Oppenheimer: Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Bomb the Japanese

Clickbait title. This has nothing to do with the film. The issue is the atomic bombing of Japan. Now the question here isn't was it justified (though I suppose we can discuss that as well (wish there was an option for two polls). The issue is whether it caused the Japanese to surrender.

Me personally, I lean towards somewhere around Options 2-5, with 3 and 5 being the ones I'd lean most strongly towards. I think it's hard to really grasp from a leadership perspective the impact the Soviet invasion meant and what a threat it meant to the leadership and elite of Japan in a way that the atomic bomb did not.

Morally...the Japanese did some awful things, but in terms of the Americans, the worst the did was catch a military installation by surprise through the incompetence of that installation and kill 2,500 soldiers. Burning alive hundreds of thousands of women and children does not really seem proportionate in my view. In fact, it comes across as borderline psychotic.

But that's my view. What's yours?

I mean there’s Nanking…..

Ask any Korean about Japan’s war-time activities.

Dunno about the Japanese being as innocent as you’re saying.

Yeah, I guess Nanjing, countless other massacres, raping, cultural genocide, and medical experiments just didn't happen, right?

I'd seriously refrain from sharing your opinion on the Japanese with Korean people. Damn.

I mean there’s Nanking…..

Ask any Korean about Japan’s war-time activities.

Dunno about the Japanese because as innocent as you’re saying.

Yeah, I guess Nanjing, countless other massacres, raping, cultural genocide, and medical experiments just didn't happen, right?

I'd seriously refrain from sharing your opinion on the Japanese with Korean people. Damn.

Learn how to read please.

Morally...the Japanese did some awful things, but in terms of the Americans,

The Americans didn't drop the bomb out of any concern over Nanking, Unit 731or trying to eliminate the Korean language. If you believe that was their motivation, you're an idiot.

So, you're saying the US should've stayed out of the war completely and just let the Japanese ravage their way across Asia (including US overseas possessions and protectorates, such as the Philippines)?

So, you're saying the US should've stayed out of the war completely and just let the Japanese ravage their way across Asia (including US overseas possessions and protectorates, such as the Philippines)?

No, that's not what I said at all.

I said that the firebombing of Japanese civilians was not proportional to the bombing of Pearl Harbor, in terms of "They horribly attacked us". Through in Corregidor and Bataan and it still isn't.

As far as Japan ravaging their way, dude, are you that oblivious of the history of the UK from 1700-1941 and the U.S. from 1776-1941 in terms of ravaging their way across the world, establishing empires and genociding people? Why do you think the Japanese started their path to Empire in the first place? Hint: They looked at all the major "civilized" powers of the world and what they did and realized it was do this or be eaten themselves.

But hey the U.S. and U.K. would never do something like massacre an entire village of civilians or shoot a bunch of unarmed civilians dead in the street in their Asian colonial possesion.

I sincerely doubt the British or Americans had a contest to see who could behead the most peasants. Or decapitate a baby. Or rape and murder a pregnant woman before placing their sword in her genitalia, cutting open her stomach and removing the fetus. The Japanese Empire was truly something else.

I highly suggest you visit Nanjing.

But why are you an apologist for Japanese imperialism? Why choose this hill to die on?

An interesting aside, a lot of Korean-Americans become 친일파 due to positive exposure to Japanese pop culture from a young age, lack of education about what the Japanese did to their ancestors, and because a lot of Korean immigrants to the US were collaborators and disgraced people in positions of authority/influence during the occupation.

Again, talk about this to your Korean friends and see what they say.

I highly suggest you visit Nanjing.

I highly suggest you visit a Native American reservation or Armritsar. Learn about some of the massacres in our past on the way to Empire. I'd also be at least somewhat skeptical of some of the more lurid stories. There's no doubt large scale massacres, rapes, acts of savagery took place. Nor to use a single psychotic soldier as an example of the norm of conduct of the Japanese military.

That doesn't excuse it, but before we declare them exceptional savages

But why are you an apologist for Japanese imperialism? Why choose this hill to die on?

