Pilot of plane that bombed Hiroshima dies

[ppopsie]

Originally Posted by drgondog

Very understandable perspective regarding the first and only use of nuclear weapons.

You probably acknowledge that for the US, the war with the Germans was more intellectual and the war with Japan was emotional - the contrast in our way of life, Pearl Harbor, the Phillipines, Nanking, etc all represented emotional wounds that the Germans didn't quite reach until the Concentration Camps were discovered -

Your question is - in President Truman's role what would your alternative course of action be? And why?

Thanks drgondog,
Constructive comments. I never read or hear before that for the US the war toward Japan was emotional, in that clear manner, but it is fully understandable. We started off the war by attacking Pearl Harbor to incur the emotion of the Americans. So what were the Japanese people at that time? I don't know. I understand by reading books that the people in Japan were not fully convinced to fight on at the point of time. Instead the people started to suffer shrtage of goods or foods, to starve.

Japan had been spending money on the military before WW2 for the obvious reason of survival but what was the survival? Spending such a huge (for Japan's economy) money on such a non-productive sector had already led the nation to near bunkrupt. If it is to think about the alternative, what was it for Japan or entire world way before the war may have priority. It is easy to find one AFTER, though...

One more thing; most of the soldiers were the citizenes just few months before.

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by ppopsie

Thanks drgondog,
Constructive comments. I never read or hear before that for the US the war toward Japan was emotional, in that clear manner, but it is fully understandable. We started off the war by attacking Pearl Harbor to incur the emotion of the Americans. So what were the Japanese people at that time? I don't know. I understand by reading books that the people in Japan were not fully convinced to fight on at the point of time. Instead the people started to suffer shrtage of goods or foods, to starve.

Japan had been spending money on the military before WW2 for the obvious reason of survival but what was the survival? Spending such a huge (for Japan's economy) money on such a non-productive sector had already led the nation to near bunkrupt. If it is to think about the alternative, what was it for Japan or entire world way before the war may have priority. It is easy to find one AFTER, though...

One more thing; most of the soldiers were the citizenes just few months before.

I had a father in law that was a B-25 pilot (Capt Albert Scott) shot down in the Aleutians and 'rescued' in 1943. When he was 'rescued' in 1945 near Tokyo he weighed 85 pounds. He never forgave or forgot until he passed away - most of the Pacific vets felt the same way. This might explain the intensity to a degree - it wasn't just the war it was also very much the treatment of POWs and Civilians. My father did not 'hate' Germans until he lost a younger brother in Holland.

I had to chuckle just a little bit at your last comment.. until December 7, 1941 we had very few soldiers relative to USSR, Japan, Italy, Germany, UK and Japan - most of our soldiers were reflecting "why, I was a civilian just a couple of months ago"

If you have a chance watch War by Ken Burns to view US contribution and loss in a different light? And I am fully aware of the great sacrifices Japan experienced during WWII - if only from an intellectual Point of View. Japan lost more dead to our fire and nuclear bombing than we lost during the entire war.

Regards,

Bill

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by Negative Creep

Good sentiments but I don't think they are applicable in a modern total war. Bombing or shelling will inevitably result in collateral damage and civilian casualties even with the most modern technology. If it was the Allies who started the war and first launched indiscriminate bombing raids then you could view it in a different context, but the Axis reaped what they had sown. Of course no country ever has a clean record in war, but compared to the crimes Germany and Japan committed US and British bombing pales in my opinion. a Bombing civilians to try and end the war may not have been noble or even correct. But sometimes you don't need to do what is right, you need to do what is necessary

NC - no argument from me - but we have the benefit of the 'winner's perspective" - I have no doubt we would have suffered far more had Japan or Germany had the upper hand... particularly after the war.

One only has to contrast what we did for Europe and Japan to rebuild vs the USSR to gain perspective.

[Negative Creep]

Agreed, I think it's impossible to look at past events with contemporary views. We can never truly look at it from a 1945 US perspective because we weren't alive in the US in 1945, same goes for the Japanese. What annoys me is morons who have no knowledge of the war calling the bombings a war crime against the poor innocent Japanese. I did see a CND protest in town a few months back and was very tempted to remonstrate but I don't think you can get through to such people

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by Negative Creep

Agreed, I think it's impossible to look at past events with contemporary views. We can never truly look at it from a 1945 US perspective because we weren't alive in the US in 1945, same goes for the Japanese. What annoys me is morons who have no knowledge of the war calling the bombings a war crime against the poor innocent Japanese. I did see a CND protest in town a few months back and was very tempted to remonstrate but I don't think you can get through to such people

Lol - actually NC I WAS alive in '45.. but as a very young child, Air Force Brat I saw Japan during the occupation from age 3-6, and Germany 8-9 so I saw pre-emergent Japan as a Stranger in a Strange land, and Germany well on way to recovery - but a child's perspective not one who fought against either of these peoples.

