These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Out of Pod Experience

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123
 

Obama tries to apologize to Japan for Hiroshima. Japan says, "Hell no!"

First post
Author
Sir Substance
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#41 - 2011-10-18 06:53:18 UTC
I dislike these kinds of apologies mainly because I feel they misrepresent the issues. Apologies imply guilt, and I doubt even .001% of the USA's current population was in any culpable for the nuclear attack on japan.

Conferring guilt on all those people who had nothing to do with it by apologizing on their behalf is a disgusting thing to do.

Kevin Rudd, Australias former PM, did much the same thing when apologized for the stolen generation, something that happened over 100 years ago (admittedly it trailed on for a while in a few isolated places). That's not my fault, you dickhead. I was born 10 years after the last cases of it happened, don't implicate me in the crime!

The beatings will continue until posting improves. -Magnus Cortex

Official Eve Online changelist: Togglable PvP. - Jordanna Bauer

Alara IonStorm
#42 - 2011-10-18 09:10:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
Reiisha wrote:

Just wondering - So you're proud of being the only nation that actually used a nuke in real combat? Especially given the fact that Japan was ready to surrender before it dropped.

Yes that is why announced they would drop the Bomb. (No Surrender) Why after the first one was dropped and Japan still did n not Surrender. The USA announced they would drop a second and again Japan did not Surrender. They must have been in a real hurry.

Let also note the fact that Japan never indicated to the Allies it had any intentions what so ever of surrender and openly stated it was preparing for a fight to the finish.

Silly rumors.
stoicfaux
#43 - 2011-10-18 13:02:50 UTC
Reiisha wrote:

Just wondering - So you're proud of being the only nation that actually used a nuke in real combat?


What is with the fascination that Nukes represent the Ultimate Evil? What's the difference between getting nuked, firebombed[1], blown up, being clubbed to death, crushed, buried alive, bayoneted, shot, drowned, suffocated, gassed, dying from chemical/biological warfare, dying from thirst/starvation, drying from deprivation, dying from disease, dying from lack of medical attention, and all of the other ways that people are killed or killed by the things done during a war?

Nukes are only "evil" because they represent a really fast way to deliver a horrendous amount of firepower in a very short time, especially when coupled with ICBMs, which makes it way too easy to intentionally and accidentally wipe out civilization.


Quote:
Especially given the fact that Japan was ready to surrender before it dropped.

There was an attempted military coup when the Emperor made plans to surrender. It was almost successful. Never mind that the code of Bushido doesn't believe in or allow for surrendering.


[1] Firebombings were often planned/coordinated to create firestorms, where the updraft caused by the fire caused fresh air to be pulled into the center of the fire at hurricane like speeds.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.

Jhagiti Tyran
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#44 - 2011-10-18 16:13:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Jhagiti Tyran
stoicfaux wrote:
[1] Firebombings were often planned/coordinated to create firestorms, where the updraft caused by the fire caused fresh air to be pulled into the center of the fire at hurricane like speeds.


The firestorms where as horrific as any nuclear blast, it just took thousands of planes hours instead of a single plane with a single bomb. For those who don't know the process it was fairly simple, gather several thousand bombers then send light and heavy bombers with HE warheads to blow roofs of buildings and cause others to collapse, this fills the streets with rubble and prevents people from escaping and keeps the firefighters out, the blown off roofs gives more tinder for the later incendiary waves.

Then the smaller bombers drop small incendiary bombs to cause fires that guide the different waves in, then the next waves drop the heavy incendiary charges.

The people are trapped, the firefighters cant get in and the city burns. But it doesn't just burn you get hurricane force winds that suck people into the fire, air currents cause tornadoes of fire that tear through the streets. Almost nothing can put it out, not even heavy rain. Then there are the horror stories of people trapped in rubble or in basements getting drowned by the firefighters trying to save them. Only the deepest shelters provide any protection from the heat that's hot enough to melt steel.

There's a whole catalogue of human suffering, worse in some ways than a nuke because it goes on for hours instead of over in seconds, apart from the unfortunate survivors with radiation sickness of course.
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
#45 - 2011-10-18 17:05:04 UTC

It got better. Even if you were IN a fireproof shelter, the firestorm sucked all the oxygen out. In Dresden, piles of people were found untouched by fire, yet suffocated. Others jumped into city water reservoirs, then drowned when they discovered the smooth vertical concrete sides had no ladders built into them.

Nasty stuff, but its stupid to apologize. My background is German, and like many, admire their technological achievements and martial prowess. Its actually extremely rare for any nation to fight to the point of utter destruction while maintaining a semblance of civil order, as Germany did.

