Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

70 Years Ago We Killed A Ton Of People

profile picture
theabortionator
Posts: 51666 - Karma: 162,558
So 70 years ago yesterday and 2 days from now we(USA) killed a massive amount of people, many of them civilians in Japan.

At the same time, we consistently remember Pearl Harbor, mourn it, talk about it, watch movies about it when that date comes yet seem to ignore these dates completely.

I don't get it. We killed as many as 100 times more people in Japan, many of them civilians, versus the much smaller amount of people, who were almost exclusively military killed at Pearl Harbor.

Why do we do this with history? If somebody wrongs us, we'll have movies, books, and any other media coming out about it a million years after, accounts of how horrible it was, how bad the people were who did it etc. Yet on the other hand, we can do some fucked up shit, and then casually brush it off because, we were on the other side, and we've already spun the history books to support us/make us feel better.

I jumped around the webz a bit while this tab was open and saw that a few places did actually write articles or at least mention the attack this year. That's nice to see.

We talk about other countries nuclear policies as if we've got our shit together yet we're the only country to nuke anyone, we did it twice, we don't even acknowledge that it was wrong, or generally really mention it at all.
Aug 7 2015 5:48PM
275 183
profile picture
Calb3rt
Posts: 6005 - Karma: 2,203
https://www.newschoolers.com/forum/thread/812134/60-years-ago-
yes yes ns is not know for its math skills.
Aug 7 2015 6:07PM
5 1
profile picture
90053
Posts: 2565 - Karma: 3,728
most nations have had dark points in their history, us in the uk have more than a fair share and its definitely
important that they are not glorified or swept under the carpet.
Aug 7 2015 6:09PM
1 1
profile picture
SFB
Posts: 8895 - Karma: 26,352
they deserved it and was necessary.
Aug 7 2015 6:20PM
25 10
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
Japan started a war with us. Why should we waste 1 more US life than absolutely necessary trying to end the war?

The entire Japanese population was brainwashed and 100% believed and was subservant to what the emperor said. There was no coupe coming. There may have been a conditional ceasefire that would have allowed Japan to rebuild and reload just to do it all over again.

So we dropped a doomsday device on them. A weapon we didn't fully understand, but one which we knew would be devasting enough, and shock &awe iiducing enough to end the war on the spot.


What it comes down to is I'd gladly kill your whole family to save one of my own if your family started the fight.
Aug 7 2015 6:24PM
19 4
profile picture
cobra_commander
Posts: 16909 - Karma: 4,687
When someone attacks the United States, we fuck their world upside down. It may take 3 1/2 years or it may take 9 1/2, but rest assured if you decide to attack the United States the one thing you can count on is a mother fucking ass whooping that not only will fuck you over but provide to the rest of the world an example of why you don't fuck with us.

Aug 6th, and Aug 9th, 1945 are two of the best damn days is American history.

A few years ago I was afforded the opportunity to visit the Arizona Memorial. There were some Japaneses tourists there who were laughing as they took photos of themselves. I reminded them that this shit resulted in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They shut the fuck up.
Aug 7 2015 6:46PM
9 19
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
cobra_commanderWhen someone attacks the United States, we fuck their world upside down. It may take 3 1/2 years or it may take 9 1/2, but rest assured if you decide to attack the United States the one thing you can count on is a mother fucking ass whooping that not only will fuck you over but provide to the rest of the world an example of why you don't fuck with us.

Aug 6th, and Aug 9th, 1945 are two of the best damn days is American history.

A few years ago I was afforded the opportunity to visit the Arizona Memorial. There were some Japaneses tourists there who were laughing as they took photos of themselves. I reminded them that this shit resulted in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They shut the fuck up.


* they were actually Chinese tourists and didn't understand CC's English.
Aug 7 2015 6:54PM
11 0
profile picture
theabortionator
Posts: 51666 - Karma: 162,558
SFBthey deserved it


One could make the same argument about 9/11
Aug 7 2015 7:05PM
4 12
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
theabortionatorOne could make the same argument about 9/11


When exactly did we execute a mass surprise attack on al queda pre 9/11?
Aug 7 2015 7:14PM
4 4
profile picture
plyswthsqrrls
Posts: 838 - Karma: 2,271
history is written by the victor

-plyswthsqrrls (and no one else)
Aug 7 2015 7:33PM
10 0
profile picture
cobra_commander
Posts: 16909 - Karma: 4,687
californiagrown* they were actually Chinese tourists and didn't understand CC's English.


