[Livia]

Originally Posted by bobnot

What if the Japanese had launched a nuclear attack on New York and Los Angeles. Would it still have been the best thing to do to save lives in the long run? Listing Japanese war crimes is fine but the US weren't exactly angels.
I always find the "it was for the best" argument really weird and ill thought out.

I suppose the difference is that Japan was the aggressor. I'd be interested to see your list of Allied war crimes and see if it compares in any way with the Japanese record. I'll save you some time Bob... it doesn't even come close.

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

The reason that the a bomb ended the war was because it was a demonstration of the firepower that was available. It would probably have had the same effect if they had dropped the nukes on unpopulated areas. Either way, what it was was a "warning shot", and one that worked. "Let's end this now - because we have THESE".

The reason specific civilian targets were chosen was because the US wanted to prove that they weren't bluffing, and had "the balls" to straight up wipe the country off the map. To scare them into surrender. In other words, it was an act of terrorism, and certainly a war crime.

But then, every country involved in WW2 was involved in or complacent in war crimes by the end of the war... It was a very messy war. What happened happened. However, I do think it's hugely disrespectful to describe what happened to the innocent people of those two cities as anything but a tragedy. You can do that without going into whose "fault" it all was.

Once again... let's see your list of Allied war crimes against the Japanese record. Your view that the dropping of the bomb was an act of terrorismis a fresh and slightly skewed one . Do you think that the bombing of Pearl Harbour was an act of terrorism? Just because someone hits a bully with a stick bigger than the one that the bully has, doesn't make them a bully too.

Most of the British soldiers that died at the hands of the Japanese - tortured to death (think about that for a minute...) starved to death, beaten to death... their stories have passed and now we can truly view the Japanese as the victims. And that's what's happening. Had the Japanese had nuclear weapons they would have used them. We all know that whether we deny it or not. The people who made the decision to drop the bomb used their best judgement at the time after six years of world war. Now people who've never been involved in a conflict are judging them to be cowards.

Do I think the Americans would make the same decision now? Not at all. To quote L. P. Hartley in The Go-Between: The past is a foreign country, they do things differently there.