But Germany (and Japan) did terrible things to other nations, and the civilian population was on the whole was undisturbed by the destruction unleashed on other countries. Either government wouldn't have hesitated to use a nuclear weapon on London, Moscow or LA.

But Obama's need to apologize has nothing to do with actual remorse. He merely is doing his best to weaken the country on the world stage. He wants to 'manage the decline' of the US, and is doing everything in his power to insure that the decline occurs.

Luckily, he only has another 13 months. Mainly just worried that Obama will emulate Der Fuhrer in his bunker and go 'scorched earth' on the US economy when he realizes his days in office are numbered. (Though the cyanide/Walther bit would be much appreciated....) Twisted
Alara IonStorm
#46 - 2011-10-18 19:01:13 UTC
Jhagiti Tyran wrote:

The firestorms where as horrific as any nuclear blast, it just took thousands of planes hours instead of a single plane with a single bomb. For those who don't know the process it was fairly simple, gather several thousand bombers then send light and heavy bombers with HE warheads to blow roofs of buildings and cause others to collapse, this fills the streets with rubble and prevents people from escaping and keeps the firefighters out, the blown off roofs gives more tinder for the later incendiary waves.

Then the smaller bombers drop small incendiary bombs to cause fires that guide the different waves in, then the next waves drop the heavy incendiary charges.

The people are trapped, the firefighters cant get in and the city burns. But it doesn't just burn you get hurricane force winds that suck people into the fire, air currents cause tornadoes of fire that tear through the streets. Almost nothing can put it out, not even heavy rain. Then there are the horror stories of people trapped in rubble or in basements getting drowned by the firefighters trying to save them. Only the deepest shelters provide any protection from the heat that's hot enough to melt steel.

There's a whole catalogue of human suffering, worse in some ways than a nuke because it goes on for hours instead of over in seconds, apart from the unfortunate survivors with radiation sickness of course.

I gotta ask...

Where did you learn that.

That is very detailed.
Jhagiti Tyran
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#47 - 2011-10-18 20:42:19 UTC
Alara IonStorm wrote:
Jhagiti Tyran wrote:

The firestorms where as horrific as any nuclear blast, it just took thousands of planes hours instead of a single plane with a single bomb. For those who don't know the process it was fairly simple, gather several thousand bombers then send light and heavy bombers with HE warheads to blow roofs of buildings and cause others to collapse, this fills the streets with rubble and prevents people from escaping and keeps the firefighters out, the blown off roofs gives more tinder for the later incendiary waves.

Then the smaller bombers drop small incendiary bombs to cause fires that guide the different waves in, then the next waves drop the heavy incendiary charges.

The people are trapped, the firefighters cant get in and the city burns. But it doesn't just burn you get hurricane force winds that suck people into the fire, air currents cause tornadoes of fire that tear through the streets. Almost nothing can put it out, not even heavy rain. Then there are the horror stories of people trapped in rubble or in basements getting drowned by the firefighters trying to save them. Only the deepest shelters provide any protection from the heat that's hot enough to melt steel.

There's a whole catalogue of human suffering, worse in some ways than a nuke because it goes on for hours instead of over in seconds, apart from the unfortunate survivors with radiation sickness of course.

I gotta ask...

Where did you learn that.

That is very detailed.


The details are in the various methods used by British bomber command, this was most infamously done to Dresden. Bomber command picked up the tactics after the burning of Coventry and pieced it together from experience learned trying to annihilate other cities. The destruction is as total as any tactical nuke, it just lacks the fallout.

Unfortunately there's no single online article that I know that describes it, there probably is one but I don't know it. To get an insight you have to trawl through the various tactics and eye witness reports, unless you can find an article.
Adunh Slavy
#48 - 2011-10-18 21:21:23 UTC
Jhagiti Tyran wrote:
Unfortunately there's no single online article that I know that describes it, there probably is one but I don't know it. To get an insight you have to trawl through the various tactics and eye witness reports, unless you can find an article.



I read the same idea expressed in a book myself years ago, but damned if I can recall which book.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Azelor Delaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#49 - 2011-10-19 15:29:16 UTC
You know, I'm all for what happened. Maybe if I had been on the receiving end of The Bomb, I'd have a different opinion. But since I wasn't, my opinion is in favor of it.

The Imperial Japanese military did not want to surrender. In fact, at Guadalcanal, Iwo Jima, Tarawa, and other islands during the "Island Hopping" campaign, all soldiers were expected to "die in glorious combat" for the Emperor and Japan. This was their code. This was Bushido. Anyone who surrendered - Allies or otherwise - were treated as less than human. Hell, even civilians who never took part in such actions were treated as less-than-human by the Japanese.

