Is this true? Maybe a war expert can fill me in on the details.
Atomic bombing on Japan
#1
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:26 PM
Is this true? Maybe a war expert can fill me in on the details.
#2
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:31 PM
(Any idea why they didn't bomb Tokyo?)
#3
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:33 PM
(Any idea why they didn't bomb Tokyo?)
Yeah I'm reading up on those and it says that the ultimatum had no mention of nuclear weapons at all.
#4
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:37 PM
It wouldn't have been so effective if they told them what was going to happen. The US president said something about something coming from the air the likes of which had never been seen (I can't remember exactly what he said ). So they knew that there would be something big happening in retaliation. I think leaflets were also dropped over the cities which we going to be hit too.
Edited by Laser Wave, 25 March 2008 - 05:37 PM.
#5
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:41 PM
Sorry for a shit explantion, it's late.
#6
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:43 PM
but don't ask me, I've only personally seen all the memorials and museums and parks in hiroshima, and been 4 times to all the nagasaki ones. XD
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
american soldiers who were against the bombs even dropped warnings after the first bomb dropped, saying to evacuate the city and whatnot. didn't work.
here, have some photosI took in hiroshima!!
Atomic Bomb dome
this cool setup they have out front the museum, lines up to see the dome thrugh the middle
showing how the skin melted right off the people
melted shit!
peace cranes
this is the statue at the memorial park in Nagasaki, symbolizes peace between land and the sky (bombs dropped from the sky)
#7
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:46 PM
Source
They kept true to their word. A week later there was utter destruction
That doesn't necessarily mean nuclear weapons. They could have easily thought of it as a bluff. I heard there are often those kinds of "big" threats in war ultimatums.
Sorry for a shit explantion, it's late.
Well you give me the bases for more research so thanks
#8
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:47 PM
Technically the arms race was started with the Nazis. Einstein wrote a letter to the US more or less begging them to make the bomb before the Nazis did.
#9
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:48 PM
but don't ask me, I've only personally seen all the memorials and museums and parks in hiroshima, and been 4 times to all the nagasaki ones. XD
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
american soldiers who were against the bombs even dropped warnings after the first bomb dropped, saying to evacuate the city and whatnot. didn't work.
here, have some photosI took in hiroshima!!
Atomic Bomb dome
this cool setup they have out front the museum, lines up to see the dome thrugh the middle
showing how the skin melted right off the people
melted shit!
peace cranes
this is the statue at the memorial park in Nagasaki, symbolizes peace between land and the sky (bombs dropped from the sky)
That third picture is so sad speaking of which have you seen Barefoot Gen?
#10
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:51 PM
no, I haven't... but if I remember correctly, they sold it in the giftshop at the museum in hiroshima...
#11
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:53 PM
I don't see how it's illogical they could have explained how nuclear weapons work and it's devastating effects, maybe even show some proof. Then give them a week to think it over and that's not nearly long enough for japan to build their own weapons. Plus the american army had more than enough troops to take over and defeat japan without the use of nuclear bombs. coupled with the help of the allies I think nuclear weapons unnecessary.
So sad, actually made me cry(keep in mind I was 11 at the time)
#12
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:56 PM
The point was to reduce the allied casualties, waiting even a week would mean lots of extra lives lost. Of course they could have invaded with thousands of troops which would have taken months but what's the point when you can just drop a couple of bombs?
#13
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:58 PM
The arms race started in the early 40's. Technological advances started in the last 30's.
And am I wrong to think the beaches at nagasaki turned to glass?
#14
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:59 PM
Anyways the 2nd bomb was just unnecessary and mean
=/
#15
Posted 25 March 2008 - 05:59 PM
Well you never know how the scenario would have played out. Maybe the japanese could have realized that defeat was inevitable(with the vast number of opposing troops and no support from anyone else) and surrendered sooner.
Edited by FlashGM, 25 March 2008 - 06:00 PM.
#16
Posted 25 March 2008 - 06:02 PM
Are you forgetting how important honour is to Japanese culture? They resorted to suicide attacks (kamikazes, human torpedoes etc) rather than defeat so it's not very likely that they'd surrender so easily...that was the whole problem in the first place.
#17
Posted 25 March 2008 - 06:15 PM
Sorry for a shit explantion, it's late.
Well, considering that the Soviets and the US were in a race to produce nuclear weapons prior to what you'd consider an arms race, it's pretty significant. Some political scientists believe that this was the first act of the cold war, rather then the last act of WWII.
Some views would suggest that the US has fully intended to test their weapons on a primary civilian location in order to determine the full effects as well as send a message to the Soviets. It's been shown that Japan hadn't surrendered under the US terms, because the US had not clarified if the complete surrender also included the removal of their religious figures (the US basically refused to clarify this).
As well, the expected death tolls that US forces that you typically see were apparently a huge exaggeration. The figures you see were taken from an old article, while ignoring many other estimations that were often below 10,000 (as opposed to a million). The fact that the military had been against the dropping of the bombs and that the US public was uneasy about the whole ordeal is often overlooked.
However, the above view is from a very typical crybaby political science professor. Just thought I'd offer it.
#18
Posted 25 March 2008 - 06:47 PM
There may not have been a nuclear arms race, but there was definitely mounting tension and push for military might. I probably should have clarified what I was saying
From what I've read, the Soviet's were never really as close to matching the US as it had appeared. They bankrupted themselves in the attempt xD
#19
Posted 25 March 2008 - 07:18 PM
#20
Posted 25 March 2008 - 08:39 PM
Anyone wanna add important that they can back up with some evidence?
#21
Posted 25 March 2008 - 09:03 PM
I just got that from pyke, earlier. I'm looking for the source on it right now
#22
Posted 25 March 2008 - 09:35 PM
Edited by Alex, 25 March 2008 - 09:37 PM.
#23
Posted 26 March 2008 - 05:09 AM
Dear God it's not just only that either :\ When the US forces invaded a Japanese manned island all of the people if they couldn't escape committed suicide. Women with their children... jumping off clips... men slitting their guts out. It was just horrible and that's why they knew they couldn't go my invasion. They'd all die. All of the citizens so they started bombing factories and that's why Hiroshima was bombed because it was a large war producer.
You're totally right. They would have never surrendered otherwise. I think the Japanese would have thought it was an empty threat and just would have laughed in our faces if we even told them about the atomic bombs...
#24
Posted 26 March 2008 - 05:36 AM
#25
Posted 26 March 2008 - 05:57 AM
You're totally right. They would have never surrendered otherwise. I think the Japanese would have thought it was an empty threat and just would have laughed in our faces if we even told them about the atomic bombs...
Committing suicide? Sounds a little farfetched....
What's your source on that? Sorry if I'm being to skeptical but I've learned not to believe everything western society teaches you.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users