Hiroshima ....just an experiment on the already defeated?

HUMAN EXPIRIMENTATION AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE Special Japanese military units conducted experiments on civilians and POWs in China and Korea. One of the most infamous was Unit 731 under Shirō Ishii. Victims were subjected to experiments including but not limited to vivisection and amputations without anesthesia and testing of biological weapons. Anesthesia was not used because it was believed to affect results.[45] To determine the treatment of frostbite, prisoners were taken outside in freezing weather and left with exposed arms, periodically drenched with water until frozen solid. The arm was later amputated; the doctor would repeat the process on the victim's upper arm to the shoulder. After both arms were gone, the doctors moved on to the legs until only a head and torso remained. The victim was then used for plague and pathogens experiments.[46] According to GlobalSecurity.org, the experiments carried out by Unit 731 alone caused 3,000 deaths.[47] Furthermore, according to the 2002 International Symposium on the Crimes of Bacteriological Warfare, the number of people killed by the Imperial Japanese Army germ warfare and human experiments is around 580,000.[48] According to other sources, "tens of thousands, and perhaps as many as 400,000, Chinese died of bubonic plague, cholera, anthrax and other diseases...", resulting from the use of biological warfare.[49] Top officers of Unit 731 were not prosecuted for war crimes after the war, in exchange for turning over the results of their research to the Allies. They were also reportedly given responsible positions in Japan's pharmaceutical industry, medical schools and health ministry.[50][51] One case of human experimentation occurred in Japan itself. At least nine out of 11 crew members survived the crash of a U.S. Army Air Forces B-29 bomber on Kyūshū, on May 5, 1945. (This plane was Lt. Marvin Watkins' crew of the 29th Bomb Group of the 6th Bomb Squadron.[52]) The bomber's commander was separated from his crew and sent to Tokyo for interrogation, while the other survivors were taken to the anatomy department of Kyushu University, at Fukuoka, where they were subjected to vivisection or killed.[53][54][55] On March 11, 1948, 30 people, including several doctors and one female nurse, were brought to trial by the Allied war crimes tribunal. Charges of cannibalism were dropped, but 23 people were found guilty of vivisection or wrongful removal of body parts. Five were sentenced to death, four to life imprisonment, and the rest to shorter terms. In 1950, the military governor of Japan, General Douglas MacArthur, commuted all of the death sentences and significantly reduced most of the prison terms. All of those convicted in relation to the university vivisection were free after 1958.[56] In addition, many participants who were responsible for these vivisections were never charged by the Americans or their allies in exchange for the information on the experiments.[57] In 2006, former IJN medical officer Akira Makino stated that he was ordered—as part of his training—to carry out vivisection on about 30 civilian prisoners in the Philippines between December 1944 and February 1945.[58] The surgery included amputations.[59] Ken Yuasa, a former military doctor in China, has also admitted to similar incidents in which he was compelled to participate.[60]

TORTURE OF P.O.W.s AND CANNIBALISM - Japanese imperial forces employed widespread use of torture on prisoners, usually in an effort to gather military intelligence quickly.[66] Tortured prisoners were often later executed. A former Japanese Army officer who served in China, Uno Shintaro, stated: The major means of getting intelligence was to extract information by interrogating prisoners. Torture was an unavoidable necessity. Murdering and burying them follows naturally. You do it so you won't be found out. I believed and acted this way because I was convinced of what I was doing. We carried out our duty as instructed by our masters. We did it for the sake of our country. From our filial obligation to our ancestors. On the battlefield, we never really considered the Chinese humans. When you're winning, the losers look really miserable. We concluded that the Yamato [i.e., Japanese] race was superior.[67] Many written reports and testimonies collected by the Australian War Crimes Section of the Tokyo tribunal, and investigated by prosecutor William Webb (the future Judge-in-Chief), indicate that Japanese personnel in many parts of Asia and the Pacific committed acts of cannibalism against Allied prisoners of war. In many cases this was inspired by ever-increasing Allied attacks on Japanese supply lines, and the death and illness of Japanese personnel as a result of hunger. However, according to historian Yuki Tanaka: "cannibalism was often a systematic activity conducted by whole squads and under the command of officers".[68] This frequently involved murder for the purpose of securing bodies. For example, an Indian POW, Havildar Changdi Ram, testified that: "[on November 12, 1944] the Kempeitai beheaded [an Allied] pilot. I saw this from behind a tree and watched some of the Japanese cut flesh from his arms, legs, hips, buttocks and carry it off to their quarters... They cut it [into] small pieces and fried it."[69] In some cases, flesh was cut from living people: another Indian POW, Lance Naik Hatam Ali (later a citizen of Pakistan), testified that in New Guinea: the Japanese started selecting prisoners and every day one prisoner was taken out and killed and eaten by the soldiers. I personally saw this happen and about 100 prisoners were eaten at this place by the Japanese. The remainder of us were taken to another spot 50 miles [80 km] away where 10 prisoners died of sickness. At this place, the Japanese again started selecting prisoners to eat. Those selected were taken to a hut where their flesh was cut from their bodies while they were alive and they were thrown into a ditch where they later died.[70] Perhaps the most senior officer convicted of cannibalism was Lt Gen. Yoshio Tachibana (立花芳夫,Tachibana Yoshio), who with 11 other Japanese personnel was tried in August 1946 in relation to the execution of U.S. Navy airmen, and the cannibalism of at least one of them, during August 1944, on Chichi Jima, in the Bonin Islands. The airmen were beheaded on Tachibana's orders. As military and international law did not specifically deal with cannibalism, they were tried for murder and "prevention of honorable burial". Tachibana was sentenced to death, and hanged.[71]

