight is still on.

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

There are NO CRIMES when One is at 'WAR'.
If I HAVE to 'exterminate' you (For, whatever reason).
I HAVE to 'exterminate' you.

I can't foresee any reason why I need 'exterminate', harm, or upset anyone or anything.
But, If there were - I would - Without concern for moral-guidelines, cultural-limitation or terms of sportsmanlike behaviour.

IF YOU (not shouting, emphasis) WERE RAPING, BEATING, TORTURING, etc, ME - HOUR BY HOUR - DAY BY DAY - OVER & OVER.
And my only escape was/were to extinguish the ENTIRE universe - In order for this to cease - UNIVERSE = BYE-BYE.

I'm not going to be (raped, tortured, maimed, etc) and overly consider how my actions are going to affect anyone else.

As for 'societal-wars' - They're all manufactured - As is your 'bondage' to your 'prescribed'-'alliance/s'

2 Replies

@mark noble,

There was no need to punish Japan any further after July of 45.

Their 70 largest cities lay in ruins from the fire bombings. Their navy had ceased to exist as had their merchant marine and they had no means of inflicting any further harm on anybody else.

2 Replies

@mark noble,

According to the Geneva Convention:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime

Quote:

War crime
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A war crime is an act that constitutes a serious violation of the laws of war that gives rise to individual criminal responsibility.[1] Examples of war crimes include intentionally killing civilians or prisoners, torture, destroying civilian property, taking hostages, perfidy, rape, using child soldiers, pillaging, declaring that no quarter will be given, and serious violations of the principles of distinction and proportionality, such as strategic bombing of civilian populations.[2]

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

There was no need to punish Japan any further after July of 45.

There was still a need to make them surrender and end the war.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

You just wouldn't understand if the conditions were turned around, and you were in Japan's position. It's called narrow-minded bigot.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

If I were in Japan's position, I would have not inflicted horrors on the world until people thought that I needed to be nuked into submission for the good of humanity.

However I would have understood that so long as I didn't surrender, the war was still on and I was open to being attacked by my opponents.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

'WARCRIME' is an oxymoron.
YOU CANNOT commit a WAR-CRIME - It's WAR.

'ALL'S FAIR' ALL! In love and WAR'.

Think about why that quote holds true?

Do you think ANY attacking army - Ever - Pre-millenialville - Considered NOT deploying their Kracken (proverbial) Because it may upset someones' editorial on legitimate slaughter-fashions?

I'm enjoying this soujourn, Cic.
Your a nice bloke.
I get your stance.
Stock up well on provisions, sir - Wheat, maize, barley, soy and rice are, climatically-challenged (Abruptlty).

Been nice interacting with you.
Always will be.

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

Gunga - It's a Game!
When YOU play the Gunga - You act as the Gunga
When YOU play the mark noble - You (love life) enjoy being
When You play the oppressive you learn what you are
When you play the JFK - avoid Elm St.

0 Replies

@babsatamelia,

it was a war crime 100%

2 Replies

@Ketrin,

Not 100%. Don't forget that Japan started the war by their surprise attack on our country that killed over 2,000, and destroyed many of our military assets.

Quote:

One hundred eighty-eight U.S. aircraft were destroyed; 2,403 Americans were killed and 1,178 others were wounded (at Pearl Harbor.)[19]

55 to 68 civilians were killed. That's a war crime.

1 Reply

Was it a war crime when US nuked Hiroshima & Nagasaki?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know