US government documents admit that the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not necessary to end WWII. Japan was on the verge of surrendering. The nu...

‘US government documents admit that the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not necessary to end WWII. Japan was on the verge of surrendering. The nuclear attack was the first strike in Washington's Cold War on the Soviet Union. Ben Norton reviews the historical record.’

  • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]
    ·
    11 months ago

    First were the Asian peoples who were being slaughtered by the Empire. Why should they go on suffering one extra day?

    Nice grandstanding, too bad part of the victims the US nuked included Korean slave workers brought against their will from Korea, so that reasoning doesn't fly. Or are Korean lives worth less than non-Koreans?

    The other is that Truman had an obligation to protect American lives; that was his sworn duty. Why should he allow any US service men to die to protect the lives fo Japaense?

    Zero American lives would've been lost if they just held a naval blockade while the Soviet Union launched the invasion from Manchuria to Hokkaido. Nobody said it's the US who had to invade Japan. Whatever casualties the Red Army would suffer would be Stalin's problem, not Truman's. Like you said, why should he allow any US service men to die?

    • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
      ·
      11 months ago

      It's pretty funny that you have no problem with Stalin unleashing his people on Japan. Why is it more moral to let a mad man like Stalin decimate a country that to drop the bomb oneself?

      • culpritus [any]
        ·
        11 months ago

        citations-needed

        let a mad man like Stalin decimate a country

        Imagine saying this in response to US military leaders being on the record that the nukes were unnecessary and/or barbarous.

        https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-08-05/hiroshima-anniversary-japan-atomic-bombs

        Seven of the United States’ eight five-star Army and Navy officers in 1945 agreed with the Navy’s vitriolic assessment. Generals Dwight Eisenhower, Douglas MacArthur and Henry “Hap” Arnold and Admirals William Leahy, Chester Nimitz, Ernest King, and William Halsey are on record stating that the atomic bombs were either militarily unnecessary, morally reprehensible, or both.

        that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender …. In being the first to use it we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages.

        • William Leahy (Admiral and Chief of Staff)
        • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
          ·
          11 months ago

          I notice not one Korean or Vietnamese was consulted as to if the bomb should be dropped.

          • culpritus [any]
            ·
            11 months ago

            oh you mean the folks liberated by the Soviets? that were subsequently terrorized by the US military? because the US had shown the world that it was willing to nuke civilians for no reason, those people?

            so let me get this straight, US nuking cities is good in your opinion even though it achieve no military objectives according to US military leaders? but the US invading and occupying Korea and Vietnam is not contextually relevant?

              • DerEwigeAtheist [she/her, comrade/them]
                ·
                11 months ago

                It did not end the war sooner and only killed houndreds of thousands of innocent civilians. Civilians that also suffered under the fascist yoke. So yes I would wait, because I am not a monster without empathy.

                Dropping the bombs brought noone back to life, brought no justice to anyone, nor prevented any future atrocities. It was an act of incredible brutality.