FORCED LABOR / DEATH CAMP PROGRAMS The Japanese military's use of forced labor, by Asian civilians and POWs also caused many deaths. According to a joint study by historians including Zhifen Ju, Mitsuyoshi Himeta, Toru Kubo and Mark Peattie, more than 10 million Chinese civilians were mobilized by the Kōa-in (Japanese Asia Development Board) for forced labour.[72] More than 100,000 civilians and POWs died in the construction of the Burma-Siam Railway.[73] The U.S. Library of Congress estimates that in Java, between four and 10 million romusha (Japanese: "manual laborer"), were forced to work by the Japanese military.[74] About 270,000 of these Javanese laborers were sent to other Japanese-held areas in South East Asia. Only 52,000 were repatriated to Java, meaning that there was a death rate of 80%. According to historian Akira Fujiwara, Emperor Hirohito personally ratified the decision to remove the constraints of international law (Hague Conventions (1899 and 1907)) on the treatment of Chinese prisoners of war in the directive of August 5, 1937. This notification also advised staff officers to stop using the term "prisoners of war".[75] The Geneva Convention exempted POWs of sergeant rank or higher from manual labour, and stipulated that prisoners performing work should be provided with extra rations and other essentials. However, Japan was not a signatory to the Geneva Convention at the time, and Japanese forces did not follow the convention.

reply to post by SimonPeter


Um, no. They weren't about ready with an atomic bomb, and no, they didn't get one from Nazi Germany. Apparently Germany sent some uranium in a submarine, but the sub sank before reaching Japan.

Where do you get your information from anyway?

reply to post by Dr Expired


It was partly an experiment to see the power of the atom unleashed for the sake of the Home of the Free and the Land of the Free. It was also a major experiment in atomic terrorism. It was also meant as an object lesson to the Soviet Union. And certainly was meant to expedite a quick ending of the war. Besides, after spending all that manpower/brainpower and money on it, it would be a shame not to use it, right?

reply to post by superballs


We didn't drop it in Tokyo because Tokyo and most other cities of strategic importance were already destroyed by by incendiary bombs. Hiroshima an Nagasaki were chosen because they were pretty much intact - not being military or industrial targets.

And unlike conventional air raids, in which hundreds of bombers are involved and which make a lot of noise to warn civilians to take cover, this was one lone plane masquerading as a weather plane, so nobody gave it a second thought. This was pure and simple atomic slaughter of innocent civilians and clearly nuclear terrorism. Make no mistake about it. That is was these two bombings were. So if you support these bombings, you can't have anything against a nation or group doing the same thing to your home town or city, unless you want to be the ultimate pathetic hypocrite.

Originally posted by thegagefather
Let's not forget about the impending Nazi invasion looming about.

What Nazi Invasion? I think you will find that at the time the Bombs were dropped, the Nazi Germany was pretty much finished. As was the case with Japan. From what you write you seem to think that Japanese civilians deserved this as some kind of punishment for what their Government ordered... if this is indeed the case you should ask yourself, why weren't any A-Bombs used in Europe?

reply to post by Dr Expired


In high school I dated our Japanese Foreign exchange student. His grandparents were at Hiroshima and Nagasaki on those two fateful days. He lost almost all of his family. His mother was at a boarding school in Switzerland and his father was luckily at a uncles in another city.

