On 72nd A-bomb anniversary, Hiroshima highlights Japan’s refusal to join U.N. nuke ba

[Toramana]

The nuclear bomb was dropped by US on non-combatant including toddlers an newborn babies.

On 72nd A-bomb anniversary, Hiroshima highlights Japan's refusal to join U.N. nuke ban | The Japan Times

[maneatinglizard]

People talk about the nukes as if they were the worst thing ever, but the US killed a lot more civilians with "conventional weapons" that are still in use today with few complaints.

The actual reason nukes have such a bad rap isn't because of their destructive power (which is huge no doubt), but rather because the major powers can't reliably defend against them. Airstrikes with conventional weaponry have and continue to be the major cause of civilian deaths by major militaries, but little will be done to prevent airtrikes because the writers of international law are the same people who use airstrikes and know they can't easily be used against them.

[Firdousi]

People talk about the nukes as if they were the worst thing ever, but the US killed a lot more civilians with "conventional weapons" that are still in use today with few complaints.

The actual reason nukes have such a bad rap isn't because of their destructive power (which is huge no doubt), but rather because the major powers can't reliably defend against them. Airstrikes with conventional weaponry have and continue to be the major cause of civilian deaths by major militaries, but little will be done to prevent airtrikes because the writers of international law are the same people who use airstrikes and know they can't easily be used against them.

More people died in the bombings of Tokyo, Hamburg or Dresde. Japs started the war by back-stabbing USA in Pearl Harbor. They committed horrible crimes against civilians in China, Korea, Vietnam, etc. In that war Americans were the less bad guys. I am glad they won Cold War too. We live in a better and more human world now thanks to the American liberal order.

In general its safe to say that nukes helped to save many lives. USA was planning a full invasion of Japan that would led to the death of millions, Japanese and Americans alike. Nukes helped to end the war.

Personally i am a pro nukes persona. Nuclear deterrance and mutual assured destruction are keeping superpowers at bay. I mean the threat and fear of destroying each other its what is avoiding huge wars. Instead of that, superpowers prefer to rely on proxy wars in third war countries such as Syria, Ukraine or Afghanistan. I know it sucks but less people die in these wars than in total wars.

[Firdousi]

BTW if I was the prime minister of Japan I would desperately push for nuclear weapons. Sooner or later China will claim Japanese Islands just like they have done with other neighbors. Japs and South Koreans shouldn't rely on the USA.This country has a huge dependency on China when it comes to its own national debt. If Japan and South Korea start a military nuclear program it put upside down the entire geopolitical reality in the Far East. Just imagine how advanced and sophisticated could be their weapons thanks to their technology.

I seriously believe once NATO collapses a nuclear race will start in Europe, Middle East and Far East. Countries such as Germany, Poland, Turkey, Iran, KSA, South Korea, Indonesia and Japan, need nukes in order to keep their nuclear neighbors at bay and impose their own interests on weaker nations. We got quite interesting days ahead of us.

[Toramana]

More people died in the bombings of Tokyo, Hamburg or Dresde. Japs started the war by back-stabbing USA in Pearl Harbor. They committed horrible crimes against civilians in China, Korea, Vietnam, etc. In that war Americans were the less bad guys. I am glad they won Cold War too. We live in a better and more human world now thanks to the American liberal order.

In general its safe to say that nukes helped to save many lives. USA was planning a full invasion of Japan that would led to the death of millions, Japanese and Americans alike. Nukes helped to end the war.

Personally i am a pro nukes persona. Nuclear deterrance and mutual assured destruction are keeping superpowers at bay. I mean the threat and fear of destroying each other its what is avoiding huge wars. Instead of that, superpowers prefer to rely on proxy wars in third war countries such as Syria, Ukraine or Afghanistan. I know it sucks but less people die in these wars than in total wars.

I wonder how can Japanese aggression justify dropping a lethal weapon on non-combatants including the elderly, the women, the sick, the yet-to-be-born in the womb, the newly-born, the toddlers, the young school going kids, etc. Not only were these people subjected to a most dreadful and painful death, the generations that were born after the use of the nuclear bomb on Japanese had to suffer due to exposure to harmful rays.

What law of war or morality can justify that except a sadistic and racist disregard for the lives of a supposedly inferior race on which to test the destructive capability of a new weapon? I believe even Chengez and Halago didn't target small kid.

True, Japanese did commit brutal killing, does that justify the innocent should pay for the decisions and acts of the elite and military classes and pay so dreadfully? If that is the case, that also give them the right to use few nuclear weapons on Muslims indiscriminately for the murderous acts of those associated with Islamist terrorist gangs like ISIS because Muslims as a whole are blamed for what the jehadists do.

It is also questionable to claim that Japanese would have had carried on the war had the nuclear weapons not been used. Many sources on the contrary claim that were about to surrender.

Nuclear weapons are good only for deterrence if they are good at all but actually using them is callous and insane.