It's not being an apologist, it's called not believing some cartoon narrative.

Do you know why Japan became a member of the Axis? What events led to Japan going from one of the Allies in WWI to one of the Axis in WWII? Look at the history.

An interesting aside, a lot of Korean-Americans become 친일파 due to positive exposure to Japanese pop culture from a young age, lack of education about what the Japanese did to their ancestors, and because a lot of Korean immigrants to the US were collaborators and disgraced people in positions of authority/influence during the occupation.

Okay. WTF does that have to do with me?

Again, talk about this to your Korean friends and see what they say.

Korean opinion on this is not uniform, same with American.

Why not take it from someone who was there? Read E.B. Sledge's With the Old Breed at Peleiu and Okinawa and get back to us.

Why not take it from someone who was there? Read E.B. Sledge's With the Old Breed at Peleiu and Okinawa and get back to us.

Yes, an individual soldier is the correct perspective for the decision to drop the top-secret atomic bomb and the mindset of the Japanese leadership. They definitely would have pertinent information on the geostrategic situation as well as any diplomatic overtures that have been made.

Yes, an individual soldier is the correct perspective for the decision to drop the top-secret atomic bomb and the mindset of the Japanese leadership. They definitely would have pertinent information on the geostrategic situation as well as any diplomatic overtures that have been made.

They did have pertinent information on the fanaticism and brutality of the Imperial Japanese Army, which was extrapolated to calculate projected casualty figures on both sides. I can't speak for him but I think that's what gogators! was getting at.

They did have pertinent information on the fanaticism and brutality of the Imperial Japanese Army, which was extrapolated to calculate projected casualty figures on both sides. I can't speak for him but I think that's what gogators! was getting at.

Ehh, individual soldier accounts can vary wildly, even within the same unit.

One mistake I see often made is that people will point to some fanatic that held out in the Philippines as an example of Japanese tenacity, but completely ignore the hundreds of thousands of Japanese soldiers that surrendered without incident once the armistice was declared. At Okinawa we saw the first large scale surrender of Japanese forces. More and more the Japanese forces were composed less of those who were the most determined.

There are other things to consider- Often Japanese who surrendered were killed anyway or in the act (not wholly unjustified as both fact and rumor of various traps were rampant). Also, apparently the efforts made to actually negotiate and persuade the Japanese were woeful until Okinawa, when translators started to be used to a large extent and were more persuasive.

The whole idea of the mindless fanatic is based more on stereotype and latent racism than anything. I mean, this was at a time when if you read actual reports on Japan, they are laughable in what they claim. Like some of the most backwards racist nonsense that defies belief. Stuff like the Japanese couldn't fight at night because of the shape of their eyes. Or because of other "Oriental" characteristics they couldn't fly planes. Also, there were reports that the Japanese were morons who could only copy, nevermind that in these reports one observer would declare a Japanese aircraft to be a copy of an American design, while the next one would claim it was Italian and the third would claim German. This idea that the Japanese were mindless fanatics was made and propagated by the same people who came up with that stuff. Case in point- the Japanese surrendered before a single Allied soldier was on Japanese soil. The Germans didn't quit as Soviet tanks rolled into Berlin. Who was really a bunch of mindless fanatics?

As bad as the Japanese were with their subjugation efforts, they are far closer to U.S. and British colonialism than to the Nazis or the Soviets. Probably just under or at the Belgians.

Now, all that being said, that's moral stuff.

Lets talk real world- The decision to drop the bomb was absolutely the correct one. There are two reasons. First is simple game theory- its already a sunk cost so might as well try it. If it does in fact end the war, then great. If not, oh well. It had to be tried. And who cares about fair terms or the history of things? Who cares if the Japanese are brutal or peaceful or justified or fanatical. That is irrelevant. This is a game of power and maximal control and one must use all the leverage they have. It was only when leverage was lost with Stalin's invasion that Japan capitulated. The second reason is if you are not preparing for the next war (or trying to prevent it), you aren't doing your job. Dropping the bomb sends a clear message to the Soviets (and also the British and French). It makes it clear who will run the world.