Japan Seeks Peace

Months before the end of the war, Japan's leaders recognized that defeat was inevitable. In April 1945 a new government headed by Kantaro Suzuki took office with the mission of ending the war. When Germany capitulated in early May, the Japanese understood that the British and Americans would now direct the full fury of their awesome military power exclusively against them.

American officials, having long since broken Japan's secret codes, knew from intercepted messages that the country's leaders were seeking to end the war on terms as favorable as possible. Details of these efforts were known from decoded secret communications between the Foreign Ministry in Tokyo and Japanese diplomats abroad.

In his 1965 study, Atomic Diplomacy: Hiroshima and Potsdam (pp. 107, 108), historian Gar Alperovitz writes:

Although Japanese peace feelers had been sent out as early as September 1944 (and [China's] Chiang Kai-shek had been approached regarding surrender possibilities in December 1944), the real effort to end the war began in the spring of 1945. This effort stressed the role of the Soviet Union ...

In mid-April [1945] the [US] Joint Intelligence Committee reported that Japanese leaders were looking for a way to modify the surrender terms to end the war. The State Department was convinced the Emperor was actively seeking a way to stop the fighting.

A Secret Memorandum

It was only after the war that the American public learned about Japan's efforts to bring the conflict to an end. Chicago Tribune reporter Walter Trohan, for example, was obliged by wartime censorship to withhold for seven months one of the most important stories of the war.

In an article that finally appeared August 19, 1945, on the front pages of the Chicago Tribune and the Washington Times-Herald, Trohan revealed that on January 20, 1945, two days prior to his departure for the Yalta meeting with Stalin and Churchill, President Roosevelt received a 40-page memorandum from General Douglas MacArthur outlining five separate surrender overtures from high-level Japanese officials. (The complete text of Trohan's article is in the Winter 1985-86 Journal, pp. 508-512.)

Source & rest of article: www.ihr.org...

If my understanding is correct Japan was ready to surrender and the American Government knew it.

That withstanding - we hear now talk of OMG WMD WMD WMD..............Well folks, so far there has only been one country that has used a Weapon of Mass Destruction TWICE - The United States of America.

What goes around comes around and karma is a real humbling experience.

We have yet to get ours and yes, while I believe in individual karma, I also believe in group karma.

To my mind, America signed an agreement (The Geneva Convention) yet we have been caught using torture.

We have used WMD.

How about HAARP?????

The American Government, not it's people, but the people quietly stand by and allow their leaders to continue on with their cruelty, greed, immoral alliances and secret plans. We the people of America have even allowed the majority of corrupt men and women in our government to stage and execute a false flag in order to allow the American Government to invade the Middle East and after bombing them for over a decade we are wondering when they are going to be able to retaliate.

Again, what goes around, comes around and both Hiroshima and Nagasaki yes were experiments on a already starving and defeated people.

There is a America the average American sees - the glorious beacon of freedom, liberty and peace and there is a America the rest of the world sees, that of a country that has slowly become a hypocritical, lying, going back on their word, tyrannical bully. Exactly like Nazi Germany and Rome before.........humanity never learns. We keep simply repeating the same cruelties over and over again.

The average American either is clueless from not being able to handle the truth or lying to themselves. We have allowed a group of cruel psychopaths to take hold of our government and eventually, when all of our freedoms are stripped away and there is a New World Order that Bush Sr. promised, then and only then will the average American MAYBE scratch their head and say, oh gee I wonder how that happened????

Americans don't really study or research who they choose for leaders, they usually party prejudice vote because it's easier and they are too dumbed down, distracted and divided to stand together and demand a accountable government.

So, while the average American is not cruel and corrupt, we have allowed our government to become that which our forefathers would reject because we're too busy watching our TVs, playing our video games, ipods, cell phones, work, soccer games, football, etc.............we the people do not REALLY CARE about the direction our country has been leading us towards.

I've even read books that Pearl Harbor, like 911 MIGHT HAVE BEEN a false flag.

Whatever you do to another always comes back at you.......always.

It's hard for me to make a judgement without knowing all the facts, theories, and what was said behind closed doors. The suffering the bombs caused cannot be disputed. War is hell, indeed it is. All I can say is that I hope karma dealt with the people involved appropriately. Aside from that, all I can put forth is wild speculation.

