Mehs wrote: Dune wrote: It makes me shiver that we call him a hero for dropping a bomb. Now I don't blame him for his actions, it was what the military ordered. However, calling the destruction of Hiroshima a lifesaver is quite ironic. Well, only to people who view life as equal. It's true that it's a lifesaver, for both sides if you think about it.  If we did not have the capability of doing that, we would've invaded Japan, which would be very costly for both sides.  The Japanese would fight until death defending their homeland, and the U.S/Russia would keep fighting at all costs to end Japan.

That's all hersay. In fact, most statistics showing that Operation Downfall would have caused up to 1,000,000 American casualties is hersay as well. Fact it, it was a quick, easy, and for the Americans, painless way to end the war and keep a hold of Japan instead of Russia. There are just as many important people that still argue that the bombs were not necessary.

To revert back to my first point however, I do not see this man as a hero.

Mehs wrote: Dune wrote: Mehs wrote: Dune wrote: It makes me shiver that we call him a hero for dropping a bomb. Now I don't blame him for his actions, it was what the military ordered. However, calling the destruction of Hiroshima a lifesaver is quite ironic. Well, only to people who view life as equal. It's true that it's a lifesaver, for both sides if you think about it.  If we did not have the capability of doing that, we would've invaded Japan, which would be very costly for both sides.  The Japanese would fight until death defending their homeland, and the U.S/Russia would keep fighting at all costs to end Japan. That's all hersay. In fact, most statistics showing that Operation Downfall would have caused up to 1,000,000 American casualties is hersay as well. Fact it, it was a quick, easy, and for the Americans, painless way to end the war and keep a hold of Japan instead of Russia. There are just as many important people that still argue that the bombs were not necessary. To revert back to my first point however, I do not see this man as a hero. There were many estimates on the causalities, I did research on this topic in the past, some say as many as 1-4 million Americans and anywhere from 5-10 million Japanese.  Hoover estimated between 500,000-1 million on the American side, it really varies.  I didn't know hersay was a word either...but my information is no hearsay.

Yes I should probably proofread for the word hearsay since this is an academic and scholarly forum.

I'm also not sure why Hoover would have anything to do with estimations at this time, since he was President in the early 30's. If you meant Truman, then those estimates are debatable. At one time he saw Operation Downfall having 31,000-100,000 American casualties depending on how long it lasted. The estimates were as flawed as the logic to use the bombs. What worries me more is that many of the top military men at the time were against the bomb; however, the President went for it. Seems similiar to Hitler and his taking over the Eastern front in late 1942.

I've seen that. It actually goes quite well with my point.

These were just estimates, and everybody had them. Even in Hoover's memorandum, he was not much of a military man and it was thought to be simply just an estimate.

Thor wrote: hoginds24 wrote: Not to insult the dead or anything, but how is Mr. Tibbets a hero excatly? He only dropped a bomb as thousands of other pilots did in the years before. He was a brave man that fought for his country as many others did. RIP Yeah, it's not like he dropped a bomb which was poorly tested and could have vaporized him and his entire mission... Are we forgetting that nukes were not always the science they are now? At one point they weren't even sure if the reaction could be contained and not destroy the entire atmosphere. Some of you with strong opinions are very poorly educated, must be the united-statesian way of debate.

Enlighten us on the "poorly educated" ones then, I must hear this.

Thor wrote: At one point they weren't even sure if the reaction could be contained and not destroy the entire atmosphere.

Well, that's reassuring...

