Do most Americans condone the nukes on Japan?

New
🎁 SANTA

New

PRE
Google
🎁 SANTAmore
Dec 12, 2018 108 Comments

I was having a conversation with someone from Amazon today and this person mentioned that the nukes on Japan were justified. I personally feel that it is quite psychotic to defend this act.

Not to include in the poll but this person also condoned that the murder of almost 200.000 civilians in Iraq - that it was the right thing to do.

Murder of 100.000 civilians in Afghanistan was according to law and there for is ok.

The torture and rape in the same wars were defended intensely. Is this really how Americans feel?

I’m not American and I don’t live in the US right now. I have lived a few years in NYC but I’m curious to know what the rest of the country thinks... I’m personally completely and totally against all forms of war and violence.

It’s scary to think that I might move back one day. Perhaps I should stay in New York.

Do most Americans condone the nukes on Japan?
112 VOTES SELECT ONLY ONE ANSWER
VOTE VIEW RESULT

comments

Want to comment? LOG IN or SIGN UP
TOP 108 Comments
  • Amazon / Mgmt KYuG83
    OPs ignorance is genuinely disturbing.

    Ignorant social justice warriors turning a blind eye to evil in the world is how countries like Japan rise to power with half a century of unmitigated mass murder and rape, to the point that only nukes can stop them.

    The Japanese murdered over 6 million Chinese, Koreans, Malaysians, Indonesians, and Filipinos between 1937 and 1945. Their holocaust killed more than Hitler’s. They were a deplorable nation whose civilians supported mass civilian casualty in the name of racial superiority. They only lost 200K in the nukes and got out cheap, to be frank. Since then, they peacefully reconstructed and gave the world Pokemon and Hello Kitty instead of putting babies heads on spikes, so I would say it was a good reality check for them.

    OP, I know that it is popular to hate America, but can you please enlighten us as to the alternative to stop the nightmare that was the Japanese empire without more bloodshed?
    Dec 12, 2018 21
    • Credit Karma EllisDee25
      No, I’m saying that dropping the a-bomb wasn’t what ended the war but it was consistent with the US strategy of bombing cities.
      Dec 13, 2018
    • Amazon MemeMagic
      What kind of alternative history are you fucking commies reading now a days? Lmao don’t waste your time on these people lct, they are just proud of their ignorance
      Dec 13, 2018
    • Credit Karma EllisDee25
      Idk, scholarly but fairly conventional history? Google it: this is a pretty mainstream view - just not in US high school textbooks or pop culture.

      A vet in 1947 probably would have been angry at hearing someone tell them that the a-bomb alone ended the war.

      The USSR and US historical myths of the “great patriotic war” or the “good war” are a self-serving rewrite of history by the victors. This is harmful because it doesn’t prepare the population for preventing fascism or the next imperial war before it gets to the point of countless dead Russians, the destruction of London, Tokyo, and Berlin among many other cities... Dresden, Hiroshima, etc.
      Dec 13, 2018
    • Amazon / Mgmt KYuG83
      I like the revisionist part of history where everyone totally glosses over the genocide in Asia, that cost more lives than the Holocaust.

      What’s the deal? Are Chinese and Korean lives less valuable than white European Jew lives? Why are we all debating whether the nukes were bad, neglecting that Japanese were actively committing racial genocide against millions until we stopped them? They were killing over 2,000 on daily basis and exploiting them for resources and sex slaves to keep their war going. Going into slow attrition because we had a tactical advantage and knew we would win eventually is not the right answer for those oppressed by the Japanese. The right answer was to pop them in the nose and end the brutality without another moment’s delay, and demand unconditional surrender so they had no leverage to keep any ill-gotten influence or territory in Asia.

      If Japan had gotten unconditional surrender of the rest of southeast Asia, they would have murdered them. America got unconditional surrender with the minimum amount of human casualty required to do so and then helped Japan rebuild and retain autonomy, culture and independence. We are a good people, and the revisionists who seem to think 30 Chinese lives have no value compared to 1 Japanese life, simply because it was America that took the Japanese life, seriously needs to revisit their values.
      Dec 13, 2018
    • Uber lct
      Exactly, fk this line of thinking
      Dec 13, 2018
  • Boeing / Ops Airbus
    Is rape in nanjing justified?
    Dec 12, 2018 2
    • New
      🎁 SANTA

      New

      PRE
      Google
      🎁 SANTAmore
      OP
      No. Obviously not. Two evils don’t make something good. Both are disgusting events. And if there was a separate poll I hope 100% would vote NO, it wasn’t justified.
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Amazon / Mgmt KYuG83
      I think we should have not lifted a finger against Japan, and let them rape hundreds of thousands of Chinese and Korean women, destroy their heritage and burn their temples, stick their babies heads on spikes, and shove their bodies in mass unmarked burial sites so that OP’s feelings would not be hurt.