I agree the moron comment and unfortunately see no 'turning back' of the percentage - the education in history is bad enough in the US - I can only imagine how thw War is treated today in Europe.

[Negative Creep]

I think you'd be very hard pressed to find anyone who doesn't feel WW2 was justified. The only real controversy seems to be over the atom bombs and area bombing. Although I tihnk there was a politicial element in the decision to use the bombs, i.e stop the Soviets capturing more territory I often wonder if their use prevented a Third World War?

[ppopsie]

Originally Posted by Negative Creep

... prevented a Third World War?

I understand that but that is another fearful thing I thought of just recently. I lived through that ages without realizing it.

[Haztoys]

Originally Posted by Negative Creep

I often wonder if their use prevented a Third World War?

Thats how I feel about it .."We all" got a tasted of what a nuke would do.. And that was a small one ..Now its "my understanding" they were really not sure what it would do...Could be wrong on that statement.. ..

Sad that the Japanese people were the ones to have to find out what it would do...Sad the anyone had to find out...

Does anyone know if there were ever plans to drop a nuke on Germany...?

[AL Schlageter]

I thought Germany was the primary target in the beginning as Germany was developing their own bomb. The utter and complete collapse into defeat of Germany resulted in a target change.

[plan_D]

I don't think dropping the atom bomb on Germany was ever on the cards after June '44. The Allied command would not have seen it as a potential war shortening weapon, and the U.S did want to see the full extent of the damage caused by an atom bomb; that's why Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen, being the only undamaged cities left.

No one better take that the wrong way. The U.S did not simply drop the atom bomb to test its abilities, they dropped it Hiroshima to test its abilities and the 'minor' matter of Hiroshima being a military center.

[Haztoys]

I guess with the Soviets closing in from the East and the Allieds on the west...All could see it was over soon.. And the Germans people were not so crazy about fighting to the death as Japan was...

[ppopsie]

Originally Posted by Haztoys

....so crazy about fighting to the death as Japan was...

I would like to note that if dying was the creed of Bushido, that should've possesed only by the Samurai class which occupied less than 10 per cent of the total population of Japan in Edo era, up until less than 80 years before the thing occured. Taking one's responsibility by Harakiri was just limited for that class people.

To my best knowledge others including farmers, merchants and workers were not allowed to carry weapons of such kind hence no such undertaking was conducted in these classes.

[plan_D]

The Allied staff would have been going on what had happened on Iwo Jima and Okinawa; assuming the Japanese would fight to the last man, woman and child.

I cannot remember where I read that all surplus Japanese aircraft had been made into human-guided bombs; something in the region of 17,000 'planes' were found when the U.S occupied the island.

We should all realise that not every person in Japan would fight, and not all would fight to the death (there were Japanese prisoners, if only a few) but the numbers of combatants (professional & militia) on the Japanese homeland would have made the resistance in Germany look minimal.

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by plan_D

I cannot remember where I read that all surplus Japanese aircraft had been made into human-guided bombs; something in the region of 17,000 'planes' were found when the U.S occupied the island.

In David Jablownski's epic book "Airwar" he stated that there were about 8,000 combat aircraft on the mainland with "thousands" of others to be used for suicide missions.

[ppopsie]

As I posted earlier on the this thread that the atom bombs and Soviet's breaking out in northeast China finally convinced Japan to take an unconditional surrender in August 1945.

This political decision making was led by the cabinet members who, though very secretly, believed in to bring the fighting to end. If the cabinet or the government was not so, which was still quite possible to happen, and still insisted on fighting, there could be a doubt whether the atom bombs alone would really made Japan to on her knees.

Then what would happen thereafter?. That is what I am scared to think of.

Following is an information only.
The ground combat took place in Okinawa in early 1945 stoods out in our war history. Not only the sacrifices were made, but also many people there killed themselves not to surrender to the Americans. It has been commonly recognized in Japan that to do so was ordered by Japanese military there. But recently a doubt on this reasoning caused a political devate which developed into a critical one (there are a pile of other political issues of course).