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

page: 3
88
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 05:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by daaskapital
Yes it is! Your ability to ignore the facts is astounding.


You are the one ignoring the facts, the bombings were not a war crime. Funny how a armchair apologist 67 years after the bombings want to just attack the USA!


Oh my God


You still don't get it do you?

I just showed you proof that the USA broke international law on more than 1 occasion in relation to the Atomic bombings of Japan.

So you think that just because the bombing saved lives, it should give the USA a free get out of jail card?


They broke the law, despite whether or not they were trying to save lives.




posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 05:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by woogleuk
but how is killing thousands of innocent civilians not a crime?


"innocent civilians"? They were heavily involved in the japanese war effort.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 05:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by woogleuk
but how is killing thousands of innocent civilians not a crime?


"innocent civilians"? They were heavily involved in the japanese war effort.


Not every single one of them.

You are delusional!

I'm sure that the USA would be calling them war crimes/crimes against humanity if the Japanese decided to bomb US cities with nukes, killing thousands of civilians...



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 06:03 AM
link   
reply to post by weston19
 


So why the second bomb, if surrender was an option? Because the USA did not agree to the terms, seems like a harsh punishment.

More like, it was a new weapon, the USA wanted to show its might, and dropping the second bomb was to show that the USA wasn't to be argued with.

I actually respect the USA in the sense that it wields all that power, yet it has managed not to use it again.....yet, but it still doesn't take away the fact that they did at the time, although, in its defense, I think afterwards it may have regretted it.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by daaskapital
You are delusional!


You are the delusional one here, claiming the bombings were war crimes....



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 06:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by daaskapital
You are delusional!


You are the delusional one here, claiming the bombings were war crimes....


Not claiming...just proving



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 06:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by woogleuk
So why the second bomb, if surrender was an option?


it was a option Japan was not going to take. I wonder if you even knew that after the 2nd bomb the emperor was going to surrender, and there was a attempt at a military coup to stop him....



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 06:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by daaskapital
Not claiming...just proving


All you have proved is that even 67 years after the bombings Japanese apologists are still attacking the USA over the bombings!



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 07:02 AM
link   
reply to post by daaskapital
 




Robert Strange McNamara admits it was unnecessary...

with tears in his eyes..





posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by daaskapital
 

Of-course they were war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Who said otherwise?



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by hellobruce
 


I wasn't aware of that, I was only aware of the surrender proposal after the first bomb, and the USA said not on your nellie, we're gonna show the world this technology we stole from the Nazi's is rather brutal and not to be messed with.

Think I am going to brush up on my history.
edit on 23/12/12 by woogleuk because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Hiroshima was shocking mainly because of the unorthodox method used... the amount of people killed paled in comparison to some of the atrocities committed by Japanese troops in the war.

www.hawaii.edu...

From the invasion of China in 1937 to the end of World War II, the Japanese military regime murdered near 3,000,000 to over 10,000,000 people, most probably almost 6,000,000 Chinese, Indonesians, Koreans, Filipinos, and Indochinese, among others, including Western prisoners of war. This democide was due to a morally bankrupt political and military strategy, military expediency and custom, and national culture (such as the view that those enemy soldiers who surrender while still able to resist were criminals)


I think the US had no choice, also, it deserved to give Japan a punch in the mouth after Pearl Harbor.

Dropping 2 might have been a little much, but Hiroshima needed to go down in history!

plus, Japan has recovered, its cities have been rebuilt, generations have past on and Hiroshima and Nagasaki continue as bustling cities...

'IT' was big, but it wasn't forever big!


They always said history was re-written by the victors, just how much has been re-written and is still being rewritten is yet to be determined.
Hawaii education dude, are you for real.

www.hawaii.edu...


MPORTANT NOTE: Among all the democide estimates appearing on this website, some have been revised upward. I have changed that for Mao's famine, 1958-1962, from zero to 38,000,000. And thus I have had to change the overall democide for the PRC (1928-1987) from 38,702,000 to 76,702,000. Details here. I have changed my estimate for colonial democide from 870,000 to an additional 50,000,000. Details here. Thus, the new world total: old total 1900-1999 = 174,000,000. New World total = 174,000,000 + 38,000,000 (new for China) + 50,000,000 (new for Colonies) = 262,000,000. Just to give perspective on this incredible murder by government, if all these bodies were laid head to toe, with the average height being 5', then they would circle the earth ten times. Also, this democide murdered 6 times more people than died in combat in all the foreign and internal wars of the century. Finally, given popular estimates of the dead in a major nuclear war, this total democide is as though such a war did occur, but with its dead spread over a century.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by daaskapital
Not claiming...just proving


All you have proved is that even 67 years after the bombings Japanese apologists are still attacking the USA over the bombings!


well the way I see it is this, the Japanese had the option to use WMD's (chemical Bio weapons) on American city's and had in place a delivery system which was effective, I.E. The Sen Toku. and the Japanese high command chose not to use them.
On the other hand the Americans/ Allies had WMD's and chose to use them taking the lives of hundreds of thousands of men women children and babies. now you can disassociate your self from this as much as you like but that's how it is.
was it against the rules , sure it was. did anybody care, no, who paid the price? the average person.
now the average American might be pretty swank about all of this because they barely got scratched at home in the war, i mean a navy base getting bombed out in the pacific is hardly anything serious and lets face it half the war was over when you decided to make an effort to come in then you had to use WMD's to finish the job anyway.
But at the end of the day is this any worse than when the allies bombed 250,000 people to death in Dresden over 4 days so much so that the Germans had to pile the body's onto mountainous funeral pyres.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 07:54 AM
link   
We all have dirty hands so what?www.globalresearch.ca...
The crown has been stomping on the world for centuries longer than the US.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 08:36 AM
link   
When the country with the most destructive force uses it...who is to enforce the War Crime ruling? The world remains too divided to even think that what was agreed upon could ever be enforced.