They understood my Japanese clearly enough.
Aug 7 2015 7:40PM
8 4
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,185
californiagrownWhen exactly did we execute a mass surprise attack on al queda pre 9/11?


One could easily make a case about the US invading other countries prior to 9 11 and pretty much doing the exact same thing that Japan did to America. But saying America deserved 9 11 is fucked up.
Aug 7 2015 7:41PM
5 1
profile picture
kshaughn
Posts: 509 - Karma: 4,568
Also, at that time, no one really knew that devastation that could be brought upon by dropping that bomb. There is a reason why no one has used one since.
Aug 7 2015 7:41PM
0 0
profile picture
SFB
Posts: 8895 - Karma: 26,352
theabortionatorOne could make the same argument about 9/11

one could make the same argument against ethiopian mango farmers
Aug 7 2015 7:41PM
1 5
profile picture
cobra_commander
Posts: 16909 - Karma: 4,687
S.J.WOne could easily make a case about the US invading other countries prior to 9 11 and pretty much doing the exact same thing that Japan did to America. But saying America deserved 9 11 is fucked up.


We invaded Afganistan? I missed that memo, last I checked we helped them fight off the Russians.


(I know OBL is a Saudi, and was pissed that the Sauds invited us into their country, and asked us to handle Iraq, not him)
Aug 7 2015 7:43PM
4 3
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
S.J.WOne could easily make a case about the US invading other countries prior to 9 11 and pretty much doing the exact same thing that Japan did to America. But saying America deserved 9 11 is fucked up.


Not at all haha. America never launched an unprovoked massive military surprise attack against alqueda.
Aug 7 2015 7:43PM
2 1
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,185
californiagrownNot at all haha. America never launched an unprovoked massive military surprise attack against alqueda.


No, but they did start wars in the middle east, kill civilians, disrupt the norm and do everything one nation could do to get itself hated. Including killing innocent civilians.
Aug 7 2015 7:48PM
3 2
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
S.J.WNo, but they did start wars in the middle east, kill civilians, disrupt the norm and do everything one nation could do to get itself hated. Including killing innocent civilians.


Prior to 9/11?

Was 9/11 meant to end the war we apparently started?

That's a no, and no.
Aug 7 2015 8:02PM
1 6
profile picture
cobra_commander
Posts: 16909 - Karma: 4,687
S.J.WNo, but they did start wars in the middle east, kill civilians, disrupt the norm and do everything one nation could do to get itself hated. Including killing innocent civilians.


which war was this?
Aug 7 2015 8:05PM
2 2
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,185
californiagrownPrior to 9/11?

Was 9/11 meant to end the war we apparently started?

That's a no, and no.


Remember the Gulf war? Or the wars in Lebanon? Both had civilian casualities higher than 911.
Aug 7 2015 8:07PM
1 0
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
S.J.WRemember the Gulf war? Or the wars in Lebanon? Both had civilian casualities higher than 911.


Gulf war was provoked and was a UN coalition.

Lebanon wasn't the US.
Aug 7 2015 8:27PM
0 0
profile picture
cobra_commander
Posts: 16909 - Karma: 4,687
S.J.WRemember the Gulf war? Or the wars in Lebanon? Both had civilian casualities higher than 911.


You remember Saddam? Yeah, that fucker started the Gulf War when he decided to invade Kuwait. The US responded as part of a UN plan to get him out of Kuwait and restrict his ability to fuckshit up in the future.
Aug 7 2015 8:39PM
2 0
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,185
californiagrownGulf war was provoked and was a UN coalition.

Lebanon wasn't the US.


One could also make the case that the US involvement in Iraq after the Gulf war made things more heated. Again leading some people wanting the US to stop militiary involvement in the middle east. The motives behind 911 are pretty open to discussion, everything from wanting to start a war, to ending US involvement in the middle east, to globalisation and a bunch of others. So in a way 911 is fairly similiar to the dropping of nuclear bombs on Japan. The only difference is one suceeded and one failed.

And how is Iraq invading Kuwait provoking the US?

And yes, the mulitnaional force in Lebanon was between the US, Italy, France and the UK against the IJO from 1982 to 1984
Aug 7 2015 8:45PM
0 0
profile picture
cobra_commander
Posts: 16909 - Karma: 4,687
The referenced post has been removed.


No, it sure as fuck is not in any fucking sense unless you are one of those fucking nut jobs who just likes to hate on the USA because its the big guy and really just want to hate against the man because its the man...
Globalization? You mean the situation that has raised the standard of living for fucking billions of people?

And how is Iraq invading Kuwait provoking the US?


