Decay On Net

Perhaps so, but we have the advantage that 20/20 hindsight provides.

Though many perished in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it is a well-known fact that those who died under the cruelty of the Japanese far outnumber the number of dead in those 2 cities on those 2 fateful days.

Yet more cruel is the fact that till today, the Japanese government still refuses to admit the wrongdoings of their forefathers more than 60 years ago.

Sicarii: I agree that what the Japanese did during WWII is far worst than the 2 atomic bomb. Especially the Rape of Nanking and the comfort woman.

But by dropping the 2 atomic bomb, are we dropping ourselves to the same level as they are?

War is never fair, and the innocents will suffer along with the guilty. In war, everyone loses.

We have the luxury of sitting at our computers today in comfort because of the millions of lives lost by the Allied Forces fighting for the liberty of the world.

Was Japan's imminent? Perhaps. But at what cost to the Allied Forces and to the rest of the world whose daily existence depended on whether a Japanese officer had mercy on him or her that day?

Or how many more comfort women would die before the Allied Forces take Tokyo down the conventional way?

We will never know, but of one thing we are sure -- the dropping of the two atomic bombs saved many more lives than if they weren't dropped.

If the Japanese had accurate military intelligence telling them that the US had no more A-bombs after those 2, I am sure the war would have continued a good while before it finally ended.

But 140,000 civilians lifes leh. Don't you sometime feel that we are at their level too?

Not at all.

Yes, perhaps it contradicts with my Christian perspective on life and the sanctity of it, but if those 140,000 perished to save the world from more bloodshed, I think they did what was necessary.

If we take your reasoning, then the Allies shouldn't even have carpet-bombed Japan way before the A-bombs were used as a last resort.

Sicarii: Maybe you are right. But still, I believe that the 2 Atomic bomb aren't required. :)

I read somewhere that the alternative plan was to send soldiers for a massive seaborne invasion of Japan.

If that happened, I believe there would be even more casualties on both sides and Japan would become a barren wasteland, knowing the fanatical nature of the Japanese army at that time.

Dropping the second atomic bomb wasn't the best thing for the Allies to do but I guess they preferred it over the invasion plans to minimize the casualties

Josei Toda (2nd president of Soka Gakkai)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josei_Toda
He was one who was against the authorities for war and got imprisoned during WWII with his mentor, Tsunesaburo Makiguchi.

He created history by making this declaration against Nuclear Weapons.
Excerpt "I wish to declare that anyone who ventures to use nuclear weapons, irrespective of their nationality or whether their country is victorious or defeated, should be sentenced to death without exception."
Full text - http://sgi.org/about/history/antinuclear_declaration.html

Daisaku Ikeda, his successor/disciple, took his mentor's words in mind and had repeated mentioned the same thing in his annual proposals to UN.
Refer to http://sgi.org/about/president/works/proposals/2007sum.html for a summary of 2007 Proposal.

I figure that it all takes 1 and more and more to spread the message. And I'm grateful to know there're beings who do bother afterall. Jiayou!

Regards,
Shan Lin

Roys: You are right. The main battle group is already near Japan. The allies could do a landing like what they did in Normany. But sad to say, they choose to use the atomic bomb.

Although Albert Einstein did not work on the Manhattan Project, he later express regret for writing a letter to President Roosevelt to advice the US to start research on Atomic weapons.

Shanlin: Wah. I thought you stop reading my blog already. :D

Yes, I agree with Josei Toda. Those who use it should be sentence to death.

More civilians died from fire-bombing. What's your take on this?

project_00

Project_00: Did the survivors and their children suffer from radiation poisoning or any side effects from fire bombing?

I guess quite a lot of them lost their limbs or were badly scarred through all that bombing.

project_00

Project_00: I don't support any bombing of civilian targets. Thanks for letting me know that it actually kill more than the Atomic bomb. All along I thought the damage is great but not as great as atomic bomb.

But I guess the after effect of Atomic bomb is far greater than firebombing.

I'm against both, but more against atomic bomb. :)