      To quote a Japanese soldier and general during the war, with respect to a Chinese woman:

      “Is it okay if I rape her?”
      “Yes, but only if you kill her when you are done.”

      Based on Japan’s 50 year history of massacre, racism, and atrocities leading up to the nuke drop, in retrospect, I believe if we had only asked nicely, perhaps they would have stopped mass raping and murdering and waging war against millions. You are right OP, we were wrong!
      Dec 12, 2018
  • Google / Eng Bluths
    Americans are usually simple minded people who can be easily brainwashed with propaganda while they point fingers at North Korea.
    Dec 12, 2018 5
    • Amazon MemeMagic
      Dumbest comment of the year. In one swoop: defending North Korea, bathing in ignorance of the realities of world war 2, and acting like a holier than thou asshat with the typical “America Bad” narrative.
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Vertivco / Eng
      FastPapuan

      Vertivco Eng

      PRE
      YouTube, American Bureau of Shipping, Facebook
      FastPapuanmore
      Not an argument, MemeMagic. What you said does not, at all, address what he said. Why the strawmanning. Why oh why?
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Amazon MemeMagic
      Sorry that I don’t feel the need to respond to a non argument with an argument. I did address what he said, what’s with your fifth grade reading level?

      I don’t think Strawman means what you mean it thinks either
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Vertivco / Eng
      FastPapuan

      Vertivco Eng

      PRE
      YouTube, American Bureau of Shipping, Facebook
      FastPapuanmore
      We helped bring in Mao and Ho Chi Minh. Those were arguably worse. Look up Diane West's publications on it.
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Uber lct
      Mao inherited a once proud and strong China that got destroyed by various western nations and its neighbors for a century in a gang rape. Population forcefed opium, land carved up and “leased” (eg Hong Kong), navy demolished, then the invasion by Japan that killed 14 million people. He made the decision to sacrifice like 2% of the country to modernize as quickly as possible to end that era. If you ask the typical Chinese to pick between the sacrifice and continuing to get fucked, I think you’ll be surprised (or not) at the answer.
      Dec 13, 2018
  • Microsoft TrumpWins
    It was the right thing to do. The only other option was an extensive invasion of Japan when it was known that the Japanese were arming every civilian to fight till death. The nukes killed less people than the alternative would have. I don't think Americans are "proud" of that, but it was justified. Also keep in mind that Japan attacked us first.
    Dec 12, 2018 5
    • Microsoft Jeph Bezos
      It was “known” that the Japanese were arming every civilian. lol. Sure bud, like we “knew” about weapons of mass destruction .
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Microsoft TrumpWins
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Microsoft Jeph Bezos
      From your article: “At this stage of the war, the lack of modern weaponry and ammunition meant that most were armed with swords or even bamboo spears.”

      Yeah. We all know how dangerous bamboo spears are and how they can only be stopped with a nuke - two nukes at that.
      Dec 13, 2018
    • Uber lct
      Are you trolling? It’s not about danger. Armed with spears means they aren’t innocent civilians, more like desperate and underarmed militants. A quick vaporization seems to be a better end than getting shot in the gut with said spear while trying to stab a US ground force soldier, no?
      Dec 13, 2018
    • Microsoft Jeph Bezos
      No.
      Dec 13, 2018
  • Splunk / Eng Jencksa
    Nuking them actually ended up killing less
    Dec 12, 2018 1
    • Amazon / Mgmt KYuG83
      Whoa, stop it with the facts buddy. Everything the US does is evil, what’s not to understand?
      Dec 12, 2018
  • Apple vAAA81
    You need some context into this topic to have an honest discussion about it. This isn’t a partisan issue. It was widely known that the emperor of Japan was never going to back down from the war even knowing Americans were beating them. Their soldiers would have fought until the end no matter what.

    We even found isolated islands with Japanese soldiers who still believed the war was still happening years after the war. These dudes were hard core with their honor and discipline, and devolved straight up into lord of the flies.

