How do you view the atomic bombing of Japan in WWII?

Question

Oppenheimer won best picture. I've not seen the movie yet, but we all know the story.

I wonder... how do people view the atomic bombing of Japan... especially Japanese viewpoint.

Why?

Because from a USA perspective... without those bombings, we would have had to send in a million plus soldiers into mainland Japan to over take the military and get to the emperor. If you know the mess of Okinawa and Iwo Jima... one can only imagine. They did not want to surrender and Japanese soldiers would fight to the last man... they were serving their "god" at that time and shaming the emperor and family was worse than death. The toll would have been high and long until someone convinced a surrender.

In Japan... the reality of " the bomb" would have been awful. One can only imagine.

And so one wonders the perspective... because humanity is always faced with..."is it worth it" "did we do the right thing... to bring an end"?

The bombs were largely used against civilians... 129000 to 226,000 people died... instantly. Carpet bombing prior had cost up to 330,000 lives.

...

Bonus history: Albert Einstein, whom started the idea rolling with "E=Mc2" figured out a small amount of material can produce a lot of energy... met the emperor of Japan decades before WWII!

Bonus history II: A distant relative of mine was killed by a Japanese aircraft bomb in mainland China. May she rest in peace.

All is good... the lesson to me is... humans need to think, because all of this was unnecessary wasn't it? We are much better working together cooperatively.

Many scientists did not want the bomb used

How do you view the atomic bombing of Japan in WWII?

Select gender and age to cast your vote:

Updates

1 mo

First use of "drones" in WWII... Bat Bombs. They attached bombs to bats to disburse incendiaries and burn down cities. It worked but was cancelled due to timing of A-bombs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bat_bomb

GuyAnswersGirls123 · Accepted Answer

I think it was very necessary.

One of the things I suspect many people outside of Japan don't teach in the history books (at least they didn't teach it in my high school in the US when teaching about WW2) is that Japanese were taught through government propaganda that Americans were complete savages who will pillage Japan and rape their women. So, for example the Japanese kamikaze pilot didn't give his life for his country; he did it thinking that's the only way to save his family.

So you got a bunch of people who, through the most extreme propaganda, were thoroughly convinced that this is do or die to the point of fighting even on the brink of starvation where babies were dying left and right because their mother's breast milk lacked proper nutrients from eating little more than sweet potatoes and insects. There was little hope for surrender except to deliver an attack so devastating that there was nothing left to do but surrender and submit.

>> From 1944 on, even in the countryside, the athletic grounds of local schools were converted into sweet potato fields. And we ate every part of the sweet potato plant, from the leaf to the tip of the root. For protein, we ate beetles, beetle larvae, and other insects that we found at the roots of the plants we picked, which we roasted or mashed. Even in the countryside, food was scarce. -- Ayao Okumura

My father lived through it. He wasn't in Hiroshima or Nagasaki but was in Shizuoka which was fire-bombed all over the place while starving so much that he recalled tales of being so excited just to find leftover fish bones to eat while rummaging through garbage all day. He also lost his sister due to the famine; she died in his arms.

After the war ended, an American soldier gave him canned food and it was the most delicious thing to him after such a long period of famine, and he was so moved by the American soldier's kindness that he dedicated his whole life to studying English and traveling to the US. That's how he ended up meeting my American mother and having me.

Even the vast majority of Japanese do not resent the atomic bombings in my experience. No Japanese person I know (I'm sure some exist, but they must be such a trivial minority) wants to return to Imperial Japan.

NamerOfStars · Accepted Answer

Awful, but necessary. It's not like conventional bombs are any more discriminating in who they kill, or that someone killed by a nuke is MORE dead.

Given how brutal the anti-American (probably anti-Allied, really, but I don't know enough Japanese to say) propaganda was, the vast majority of the Japanese population probably literally believed that capture would genuinely be worse than death, and everyone strong enough to hold a pointed stick would've been given one, and few would've surrendered. Looking at the effects on Iraqi soldiers of gunning down Iranian street urchins during operation: blessed Ramadan during their war, it's not hard to imagine what would've happened to Americans who had to do the same.

Those bombs saved more lives- both American AND Japanese- than they took. They should've been a bitter reminder that war really should be a last resort; here's hoping someday we'll have leaders wise enough to listen.

purplepoppy · Accepted Answer

No need to send millions of soldiers to invade, simply stopping imports would have brought them to their knees. The fact is after investing so much America simply wanted to test the bomb.