The UN asked us to go in, we did.
Aug 7 2015 8:58PM
9 0
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
S.J.WOne could also make the case that the US involvement in Iraq after the Gulf war made things more heated. Again leading some people wanting the US to stop militiary involvement in the middle east. The motives behind 911 are pretty open to discussion, everything from wanting to start a war, to ending US involvement in the middle east, to globalisation and a bunch of others. So in a way 911 is fairly similiar to the dropping of nuclear bombs on Japan. The only difference is one suceeded and one failed.

And how is Iraq invading Kuwait provoking the US?

And yes, the mulitnaional force in Lebanon was between the US, Italy, France and the UK against the IJO from 1982 to 1984


Do you not understand what invasion, alliance, and treaty mean?

Since when is invading an ally not provocation lol.



Again, the nukes were to end a war with an enemy who started said war militarily unprovoked. And 9/11 was a militarily unprovoked attack against a nation whose only provocation was accepting an invitation from Saudi Arabia to build bases there.
Aug 7 2015 9:04PM
1 0
profile picture
Calb3rt
Posts: 6005 - Karma: 2,203
i came back for more maths and slightly different perspective...

~166,000 people in Hiroshima x 130lbs (avg weight of japanese person)= 21,580,000 lbs
~80,000 people in Nagasaki x 130lbs = 10,400,000 lbs

...70 years ago we killed roughly 15,990 (short)tons of people
Aug 7 2015 9:04PM
3 0
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,185
californiagrownDo you not understand what invasion, alliance, and treaty mean?

Since when is invading an ally not provocation lol.



Again, the nukes were to end a war with an enemy who started said war militarily unprovoked. And 9/11 was a militarily unprovoked attack against a nation whose only provocation was accepting an invitation from Saudi Arabia to build bases there.


The US and Kuwait were not allies at the time though. If anything the US only cared about Persian Gulf for shipping and not actually Kuwait and it's soveignty.

And the US was still in Iraq from 91 up until 911. So I wouldn't exactly call it unprovoked.
Aug 7 2015 9:18PM
0 0
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,185
cobra_commanderThe UN asked us to go in, we did.


You mean the UN invitation spearheaded by the US?
Aug 7 2015 9:18PM
0 0
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
Calb3rt(short)tons of people


Thats racist.




But really though. What happened was terrible. there is never a good reason for civilians to die in war. there is never a good reason for soliders to die in war. But in the time and place, and under those particular circumstances, Dropping the bombs was the least worst option. It saved american lives. And in a war, you gotta pick sides and get nasty- thats just the way it is.
Aug 7 2015 9:20PM
6 0
profile picture
cobra_commander
Posts: 16909 - Karma: 4,687
S.J.WThe US and Kuwait were not allies at the time though. If anything the US only cared about Persian Gulf for shipping and not actually Kuwait and it's soveignty.

And the US was still in Iraq from 91 up until 911. So I wouldn't exactly call it unprovoked.


Iraq attacked us on 911?
Aug 7 2015 9:22PM
0 0
profile picture
cobra_commander
Posts: 16909 - Karma: 4,687
S.J.WYou mean the UN invitation spearheaded by the US?


Well who else was going to do it? News flash, anytime the UN actually wants something done they ask the U.S.?

They were doing fucking great in Bosina without us too.
Aug 7 2015 9:23PM
1 0
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
S.J.WThe US and Kuwait were not allies at the time though. If anything the US only cared about Persian Gulf for shipping and not actually Kuwait and it's soveignty.

And the US was still in Iraq from 91 up until 911. So I wouldn't exactly call it unprovoked.


I suppose you dont realize that Saddam and OBL were mortal enemies. Like, anyone who knew about the middle east was laughing super hard when Bush said that Iraq was harboring al queda. Fucking hated each other.

that was something that OBL wasnt hating on the USA for, i assure you.



Again, the provocation that is referenced in Al Queda and OBL documents is the establishment of bases in Saudi Arabia... which only happened because the saudi royal family (of which OBL belonged) begged the USA to establish bases there.

It was only after 9/11 and the the US's clusterfuck job in Iraq and afghanistan did the tide of public opinion in the middle east really start to swing against he USA.
Aug 7 2015 9:26PM
0 0
profile picture
THEBONE
Posts: 31 - Karma: 18
SMELL MY FARTS
Aug 7 2015 9:28PM
1 5
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,185
cobra_commanderWell who else was going to do it? News flash, anytime the UN actually wants something done they ask the U.S.?

They were doing fucking great in Bosina without us too.


