The Atomic Bombings on Japan were war crimes and here is why!

page: 14
88
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 01:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by daaskapital
My objective here is to let people know the truth.


By posting lies? that does not help at all!




posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 01:45 AM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Okay...even if the civilians were soldiers, it still has no effect on the WMD droppings being war crimes.

The bomb was still used to cause unnecessary suffering.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 01:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by daaskapital
The bomb was still used to cause unnecessary suffering.


Wrong, it was used to force japan to surrender, and it took 2 of them for the Japanese to finally agree to surrender. And there many more on the way if necessary.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 01:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by daaskapital
My objective here is to let people know the truth.


By posting lies? that does not help at all!



They're not lies.

The bombings caused unnecessary suffering on civilians in cities, therefore the bombings were war crimes. It doesn't matter if some of the population were considered soldiers or were working for the war machine. Some people bombed would have been civilians. Therefore, the USA broke the law.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by daaskapital
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Okay...even if the civilians were soldiers, it still has no effect on the WMD droppings being war crimes.

The bomb was still used to cause unnecessary suffering.




I gave you the facts, as MANY in this thread have given you the facts.

Why are you being so obtuse?



The Japanese Generals themselves stated that the war would have continued if it wasn't for The Bombs and the Threat of Russia. Its Atomic revisionist history you are perpetrating in. The Japanese were committing suicide and killing their OWN children ! You cant just focus on the bombings, without focusing on the WHOLE picture.
Its disingenuous.


Just look how the Japanese viewed it.........

The commander of the 5th Japanese Army, General Simidzu, commented that "each nation lives and dies by its own laws."



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by daaskapital
The bombings caused unnecessary suffering on civilians in cities,


Who said it was unnecessary? You?


. Therefore, the USA broke the law.


No they did not. All civilians were told to leave the city - but you ignore that, japan was told what would happen if they did not surrender, but both you and the japanese ignored that.

But keep being a Japanese apologist!



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 01:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by daaskapital
The bomb was still used to cause unnecessary suffering.


Wrong, it was used to force japan to surrender, and it took 2 of them for the Japanese to finally agree to surrender. And there many more on the way if necessary.


Regardless, the survivors of the blast had to SUFFER for the rest of their lives. Therefore, the Atom Bombs caused unnecessary suffering. The bomb was also detonated at an altitude and not on the ground (in order to cause more damage), which was unnecessary given the circumstances.

So the bombs did in fact cause unnecessary suffering, and as such were war crimes.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by daaskapital
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Okay...even if the civilians were soldiers, it still has no effect on the WMD droppings being war crimes.

The bomb was still used to cause unnecessary suffering.




I gave you the facts, as MANY in this thread have given you the facts.

Why are you being so obtuse?



The Japanese Generals themselves stated that the war would have continued if it wasn't for The Bombs and the Threat of Russia. Its Atomic revisionist history you are perpetrating in. The Japanese were committing suicide and killing their OWN children ! You cant just focus on the bombings, without focusing on the WHOLE picture.
Its disingenuous.


Just look how the Japanese viewed it.........

The commander of the 5th Japanese Army, General Simidzu, commented that "each nation lives and dies by its own laws."



And i gave you all the law.

And powerful Americans had stated that they would have got nailed for War Crimes (in regards to the bombings on Japan. Nuclear and otherwise) if they had lost.

it doesn't matter how the Japanese viewed it, because the international law is what stands during times of war.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by daaskapital
Regardless, the survivors of the blast had to SUFFER for the rest of their lives.


All due to the Japanese government, but you are unwilling to blame them! I wonder why....


So the bombs did in fact cause unnecessary suffering, and as such were war crimes.


No, it was not. Again why do you keep repeating that lie?



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:02 AM
link   
reply to post by daaskapital
 

reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 

reply to post by SpeachM1litant
 


WWII Atrocities The International Military Tribunals


As the Allied Powers developed the constitutions of these military tribunals, the existing international legal framework's limitations became apparent. For example, the Geneva and Hague Conventions in place during World War II were focused on the relationship between belligerent nations and military forces while ignoring, at least to some extent, war's impact on the civilian population. The Hague Convention of 1907 codified a series of limitations and protections only with respect to the treatment of the civilian population in an occupied territory.

Therefore, crimes perpetrated against the civilian populations of Poland, Austria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Yugoslavia, and the other countries invaded by Germany were punishable under the Hague Conventions. The crimes committed against German civilians, however, were not specifically covered under any of the existing conventions governing conduct during warfare because they were not committed by an invading power, but rather by the citizens' own government. This absence of law establishing protections for all civilians challenged the Tribunals' ability to hold military and civilian leaders of the Third Reich accountable for the war crimes committed against its own civilian population.