Chinese and other Asian civilians were used in experiments by the infamous Unit 731. Vivisections occurred, without anesthesia as it was believed anesthesia would "skew" results. Stomachs were removed, with the esophagus attached to the intestines of some prisoners. People were left out in the cold with water poured over extremities so frostbite and hypothermia set in, and the limb was amputated. Allied forces "liberated" camps where there were prisoners that were nothing more thna a head and torso. Allied prisoners of war weren't exempt from this, either.

Then there was the Bataan Death March. Did you hear about that? You probably have.

Oh, and what about the "comfort women"?

The truth is, as much as you would like to say, "The United States was wrong to nuke them twice!", the Japanese main islands would have required far more to take than any three islands (excluding Okinawa) in the Island Hopping campaigns. We didn't have the manpower to do it in a manner that would leave the Japanese with their dignity intact.

The Marines, Navy, Air Force, and Army will be staying on Okinawa for years to come. Even after the "base re-alignment" is complete and they move the majority of the Devil Dogs off that God-forsaken island, you'll still have troops ready to deploy, because China and North Korea need to be reminded that people will stand against them if they get a bit uppity.
Iosue
League of Gentlemen
The Initiative.
#50 - 2011-10-19 15:30:59 UTC
Siva Surya Kshatriya wrote:
I think I do; one such obvious example is the 1953 overthrow of the Shah of Iran, who was democratically elected.


Btw, the Shah of Iran was not democratically elected, rather he was imposed by the US with backing of Britain. BP didn't like the idea of Iran nationalizing their oil reserves, a position which Mossadeq advocated. So the Brits agreed to help train our newly founded Central Intelligence Agency in return for us helping with this little "democratic" problem. We (the US) overthrew Mossadeq who was democratically elected and replaced him with the Shah, who was then overthrown by the Islamic regime a decade or so later and retain control to this day.

Oh yeah, then there was that whole thing were we supported/funded S. Hussain in order to fight the Iran, getting them into a bitter and bloody war only to overthrow S. Hussain years later when he became more trouble than he was worth. (btw, i know i misspelled his name, but for some reason EVE thinks its a dirty word)

And you think EVE is a cold and ruthless place...
stoicfaux
#51 - 2011-10-19 17:06:58 UTC
Azelor Delaria wrote:

The truth is, as much as you would like to say, "The United States was wrong to nuke them twice!", the Japanese main islands would have required far more to take than any three islands (excluding Okinawa) in the Island Hopping campaigns. We didn't have the manpower to do it in a manner that would leave the Japanese with their dignity intact.



If you're ever in New Orleans (US), then take a trip to the WWII Museum. At the end of the tour they have a display that compares the size of the Normandy invasion versus the estimated size of an invasion of the Japanese mainland. It makes Normandy look like a lazy Sunday picnic.

Also, if you're in a war, be careful about pulling your punches (i.e. the US not using nukes on Japan.) It turns out that the Germans had transferred jet technology to Japan, and the Japanese had mountain factories that Allied intelligence never found. If the war had gone on long enough for an Allied invasion of Japan, there was a chance that the Allies would have been met with Japanese jets which would have wrecked havoc on the invasion ships.

And speaking of Okinawa and pulling punches, civilians committed mass suicide over Japanese propaganda portraying the marines as baby-eating sadistic monsters. Plus there are claims that the Japanese army encouraged civilians to commit suicide. Demonizing your enemy during war is SOP, but the Japanese took their propaganda to a whole new level, and it would have made a conventional invasion of Japan extremely bloody.


Anyway, if more people watched History Channel (during its early years) with its endless WWII programs, I don't think as many people would be ready to apologize, agonize over, or generally feel bad about the US dropping nukes in WWII.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.

iudex
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#52 - 2011-10-19 17:40:38 UTC
What's wrong with apologizing for a war crime and human rights violation ? The unnecessary nuclear holocaust was just that and no one apologized for it so far. It's about time !
And while we're at it, the president should also apologize for the US having bombed undefended German cities. Cities with no military objectives, just in order to mass-murder civilians and breaking the will of the people. That was an US war crime as well, which no one apologized for so far.
Alara IonStorm
#53 - 2011-10-19 18:59:14 UTC
iudex wrote:
What's wrong with apologizing for a war crime and human rights violation ? The unnecessary nuclear holocaust was just that and no one apologized for it so far. It's about time !
And while we're at it, the president should also apologize for the US having bombed undefended German cities. Cities with no military objectives, just in order to mass-murder civilians and breaking the will of the people. That was an US war crime as well, which no one apologized for so far.