    I don’t buy the excuse that we were targeting military facilities. It was known there would be enormous civilian casualties. And this was part of the decision. We had only a few nukes. One scenario floated around was to demo a nuke detonation with the Japanese as witness to show them what will be dropped on their country. But that was defeated because the consensus is that it wouldn’t of changed the emperors mind, because he was obsessed with holding on to power.

    So we had to face the decision of sacrificing 10s of thousands of additional American lives killing hundreds of thousands more Japanese, or shock and cripple Japan by nuking one of their cities to get the emperor to cave and come to the table.

    In the end, it worked. Japan surrendered after Nagasaki. It was a terrible act, but it saved many more lives.

    I say this as an American and as a democrat, whose grand dad fought in the pacific theater. I used to hold the opinion that this was an act of genocide, but the more I learned about this history of the time, the more I think they made the right call.
    Dec 12, 2018 4
    • eBay 🍜 soup
      Wasn’t 1 bomb enough to stop the emperor?
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Facebook Doelm
      No, Japan refused to surrender after Hiroshima
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Oracle PypPyp
      Apparently not. Even though the Prime Minister and others were openly calling for surrender at this point, many military leaders wanted to continue the fight and the emperor had not yet decided it was the end (even with Russia then openly declaring way on them too!) The use of a second bomb so quickly after the first helped bluff the idea that the US had a stockpile of these things just sitting around that the could use to wipe the island off the map. Had Japan known those were their only two then they may still have fought longer.
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Apple vAAA81
      ☝🏻that’s exactly right. The shock and awe strategy.
      Dec 12, 2018
  • Indeed UNUH67
    When you attack America unprovoked, get smacked, refuse to surrender, fucking eat soldiers in the pacific campaign and plan on fighting until death, you’re gonna get nuked. Sorry
    Dec 12, 2018 15
    • Amazon / Mgmt KYuG83
      So santa, are you saying we should have allowed japan to continue? What is the alternative you propose?

      You’re the f*n psycho.
      Dec 13, 2018
    • New
      🎁 SANTA

      New

      PRE
      Google
      🎁 SANTAmore
      OP
      👌
      Dec 13, 2018
    • Credit Karma EllisDee25
      @Amazon again, the bombs didn’t end the war. The US was showing off it’s new weapon like when the US recently dropped the “Mother of all bombs” even though their existing absurd arsenal would have been more than enough.

      As far as the US strategy to destroy cities in Japan more generally through blitz: the strategic US thinking there is that the Japanese military was broken - except the army which would have potentially fought it out . Fought, not to win but to make it difficult enough that the US would ditch unconditional surrender and negotiate instead.

      The main alternative for US options was not calling for unconditional surrender or having Russia negotiate a deal. They decided just bombarding cities would be the best option.

      Ultimately, Russia declared war and moved east. Japan had no more alternatives and called it.
      Dec 13, 2018
    • Amazon / Mgmt KYuG83
      We were strategically positioned to win, but it was far from over. There is a difference between being in a winning position and delivering the checkmate, the bombs delivered the checkmate.

      If we stalled, it would have only cost more lives. The Japanese were not surrendering.
      Dec 13, 2018
    • Credit Karma EllisDee25
      If you were the Japanese leadership, would the firebombing of Tokyo be less important than the A bomb drops?

      Bombing in general was no different than the atomic bombs. The a-bombs were not decisive, just part of a much larger destruction of the urban centers of the country.

      Air bombing civilians (“total war”) was the technological “innovation” of WWII. The A-bomb was just an extension of that.

      During the Cold War when Americans were under threat of nuclear arms races, that’s when the story that the a-bombs ended the war became a common argument for why Japan surrendered.

      A quarter of Tokyo was ash - Japan still thought it could fight a kind of attrition war to force negotiations. It was only when Russia switched from Neutral to declare war that Japan felt time had run out. That’s a lot less interesting or mythic tale for the US to tell. Dropping a bomb and ending the conflict in one dramatic gesture is much more satisfying and Hollywood.

      If you want to argue that the US firebombing Japan helped force surrender, then that’s general but true in part - that’s the strategy that was used. But idk if it’s the best of all outcomes - probably trying to politically stop fascist movements in society and nationalist efforts by our own government is a better way to stop wars than waiting for industrial countries to arm up and start acting belligerent.

      https://www.tampabay.com/news/military/war/deadly-wwii-firebombings-of-japanese-cities-largely-ignored/2220606%3ftemplate=amp
      Dec 13, 2018
  • Bose JustMeHa
    I think it was sick but Americans are pretty proud of it honestly
    Dec 12, 2018 6
    • New
      🎁 SANTA

      New

      PRE
      Google
      🎁 SANTAmore
      OP
      I would prefer for not instantly killing +300.000 civilians on purpose.

