BBC - Hiroshima

[Tenzan]

I don't know if there's too much of a need to debate if you accept that Japan needed (and wanted ) to find an 'out' of the war but, was finding a difficult time of consolidating enough political power in one place to get a surrender through, barring extraordinary circumstances....This, I think, is what the A-Bombings provided-the straw that broke the camel's back, as it were...It provided an acceptable way to back the call to throw in the towel..I read alot of this sentiment in Showa's surrender rescript.

Not to take anything away from the ferocity and shock of the Soviet invasion of Manchu- It was such a good operation that it served as the inspiration for the U.S.'s 1991 lightning attack in Kuwait/Iraq.."August Storm" became the namesake for "Desert Storm" (funny military trivia there)however, I just don't see the Japanese reaction to this setback as exceptional enough to cause the Japanese to accept giving up (in and of itself)

I can't say I'm particualrly 'for' or 'against' the decision to drop them...I just accept it as 'just the way it went down' as it were...I guess the best that can be said about it is that, by using them, It created enough of a taboo that they havent been used since...And that's a GOOD thing. -and you can bet the house that we would have used them in Korea...possibly against the Chinese...The results of that scenario are pretty darned not good...as an understatement.

[Dereck]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

What does concern me though and where i think apologies are due...is with Japan's treatment of POW's and her record in China and Asia, China in particular has the greatest grievience with Japan. I'm also concerned with current Japanese revisionism that seems bent on not accepting her role in the war and denying that atrocities were done by her military forces (that didn't go down very well in Nanking recently)

I should have been more specific. When I meant Pearl Harbor I meant generally for initiating the war in the first place.

On January 18, 1990 the mayor of Nagasaki was shot in the back at point-blank range for daring to say that Emperor Hirohito was partly to blame for the conflict. All countries involved in WWII, except Japan, has acknowledged things they did that were not necesarily right to do and have in one way or another apologized. Until Japan accepts their fair share of the blame for the war (and god knows there's plenty of blame to spread around) I can't feel sorry one bit for the way the US ended it.

[Dereck]

ORIGINAL: Tenzan

I don't know if there's too much of a need to debate if you accept that Japan needed (and wanted ) to find an 'out' of the war but, was finding a difficult time of consolidating enough political power in one place to get a surrender through, barring extraordinary circumstances....This, I think, is what the A-Bombings provided-the straw that broke the camel's back, as it were...It provided an acceptable way to back the call to throw in the towel..I read alot of this sentiment in Showa's surrender rescript.

Not to take anything away from the ferocity and shock of the Soviet invasion of Manchu- It was such a good operation that it served as the inspiration for the U.S.'s 1991 lightning attack in Kuwait/Iraq.."August Storm" became the namesake for "Desert Storm" (funny military trivia there)however, I just don't see the Japanese reaction to this setback as exceptional enough to cause the Japanese to accept giving up (in and of itself)

I can't say I'm particualrly 'for' or 'against' the decision to drop them...I just accept it as 'just the way it went down' as it were...I guess the best that can be said about it is that, by using them, It created enough of a taboo that they havent been used since...And that's a GOOD thing. -and you can bet the house that we would have used them in Korea...possibly against the Chinese...The results of that scenario are pretty darned not good...as an understatement.

I personally have the belief that neither the Soviets entering the war NOR the atomic bombings alone would have provided the Japanese with enough of a "shock" but the two coming so close together did.

[usersatch]

I read that the US had chemical weapons ready for Op Downfall as well. Dont know what kind, but it doesnt really matter. We dodged a HUGE bloodbath with the A-bomb.

I too, dont think that Japan needs to apologize for PH. I think apologies are pretty meaningless coming from a country 60 years after the fact. BUT, the fact that Japan refuses to even admit to their war crimes in China (Singapore, Nanking, Unit 731, POWs, etc) makes me pissed and the entire country of China as well. The Germans have been very forthcoming (it took a while) about the role of the 3d Reich in WW2, I wish the Japanese would as well.

[51st Highland Div]

Yep the A-bombs ended the requirement for the bloodbath for both sides that invasion would have brought about.I heard on the BBC Five Live the "Shockwave" author being interviewed and saying that as Nagasaki was being bombed a B29 was on its way to the US to pick up the 3rd A-bomb.

[Terminus]

ORIGINAL: usersatch

The Germans have been very forthcoming (it took a while) about the role of the 3d Reich in WW2, I wish the Japanese would as well.

A lot of Japanese, especially the people who write the history books, don't seem to think that Japan did anything wrong during the thirties and fourties...

[Yamato hugger]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

What does concern me though and where i think apologies are due...is with Japan's treatment of POW's and her record in China and Asia, China in particular has the greatest grievience with Japan. I'm also concerned with current Japanese revisionism that seems bent on not accepting her role in the war and denying that atrocities were done by her military forces (that didn't go down very well in Nanking recently)

Over 1100 Japs were executed for "war crimes" after the war. Not counting those that died in combat and/or killed themselves. It wasnt Japaneese policy to treat the PoWs badly it was local commanders.