The US should apologize the moment the Axis wins the War. Till then F@#% those guys.

But hey next time any of them think about starting something that kills 60 million people they will have a nice reference point to what the US will unapologetically do to them.

Also they should stop killing Jews and Mass Raping Chinese Cities. It really isn't nice.
stoicfaux
#54 - 2011-10-19 19:37:56 UTC
iudex wrote:
What's wrong with apologizing for a war crime and human rights violation ? The unnecessary nuclear holocaust was just that and no one apologized for it so far. It's about time !
And while we're at it, the president should also apologize for the US having bombed undefended German cities. Cities with no military objectives, just in order to mass-murder civilians and breaking the will of the people. That was an US war crime as well, which no one apologized for so far.


Did it ever occur to you that the people who dreamed up the list of "war crimes" might have been wrong, unrealistic, or simply overly idealistic about what constitutes a war crime?

I'm fuzzy on the details, but when the war crimes prosecutors decided to try the Japanese for the war crime of "unrestricted submarine warfare" during WWII, it was pointed out by a US Admiral that US sailors would have to be tried as well and that the notion of submarines engaging targets according to various rules (such as warning shots, giving merchant ships time to abandon ship, etc.,) was just stupid. It would have been suicide for subs to follow the rules of civilized warfare.

If you don't want to die in a war or you want to artificially limit the damage done by war, then a) don't start a war, b) don't let someone start a war with you, and c) don't let your neighbors' wars affect you. As history has shown, relying on gentleman's agreements, rules of warfare, and/or expecting to fight a civilized war isn't a reliable means of protection.

More importantly, it's the victor that decides what is and isn't a war crime. War crimes don't mean squat unless you can enforce them.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.

Azelor Delaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#55 - 2011-10-19 22:22:37 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
iudex wrote:
What's wrong with apologizing for a war crime and human rights violation ? The unnecessary nuclear holocaust was just that and no one apologized for it so far. It's about time !
And while we're at it, the president should also apologize for the US having bombed undefended German cities. Cities with no military objectives, just in order to mass-murder civilians and breaking the will of the people. That was an US war crime as well, which no one apologized for so far.


Did it ever occur to you that the people who dreamed up the list of "war crimes" might have been wrong, unrealistic, or simply overly idealistic about what constitutes a war crime?

I'm fuzzy on the details, but when the war crimes prosecutors decided to try the Japanese for the war crime of "unrestricted submarine warfare" during WWII, it was pointed out by a US Admiral that US sailors would have to be tried as well and that the notion of submarines engaging targets according to various rules (such as warning shots, giving merchant ships time to abandon ship, etc.,) was just stupid. It would have been suicide for subs to follow the rules of civilized warfare.

If you don't want to die in a war or you want to artificially limit the damage done by war, then a) don't start a war, b) don't let someone start a war with you, and c) don't let your neighbors' wars affect you. As history has shown, relying on gentleman's agreements, rules of warfare, and/or expecting to fight a civilized war isn't a reliable means of protection.

More importantly, it's the victor that decides what is and isn't a war crime. War crimes don't mean squat unless you can enforce them.



I believe it was Admiral Nimitz who said they'd have to try Allied submariners for the same crimes if they tried German and Japanese for those crimes.
Vikarion
Doomheim
#56 - 2011-10-24 08:21:14 UTC
Before you condemn the atomic bombings, you need to do the following:

1. Research the records as to exactly what the policy of Japan was towards surrender before the bombings.

2. Research the projected casualties for the invasion of Japan, on both sides.

3. Research the atrocities committed by Japan in China and other areas of the Far East, especially the violation and destruction of the residents of Nanking.


After I had researched the first, I was convinced that the combination of the atomic bombs and the Soviet declaration of war were the only events with sufficient shock value to compromise the leadership of Japan that the allies would indeed defeat Japan.

After researching the second, I understood that dropping the bombs was a trade-off, but one that saved millions of Japanese lives by ending the war and further firebombings.

If you research the third, you may, like me, experience a bit of an emotional response, perhaps along the lines of a complete loathing for any nation that possessed a military that would do such things. Of course, there is no such thing as collective responsibility, but the actions of the government of Japan and its military horrified even the Nazis who were in the affected areas.

Now, to those who say that we should forget the past, I would accuse them of setting the stage to repeat the future. If any today can actually be guilty of of the crimes of yesterday, it is those who would have us wipe the victims from the pages of history. Only by scarring ourselves with our horror at such atrocities can we prevent future inhumanities. The day that we forget that Jewish children were cast alive into burning pits is the day that we prepare the flames for the next hated ethnicity, class, or nationality. If we forget Nanking, the Killing Fields of Cambodia, Vietnam, the Trail of tears, Auschwitz, Lenin's Terror, the Holodomor, Rwanda, Bosnia...if we forget these, we may well count ourselves as both traitors to past victims and destroyers of our children.

Face these things. Rub them, metaphorically, into your skin, get them under your fingernails, lodged in your mind, lacerate your emotions with the stories. Then you will hate them, you will do anything to prevent them from ever happening again. Only this can.
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#57 - 2011-10-24 10:07:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
Herr Wilkus wrote:

Extremely biased and needlessly inflammatory piece of reporting which...

...just barely syncs up with the ACTUAL text in the leaked cable, if you are to interpret it in just the "right" way.

To me it sounds as if the Japanese say that while they would like to see something similar, they are unsure whether the timing is appropriate (basically saying "way too soon") for an actual apology, and not quite right for a simple acknowledgment visit just yet either.

As for the actual bomb droppings, they had almost nothing to do with the war which was about to end soon enough anyway (all but the fine print was just about as good as ready to be put on paper), they had barely something to do with really saving many American lives either (unless you count barely rational heavily inflated fear-based estimates), but they had ALMOST EVERYTHING to do with testing an "awesome" new weapon in a way that will make it clear to the entire world just how badass the USA was supposed to be (TWICE) while using the most convenient of EXCUSES they could have asked for from the powers that be.
And yes, THAT is something the USA SHOULD apologize for.


Don't get me wrong, the Japanese did "have it coming" to a certain degree, so to speak, but it's one thing to slap somebody hard, another thing to beat them into a long hospital stay, but a whole different ball game to pass them through a woodchopper and splatter their remains over their family home with a graffiti saying "don't mess with the USA", then do the same again to another family member just in case the message was not clear enough the first time for all the neighbors, NO MATTER how badly they "had it coming".
You know, that whole moral superiority argument and that thing called "civilized behavior" ? Ringing any bells ? No ?
You DO NOT slowly torture and eventually kill somebody, not even a serial killer. You DO NOT kill a petty thief, even if his stealing caused a few families to starve to death. You do not wipe out thousands upon thousands of civilians just to make a point, then do the same again a few days later while they're all still in shock from the first bomb. It's just things you never ever as an alleged civilized and moral person are allowed to do without AT LEAST OWING AN APOLOGY afterwards.

Sure, the Japanese were far from the "good guys" in this whole mess... then again, they didn't even really start the whole mess - no, Pearl Harbor was NOT the start of the SNAFU, just the first public opening salvo in a not-really-so-cold cold war that took place before THE "Cold War" (with the USSR). But that's a whole different story, one which I am sure you would not care to admit it's even remotely accurate, so, meh.

They also weren't very nice people when you look at their actions on the battlefield and soon after either. But that doesn't excuse ANY action you might choose to take against them WITHOUT owing an apology.

It is somewhat distasteful that it took that long for the idea to be even brought up at all in the first place and it is actually repulsive that quite a few USians find it not just unnecessary, but that it shouldn't happen at all.
The people that made those choices are dead and buried anyway, it's not like they'll actually stand any trials or anything.
But, oh, no, our mightly ancestors could never do anything wrong and we should revere them and... oh, how mighty Japanese of the USA to do that, don't you find it the least bit bizarre ?
Sidus Isaacs
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#58 - 2011-10-24 14:17:00 UTC
Herr Wilkus wrote:
Apparently this revelation came from State Department cables from Wikileaks.
Boston Herald Editorial

Is Obama officially the biggest pussi ever? He wants to damage the US by grovelling before Japan - and the Japanese tell him, effectively, to get lost and 'be a man'. Such an action, aside from not representing the average American, would cause problems both within Japan and is an embarrassment for any country in a position of leadership, such as the United States.

Leave it to our ally, the Japanese, to try to force our late-term abortion of a 'president' grow some balls.

My guess? The Japanese do NOT want a spineless whimp like B.O. backing them if China becomes aggressive. Roll



Tbh, if you are so concernd about "damages to the US" this should be th least of your concern. The US have gone downhill since WWII and is pretty much a bad joke right now.
Benedict Fryday
Khanid Civil Labour Union
#59 - 2011-10-24 14:57:42 UTC
Eve is a game of Trolling likely so are its player. Love you Guys. P
CCP Phantom
C C P
C C P Alliance
#60 - 2011-10-24 16:44:05 UTC
As per the Out of Pod Experience rules:

"Discussions about politics and religion not allowed, there are other websites with forums for these topics."

Thread locked.

CCP Phantom - Senior Community Developer

Previous page123