As for never surrendering, the UK had a similar policy, would a German nuke on London be justified? The American complaint also suggest that if America is invaded they'll surrender pretty quickly.

katiesmuff · Accepted Answer

It accomplished exactly what it was supposed to do and was a wake up call for the world!

Unit1 · Answer

This is a sensitive topic.

Before I'm gonna say anything and sound like a smartass not knowing every single detail of the bombing and what happened before that led to the bombings of Japan and then say either "bombing good" or "bombing bad", I prefer to not say anything at all. I don't need more enemies from the west or east for basically nothing, that could easily be avoided by not saying anything at all on that matter.

AviatorTom · Answer

It probably saved millions of Japanese and American lives, had the war continued with an invasion if Japan. One thing Hiroshima and Nagasaki did, that isn't mentioned much, is point out the horrors of nuclear weapons. No nuclear weapon has been used "in anger" since, and hopefully never will.

strateguy632 · Answer

TEST "without those bombings, we would have had to send in a million plus soldiers into mainland Japan" would that justify poison gas? or other geneva convention? certainly not.

also the next day emperor didn't surrender saw it doesn't cause surrender! no excuse to use a second.

in fact japan didn't surrender until 2 weeks after 2 atom bomb. so not caused by atom bomb.

but... the president was democrat so film to draw a pretty picture of democrat... despite mass murder a city, so rewarded by oscar!

LordMadara · Answer

A war between Reptiles

US based Reptiles vs Japanese based reptilians

Hitler was right not to fully engage the japanese

Although to be fair the japanese reptiles seemed benevolent to the human race/ species, as they didn't agree or support the war hungry UK / US reptilians who were hellbent on totally controlling humanoids,

The atomic bombings wasn't spectacular at all, it was just a big bomb of that time to ever been built to destroy humans, meanwhile Germany was legitimately fighting for her life because she had more wonder weapons then the allies combined, it was not good for US to throw a big bomb at japan when it was US who provoked Japan in the 1st place,

Now reptilians are ruling amass in total control and passing weird laws to further surpress humans and crush them,

JacobJordan · Answer

It served its purpose. The purpose was to teach Japan and by extension the rest of the world a lesson about attacking the US and the consequences it entails. Ww2 America was THAT country. It is a pity they lost it and started tolerating bullshit from mentally unstable people

normalice · Answer

It is easy to call it uncalled for in hindsight. And i do, in hindsight. I don't know the details of the situation, though. I will say any time someone comes up with a new weapon the first thing they'll want to do is use it - this is particularly true in the midst of a violent stalemate. Consideration for the casualties tends to only be something people even can consider after they've created them.

BoopBoopBeep · Answer

We occupied Afghanistan for 20 years. How many civilians died there? Japan was brutal, sure, but it was fast, less suffering overall and allowed Japan to go on to be a global powerhouse.

DJB72 · Answer

Hiroshima was necessary but dreadful. Nagasaki was unnecessary after the devastation and suffering the first bomb caused.

noohair · Answer

It caused an arms race, but it save many lives. One must remember that the weapons today are 100 times more powerful and no one can win a nuclear war. A nuclear war would be a catistrophic climate event.

RavVid · Answer

invasion of Japan was impracticable. In fact surrendering after just two nukes was touch and go as the Japanese had a shrewd suspicion there were only two.

Likes2drive · Answer

It was the only way at the time to end the war and quickly

SeekerOfTruth007 · Answer

It was unnecessary, and besides Japan had already surrendered to Russia some seven days earlier.

Jerre · Answer

It was a terrible act, but did end the war with Japan rather quickly

Agape93 · Answer

I consider it war terrorism. Nuking 2 civilian populations in order to cause horror and chaos.

Med_guy1978 · Answer

Japan surrendered days before it was bombed, just an excuse to try out the bomb.

zagor · Answer

Given the loss of life involved in taking Okinawa and Iwo Jima an invasion of the mainland would have been horrendously costly, and would have taken more Japanese lives than the bombs did.

JesseP1nk · Answer

How i view it? Same way i view 9/11 for americans. People who say "it was necessary" Imagine they say same shit about your 9/11.

Dongie · Answer

It was that or sacrifice 100,000 U S soldiers and with that would have been an estimated 1,000,000 Japanese fatalities.

laly520 · Answer

very awful

How do you view the atomic bombing of Japan in WWII?

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

How do you view the atomic bombing of Japan in WWII?

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

We're glad to see you liked this post.