Then how come the US isn't helping with the problems in Africa? Is it possible because the US has no economic benefit from helping Africa?
Aug 7 2015 9:30PM
2 3
profile picture
THEBONE
Posts: 31 - Karma: 18
S.J.WThen how come the US isn't helping with the problems in Africa? Is it possible because the US has no economic benefit from helping Africa?


kiss my ass
Aug 7 2015 9:31PM
1 3
profile picture
Calb3rt
Posts: 6005 - Karma: 2,203
californiagrownThats racist.


I was specifying which unit of measurement (short/long/metric) i was using.. the racial stereotype was merely a coincidence.

as heated and heavy as this subject may be, its nice to see that ns can actually have some productive discussions once in a while. at least i can say i've learned some some things/ broadened my perspective on these matters just from reading what yous guys have had to say in these two threads.

i wish i could ban theboner though...
Aug 7 2015 9:39PM
0 0
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
Calb3rtI was specifying which unit of measurement (short/long/metric) i was using.. the racial stereotype was merely a coincidence.

as heated and heavy as this subject may be, its nice to see that ns can actually have some productive discussions once in a while. at least i can say i've learned some some things/ broadened my perspective on these matters just from reading what yous guys have had to say in these two threads.

i wish i could ban theboner though...


lol i know, i was joking haha. It fit too perfectly.
Aug 7 2015 9:48PM
0 0
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
S.J.WThen how come the US isn't helping with the problems in Africa? Is it possible because the US has no economic benefit from helping Africa?


we have limited resources to help. why would we neglect the countries that need help AND whose interests are in our best economic interest?
Aug 7 2015 9:53PM
1 0
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,185
californiagrownwe have limited resources to help. why would we neglect the countries that need help AND whose interests are in our best economic interest?

So you admit that you think America goes to war to better themselves economically?
Aug 7 2015 10:08PM
0 2
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
S.J.WSo you admit that you think America goes to war to better themselves economically?


There are 20-30 countries out there who are badly in need of our help right now. We cannot help all of them. We choose to help the ones that benefit us the most. Absolutely. This is common fucking sense.


You think we should choose to help the countries that benefit us the least instead? haha?
Aug 7 2015 10:31PM
2 0
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,185
californiagrownThere are 20-30 countries out there who are badly in need of our help right now. We cannot help all of them. We choose to help the ones that benefit us the most. Absolutely. This is common fucking sense.


You think we should choose to help the countries that benefit us the least instead? haha?


ahhh yes, choosing who you give freedom to over how much money you can make. Truely a great foreign policy. Putting money above human lives. Thanks America
Aug 7 2015 10:38PM
1 4
profile picture
Calb3rt
Posts: 6005 - Karma: 2,203
S.J.WThen how come the US isn't helping with the problems in Africa? Is it possible because the US has no economic benefit from helping Africa?


dont we though? we are extremely selective on what and how much we "help" but Darfur, Somolia in the early 90's(because destabilizing governments it totally "helping"), and most recently the hunt for Kony which we have sent troops as recently as last year. but geographically speaking africa is such a massive landmass that it is difficult to generalize ALL of africa.

as far as no economic benefit, china has had no problem moving into africa in search of rare earth elements and we(US) do love buying the subsequent products.




californiagrown, i got a good laugh out of that.
Aug 7 2015 10:55PM
0 0
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
S.J.Wahhh yes, choosing who you give freedom to over how much money you can make. Truely a great foreign policy. Putting money above human lives. Thanks America


Youve gotta be trolling haha.

when looking at equally fucked up countries, what should be the deciding factor in your eyes?
Aug 7 2015 11:04PM
0 0
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,185
californiagrownYouve gotta be trolling haha.

when looking at equally fucked up countries, what should be the deciding factor in your eyes?


If you have two countries that both need help,and those countries are 100% equal. In my opinion, the country which gets the help is the country that is more likely to be invaded or fall back in trouble once forces pull out. If you base your choices on who you choose to help with which country will give you the most money then you end up with a dependence on war and a military industrial complex. Like the one that already exists in the US.
Aug 7 2015 11:10PM
0 0
profile picture
Rafiki
Posts: 3858 - Karma: 2,251
S.J.WIf you base your choices on who you choose to help with which country will give you the most money then you end up with a dependence on war and a military industrial complex. Like the one that already exists in the US.