If there was any value to the crimes that have taken place anywhere, it is to look back and see what we are capable of during times where we feel threatened. To recognize that WAR coupled with FEAR unleashes a survival instinct that has no boundaries. That instinct has always/all ways existed and should never be thought of as a bluff.

I have heard some say that the USA did not go far enough. That they should have moved forward and continue bombing until all nations surrendered and agreed to a democracy that served all. Of course this would put world power on one nation and we know that the second part of nature would kick in...Greed.

We as a society are growing and with that comes growing pains. Our social media for the first time in a long time gives the masses the means to take part in the world events. As we mix our cultures in many countries we see that our needs and desires are for the most part similar...and our fears and actions still remain. I for one think we are doing better as a result from learning from the past, and that our current world leaders have a much larger task as the masses become vocal.

Death...Destructiion...such an easy way out. We are better than that, and perhaps will still have a window of opportunity to prove it.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by woogleuk
reply to post by hellobruce
 


Not attacking the USA in general, but how is killing thousands of innocent civilians not a crime? Collateral damage only goes so far.

You can't point out some action and ask how it is not a crime. Society doesn't make lists of things that are not-crimes and assume everything else is a crime, it makes lists of things that are crimes--we call these laws--and assumes everything else is permissible. The burden of proof is on you to prove that something is a crime, by demonstrating that it violated a law. So, name the convention or statute which was violated by the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and show us all how those actions violated specific parts of that convention or statute.

You might want to start here.
edit on 23-12-2012 by FurvusRexCaeli because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by woogleuk
reply to post by weston19
 


So why the second bomb, if surrender was an option? Because the USA did not agree to the terms, seems like a harsh punishment.

"Punishment?" Japan did not agree to the Allied terms for surrender. They maintained a state of belligerency, and were subject to attack. That's what one does to belligerents in a war, one attacks them until there is a mutually acceptable proposal to end the conflict. If that is "punishment," so is every battle in every war, ever.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   
All sides of the argument have been addressed it would appear. I believe everyone involved in the decision to drop those bombs is dead now. How far do we go back to charge a country with crimes? There have been crusades throughout history that murdered millions. Do we charge those countries for murdering innocent women and children? Where does it end if you succeed in convicting America of long past war crimes? Is that not a sort of Pandoras box?
I wish the nuclear bomb had never been invented/discovered. We all do. The harsh reality is that it would have been discovered by someone/someday and it would have been used against one country or several. The loss of life involved is regretable, however it did demonstrate to the world its horrendous destructive power to the extent that it has never been used again. Let us hope it will never be used again.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by repeatoffender
 


The Sen Toku wasn't ready until too late in the war to do anything. They trained and prepared for the Panama Canal attack, but it was called off due to the fall of Okinawa. When they found out that America and her allies were preparing to assault the Home Islands, they thought the Panama Canal attack would be useless to change anything, and something more drastic was needed. Plans were drawn up to attack 15 American aircraft carriers at Ulithi Atoll.

The plan was for I-13 and I-14 to join I-400 and I-401 and launch a kamikaze attack on the carriers. They went so far as to paint their aircraft silver and put the "stars and bars" on them to confuse defending aircraft. After the attack, they were to sail to Hong Kong, recover more aircraft, and head to Singapore for more fuel.

I-13 was detected on the surface and damaged by Avenger torpedo bombers, and later sank by a destroyer. Japan surrendered before the attack, and the aircraft were launched with wings folded, and torpedoes fired at nothing to get rid of them.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by daaskapital
 



I honestly believe the atomic bombings of Japan are among the worst atrocities committed by our "civilised" world. I feel both anger and sadness for the suffering of so many people, because of the apparent indiscriminate nature of the devastating effects caused by the atomic weapons. However, I maintain my opinion that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not war crimes, when kept within the perspective of the atrocities commited by all the combantant nations.

I am aware of the 1963 Shimoda case, and how the District Court of Tokyo found that the bombings violated the Hague convention of 1907. The plaintiff used the same arguements you are presenting. The District Court also found that there was nothing that could be done about it, but that is not why I will not concede that the bombings were a war crime.

I won't accept the findings of the District Court of Tokyo, simply because the indiscriminate bombing of many Chinese cities by Japanese Imperial Forces was never raised. Nevermind the long lists of other "war crimes", which have also not been offically recognized by the Japanese. I believe the District Court of Tokyo, ruled that the peace treaty waived the rights of their citizens, in order to prevent a closer scrutiny of Japans own war crimes.




edit on 23-12-2012 by tamusan because: (no reason given)





 
88
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join