Darur wrote: Dune wrote: It makes me shiver that we call him a hero for dropping a bomb. Now I don't blame him for his actions, it was what the military ordered. However, calling the destruction of Hiroshima a lifesaver is quite ironic. Well, only to people who view life as equal. Consider what might have happened if we had not dropped the bomb. The Japanese are all taught stories of the Samurai, their culture revolves around honor.  Its partly because of that belief the 442nd regiment was such a distinguished unit.  If we had invaded mainland Japan, we would have seen some of the fiercest resistance and there would have been far more casualties then dropping the bomb. You mentioned Russia as well, yes, dropping the bomb stalled Russian advances.  They were quickly moving to take Europe and Asia, by dropping the bomb we may well have prevented a World War 3. Finally, we all know in the years that followed the dropping of the bomb, our weapons became far more powerful.  Little Boy and Fat Man were tiny compared to the nuclear weapons produced a decade later.  We knew the weapon was powerful from the Trinity test, but until we actually saw the weapon used on a real target did we understand the devastation.  The bomb became public knowledge and leaders knew what it would mean to use nuclear weapons again.  Its very likely that if we didn't drop the bomb then, a much larger and more powerful bomb would have been used in the future. The 180,000 lives lost at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were tragic, but on the grand scheme of things they were much better then the millions and millions of lives that could have been potentially lost if we hadn't dropped the bomb.

I don't think so at all. For one, who's right was it for us to take Japan and not Russia? Who said they'd even make the invasion let alone massacre Japanese on the mainland? The estimates for Operation Downfall were all over the board so we can't use that as an excuse.

Mass bombing campaigns in general are criminal and just because we won doesn't make us better. Albert Einstein had the best quote when saying that had Germany developed the bomb and dropped it on us, we would have had those commanders tried and hung at Nuremburg along with all the other criminals.

Pezzer wrote: Dune, do you have no sense of self preservation?

I have a sense of logic. If what one group did was wrong, then what we did was wrong, regardless of "what you're fighting for." In hindsight, the bombs were unecessary, yet people act as if the life of an American military man is worth more than a Japanese civilian. I have a hard time being that egotistical.

The Japanese were beaten. They had no navy and barely an army. I really doubt Americans at home feared an invasion from them.

The Japanese knew they were beaten. Reports from civilians have shown that they had no interest in fighting to the end. They were all starving and assassination attempts on many military leaders had allowed for peace feelers to be sent out. The one thing Japan wanted was to leave Hirohito in power and they would have surrendered. We said no, dropped the bombs, then left him in power. It was unecessary.

The second part wasn't in response to you, it was a general statement of mass bombing.

I just can't agree that since we dropped it, then we prevented more of it. It is a good point, but I would hardly state that we killed them to save everyone.

As for Russian aggression, once again, we killed them to save them? Granted maybe ending the war before Russia was willing to make an invasion was good; however, why not go with the original idea of letting them surrender while keeping Hirohito? We did it anyways. So if they would have surrendered sooner, than Russia wouldn't have gone in either. I still say they were unecessary.

I've asked many a veterans during interviews for national archives and I like the fact that they don't believe themselves to be heroes.

Of course the history channel says that, they are always right!! Well, no, but at least they constantly show things from one side. That's dedication.

Dune wrote: I just can't agree that since we dropped it, then we prevented more of it. It is a good point, but I would hardly state that we killed them to save everyone.

Not to mention make a statement to the rest of the world.

I'd be willing to say there's alot more behind that particular bombing than just preservation and necessity. WWII wasn't just a war, it was a rapid fire arms race, and we won.

Anyway, RIP. It always saddens me when a member from that generation dies. They were a whole level of class and integrity that the world will likely never see again, it's a shame.

RIP.

My view: The two bombs means less American's dead. You can ask all you want "are American soldiers better than Japenese civilians?" all you want. We dropped them, ended the war as fast as we can. Thus less Americans dead. Should of thought twice before Pearl Harbor. Payback is a b*****.

I never said I blamed him for the bombs, and I do put it in to perspective with things like Dresden, Unit 731, etc. Point is, it was just as wrong as anything previous to it. It's disappointing that diplomats couldn't work out any other way and it's still sad that we can't admit that. Thinking that they were unecessary and criminal will not change for me.

I won't use the word hero, but he did what he was told, regardless of how horrible it was.