Yes, an individual soldier is the correct perspective for the decision to drop the top-secret atomic bomb and the mindset of the Japanese leadership. They definitely would have pertinent information on the geostrategic situation as well as any diplomatic overtures that have been made.

Have you read the book?

They did have pertinent information on the fanaticism and brutality of the Imperial Japanese Army, which was extrapolated to calculate projected casualty figures on both sides. I can't speak for him but I think that's what gogators! was getting at.

Thank you!

Have you read the book?

Why? The following reasons are why your book is irrelevant and why your using it as a basis is highly illogical.

1. It is anecdotal.
2. It is not from the perspective of the decision-makers on either side.
3. It takes a single battle and projects that onto the entire Japanese population.
4. It in fact, does no address the bombing nor provide evidence the bombing caused the surrender.
5. Is this book the single most comprehensive and authoritative source on the bombing to the rejection of all other sources?

Also, no doubt you will think your predictable response of "So, you haven't read the boom" actually "wins" the argument, which would be atrocious critical thinking skills.

Why? The following reasons are why your book is irrelevant and why your using it as a basis is highly illogical.

1. It is anecdotal.
2. It is not from the perspective of the decision-makers on either side.
3. It takes a single battle and projects that onto the entire Japanese population.
4. It in fact, does no address the bombing nor provide evidence the bombing caused the surrender.
5. Is this book the single most comprehensive and authoritative source on the bombing to the rejection of all other sources?

Also, no doubt you will think your predictable response of "So, you haven't read the boom" actually "wins" the argument, which would be atrocious critical thinking skills.

Not a single battle. The experiences of the Allied and Japanese soldiers obviously impacted decision makers on both sides. Japanese population was a homogeneous one (still is) that were united in their beliefs and allegiance to the emperor. A book doesn't have to be the "single most comprehensive and authoritative source on the bombing to the rejection of all other sources" to be informative concerning why the bomb was dropped.

Before you go off on anyone for lacking critical thinking skills, it would behoove you to rethink what critical thinking actually consists of since you keep confusing it with sophistry.

Why not read the book and learn a thing or two?

Everyone knows that the real secret weapon was Captain America. The Manhattan Project was created with the objective of building an army of super soldiers. Unfortunately many died along the way, but as a byproduct yielded pure uranium and plutonium. When the final perfect specimen was born, there was enough leftover radioactive material to build several atomic bombs. When Captain America was finished repelling the German counterattack in the Ardennes, he was transferred to Okinawa and the Japanese s*** themselves, surrendering in droves. He was going to be the spearhead in Operation Olympic but Curtis Lemay wanted to steal the glory and dropped two atomic bombs on Japan, ending the war. That said, Captain America did have an impact on the post-war world. He arrived on the USS Missouri for the surrender ceremony with Douglas MacArthur and Cher (who commemorated the occasion with a performance of her smash hit single 'If I Could Turn Back Time', an obvious reference to Japan's atrocities during the war) and the Soviets who were considering carving out their own sphere of influence on Hokkaido backed off. This poll needs another option. Jonvoightcar needs to read a book.

Sgt. Rock and Easy company could have handled Capt. America and Bucky.

I seem to recall Marty getting anal about a debate that the Japanese occupation brought good things to Korea. But now, he's saying that maybe, they weren't as evil as people made out.

Would you rather be a POW under Allied or Japanese authority?

Foolishness.

I was a newspaper journalist in the '90s when the New York Times reported on the 50-year sealed gov't docs that were unveiled, showing Japan was totally willing to surrender as long as their emperor was preserved. Those docs also showed American concerns about resistance to U.S. plans for American companies to jointly rebuild Japanese industry (and unilaterally re-structure Japanese gov't) in a post-WWII world. (It was noted in news media for two days, then rarely thereafter, like a gust of wind.)

There was not a single human clearly saved by obliderating those cities; but a ton of economic benefits.

JFK, 9/11, ... this. 

I am gladly no longer a journalist. People ask me why. I give half answers.