Did we really have to drop atomic bombs on Japan?

[Underock1]

Sorry to post that when the thread seems to have moved on, but it was in reply to OP.

Thank you anyway, oakapple. I don't know whether you read my last post on this thread. There actually is a memorial museum in Nanking. Quite a horrific one, at that. They do hold services annually. The Japanese attempt to white wash the event is causing current difficulties in their relationship with China.
I have been thinking about this whole memorial business generally, lately. Are we mourning the dead, or celebrating hate? "Let us never forget"? What do we really achieve by that? Don't forget to hate these people? "These people" are dead! We know how destructive never forgiving is in our personal relationships. No different with nations. We are still fighting the Crusades a thousand years later. Maybe its time to confine these things to the history books, and pay attention to our current problems.

 

[Butterfly]

An excellent post, and awful as the nuclear bombs were, I have to agree with this post by Underock.

I do, as well. You should hear what my neighbor, a 90-something WWII veteran who experienced the Japanese first hand in the Pacific theatre, has to say on the subject of "innocent victims." He still bears scars of their compassionate treatment, both physically and mentally.

 

[~Lenore]

[h=2]Did we really have to drop atomic bombs on Japan?[/h]
No, we could have just left the Japanese and our other enemies keep going, sorta like the current president is doing with Muslim terrorists. Just let them keep moving and growing and what ever happens happens. It's not our problem.

 

[QuickSilver]

Did we really have to drop atomic bombs on Japan?


No, we could have just left the Japanese and our other enemies keep going, sorta like the current president is doing with Muslim terrorists. Just let them keep moving and growing and what ever happens happens. It's not our problem.

Bomb bomb bomb........ Bomb bomb IRAN....

 

[Shalimar]

Butterfly, my aunt, a nurse, was interred by the Japanese. I have seen the keloid scars on her back. She was not embittered by her imprisonment, but spent the rest of her life working for peace, including speaking out against the bombings.

 

[Jackie22]

Regarding President Obama's record on terrorism, I'd say he uses his brain instead of a bomb or war....The scope of Obama’s counter-terrorism successes06/17/15 08:03 AM By Steve BenenWhenever the political world’s attention turns to matters of national security and terrorism, Republican criticisms of President Obama feature familiar talking points. The president isn’t “aggressive” enough, they say. His approach must be “tougher,” like the policies adopted by the Bush/Cheney administration. Obama’s counter-terrorism policies are so ineffective, the right insists, that the White House won’t even use the specific words – “radical Islamic terrorism” – that Republicans demand to hear. But the gap between GOP rhetoric and national-security reality continues to grow. We learned yesterday, for example, that a U.S. airstrike killed Nasir al-Wuhaysh, al Qaeda’s No. 2 official – and the top guy in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. As Rachel noted on the show last night, his death is a “huge deal,” especially given the terrorist plots al-Wuhaysh has helped oversee. NBC News had a helpful report yesterday on the frequency with which U.S. strikes have successfully targeted al Qaeda’s top leaders.Since Navy SEALs killed [Osama bin Laden] in 2011, American drone strikes have taken out seven potential candidates to succeed him as the leader of what was once the most-feared terror gang. The targeted attacks started within weeks of bin Laden’s death. Three al Qaeda higher-ups were killed in June, August and September of 2011, followed by another three in late 2012 and early 2013…. Now, the death of 38-year-old Wuhayshi – killed in a strike on Friday – is seen by American intelligence officials as a major blow to al Qaeda, which is struggling with decimated ranks and ideological competition from the Islamic State.I’m reminded of this piece in The Atlantic last fall, when Jeffrey Goldberg, hardly a liberal, wrote, “Obama has become the greatest terrorist hunter in the history of the presidency.” It’s a detail Republicans simply don’t know what to do with, so they ignore it and pretend the president is indifferent to matters of national security, all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding. While GOP officials and candidates continue to insist that what really matters is word-choice, Obama’s counter-terrorism strategy includes so many successes, they no longer generate much attention. Notice, for example, just how little chatter al-Wuhaysh’s death garnered yesterday.more here...http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/the-scope-obamas-counter-terrorism-successes

 

[WhatInThe]

private company no better than Japanese military

In regards to the entire country of Japan vs the Japanese military.