[Toramana]

BTW if I was the prime minister of Japan I would desperately push for nuclear weapons. Sooner or later China will claim Japanese Islands just like they have done with other neighbors. Japs and South Koreans shouldn't rely on the USA.This country has a huge dependency on China when it comes to its own national debt. If Japan and South Korea start a military nuclear program it put upside down the entire geopolitical reality in the Far East. Just imagine how advanced and sophisticated could be their weapons thanks to their technology.

I seriously believe once NATO collapses a nuclear race will start in Europe, Middle East and Far East. Countries such as Germany, Poland, Turkey, Iran, KSA, South Korea, Indonesia and Japan, need nukes in order to keep their nuclear neighbors at bay and impose their own interests on weaker nations. We got quite interesting days ahead of us.

Is not that far-fetched ?

[khushal]

The 2 A-bombs were dropped on Japan because the US wanted a complete Japanese surrender as quickly as possible. The Soviets were advancing from the West and the US was afraid the Soviets might capture most of Japan and wanted to avoid splitting Japan like they did Germany.

No one needs to test A bombs on people to know its destruction.

[Firdousi]

I wonder how can Japanese aggression justify dropping a lethal weapon on non-combatants including the elderly, the women, the sick, the yet-to-be-born in the womb, the newly-born, the toddlers, the young school going kids, etc. Not only were these people subjected to a most dreadful and painful death, the generations that were born after the use of the nuclear bomb on Japanese had to suffer due to exposure to harmful rays.

What law of war or morality can justify that except a sadistic and racist disregard for the lives of a supposedly inferior race on which to test the destructive capability of a new weapon? I believe even Chengez and Halago didn't target small kid.

True, Japanese did commit brutal killing, does that justify the innocent should pay for the decisions and acts of the elite and military classes and pay so dreadfully? If that is the case, that also give them the right to use few nuclear weapons on Muslims indiscriminately for the murderous acts of those associated with Islamist terrorist gangs like ISIS because Muslims as a whole are blamed for what the jehadists do.

It is also questionable to claim that Japanese would have had carried on the war had the nuclear weapons not been used. Many sources on the contrary claim that were about to surrender.

Nuclear weapons are good only for deterrence if they are good at all but actually using them is callous and insane.

You are taking a wrong perspective. You can't judge actions from your own modern perspective and morality. Actually its not even about "good" or "bad". It was just pure "realpolitik". More than 70 million human beings had already been killed, who cares if few thousand more were killed if by doing that you end the war for good? If the Japs really cared about their own new born and yet to be born children, their elders, women and men, they shouldn't have started that war. They did, and they lost. And I am glad that happened.

Its not about racism. Despite all their hypocrisy Western civilization stands mostly for secular humanism. Human beings are treated much better and fairly in Western countries than in other places. Thats why you and I both live in Western countries.

You can not compare current war in the Middle East than WW2. Its completely different. And already more people have died in these wars than in Nagasaki and Hiroshima combined. USA imposed sanctions on Iraq led to the starvation to death of almost 600k Iraqi children. People are already dying by the thousands, but there is no need to use nukes. These wars can be put to an end by using diplomacy and conventional warfare. You are being very biased now, brother.

[Firdousi]

The 2 A-bombs were dropped on Japan because the US wanted a complete Japanese surrender as quickly as possible. The Soviets were advancing from the West and the US was afraid the Soviets might capture most of Japan and wanted to avoid splitting Japan like they did Germany.

No one needs to test A bombs on people to know its destruction.

Exactly it was pure realpolitik. But i do believe Americans wanted to show to the rest of the world their power. They knew already about nukes power od destruction. What they wanted is the rest of the world to know it too.

[khushal]

Exactly it was pure realpolitik. But i do believe Americans wanted to show to the rest of the world their power. They knew already about nukes power od destruction. What they wanted is the rest of the world to know it too.

You may be right but its a double edged sword. If you show the Word your power, The World is not going to sit still but will work extremely hard to bring balance which is why it only took the Soviets 4 years to develop their own A bomb which surprised US nuclear scientists and political leaders of the time. You only show your power when you have to that is if you have it.
This is a nice read about Soviet reaction to US A bomb to those who are interested: Stalin and the Bomb, by David Holloway

Trump thinks being tough with North Korea will bring results but incompetent leaders never realize that when you play hardball, the reaction from the other side is fear and paranoia and today they just announced North Korea has successfully built a sophisticated delivery device for its nuclear arsenal.

[khushal]

You are taking a wrong perspective. You can't judge actions from your own modern perspective and morality. Actually its not even about "good" or "bad". It was just pure "realpolitik". More than 70 million human beings had already been killed, who cares if few thousand more were killed if by doing that you end the war for good? If the Japs really cared about their own new born and yet to be born children, their elders, women and men, they shouldn't have started that war. They did, and they lost. And I am glad that happened.

Its not about racism. Despite all their hypocrisy Western civilization stands mostly for secular humanism. Human beings are treated much better and fairly in Western countries than in other places. Thats why you and I both live in Western countries.