The Hague Convention of 1907

Art. 2. The inhabitants of a territory which has not been occupied, who, on the approach of the enemy, spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading troops without having had time to organize themselves in accordance with Article 1, shall be regarded as belligerents if they carry arms openly and if they respect the laws and customs of war.


List of Japanese operations during World War II

Operation Ketsugō

While Japan no longer had a realistic prospect of winning the war, Japan's leaders believed they could make the cost of conquering Japan too high for the Allies to accept, which would lead to some sort of armistice rather than total defeat. The Japanese plan for defeating the invasion was called Operation Ketsugō (決号作戦 ketsugō sakusen?) ("Operation Codename Decisive"). The Japanese had secretly constructed an underground headquarters which could be used in the event of Allied invasion to shelter the Emperor and the Imperial General Staff.


Just for Kyushu -

In March 1945, there was only one combat division in Kyūshū. Over the next four months, the Imperial Japanese Army transferred forces from Manchuria, Korea, and northern Japan, while raising other forces in place. By August, they had 14 divisions and various smaller formations, including three tank brigades, for a total of 900,000 men.[22] Although the Japanese were able to raise large numbers of new soldiers, equipping them was more difficult. By August, the Japanese Army had the equivalent of 65 divisions in the homeland but only enough equipment for 40 and only enough ammunition for 30.[23]


Plans for the Patriotic Citizens of Japan -

In addition, the Japanese had organized the Patriotic Citizens Fighting Corps, which included all healthy men aged 15 to 60 and women 17 to 40 for a total of 28 million people, for combat support and, later, combat jobs. Weapons, training, and uniforms were generally lacking: some men were armed with nothing better than muzzle-loading muskets, longbows, or bamboo spears; nevertheless, they were expected to make do with what they had.[25]

One mobilized high school girl, Yukiko Kasai, found herself issued an awl and told, "Even killing one American soldier will do. ... You must aim for the abdomen."[26]


What is the Patriotic Citizens Fighting Corps?

The Kokumin Giyū Sentōtai was intended as main reserve along with a "second defense line" for Japanese forces to sustain a war of attrition against invading forces. After the allied invasion, these forces were intended to form resistance or guerilla warfare cells in cities, towns or mountains.

Some 28,000,000 men and women were considered "combat capable" by the end of June 1945, yet only about 2,000,000 of them were recruited when the war ended, and most of them did not experience combats due to Japan's surrender before the Allied invasion of the Japanese home islands. The Battle of Okinawa took place before the formation of Volunteer Fighting Corps. [3] At this stage of the war, the lack of modern weaponry and ammunition meant that most were armed with swords or even bamboo spears.


Please check the war crimes argument at the door and learn ALL of the history involved.
edit on 25-12-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-12-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-12-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by daaskapital
The bombings caused unnecessary suffering on civilians in cities,


Who said it was unnecessary? You?


. Therefore, the USA broke the law.


No they did not. All civilians were told to leave the city - but you ignore that, japan was told what would happen if they did not surrender, but both you and the japanese ignored that.

But keep being a Japanese apologist!


It was unnecessary because the USA had detonated the bomb at an altitude on purpose, to cause maximum damage.

_________

That was one of the only things the USA done (which abided by the law) before the Atomic bombings.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by daaskapital
Regardless, the survivors of the blast had to SUFFER for the rest of their lives.


All due to the Japanese government, but you are unwilling to blame them! I wonder why....


It doesn't matter whose fault it was. The USA dropped the bomb, which caused unnecessary suffering. Therefore, they committed the crime.



So the bombs did in fact cause unnecessary suffering, and as such were war crimes.


No, it was not. Again why do you keep repeating that lie?


See above. They were war crimes.
edit on 25-12-2012 by daaskapital because: quote



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Stop it X........

Quit giving out free facts. There is no room for them, when AGENDA and BLAME is the only reason this thread was made.....




posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:13 AM
link   
reply to post by daaskapital
 


I hope you understand that part of the decision to detonate at altitude was in case of a malfunction that way Japan wouldn’t be able to recover an undetonated bomb then be able to reverse engineer or repair it then turn around and use it on the US. It is a solid military tactic. See also proximity fuses for air AA burst rounds the US went to great lengths to keep that technology from enemy hands. The second bomb was used because a conditional surrender was unacceptable of course you already knew that. If japan had unconditionally surrendered and we had bombed them again then it would be a war crime however they held out and the US used there last remaining nuclear bomb.

This has been gone over many times both on ATS and the international community the US did not commit a war crime by using the atomic bomb that has been the official word on the matter.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


I honestly don't understand why you insist on derailing this thread with facts.....



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


I honestly don't understand why you insist on derailing this thread with facts.....



Because ignorance has been derailing threads on this site for many years now and I thought we would try something new.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by daaskapital
because the international law is what stands during times of war.


