“We would have just blockaded the island, without external resources Japan was ineffective.”
And may I know your source as well(hoping against chance that it is not a biased article written by an American or an American-devotee like you justifying the atomic attack on Hiroshima and Nagasaki)?
I find it disturbing that the American citizens have come to accept what must have been fed to them by their dominating government, which still tends to act as a dictator of the world
“And may I know your source as well”
Here is one for starters:
Is that all you could come up with? If you think I hate the US just because I am not an American, then you are seriously mistaken, my friend.
The latter link shows your ignorance that a person who is not a supporter of American actions can’t have an opinion. That is my opinion and I stand by it because my morality hasn’t blinded me and hasn’t led me to ignore the common sense that the atom bombs harmed innocent pupils. The propagator of Human Rights has wreaked havoc over the mankind since years past. US government “butts in” and that is one main reason that we are still living in such terrible times as a result of this Unipolar world order.
I would quote from your link: “The U.S. believed that if the atomic bomb could end the war, Soviet influence after the war would be restricted and domestically the tremendous cost of development would be justified.” Did the US think about the population of Japan because as far as I know and understand, the Emperor was not the embodiment of the entire population of Japan. Why was it alright to bomb Japanese cities to stop the influence of Soviet Union? Again from your link: “After spring 1945, with Japan in an extremely weak position, the United States was considering the following ways of bringing the long war to an end: invade the Japanese mainland in November 1945.” If Japan was already weak, then what was the need of even thinking about conquering the country. Did the American government want to satiate its blood thirst?
And for your kind information, I don’t hate anyone. I just can’t bear the mistakes of the US government which are deemed necessary by so many… just because it is the great government of USA, the world superpower. I have no personal ill-will with the country, nor with its citizens.
” If you think I hate the US just because I am not an American, then you are seriously mistaken, my friend.”
You called the United States Government disturbed, “dominating” and a “dictator”. Hardly sounds as if you like them.
“The latter link”
The latter link was chosen as a joke to mock you, and should be judged with that in mind.
” If Japan was already weak, then what was the need of even thinking about conquering the country.”
Weak in this context means having lost all of it its captured islands, and some of its supplies. The entire Japanese population would have fought tooth and nail for every last inch of their island, so that is why the bombing was a better alternative for the US, but not necessarily right from a moral standpoint.
As to the rest of your comment, this is not a debate about the “morality” of the atomic bombings, I was only sharing with you what would likely have happened if the bombings had not taken place.
I know, you’re wondering what is this? Today, I got into a discussion about the nuclear attack on Hiroshima and Nagasaki on a nuke-related list on Listverse. If you’ve read my statements, let me tell you that I have made some wonderful contacts on wordpress with some American bloggers and I like them and respect them a lot.
If you think I am criticizing the people or nation of US like Nathaniel felt, let me clarify that I am actually criticizing the US government and its policies and actions and not the people. And here is my last reply to Nathaniel which I’d like all of you to read as well. I know, it has turned out to be a big post but it is significant.
You still seem to dwell in the era of Ancient Greek when politics meant both nation and state and there was seen no difference between the nation and a state. But dear friend, modern political philosophers definitely realized a difference between the two. Let me specify it to you briefly:
A Nation is referred to as a group of people who are interlinked with a bond so strong that they feel compelled to stay together on a particular geographical area or beyond and support each other and they are frustrated,when separated or controlled by an outer force. Nation encompasses the psychological connection of people.
A State on the other hand is build up of four components: People, Land, Government and Sovereignty.
Dear friend, as a result of confusion between nation and state, you tend to forget the difference between people and government. I tend to love people of not only US, but the entire world and I quite dislike US government which you even mentioned correctly but failed to realize:
(Nathaniel’s statement, from above)
“You called the United States Government disturbed, “dominating” and a “dictator”. Hardly sounds as if you like them.”
Yes, I repeat that the United States Government is dominating. But isn’t it well known? May be the use of the word, “dictator”, was ill-mannered. I apologize because I was a little emotionally charged while typing my reply to you. Okay, I agree that I don’t like US Government.
Now let me ask you some questions, in context of our discussion as well as the tragic event we were discussing about:
1. With a silly link that you posted for my kind reference: http://hateusa.narod.ru/, which you later regarded as a way of mocking me, I feel sorry that the topic of our discussion was so comical to you. We are talking of murder of so many people and you tend to regard it as a joke. May I ask you, what did you find so funny about the points that I put forth that you judged me about my opinion and provided me with such a silly link?
2. First you mention that the US government had two choices: 1. Nuclear Attack on Japan, or 2. Conquering Japan by land. You provided a link(comparatively sensible one) to support your statement. When I quoted from that link provided by you regarding the fact that Japan was too weak and I further suggested that there was thus no need of trying out ways to punish Japan by way of bombing it or conquering by land as an alternative, you mention that, “The entire Japanese population would have fought tooth and nail for every last inch of their island, so that is why the bombing was a better alternative for the US”. Would you share your thoughts as regarding why was it so necessary to crumble Japan from within? The war was almost won. Was there really any sensible reason to drop nuclear bombs on those two cities according to you? According to me, there wasn’t any. There could have been other ways to make the Empire fall down and not the people. I hope you won’t confuse Empire/Govt. with people again.
3. Here comes the question of morality. When I apply my notions of morality in determining what I consider to be the common-sense(which you earlier suggested that I lacked) that the direct implication of those bombs was on the people, you state in the end that our discussion is not about morality and that you were “informing” me of what would have happened(as in the loss of life of a large number of people in the bid of US govt. to conquer the territory of Japan) if what actually happened(the nuclear bombs dropped on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki which claimed many lives) didn’t happen. I ask you, why not? The society, the government, the people prod us to use our morality in our actions. Why shouldn’t we talk about morality in case of such a serious discussion? Was US government’s decision to drop those bombs a moral one? I don’t know of a specific answer for the second question because I have only read about in books. I was not there, then, at that point, neither am I a high scholar who is an expert of that time… but I am a person and my heart beats and it condemns what happened. That was terrible. And you have produced an ambiguous source behind your statements but that source doesn’t explain… why was it so necessary for the US to cripple Japan and makes me question if it was only a method of the US political leaders to declare their power, their dominance over the world.
* You may not agree with my thoughts but that is alright. I won’t “mock” what you have to say about it. Please do share your viewpoints because it would only add into my understanding and help me realize or further question, what was the necessity behind that action!?
** I apologize profusely for being a little too critical in the comments shared on Listverse. I was emotionally charged and that is all I have to say.