Aug 7 2015 11:22PM
3 0
profile picture
cobra_commander
Posts: 16909 - Karma: 4,687
S.J.WThen how come the US isn't helping with the problems in Africa? Is it possible because the US has no economic benefit from helping Africa?


lol
We went to Somalia with operation Restore Hope right after Desert Storm. The casualties from Gothic Serpent were influential in keeping the US from getting involved in Rwanda a year latter. Something the UN and most people wished we had stopped. President Obama got yelled at by the GOP for getting involved in Libya. The 101st Airborne deployed to West Africa to help fight Ebola just last fall.

Needless to say, we have been involved in Africa and will continue to do so. We have several lower profile FID missions across Africa currently. You mentioned Botswana in another thread. I have personal experience working with the Botswana military.

France also generally prefers to take the lead on many African issue.
Aug 7 2015 11:32PM
3 0
profile picture
californiagrown
Posts: 9794 - Karma: 2,014
S.J.WIf you have two countries that both need help,and those countries are 100% equal. In my opinion, the country which gets the help is the country that is more likely to be invaded or fall back in trouble once forces pull out. If you base your choices on who you choose to help with which country will give you the most money then you end up with a dependence on war and a military industrial complex. Like the one that already exists in the US.


So we should send american troops to die, let the economy crumble, and not be able to fund any more peacekeeping/ missions? That seems awfully shortsighted dont you think?


Do you not think it would be more beneficial to help the countries that need it, but that also benefit the USA so that we can continue helping countries that need it?


Its always easy to criticize the entity that, at the end of the day, has to stick its neck out and be the pointy end of the spear, while your entity gets to armchair quarterback. Could the american govt chosen its involvment in conflicts better over the past 4 years? absolutely. But the only reason i can say that is because of hindsight. I cant think of more than a select few conflicts in which there was no good reason to get involved. Can you?
Aug 7 2015 11:45PM
1 0
profile picture
90053
Posts: 2565 - Karma: 3,728
not sure whether people are trolling or not. It doesn't matter whether japan 'deserved' it or not or whether it was necessary to end a war, loss of civilian life is never something to be proud of.

It pretty fucked up to have no feelings of remorse or sadness about an event with such a high death toll even if you do think that it was the right thing to do.
Aug 8 2015 1:48AM
1 1
profile picture
Willskiforfree
Posts: 929 - Karma: 3,167
plyswthsqrrlshistory is written by the victor

-plyswthsqrrls (and no one else)


.
Aug 8 2015 5:34AM
0 0
profile picture
onenerdykid
Posts: 6660 - Karma: 10,905
californiagrownSo we dropped a doomsday device on them. A weapon we didn't fully understand, but one which we knew would be devasting enough, and shock &awe iiducing enough to end the war on the spot.


But it didn't end the war on the spot and Japan kept on fighting (and would have for sure) until Russia declared war on Japan too. That was what (at least historically is thought to) brought an end to the war.

kshaughnAlso, at that time, no one really knew that devastation that could be brought upon by dropping that bomb. There is a reason why no one has used one since.


The US government definitely had an idea of the destruction and amount of civilian death dropping those bombs would total since they tested one in the desert of New Mexico. They knew full well what they were doing and what it would do to the innocent people there and the city itself. The huge loss of civilian life (people like you & me who were not fighting the war) is one of the reasons why no country has used one since.

californiagrownBut really though. What happened was terrible. there is never a good reason for civilians to die in war. there is never a good reason for soliders to die in war. But in the time and place, and under those particular circumstances, Dropping the bombs was the least worst option. It saved american lives. And in a war, you gotta pick sides and get nasty- thats just the way it is.


90053not sure whether people are trolling or not. It doesn't matter whether japan 'deserved' it or not or whether it was necessary to end a war, loss of civilian life is never something to be proud of.

It pretty fucked up to have no feelings of remorse or sadness about an event with such a high death toll even if you do think that it was the right thing to do.


In modern warfare, we don't target civilians on a small scale nor a large, especially an entire city large. While yes we have devices locked onto certain cities should an attack be provoked towards us, it's possibility is what is mainly used as a deterrent towards other nuclear armed countries. What the US did to Japan 70 years ago is completely deplorable- there is no way around that. Civilians are not the targets in warfare and when they are, it is completely immoral and wrong.
Aug 8 2015 6:03AM
1 0
profile picture
cobra_commander
Posts: 16909 - Karma: 4,687
onenerdykidBut it didn't end the war on the spot and Japan kept on fighting (and would have for sure) until Russia declared war on Japan too. That was what (at least historically is thought to) brought an end to the war..


The second bomb dropped on the 9th. The Soviets declared war on the 9th. The first offer of surrender was on the 10th. Hard to say which one of the two it was.
Aug 8 2015 8:39AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)