Were the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki terrorist acts?

I'd say no it wasn't terrorism. Whether it was justifiable is another question. I'd say a conditional yes. The action has to be judged based on what was known at the time not what might be known now. Japan would probably have surrendered anyway but we didn't know that.

 

TRUTH:
Jennifer Anniston's only good movie ever. (*)(*)(*)(*) her hairspray.

 

I liked her in friends however she started going downhill once Brad Pitt dropped her for an upgrade.

 

What was the American experience as their forces closed in on Japan? Did that experience play a factor in American decisionmaking? Put yourselves in the shoes of Americans in 1944 and 1945.

 

The experience was that the Japanese were so fanatical that they fought to the death and then killed their own civilians.

 

Yes, and the closer American forces got to Japan the more fanatical the Japanese became. James Byrnes told Truman that if he didn't use atomic weapons to force the surrender of the Japanese the families of the Americans who died in Opertations Coronet and Olympic would curse his name and destroy his Party forever.

 

Guess what? That's how you win wars. Those two cities were important military targets, as well. You don't not attack cities because civilians live there. Not when your enemy was training women and children to fight to the death.

Truman's decision was one of the best in history. It prevented an invasion of the Japanese mainland which would have killed many more Japanese and Americans.

Liberals like these are rewriting history to demonize our previous leaders and our country. It's sickening.

 

On second viewing my post was probably in the wrong order.

 

It's perfectly logical for people to question these bombings. They will never stop being questioned, and it's not an accusation or a condemnation of the U.S. or anybody to ask the question.

Nobody's trying to rewrite history. We're trying to get to the truth of the matter is all.

 

Simply put imagine if someone did it to us. Nuked San Fransisco or something because it had a military base in there. Then 1,000,000 or so civilians die. Can you really claim they weren't a target? That they were unavoidable casualties?

If any nuke happened here everyone would be screaming "terrorist". Even if it came from... say England or Canada during open war.

 

Even if it came from us. Which is maybe more likely.

 

Yeah, but Bush changed the definition of everything to terrorism if it's directed at the US.

 

And saying "the U.S. knew what would happen by dropping those devices on cities" is simply false.

At that point, exactly one nuclear device had ever been detonated and that was in the isolated desert of the United States.

It was not known what an atomic bomb would do in an urban area.

for example.

Though the Nagasaki bomb was significantly larger than Hiroshima, it killed far less people and did not cause a firestorm in the city like Little Boy did to Hiroshima.

 

Standards of conduct in war are different now than they used to be.

The U.S. hasn't conducted the large scale conventional bombings of major cities since early in the Korean War either. More than 60 years ago.

 

I suppose it all depends on your definition of 'terrorist act'. In a broad sense, aren't all offensive tactics used in a war, 'terrorist acts'? If not, what are they? I've been in a war, I can categorically confirm that in a fire fight, on a recon patrol in enemy territory and during any enemy engagement either offensively or defensibly, I was completely terrorized. One thing the use of atomic bombs in Japan did was teach us that they shouldn't be used. A lesson hard learned. A regretful act indeed.

 

Technically, yes. It was actually more done to terrorize the Soviets than the Japanese though.

The Soviets were in the process of trying to take over Europe while we were occupied with the war in the Pacific.

So, to simultaneously force an unconditional surrender on Japan while scaring the (*)(*)(*)(*) out of the Soviets, the bombs were dropped.

It was basically a statement of "if you try fighting us, we'll nuke you, Stalin."

 

It was horrible, to be sure, but it was also a wake-up call for the whole world that we can be gone in a flash. Was it terrorism? No. No more than a Sunday morning attack on our ships that started everything was.

 

From your own link.... "The psychological effects on Japan were of great importance to the committee members. They also agreed that the initial use of the weapon should be sufficiently spectacular for its importance to be internationally recognized."

I find that no different than president Bush's "Shock and Awe" or Al-Quida striking the twin towers. Truman knew exactly what he was doing and history books should be rewritten to reflect the truth.

We murdered hundreds of thousands of women, children and babies who were not soldiers nor trained to be soldiers. We radiated hospitals and playgrounds so please tell me...in detail... how those two bombs killed less Japanese.

Liberals like these? What was sickening was a country who devoutly champions human rights specifically targeting and dropping two atomic bombs on civilian cities.

Before the first bomb was dropped they knew. When the first bomb detonated they saw. Since they went ahead and dropped a larger second one makes your statement false.

Bee

 

Nuclear weapons technology proliferation will result in repeated use of nuclear weapons in this century. It's inexorable.

 

So what would have been your idea to end the war? Even though the Allies pushed Japan back to their homeland, they were not at the stage of surrender yet.

Would you have rather seen a invasion of Japan, where many more innocent people would have been killed than were killed Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

 

I think the War on Terror is mostly BS, but it's precisely because some of what is considered "terrorism" is necessary depending on the circumstance.

As I mentioned above, nuking Japan was the most practical course of action when considering that we wanted an unconditional surrender while at the same time needing to get the message across to the USSR that we had a weapon that could wipe them out if they tried taking over Europe.

The Soviets were our allies during WW2, but after the Nazies were defeated, their actions in Eastern Europe revealed a different agenda in the months leading up to the end of the Pacific War.

 

Operation Downfall would have completely destroyed Japan in the end. Fighting from city to city does not leave much left.