You can not compare current war in the Middle East than WW2. Its completely different. And already more people have died in these wars than in Nagasaki and Hiroshima combined. USA imposed sanctions on Iraq led to the starvation to death of almost 600k Iraqi children. People are already dying by the thousands, but there is no need to use nukes. These wars can be put to an end by using diplomacy and conventional warfare. You are being very biased now, brother.

The Japanese might have shot first but they had no other choice with a hard blockade imposed on them. It was a fight or starve scenario. A war between the Japanese and the Allied powers was inevitable. The US would have attacked but the gov was afraid of its isolationists citizens. If you force the Japanese to attack, then you could weaken the isolationist's argument which is what happened.

[Saleh]

You are taking a wrong perspective. You can't judge actions from your own modern perspective and morality. Actually its not even about "good" or "bad". It was just pure "realpolitik". More than 70 million human beings had already been killed, who cares if few thousand more were killed if by doing that you end the war for good? If the Japs really cared about their own new born and yet to be born children, their elders, women and men, they shouldn't have started that war. They did, and they lost. And I am glad that happened.

Its not about racism. Despite all their hypocrisy Western civilization stands mostly for secular humanism. Human beings are treated much better and fairly in Western countries than in other places. Thats why you and I both live in Western countries.

Is it not a simplistic way of looking at the situation?

If the Muslims had held on to their power, and possibly expanded it further (discovered the Americas first before Euros did, etc.) in an alternate reality Muslim world would be the developed world today instead of Europe/West.

Humanism seems to be a byproduct of wealth (or abundance of wealth).

No matter who rules the world, there will always be some sort of order, and the scraps will fall to the lower ranked in the hierarchy.

[khushal]

Is it not a simplistic way of looking at the situation?

If the Muslims had held on to their power, and possibly expanded it further (discovered the Americas first before Euros did, etc.) in an alternate reality Muslim world would be the developed world today instead of Europe/West.

Humanism seems to be a byproduct of wealth (or abundance of wealth).

No matter who rules the world, there will always be some sort of order, and the scraps will fall to the lower ranked in the hierarchy.

You are right. The double edged sword is played again. When the Ottomans placed an embargo on Europe, the Europeans reacted the only way they could which was to put all their resources on building powerful Navies to have access to South Asian and East Asian markets. Columbus was just looking for a shorter route to India when he discovered the Americas. The Europeans realized first that the future belongs to the ones who can control the seas trading routes with powerful navies. It was through those powerful navies that they acquired enormous wealth.

[Firdousi]

Is it not a simplistic way of looking at the situation?

If the Muslims had held on to their power, and possibly expanded it further (discovered the Americas first before Euros did, etc.) in an alternate reality Muslim world would be the developed world today instead of Europe/West.

Humanism seems to be a byproduct of wealth (or abundance of wealth).

No matter who rules the world, there will always be some sort of order, and the scraps will fall to the lower ranked in the hierarchy.

West ist not more developed than the islamic world because they "discovered America" or "looted the rest of the world". There are many factors and reasons behind what its called the "Great Divergence". Westerners seriously worked for many centuries in order to change their collective mentality. Thats what led them to develop and create what we now call "modernization". Muslims discovered or conquered many regions before the West such as the Far East or the Indian Subcontinent and still we didn't develop. You shouldn't underestimate nor dwarf Western accomplishment which are remarkable.

Western obsession when it comes to Human Righs and Humanism started mainly after WW2, when horrible crimes that were committed seriously struck the West. Several constitutions and declarations have declared that human beings have some inherent rights that can't be taken away (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) although many others claim the same thing (American Constitution or the French Declaration of the Rights of the Man and of the Citizen). Actually Western secular humanism can be traced back to old Christian scholars such as Thomas of Aquinas and his Natural Law. You see there are plenty of wealthy islamic countries out there but you can't find any humanism in there. Thats why Muslims prefer to risk their life and reach Europe instead going there.

I do agree. Some hierarchy and order exists and will always exist. Its part of the human nature and complex human societies.

[Firdousi]

The Japanese might have shot first but they had no other choice with a hard blockade imposed on them. It was a fight or starve scenario. A war between the Japanese and the Allied powers was inevitable. The US would have attacked but the gov was afraid of its isolationists citizens. If you force the Japanese to attack, then you could weaken the isolationist's argument which is what happened.

Good point, but the Japanese were already looting, raping and devastating the Far East many years before Pearl Harbor or any blockade. When I state that I am glade the USA won that war and the Japs lost its not because I love Murica or hate the Japanese. It has nothing to do with that. Its all about the way they both saw the world: for the fascistic Japanese regime everything was about them while the rest of the world should submit to their militarism. But Western liberal democracy, despite all its flaws, offers us something different and exceptional. For the very first time in human history a political systems offers individual freedom, private property, peace, understanding, international cooperation and to some extend, reason.

I have been taught to appreciate what exceptional and unique things, and democracy its indeed something exceptional and unique. Thats why I am glad Americans won the Cold War: their system is the less bad option and has brought a lot of prosperity, peace and development to our planet. No wonder the most developed countries in the world are those who adopted the Western economic and to some degree political system.