I saw a show on history channel a few weeks back where they took some of the survivors from Wake back to the island. They showed where they were, where they fought. Dispelled some myths about the battle and made me aware of a lot of things that I didnt know before.

One of those was that after the island fell, the Jap commander was going to execute every last one of them, was over-ruled by higher command and they (minus the civilians) were sent to China. They were treated very well there. One of the men they had on the show had escaped a few months before the war was over. He and another man jumped from a train as they were being moved. The other man broke his leg and remained behind. The Japs recaptured the man with the broken leg and did nothing to him. No beatings, no beheading, nothing whatsoever.

Now the civilians that were left behind on the other hand were kept on Wake, forced to make bunkers and emplacements for the Japs and near the end of the war, they were all shot. Several of the senior Jap officers were executed for this.

Apologies 60 years after the fact mean little more than those that are given immeditately after. Words are words. They dont make up for the loss.

[FDRLincoln]

I do some work with a Japanese company, and both of the Japanese guys I work with are aware of the war atrocities committed in China, as well as the "sneak attack" nature of the Pearl Harbor assault. They arent' very proud of what their country did, granted both of them were merely children at the time and weren't responsible in any way. Both of them are proud about how hard Japanese soldiers, sailors, and airmen fought in the war, but they both feel that the war itself was a mistake, and that the Japanese military leadership betrayed the best ideals and principles of Japanese culture with the treatment of POWs and the Chinese population.

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

A lot of Japanese, especially the people who write the history books, don't seem to think that Japan did anything wrong during the thirties and fourties...

To be sure the situation in the Pacific was alot more grey than in Germany in terms of Japan's position, her relationship with the United States etc etc. Both sides were racist against each other and its not well known but the Japanese did try to compromise with the Roosevelt administration in regards to rsolving their crisis but the US position by policy was inflexible....complete withdrawl or no end to embargo. Roosevelt knew this would be politically unacceptible to Japan and it gave the Hawks justificaiton to move to war as the only option. (but i do still think Roosevelt was right...he knew war had to come sooner or later between the Democracies and the dictatorships of the world)

The above should most definately not be misinterpreted as statement on my part that Japan's aggression in Asia was justified....it wasn't, however one does have to realize that Japan was a classic example of a "have not" nation and in that she can be at least partially excused for wanting to follow the West's footsteps in regards using Imperialism as a means by which Japan could make herself self-sufficient. Its easy for a "have" nation like the US to just summarily judge others without realizing that we are doing so in part because we already have what we need.

Where things REALLY get confusing was some readings i have done which try to explain Japan's violent behavior in China, that Japan truely believed that for Asia to be "for the Asians" she had to be the "big brother" that would, "if necessary" correct China in order to make them get in step and realize the 'threat' and act accordingly. (talk about the Rod of correction!) In the murky depths of culture and psychology i can sort of see where they (the authors) were going with it. (I dont profess to fully understand it) nevertheless there's no question in my mind that it was no excuse for the sheer level of brutality that was unleashed through a combination of the above, the need to expand and the effect of the militarization of the Japanese society that stressed full obedience and even a 'death cult' that unleashed the true dark inner nature in human beings.

In the end, Japan was the aggressor, like Nazi Germany and Italy....she paid the price for being an aggressor and does need to acknowledge it...not so that people here in the US and other countries can feel superior, but so that history doesn't get repeated. The first step in history repeating itself is to either forget or revision the past. Thus my concern about the curious Japanese "version" of WWII.

To stress the last paragraph, acknowleding the mistakes the Allies made after WWI in terms of Germany's unfair and harsh treatment postwar which directly led to people like Hitler taking power in a nation hit hard by economic bad times exaserbated by ruinous reperations and seething from humliation in the end does not excuse what the Nazi's did. The same is true of the Japanese.

Thank god that we learned the lessons right at the end of WWII....and worked to actively restore and rebuild Germany and Japan and not simply pillage and exploit sowing the seeds for yet another conflict.

[FDRLincoln]

Following up on that, one of them (the older one, in his early 70s) thinks that the atomic bombs, both of them, were probably necessary to end the war and does not harbor ill-feelings towards the US about it. The younger one (early 60s) says he "understands" Hiroshima, but that he thinks the Nagasaki bomb was unnecessary. He thinks the government should have been given at least a few more days to figure out what had happened and the implications.

[Nikademus]

I'm not concerned with apologies as much as ackowledgement, and the acceptance of responsiblity for actions done on Japan's behalf. I do as mentioned believe the Japanese government owes China a big apology for what her army did on their soil but even just ACKNOWLEDGING what was done would have gone a long way towards mollifying Chinese sentiments. For Japan to claim that such things never happened at all was like a slap in the face to them. I dont blame the Chinese for being angry.