Originally posted by MrInquisitive
reply to post by superballs

 

We didn't drop it in Tokyo because Tokyo and most other cities of strategic importance were already destroyed by by incendiary bombs. Hiroshima an Nagasaki were chosen because they were pretty much intact - not being military or industrial targets.

And unlike conventional air raids, in which hundreds of bombers are involved and which make a lot of noise to warn civilians to take cover, this was one lone plane masquerading as a weather plane, so nobody gave it a second thought. This was pure and simple atomic slaughter of innocent civilians and clearly nuclear terrorism. Make no mistake about it. That is was these two bombings were. So if you support these bombings, you can't have anything against a nation or group doing the same thing to your home town or city, unless you want to be the ultimate pathetic hypocrite.

Interesting how civilian targets were chosen, no? Seems as though nowadays we try, or at least say, that civilian casualties are to be minimized. What if in the invasion of Iraq we simply bombed the entire country? Another question I have is this, if we had a blockade in place do you believe there would have been rampant starvation before Japan surrendered? Thank you.

If it was all about:

1) how evil the enemies were
2) saving allied lives invading a fanatically held homeland
3) any means necessary

why didnt we fill Europe with mustard gas? We could have easily won the war without losing a tenth of the troops.

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by Bakatono
Should we have bombed the two cities in order to stop the war, knowing it would kill innocents such as women and newborn babies? Should we have let the Japanese continue to murder millions of women and babies indiscriminately with medical experiments and just plain old cold blooded, evil, maniacal murder?

OMG WERE THEY RIPPING BABIES FROM INCUBATORS??? ahem.

At that point, we had them on their home ISLAND, a place surrounded by WATER. They could not get off it. We had it blockaded, and effectively controlled the air space. We had them beaten. As I mentioned before, the entire world was now ganging up on Japan. It would not have cost "millions of American lives", unless of course, the US WANTED TO BE THE ONLY NATION TO OCCUPY JAPAN for some reason.

And irradiating the crap out of them was the easiest way for us to do that. And that is why we did it. Not bacause the Japanese were evil, or all the lives it would save...because we wanted the economic benefits of being conquerers all to ourselves...and it worked. We still have a base there to this day.

Well said. Your post carries so much truth and common sense it is bound to be ignored by decades of neanderthal talking points. Star for you.

reply to post by passit

The US would have never dropped an atomic bomb on a white nation. Think about it. Nazi Germany committed far more atrocities than Japan in the war. They didn't get the bomb, let alone 2. Did they deserve it?

The war in Europe was over before the US had an atomic bomb ready to deploy, the war in Europe ended on May 7th, 1945, the first test (Trinity test) of an atomic bomb was on July 16th, 1945.

The mainland invasion of Japan (Operation Downfall) was scheduled to begin in October, 1945. The estimate of casualties varies.

In a study done by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in April, the figures of 7.45 casualties/1,000 man-days and 1.78 fatalities/1,000 man-days were developed. This implied that a 90-day Olympic campaign would cost 456,000 casualties, including 109,000 dead or missing. If Coronet took another 90 days, the combined cost would be 1,200,000 casualties, with 267,000 fatalities.

A study done by Adm. Nimitz's staff in May estimated 49,000 U.S casualties in the first 30 days, including 5,000 at sea. A study done by General MacArthur's staff in June estimated 23,000 US casualties in the first 30 days and 125,000 after 120 days . When these figures were questioned by General Marshall, MacArthur submitted a revised estimate of 105,000, in part by deducting wounded men able to return to duty.

In a conference with President Truman on June 18, Marshall, taking the Battle of Luzon as the best model for Olympic, thought the Americans would suffer 31,000 casualties in the first 30 days (and ultimately 20% of Japanese casualties, which implied a total of 70,000 casualties). Adm. Leahy, more impressed by the Battle of Okinawa, thought the American forces would suffer a 35% casualty rate (implying an ultimate toll of 268,000).

Admiral King thought that casualties in the first 30 days would fall between Luzon and Okinawa, i.e., between 31,000 and 41,000. Of these estimates, only Nimitz's included losses of the forces at sea, though kamikazes had inflicted 1.78 fatalities per kamikaze pilot in the Battle of Okinawa, and troop transports off Kyūshū would have been much more exposed.

A study done for Secretary of War Henry Stimson's staff by William Shockley estimated that conquering Japan would cost 1.7-4 million American casualties, including 400,000-800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese fatalities. The key assumption was large-scale participation by civilians in the defense of Japan.

