Is it possible that United States will officially apologize in future for atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Status
Closed
If that is the definition of terrorism, than all aspects of warfare that negatively affect the human psych are terrorism. Which means all of them, since warfare is more psychological than physical. Which then waters down the definition of terrorism to the point it doesn't even mean anything.
I wasn't claiming that it is terrorism, I was trying to go with Azad's logic. I have already pointed out that I think that the bombing was justified and I have not objected to total warfare. If we go by terrorism itself the bombing doesn't fit any definition of it.
 
Oct 2009
3,523
San Diego
Why?

we rather pointedly asked them to surrender before bombing them. They refused to even discuss it.
We did not sneak attack them. They sneak attacked us.

MORE japanese civilians died in the fire bombing of Tokyo and Kure than died in Hiroshima and nagasaki combined.
More houses and businesses were destroyed.
What's so special about burning to death from an atomic fireball as opposed to an incendiary fireball that we owe apology for the former but not the latter?
Stop mythologizing atomic bombs. They are only more dreadful in the terrible efficiency of their killing. But the dead find every means by which they are killed to be equally dreadful.

It wasn't the A-bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki and it wasn't the incendiary bombs that destroyed Tokyo and Kure.
One bedsheet on a stick would have been all it took to stop the bombing... both traditional and nuclear.

It was stubborn pride that killed all those people.
And No one owes any apologies to an Aggressor for the level of violence required to get them to Stop.


Moreover... Using the Atomic bombs in japan is the ONLY reason they have not been used since. The world HAD to SEE how awful they really were, to instill that fear of ever using them as they grew more devastating in power.
Until we used them, they were nothing but some physicists' abstract description of something bigger than imagination could encompass.

There has been no WWIII because of those 2 bombs.

Limited wars drag on for decades. Decades of killing and cruelty- and profiteering.

Total war lasted 4 years, maybe 5.

Those two bombs were a mercy to the millions who did not die in an invasion of Japan.
 
Jul 2016
9,311
USA
poor united statesins never even hurt a fly illegally :nerd:

regards
LOL. You guys are doing such a great job convincing everyone of your argument. I'm sure everyone is going to suddenly stop thinking Al Qaeda and other Islamic groups are the worst terrorists, and will instead consider the US in WW2. LOLOL

Tell me more about Agent Orange, the biological agent. LOL
 
Apr 2018
589
India
Chill, dont be emotional, we are just having a discussion here. I am here to learn and discuss. I dont understand why members here are getting so agitated and offended?. Its a very inoffensive question. If Americans are getting offended then one can understand why but whats your excuse?.
Excuse? Who needs a nationalistic excuse/reason to discuss history in a history forum?

"What about rape Nanjing" is whataboustism. I have already explained why. I am here to discuss only American atomic bombing of the two cities of Japan and the possibility of America officially apologizing for it in future. I am not going to discuss the other war crimes and acts of terrorism by allied forces during WW1.
Show me one piece of historical debate where parallels have not been drawn? Secondly bear in mind that US didn't even bother to enter the war until the Japs literally dragged them into it. US, after fighting a bloody trans oceanic campaign for 3 and a half years resorted to dropping the bomb to end a war which began in 1937 with the beginning of the Second Sino-Japanese War. This war, waged by Japan against virtually the entirety of East, South East and South Asia and America culminated with the bombings. Of course topics like Rape of Nanking, Unit 731, Plaguebombing of Ningbo and countless other atrocities of the Japs will arise whether you like it or not. And not only these topics are relevant but the discussion itself will be incomplete without getting the broader picture which these topics will help complete.

And i am not going to entertain whataboutism and derailing of this thread with "what about rape Nanjing" , "what about nukes of Pakistan", "what about rapes of Bengali women by Pakistani soldiers". etc
You are no one to entertain nothing. You don't get to dictate how other people will argue a subject. The only thing you can do is defeat them using facts and logic. And about Rapes of Bengali women by Pakistani soldiers, there is no reason to bring that up as that neither has anything to do with WW2 in Asia-Pacific nor any such point has come up that necessitates introduction of that topic as a direct reference, example or a relevant parallel. I will definitely bring that up IF and ONLY IF it comes to that.

Its not the trial of America on the basis of some treaties and laws. Terrorism and genocide is objectively wrong. America herself acknowledges that use of unconventional weapons is against ethics and principles of war. It is evident from their resolution in 1922 and when she invaded Iraq for possessing chemical weapons (which was a false propaganda). America acknowledges that nukes are dangerous and threat to this world and it is evident from her efforts against nuclear proliferation. America has been on the verge of war with Iran over this.
This has already been answered numerous times in numerous posts. 1922 Resolution never came into effect. It was about chemical weapons not atomic ones. Japan itself ratified and violated that even before the US. And if you talk about unconventional weapons, do mention what exactly is the internationally accepted definition of that term or if there isn't, what is the general understood by it? What makes a weapon conventional and what unconventional? And how is any weapon used for the first time, since the invention of stone clubs by paleolithic men, is not 'unconventional'? And if so what makes you opine that the US committed a crime that every other military power before that had not? Also note that the nowhere in the 1922 Treaty text was the word 'unconventional' mentioned.

I agree , Japanese people were test subjects and America wanted to see the impact and effects of nukes on cities. Besides that, the intention was to terrorize Japanese nation. Thats why its a greatest incident of terrorism and war crime in human history, in my opinion.
You have a problem with terrorizing the Japanese nation and do not wish to discuss the Rape of Nanking?

So an American says Japanese people were pawns of their rulers and Americans liberated them and did them a great favor by instilling fear in their hearts and irradiating two of their cities. One can also say American people were/are pawns and fuel of their governments. And Al-Qaida were also thinking along your lines when they crashed planes into world trade center i.e shortcut to end American interventionism in the Muslim world at the cheaper cost of "few thousands" deaths.
Here's to whataboutism.
 
Apr 2018
589
India
Tell me more about Agent Orange, the biological agent. LOL
In the Hindu festival of Holi people smear and drench each other in colors. It looks pretty on the outside but can turn nasty with people like, you know, us boys. Then it first becomes a contest of turning each other into tar drenched chimps and then, well messing around the neighborhood (no one can identify anyone). So when I was a kid there was this chap who once spent the entire day inside his apartment locked up. Thought he would get away with it. We did everything, then went home. I scrubbed myself for two hours, got rid of the green color but the reddish purple one (called Monkey Paint colloquially) just didn't go. So we came out in the evening to play cricket, all looking like zombies and clowns and suddenly this chap appeared all clean and nice and tidy.

We bathed the idiot in a bucketfull of water mixed with cow crap. Took him a week to get rid of the smell.

My firsthand experience with biological agents.
 
Status
Closed

Similar History Discussions