      It would have been a different story if there was a tactical attack that specifically targeted military.
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Amazon Jеff Bezоs
      We have big, beautiful nukes.
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Boeing / Ops Airbus
      US dropped thousands of warning leaflets into the city before bomb was dropped. Japan didnt want its citizens to panic and punished person who read them
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Google / Eng Tdca40
      Also the nuke is not even close to the worst attacks wrt civilian deaths during WW2.
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Amazon / Mgmt KYuG83
      Ignorant SJWs need to prove how woke they are against US imperialism by siding with the Japanese Axis empire that murdered over 6 million Chinese, Koreans, Malaysians, Indonesians, and Filipinos in 1937-1945 in a genocide their civilians vociferously supported in the name of racial superiority. The politically correct thing to do would have been to let Japan keep enslaving and raping women across Asia while putting their babies’ heads on spikes. 👏
      Dec 12, 2018
  • Qualcomm XBKO65
    Livid about 9/11 but proud of nuking Japan. How hypocritical.
    Dec 12, 2018 2
    • Amazon MemeMagic
      Yes because the US ending a war and preventing another couple million dead that would have resulted from an invasion of Japan is in any way comparable to radical Jihadists performing a surprise attack
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Amazon / Mgmt KYuG83
      I am proud that the US nuked Japan, because it ended the largest scale act of genocide the world has ever seen. The nukes took 200K civilians. The Japanese took 6M civilian lives across Asian and enslaved their women for sex. In other words the Japanese caused 30 times as many civilian casualties as the US nukes caused. If the US nukes had killed 1M, I’d have still been proud of what we did, because Japan would not stop until it was utterly defeated. The alternative to nukes would have been a brutal ground invasion which would have been far costlier.
      Dec 12, 2018
  • Amazon / Mgmt KYuG83
    Japan spent the first half of the century invading, exploiting, occupying, murdering and raping in China and Korea, then wages war on the USA. To this day their gov’t denies that they ever did anything wrong in China and Korea.

    I feel for the civilian casualties but the Japanese gov’t had to be stopped, and this stopped them. If the war continued far more Japanese would have died.
    Dec 12, 2018 0
  • Facebook / Eng
    SteveIrwin

    Facebook Eng

    PRE
    Google
    SteveIrwinmore
    The japs were worse than the natzis during ww2.
    Dec 12, 2018 7
    • Amazon / Mgmt KYuG83
      Yes, that is their logic. Nuking Japan after 50 years of aggressive empire expansion, occupation, and war atrocities was unfair. It would be more fair if we let Japan murder a million more Chinese, Korean, and Americans, and it would have been more fair to wage a ground invasion and fire bombings in Japan, resulting in at least as man civilian casualties but over a longer period of time and with incalculable death for all other countries involved, somehow.

      These people apologizing for Japan are outrageous. Japan’s leaders compromised the safety of its own people by invading other countries.

      I don’t even feel bad for the Japanese civilians. The golden rule: do unto others as you would have done unto yourself. Japan invaded and murdered civilians, Japanese civilians were perfectly fine with Chinese and Korean civilians dying as long as it wasn’t them, because of their own racial superiority complex. Then, they got invaded and suffered their own casualties, surprise surprise. Why exactly are people apologizing for Japan? Its civilians should have been revolting against their own government for the Nanjing massacre, but they thought it was fucking great.
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Uber lct
      Exactly. The Japanese public was fully aware of what was happening and supported it. Articles like this were appearing in their newspapers. They were holding competitions to see who can behead more Chinese civilians and folks back home loved it.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contest_to_kill_100_people_using_a_sword
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Uber lct
      Say what you will about Americans and our actions in Iraq - I don’t support the war either. But I have full confidence that if we went and murdered 5 million Iraqi civilians by claiming racial superiority and put up a picture of two US army captains holding a competition to see how many captive civilians they can shoot with their M16s, we would have uncontrollable riots even in the reddest states.
      Dec 12, 2018
    • eBay 🍜 soup
      Are you kidding me? Comparing 2000 with 1900? If kind of racism that was 100 years back was now, I’m sure there will be riots in every state but still it was there 100 years back
      Dec 13, 2018
    • Uber lct
      1) this was not 1900, more like 1945.
      2) the revisionism in their society is strong, having never fully acknowledged the wrongdoings like Germany and instead glossing over the events in their education system.
      Dec 13, 2018
  • This comment was deleted by original commenter.