So based upon those forecasts and also wanting to end the war with Japan before the Soviets became fully involved President Truman decided to use the atomic bomb.

Originally posted by CynicalWabbit
A study done for Secretary of War Henry Stimson's staff by William Shockley estimated that conquering Japan would cost 1.7-4 million American casualties, including 400,000-800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese fatalities. The key assumption was large-scale participation by civilians in the defense of Japan.

Please respond to my post. If it was all a numbers game and saving lives, then why not use gas in Europe?

Originally posted by aching_knuckles
If it was all about:

1) how evil the enemies were
2) saving allied lives invading a fanatically held homeland
3) any means necessary

why didnt we fill Europe with mustard gas? We could have easily won the war without losing a tenth of the troops.

Haha, just finished reading the thread up to this point, its funny how many people defending the use of the Atom Bomb using the phrase "If we didn't drop, they would have fought to the death..." This proves that the History is really written by the victors.

Anything to feel better about what your parents/grandparents did.(not directed at everyone, just those that felt OK to bomb the crap out of civilians).

reply to post by MrInquisitive

An article in the Atlanta Constitution by David Snell . The test was successful but it used all of their uranium according to the article . The fact is that they would not have hesitated to use it on us as was evident as such a barbaric people . Had the sub not surrendered the U235 ore we would have been bombed . I'm sure that neither of us has the full truth of the matter . Japans intent was evident for sure . Ironically they have Nuked themselves and possibly the world . Their leaking power plant radiation will likely kill the Pacific fisheries .

For our country to secure its place as a super power it had to show its military prowess and its ability to use it.

I believe japan regardless of what you all think could have been easily defeated by alternate means with less destruction but that would not end the war with a crescendo praising the USA.

If you believe the bomb was dropped to prevent bloodshed of our boys you are wrong .. read up what happened at the end of WW1 where generals committed war crimes by pushing soldiers to attack the enemy even after the cease fire was called.. down to the wire they kept pushing them to fight. any war crimes were dismissed from our generals at the time since it was bad pr.

the same thing happened here, except in this case the decision was easier since they were not our people who were dieing

I do not like it but it had a lot to do with where are are today as a nation.... and it is still reflected in our current treatment of other countries during war. mistreat the enemy and kick it under the rug. ALL COUNTRIES ACT THIS WAY. had the shoe been on the other foot japan would have done the same to us .

better them than us

Originally posted by thegagefather

Originally posted by SeventhSeal
At times I really do question if using TWO atomic weapons was really the right approach to end the war. Then I remember how the Japanese raped, tortured, and murdered over 300,000 innocent Chinese civilians, committed chemical and biological experiments on prisoners of war, flew planes into ships killing U.S. sailors, and beyond.

There was absolutely no other way to end the war with Japan. I'm convinced of that.

We actually tried to use 3.

Cool story bro.

Point still stands.

Hiroshima was needed, as horrific and painful as it was.. it ended the war, saved tens of thousands of lives and drew the line with the rest of the world that any sort of barbaric slaughter in the name of a god would not be tolerated any longer.

The US was rapidly running out of money and materials to fight the war, it had lost countless men and it was
suffering from fatigue having just assisted the Russians and Brits in defeating the Nazi's.

Hiroshima was important, however Nagasaki was questionable.

Did we need to drop a second bomb on Nagasaki? couldn't we have vaporized a small island of the coast and told the Japanese we will drop dozens of these bombs unless you surrender now.

They thought we didn't have another one, or many..

One interesting fact about the bombing,

Is that when it dropped the bomb over Hiroshima, the people believed the plane was going down and the pilot ejected.
They saw the parachute floating down.. many of them applauded. Thats right, they sat out doors, stared at the parachute and clapped their hands thinking an American plane had been shot down.

I'm not sure what hit them first.. the flash, the shock wave or reality!

reply to post by votan

If you believe the bomb was dropped to prevent bloodshed of our boys you are wrong .. read up what happened at the end of WW1 where generals committed war crimes by pushing soldiers to attack the enemy even after the cease fire was called.. down to the wire they kept pushing them to fight. any war crimes were dismissed from our generals at the time since it was bad pr.

The Japanese a supposed "beaten" enemy inflicted over 62,000 casualties including over 12,500 killed, destroyed 768 planes and sunk 28 ships during the battle of Okinawa which ran from April through June, 1945

If the Japanese fought with such tenacity over Okinawa how do you think they would have fought for Tokyo