Posted on Aug 7, 2015
Should the United States apologize to Japan for dropping the atomic bomb?
36.8K
391
227
21
20
1
Yesterday was the 70th anniversary of the United States using the first atomic bomb dropping it on Japan, many news organizations and individuals recognized this historic event. A post by one of my friends caught my eye “…why Japan had apologized for its wartime atrocities repeatedly, but the people of Japan had never received an apology for the dropping of two atomic bombs.” Should the United States apologize for the use of atomic weapons that ultimately ended World War II?
WWII World War Two
Japan
Nuclear
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 131
29
29
0
Sgt (Join to see)
Absolutely not! If we had to invade the Japanese mainland, there would have been massive casualties on both sides.
(0)
(0)
Capt Tom Orlando, MSOM, PMP
This is a tough one. Have they apologized for Pearl Harbor? If so, I suppose I could entertain arguments for apologizing for the first one. Then they should apologize for making us drop the second one.
(0)
(0)
SPC George Long
If someone punches me in the mouth, what I do to them is their own fault. Very simple to understand to me.
(0)
(0)
18
18
0
No. it is very easy to armchair quarterback 70 years later.
In the context of 1945, the bombings were a correct military, and diplomatic strategy. The bombings most likely saved many lives, military and civilian, by concluding the war in the Pacific.
In addition, we will never know the influence that the bombings had in possibly preventing or restraining future wars and conflicts as well. The difference between the Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, from the civilian casualties resulting in the Firebombings of Dresden and Tokyo, were that the atomic bombs killed and wounded in seconds, while the firebombings took hours and days.
In the context of 1945, the bombings were a correct military, and diplomatic strategy. The bombings most likely saved many lives, military and civilian, by concluding the war in the Pacific.
In addition, we will never know the influence that the bombings had in possibly preventing or restraining future wars and conflicts as well. The difference between the Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, from the civilian casualties resulting in the Firebombings of Dresden and Tokyo, were that the atomic bombs killed and wounded in seconds, while the firebombings took hours and days.
(18)
(0)
SGT David Ewers
I agree with you, given the time and strategy I think it was the right thing to do. I try not to get sensitive to my friends posting but this one just got me all twisted.
(2)
(0)
SGT David Ewers
You also brought up a very good point, restraining future wars and conflicts. That was an excellent point.
(0)
(0)
17
17
0
Stepping back from the emotional aspect which is what apologies are about, and looking at this from strictly pragmatic aspects, who is apologizing to who?
Anyone involved in the decision to drop the weapon is likely dead, and definitely not in power. Anyone who had the weapon dropped on them, or was an "instigator" in that decision is likely dead.
It would be an empty apology, with an empty acceptance. It would be a worthless gesture, without point.
The idea of apologizing for the act of our ancestors is frankly asinine. WE did not commit those acts. We can be appalled by them, and vow not to repeat them, but we do not share the guilt in the act itself.
Our Constitution actually has references to this concept within Art 3, Section 3, Clause 2.
"The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."
We don't believe in the "sins of our fathers." Our Nation does not acknowledge this concept.
Anyone involved in the decision to drop the weapon is likely dead, and definitely not in power. Anyone who had the weapon dropped on them, or was an "instigator" in that decision is likely dead.
It would be an empty apology, with an empty acceptance. It would be a worthless gesture, without point.
The idea of apologizing for the act of our ancestors is frankly asinine. WE did not commit those acts. We can be appalled by them, and vow not to repeat them, but we do not share the guilt in the act itself.
Our Constitution actually has references to this concept within Art 3, Section 3, Clause 2.
"The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."
We don't believe in the "sins of our fathers." Our Nation does not acknowledge this concept.
(17)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google