    • Amazon / Mgmt KYuG83
      And a country that saved Europe from the Nazi empire and Asia from the Japanese empire, spread democracy to the world and produced the majority of the world’s greatest scientific, technological, industrial and social advances in the last century.

      But let’s characterize the entire country off of one thing you don’t like. Ps - I believe we should have let Japan invade all of Asia, and the USA too. This would have been more politically correct.
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Salesforce End13dh
      US saved the Europe, please...
      Dec 12, 2018
    • Salesforce 5"6Indian
      Let's be fair here. The US helped, but it was Russia who saved Europe
      Dec 12, 2018
  • Northrop Grumman / Eng (Ω,A,μ)
    Well it ended the war,.and the Japanese murdered like 10 million Chinese, look at Nanjing for instance.

    Is killing that many people Instantly bad, yes, but it was war time.
    Dec 12, 2018 0
  • Microsoft Jeph Bezos
    It was unnecessary. Japan had no allies; its navy was almost destroyed; its islands were under a naval blockade; and its cities were undergoing concentrated air attacks. Japan had already lost the war and they were no longer a threat.

    Post the bombs being dropped, Rear Admiral Tocshitane Takata concurred that B-29s “were the greatest single factor in forcing Japan’s surrender”, while Prince Konoye already thought Japan was defeated on 14 February 1945 when he met emperor Hirohito.

    If anything, the nukes were used as a “nobody ever think about fucking with America again” type of statement.

    To answer your question. Yes, most Americans do condone the Nukes on Japan. Whether they are right or wrong is a different question.
    Dec 12, 2018 1
    • Amazon MemeMagic
      A swing and a miss
      Dec 12, 2018
  • Google d86gd2
    I never got navel gazing over the nukes. They were small-time compared to the fire bombing of Tokyo, or the complete destruction of Dresden.

    It's fascinating how one Axis power receives so much sympathy while another gets so little. I suspect it's education.
    Dec 12, 2018 0
  • Amazon MemeMagic
    So many ignorant comments here, everyone drinking the “America is Bad” coolaid.
    Dec 12, 2018 0
  • HBO / Eng
    j1234

    HBO Eng

    PRE
    Redfin
    j1234more
    The amount of commies here on blind is insane.
    Dec 12, 2018 1
    • Uber lct
      The level of indoctrination of the education system’s hilarious. What the hell is a “commie”? Person who believes in a particular economic arrangement? Your comment left me confused as to which side you’re backing, lol

      If commie = leftist I guess you are backing the US.
      If commie = Chinese I guess you are saying the US shouldn’t have nuked Japan and should have let Japan continue its slaughter in China ...?
      Dec 13, 2018
  • Uber lct
    The Japanese military, government, and people were one and the same, supporting and backing one another. A land invasion would have turned the civilians into the military.

    To those saying “well we did x so we are no better than them!” - their atrocities in Asia needed to be stopped, as quickly as possible. The cop that shoots the mass murderer is not equivalent to the latter.

    Don’t use wars like Iraq to retrospectively discredit everything America ever did in the history of its existence. Iraq may well have been a big mistake. But stopping Japan was not.
    Dec 12, 2018 0
  • New EKPg16
    I’m not american, but definitely justified. Anyone who disagrees hasn’t studied the game theoretical scenarios in context
    Dec 12, 2018 0
  • Credit Karma EllisDee25
    The bombs didn’t end WWII, they just started the nuclear arms race. The idea that the two a-bombs were needed to end the war is just revisionism. The Nazis were crushed and Japan was all but toast.

    Japan’s rulers wanted the USSR to mediate, but when the USSR declared war, Japan was out of options and that’s why the surrender happened.

    The US had already destroyed Japanese cities, the bomb was to intimidate rivals. The US did not want to have to compete for post-war dominance in East Asia like in Europe.

    So for the US military’s perspective it was justified.

    But most Americans wouldn’t see it that way — so various other justifications were used. We know the drill: it’s wmd’s... well really about democracy for Iraq... well really...
    Dec 12, 2018 0

Salary
Comparison

    Real time salary information from verified employees