Netanyahu tells Israel ‘We are at war’ after Hamas launches an unprecedented attack, killing at leas

I posted about these use of atom bomb on Japan. Do you think it was the right decision or more akin to a war crime ?

 

seeing that they didn’t surrender only left to assume all of them. In the millions.

 

in hindsight I agree with you about the Iraq war and that it was a blunder of historical proportions but for different reasons than you think. It was a false premise and unnecessary.

 

I don't think dropping the bomb had anything to do with ending the war, and I think the "ground invasion argument" is simply a ex-post facto justification for a decision that was already made. It was done so the Soviets didnt enter the war in that theater in a way they could demand more influence in the region after the dust had settled, they didnt want it to be like Europe (and we fought two subsequent wars over communism in Asia). Like Japan was contained and crippled militarily, the US had air superiority and naval superiority, and its an island nation. What were they going to do? The bomb was a demonstration of power with geopolitical purposes in mind.

 

Some would have rather have seen millions of soldiers die in Japan. Some would rather see Israel get bombarded over and over and over by Hamas. Some would prefer that those that attacked be allowed to do so without repercussions and those that are attacked be vilified for defending themselves.
Probably best not to engage with the Jew hating, Hamas excusing, Pearl Harbor forgiving crowd.

 

You beat me to it. I’m Jewish and the parent of to Jewish children. With antisemitism on the rise, I’m concerned every day now sending them off to school and Sunday school, not being there to protect them, not knowing what they may encounter. I don’t want Muslim families to have to feel that too just because Israel is at was with a Muslim group. I don’t take offense to her message. While I don’t have any empathy for Hamas, I don’t think her message was aimed at empathy for Hamas and agree innocent being shouldn’t be discriminated against for their religion.

 

I believe that you believe that. After years of war, in your eyes, it was more unlikely the reason we used the atom bomb was we were running out of money and invading Japan would have cost in blood ( the 1m referenced and resources) that would have stretched our capabilities. I won’t bother posting Truman’s quotes of his thoughts about it.

 

I agree 100% that no one should be discriminated against for their religion. But the timing of this is a little tone deaf considering the significant rise in anti-Semitism going on right now.

 

WWII Japanese honorable? You might want to brush up on some history.

 

That has to be fake. All Palestinians support Hamas.

 

Careful there. Some on this thread are going to label you an antisemite.

 

Just a reminder and although Americans weren't the victims what the Japanese did to the citizens of Nanjing is strikingly similar to the atrocities committed by Hamas against Israelis and it was conducted on a much larger scale.

To break the spirit of Chinese resistance, Japanese General Matsui Iwane ordered that the city of Nanking be destroyed. Much of the city was burned, and Japanese troops launched a campaign of atrocities against civilians. In what became known as the “Rape of Nanking,” the Japanese butchered an estimated 150,000 male “war prisoners,” massacred an additional 50,000 male civilians, and raped at least 20,000 women and girls of all ages, many of whom were mutilated or killed in the process.​

The Rape of Nanking | December 13, 1937 | HISTORY

The elimination of the Chinese POWs began after they were transported by trucks to remote locations on the outskirts of Nanking. As soon as they were assembled, the savagery began, with young Japanese soldiers encouraged by their superiors to inflict maximum pain and suffering upon individual POWs as a way of toughening themselves up for future battles, and also to eradicate any civilized notions of mercy. Filmed footage and still photographs taken by the Japanese themselves document the brutality. Smiling soldiers can be seen conducting bayonet practice on live prisoners, decapitating them and displaying severed heads as souvenirs, and proudly standing among mutilated corpses. Some of the Chinese POWs were simply mowed down by machine-gun fire while others were tied-up, soaked with gasoline and burned alive.

After the destruction of the POWs, the soldiers turned their attention to the women of Nanking and an outright animalistic hunt ensued. Old women over the age of 70 as well as little girls under the age of 8 were dragged off to be sexually abused. More than 20,000 females (with some estimates as high as 80,000) were gang-raped by Japanese soldiers, then stabbed to death with bayonets or shot so they could never bear witness.

Pregnant women were not spared. In several instances, they were raped, then had their bellies slit open and the fetuses torn out. Sometimes, after storming into a house and encountering a whole family, the Japanese forced Chinese men to rape their own daughters, sons to rape their mothers, and brothers their sisters, while the rest of the family was made to watch.​

The History Place - Genocide in the 20th Century: Rape of Nanking 1937-38

 

The Japanese were worse than the Nazis. But facts left this thread a while back.

 

Well of course the guy who made the decision to do it is going to rationalize it in a way that makes it his only choice, the "humane" choice even. Many acts of evil are similarly justified. You see that with the Israeli government right now. Everything they are doing is the only choice, very convenient and self-serving.

 

Those figures regarding the estimated number of American lives that would be lost lost during an invasion (500,000) have been determined to be grossly exaggerated. They were used to justify our actions. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not selected due to their military value...that was minimal. They were selected to cause terror among the Japanese civilian population to force the surrender. You apparently have very little information about this outside of high school history books. There was a Target Committee and an Interim Committee set up to select the target cities and where over the cities the bombs would actually be detonated. A main consideration was to cause the most terror among the civilian population, particularly with Hiroshima....it was detonated above the residential and commercial center of the city.

Any military targets there were scattered throughout the cities.. The city centers were selected to ostensibly destroy as many as possible and to create maximum terror among the civilians. Hiroshima had a couple of munitions manufacturing plants on the outskirts of the city, it's most valuable military targets, that went relatively untouched as the bomb was detonated too far away.

I hasten to add these were not war crimes then. Contrary to popular belief, the Geneva Conventions (plural) did not begin to deal with civilians until the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949. It was not until the Additional Protocol of 1977 that attention was turned to civilian populations and the use of weapons. My read of that protocol is such that I believe if we repeated our bombings of August, 1945 today, they would in fact, constitute war crimes...on multiple bases.

Would I have done it if I was HST? Hard to say. It was undoubtedly effective, but at great cost of civilian lives. I think on balance, I would have tried with locations with more military value first.

 

it was tongue and cheek comparing the attack on Pearl Harbor and it being a military installation vs putting knives in infants heads in some kibbutz….while laughing.

 

It could be fairly said that the USA is responsible for the most deadly act of terror in the history of the world

 

The Japanese definitely did that too

 

and I Believe you believe all that too