"each nation lives and dies by its own laws."



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by daaskapital
because the international law is what stands during times of war.


"each nation lives and dies by its own laws."


"All wars are crimes"



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fromabove
reply to post by daaskapital
 


It was necessary to inflict damage on Japan with Atomic weapons. The damage was also unavoidable. So, there was no war crime committed. And besides, rules for war are stupid to say the least. The idea behind war is to destroy your enemy by whatever means possible in order to be the victor.




edit on 24-12-2012 by Fromabove because: (no reason given)


so by that notion you dont believe in war crimes at all, because as you say



rules for war are stupid to say the least. The idea behind war is to destroy your enemy by whatever means possible in order to be the victor.


and if you believe your enemy were conspiring to bring your regime down financially or what ever they were planning it would be up to you to stop them, maybe ship them into big camps work them and furnace them. its not really a crime there the enemy of the state after all



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:55 AM
link   
- The Soviet Union received word from high level Japanese sources that the Japanese would be willing to surrender on the condition that the Emperor’s position was safeguarded.

- Nobel Laureate James Franck urged the government to consider dropping the new bomb on a deserted island. Some American leaders believed that if this demonstration bomb did not detonate, the war would be lengthened, not shortened.

- The first defeat for the Japanese army came in Mongolia at the hands of the Soviets three days after the first bomb was dropped.

- From June to the beginning of August 1945 the Japanese cabinet was split 3:3 over unconditional surrender to the allies.

- Considerably more damage was done to Tokyo, Dresden and Hamburg in firestorms caused by traditional bombing than from the A-bomb raid on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

- An invasion of the home islands would be incredibly costly in terms of the numbers killed and wounded. Estimates vary widely but the campaign to retake the Philippines island of Luzon cost 31,000 American lives along with 156,000 Japanese casualties.

- It was unclear just when or if the Japanese would surrender. The Germans had fought to the end with defeat only coming when their capital Berlin was taken and their leader Hitler was dead.

- The American public was overwhelmingly behind the atomic bombing of Japan: the bomb received an 85% approval rating.

- One reason in favour of dropping the bomb was to show the Soviets the extent of American power and that the Americans were willing to use it.

- Even though the American government insisted on unconditional surrender, and that included no safeguard of Emperor Hirohito's position after the Japanese surrender, this position was soon forgotten and the Emperor was allowed to stay.

- There was a great depth of feeling in the US against the Japanese. This was partly because of the undeclared attack on Pearl Harbour but also because of the well-known and brutal treatment of allied prisoners of war.

- The Japanese population was starving to death. The vast majority of Japan's merchant ships had been sunk and supplies were not entering the country.

- The Japanese surrendered soon after the bombs were dropped. The bombs may have made it easier for the politicians to make peace.

- The making of the atomic bombs was incredibly expensive. If the bombs were not used and Americans died, it would be politically damaging to Truman.

- The allies feared that the Soviets would move into the far east, just as they had moved into Eastern Europe.



There were those who considered that the atomic bomb should never have been used at all. I cannot associate myself with such ideas… I am surprised that very worthy people—but people who in most cases had no intention of proceeding to the Japanese front themselves—should adopt a position that rather than throw this bomb we should have sacrificed a million American and a quarter of a million British lives…
Winston Churchill, leader of the Opposition, in a speech to the British House of Commons, August 1945[7]


The U.S. anticipated losing many soldiers in the planned invasion of Japan, although the number of expected fatalities and wounded is subject to some debate. U.S. President Truman stated in 1953 he had been advised U.S. casualties could range from 250,000 to one million men.


Some historians see ancient Japanese warrior traditions as a major factor in the resistance in the Japanese military to the idea of surrender. According to one Air Force account,


"The Japanese code of bushido—'the way of the warrior'—was deeply ingrained. The concept of Yamato-damashii equipped each soldier with a strict code: never be captured, never break down, and never surrender. Surrender was dishonorable. Each soldier was trained to fight to the death and was expected to die before suffering dishonor. Defeated Japanese leaders preferred to take their own lives in the painful samurai ritual of seppuku (called hara kiri in the West). Warriors who surrendered were not deemed worthy of regard or respect."[21


Even though the devastation that was levied by the atomic bombs was great it is undeniable that by ending the war instead of dragging it out was far more humane. Keep in mind the Japanese were starving and in many reports say they were prepared to fight to the last man woman and child. Japan up until that point was a brutal warrior culture that would prefer death over defeat had we not used the atomic bomb there it is quite possible victory over japan would have been at a cost on par with genocide. Calling the use of the atomic bomb demonstrates a great deal of ignorance on the part of those making that accusation. After the Japans surrender the US helped rebuild Japan installing a peaceful government which is far better than what they had before.
edit on 25-12-2012 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
88
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join