Posted on Aug 7, 2015
Should the United States apologize to Japan for dropping the atomic bomb?
36.9K
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 9 y ago
Responses: 131
0
0
0
J. Robert Oppenheimer: "I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds."
J. Robert Oppenheimer speaks those famous words. This video was posted on the 66th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima.
I know what Oppenheimer would say
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb13ynu3Iac
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb13ynu3Iac
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
No for two reasons:
1. More lives were saved by not having to invade the home islands.
2. The graphic impact of the bomb and the after effects, has given many would be belligerents pause, and as a result we have not had a major world conflict since. However...
I believe the "cold war" was WWIII. Nukes were used, not on each other but in remote areas of the world, to demonstrate power.
1. More lives were saved by not having to invade the home islands.
2. The graphic impact of the bomb and the after effects, has given many would be belligerents pause, and as a result we have not had a major world conflict since. However...
I believe the "cold war" was WWIII. Nukes were used, not on each other but in remote areas of the world, to demonstrate power.
(0)
(0)
Suspended Profile
SGT David Ewers. While we may not apologize for dropping two atomic bombs, we may want to respectfully remember and regret inevitable massive vaporization, burns, wounds, radiation poisoning, and radiation induced mutations inflicted on so many unsuspecting and defenseless civilians. The before and after strike imagery of Hiroshima . . . together with the implications of actually fighting a protracted nuclear war with thermonuclear weapons one thousand times more powerful than Hiroshima and Nagasaki devices . . . brought about limitations, reductions, and the potential for the complete elimination of nuclear weapons . . . massive stockpiles and hair trigger delivery systems that according to even Ronald Reagan were never intended to be used, were developed to counter the threat of use by other countries, and that threatened the continued existence of the human population and other life on earth. Warmest Regards, Sandy
CPT Aaron Kletzing
CPT Aaron Kletzing
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Based on discussions I have had with Japanese Citizens. They Don't even blame us for the event. They blame Germany and Russia more than us and even though it was a tragedy, I was War. Do I think It was necessary? I don't really know because I want their, but I think apologizing isn't necessary but would be the gentlemanly (or lady like) thing to do.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Honestly not sure. I understand why we dropped it, but I don't think i could have given that order. Those towns were full of innocent (Yes, innocent women and children). I think i would have bombed the crap out of their emperors temple and Tokyo. I'm internet Generaling i know but not that bomb on those people. Maybe dropped it near a town and then say the next is on Tokyo! I think as a people we crossed a line. A a very horrible line. Just google the "Shadows" that were left after the blast.
(0)
(0)
SFC Joseph James
MCPO Roger Collins - can you clarify your question in regards to the point of the discussion? Not attacking, just lost in your question.
(0)
(0)
MCPO Roger Collins
Despite all that new technology, we are being stymied by a force of around 50,000 according to some estimates.
(0)
(0)
MCPO Roger Collins
Read my question again, simple question. What was confusing? Not attacking, just posing an easy question to answer. It's directly related to the collateral damage caused by the use of nuclear devices during WWII, most studies I have seen say 6,000,000 or more lives would have been lost with conventional weapons in conjunction with a mandatory invasion. When we evolve to a point where there is no longer war, I will agree these weapons are not necessary and should be gone. Amplification enough?
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
I can see this happening, especially in the politically correct world we live in today. The newer generation today would say 'yes', however, the generation that stormed the beaches and died on their sands would scream 'hell no'. I personally say 'no', it led to the end of the war. Yes, hundreds of thousands died in the bombings and effects afterwards, but it could have been much worse. What if the US decided to drop it on the Emperor's castle? All of Japan's leadership would have been lost, millions killed, Japan as it's seen today would never be. Who knows what kind of government would have arisen out of a Tokyo bombing, if any at all. These were strategic bombings, felt to this day, but it could have been felt much worse. I guess, technically, the war wouldn't have ended with a peace treaty until a new government was stood up, which could have taken many more years and a US occupation would have been much more intense in the end.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google