- Joined
- Aug 28, 2008
- Messages
- 11,387
- Reaction score
- 2,849
I just pasted the first two articles that popped up..... There were pages and pages more. Take some time to read for yourself, including the scholarly works.There's no consensus among historians that Japan was about to surrender, and there were significant deal breakers between the US position and Japanese position in surrendering. Most of the stuff you're citing isn't actually contemporary evidence, and a lot of post-event hindsight.
Note that there were multiple coup attempts as soon as Japan announced it was surrendering.
The idea that we dropped nukes to save lives is one of the most obvious pieces of horseshit propaganda of all time.
Firstly, more people were killed in the firebombing of Tokyo than either nuclear bomb. Firebombs would have done the job just fine without the generations of innocent civilian fallout victims, birth defects and cancer patients that had nothing to do with the war.
Secondly, the Japanese had no hope of winning the war against the US. Surrender was coming anyway. It would have been far better to have lost a few more lives to service the surrender than to unleash such generational devastation on hundreds of thousands of people.
As a side note, given Senator Lindsay Graham's comments this week, I feel like this subject (justification of nuclear warfare) may be being brought up with the idea that it would be justifiable for Israel to nuke Gaza.
I'd like to make it perfectly clear right now that a technologically advanced military with precision targeting weapons capabilities nuking a civilian population trapped in a concentration camp would be one of, if not the most morally bankrupt event our species will have ever witnessed.
Last edited: