Quote:
Originally Posted by GoNative
Ronin is it just that they were atomic bombs that makes you think they were so bad?
Over 500,000 Japanese people were killed by conventional bombing during the war. If the atomic bombs were not used and the war was taken to it's conclusion through conventional bombing only is there any reason to think less people would have been killed in the end? The fire bombing of Tokyo killed around 100,000 people alone. If they had of continued that for much longer the death toll would have easily exceeded anything the atomic bombs did and it was just about as horrific.
Plus I really don't find the whole argument that the Japanese were seriously thinking of surrender and it was ignored by the US. Sue for peace? Sure I can accept they tried to do that especially after they realised they were starting to lose. But I doubt they were seriously offering to give up all the lands they had invaded or offering an unconditional surrender. It took the bombs to get that...
|
As Protheus mentioned.
The after effects are the tragic part.
The firebombing was a disgrace too though as was the English bombing and Russian pillaging and raping of German cities.
Also, towards the end Japan didn't have anything to give up. So while your opinion might be valid regarding the earlier attempts to surrender it is irrelevant towards the end.
Also... if I remember correctly I think all that they really wanted was for the Emperor to maintain his position and not be charged with war crimes. As you are well aware.. that happened anyway.
But we'll never know what they were willing to accept as the allies never even entered into negotiation.