A Japanese Company; Mitsubishi apologized to US pows for having to work in their mines in World War II as slave labor.

http://news.yahoo.com/70-years-wwii-japanese-firm-apologize-us-vets-144146733.html

For the most part the entire country of Japan contributed to their war effort. When private companies use slave labor the distinction between military and civilian becomes much less defined. 50,000 POWs were forced to work for Japanese companies during the war.

 

[Cookie]

Dr. Strangelove; or How to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb

 

[AZ Jim]

I do not mind debating this issue with anyone who was alive at the time but I resent today's youth who are only aware of things as they are now, in their lifetimes making rash statements about how "wrong" we were.

 

[BobF]

I do not mind debating this issue with anyone who was alive at the time but I resent today's youth who are only aware of things as they are now, in their lifetimes making rash statements about how "wrong" we were.

I agree with your comments Jim.

 

[BobF]

Regarding President Obama's record on terrorism, I'd say he uses his brain instead of a bomb or war....The scope of Obama’s counter-terrorism successes06/17/15 08:03 AM By Steve BenenWhenever the political world’s attention turns to matters of national security and terrorism, Republican criticisms of President Obama feature familiar talking points. The president isn’t “aggressive” enough, they say. His approach must be “tougher,” like the policies adopted by the Bush/Cheney administration. Obama’s counter-terrorism policies are so ineffective, the right insists, that the White House won’t even use the specific words – “radical Islamic terrorism” – that Republicans demand to hear. But the gap between GOP rhetoric and national-security reality continues to grow. We learned yesterday, for example, that a U.S. airstrike killed Nasir al-Wuhaysh, al Qaeda’s No. 2 official – and the top guy in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. As Rachel noted on the show last night, his death is a “huge deal,” especially given the terrorist plots al-Wuhaysh has helped oversee. NBC News had a helpful report yesterday on the frequency with which U.S. strikes have successfully targeted al Qaeda’s top leaders.Since Navy SEALs killed [Osama bin Laden] in 2011, American drone strikes have taken out seven potential candidates to succeed him as the leader of what was once the most-feared terror gang. The targeted attacks started within weeks of bin Laden’s death. Three al Qaeda higher-ups were killed in June, August and September of 2011, followed by another three in late 2012 and early 2013…. Now, the death of 38-year-old Wuhayshi – killed in a strike on Friday – is seen by American intelligence officials as a major blow to al Qaeda, which is struggling with decimated ranks and ideological competition from the Islamic State.I’m reminded of this piece in The Atlantic last fall, when Jeffrey Goldberg, hardly a liberal, wrote, “Obama has become the greatest terrorist hunter in the history of the presidency.” It’s a detail Republicans simply don’t know what to do with, so they ignore it and pretend the president is indifferent to matters of national security, all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding. While GOP officials and candidates continue to insist that what really matters is word-choice, Obama’s counter-terrorism strategy includes so many successes, they no longer generate much attention. Notice, for example, just how little chatter al-Wuhaysh’s death garnered yesterday.more here...http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/the-scope-obamas-counter-terrorism-successes

One of the arguments about the way Obama has gone about killing suspected future leaders should be like this. First we should try to capture them and hold them in a jail as we try to find as much as we can about their activities and their future plans. It is known that not all can be captured but at least we would be working on the future plans of these folks.

Now it would be even more so of a way of understanding about these folks that are trying to rearrange all of the middle east and have plans to change the US too. Just plain old killing suspected or known leaders is not the only way to try to get ahead of them. Eventually we, the US, will have to pick up arms and really fight them off. We do not want them on the US lands at all. But it seems we do have some sympathizers here for sure.