The executing of war criminals by us isn't the same thing as acknowledement by the Japanese government itself. We tried and executed German war criminals as well....but Germany also herself had to realize and accept what had been done, otherwise the trials mean little other than to those directly involved giving a sense of justice and closure.

[usersatch]

Who was that who said that war criminals are deemed as such only if they are on the losing side?

We as a country did a lot of nasty stuff as well. Granted, not on the scale of Nanking and Singapore, but some of our actions were indeed criminal with respect to the "laws of war". I am not trying to indict the US on war crimes or anything, I am just merely making an observation about our views as the victors. I wonder what the Japanese would try the US on, if they had won the war. On second thought, there probably would not have been trials, just executions LOL.

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: usersatch

Who was that who said that war criminals are deemed as such only if they are on the losing side?

True. but you also answered your own question. The US was not unscathed by the actions in WWII.....i think our worst hour was our treatment of our own citizens, putting Japanese Americans into concentration camps during the war...robbing them of liberty and property. However we didn't put them into ovens either and now, many years later (and admitedly long overdue) that injustice has been acknowledged by the US government and public and an effort to make it good has been done.

As i said...the actions of Japan in terms of what was done in China in particular were indeed crimes against humanity.

[Fafner]

I believe Richard B. Franks' Downfall is the definitive - certainly the most scholarly - work on the matter. He believes the second bomb was absolutely necessary to end the war - this is what finally brought Hirohito to intervene and force an end to the war. Read the book for fuller details but many have been discussed earlier. The Russian entry while a shock to some (not all), was certainly was not an iminent threat to the mainland.

Afterall, people in this forum should know first hand how difficult it is to conduct a large scale amphibious operation - especially when you have no landing craft. [;)]

[Terminus]

Plus, there was actually a cabal of War Party officers who tried to intercept the recording of Hirohito's speech announcing the ending of the war. They knew that once Hirohito had spoken, they'd be able to do nothing.

Anectodally, it was only a minority of the Japanese population who could understand Hirohito's speech; he spoke in court Japanese, an odd mix of extremely ideomatic Japanese and Chinese.

[keeferon01]

I think it really naive to believe that the 2 bombs ended the war, I mean the reaction from the palace and military leaders was "so what" . What did the thinking men come up with that would be needed 7 bombs in total, pretty interesting though that truman met with the King of England to tell him that Tokyo was to be A-bombed that day, and they surrended that day.

Ron

[Tom Hunter]

usersatch,

At least one of the war criminals exicuted killed at ATE American Aircrew on Chichi Jima. There were other war criminals who did the same thing in China.

I don't think it was just a question of being on the losing side.

[Arkan]

I think you missed the point of the sentence. It's not that the guilt of the convicted and executed soldiers is disputed, but that war criminals on the winning side tend to get away with it or get judged milder.

Btw1: I think in the Nuremberg mini series Göring says something on the lines of this, but I have no clue about the historical accuracy.
Btw2: If that was to mean "killed and ate" then I don't really see how anything could make the killing much worse.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: doktor

ok, here's a firestorm of debate:
Was it the A-bombing or the Soviet declaration of war the forced Japan to capitulate?

By the end of the Summer of 1944, it was clear to anyone looking at the situation even from the Japanese side that the war was irritrevably lost. If any of the worthless bastards running the country had really given a tinker's damn about it's future, they would have surrendered and committed Hari Kari in attonement for their multiple sins.

Instead they subjected the nation and it's people to utter devestation trying to save their own stinking hides... So much for the Spirit of Bushido---it was a purely selfish ducking of the responsibility for having gotten the nation into such a mess motivating these stooges. You want to blame someone for "firebombing" and nukes? Blame the Japanese Military and it's leaders. A bunch of gutless cowards who wouldn't stand up and accept the consequences of their own short-sighted and stupid actions..., and who instead wanted to get the whole nation destroyed in hopes of covering their collective asses...

[spence]

The Japanese apparently slaughtered 5 times as many Chinese as the Germans killed in Auschwitz and the other death camps. They had a regulation in their Army Regs that formally forbid the eating of human flesh: however, if one surrendered one was no longer a human so therefore available for what the IJA termed as "local supply". At the end of the war the IJA released all Chinese POWs - all 52 of them.
BTW I believe that at the time of the Japanese surrender there was 1 or more I-400 series I-boats enroute to the US West Coast to launch biological agents at US cities (plague I think- delivery via the subs seaplanes). Pretty sure I saw some kind of news item not that long ago about it.
In any case, by August 1945 it was definitely time to end the worst and greatest of all wars. Given the nature of the killing that had been going on since 1937 in Asia (by all participants) I really don't see what the hub-bub about killing with gamma rays (in addition to the normal bombing agents of death such as heat, flying debris, and shock) is all about.
If the whole invasion thing had gone on as scheduled in March 1946 AND only 1000 people were killed from all war related causes each day in all of Asia/Oceana in the intervening time (an unlikely proposition IMO) the toll would have certainly exceeded that of Hiroshima/Nagasaki.
To the dead it really doesn't matter how they got that way.