10 ms·

Chomsky claims there was a bombing after the two atomic bombings. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s1h6wT91sc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s1h6wT91sc I thi

Chomsky claims there was a bombing after the two atomic bombings. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s1h6wT91sc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s1h6wT91sc I think when the atomic bombs were dropped Japan basically didnt have any means of defense. I think nuking a country that is defenseless is probably evil even if in their hearts they are unwilling to accept unconditional surrender (this last point is even in contention).

throw0101d 2y ago
> Chomsky claims there was a bombing after the two atomic bombings. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s1h6wT91sc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s1h6wT91sc The Japanese took 'too long' to surrender, so by the time they contacted the US government on August 14th, because of communication delays the sorties had already gone out early August 15th and dropped their payloads: * https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14980968 https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14980968 > I think when the atomic bombs were dropped Japan basically didnt have any means of defense. The Japanese didn't think they were defenseless: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volunteer_Fighting_Corps https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volunteer_Fighting_Corps From a 1946 article: > About a week after V-J Day, I was one of a small group of scientists and engineers interrogating an intelligent, well-informed Japanese Army officer in Yokohama. We asked him what, in his opinion, would have been the next major move if the war had continued. He replied: "You would probably have tried to invade our homeland with a landing operation on Kyushu about November 1. I think the attack would have been made on such and such beaches." > "Could you have repelled this landing?" we asked, and he answered: "It would have been a very desperate fight, but I do not think we could have stopped you." > "What would have happened then?" we asked. > He replied: "We would have kept on fighting until all Japanese were killed, but we would not have been defeated," by which he meant that they would not have been disgraced by surrender. * https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1946/12/if-the-atomic-bomb-had-not-been-used/376238/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1946/12/if-the-...
- petermcneeley 2y ago
  > "At this stage of the war, the lack of modern weaponry and ammunition meant that most were armed with swords or even bamboo spears." So basically defenseless. I understand that your opinion is that at the time they did not think of themselves as defenseless but this actually doesnt matter to me in the moral claims. The fact is that they were defenseless and we nuked them twice. We nuke them because we wanted to test these weapons and AFAIK the USA kept these cities from bombing raids in order to test the effectiveness of the weapons. Also the Japanese being 'too long' to surrender because they were not a well organized fighting force by that time. I think it was days before they even understood what happened in Hiroshima. and to address your edit: The irony is that we actually gave them what they wanted. The wanted to keep the emperor and we caved.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - throw0101d 2y ago
    > So basically defenseless. It doesn't matter what "reality" is: it matters what (your enemy's) perception is. The Japanese did not think themselves defenseless. You have not beaten your enemy when you think you have: you have beaten your enemy when they think you have.

throw0101d 2y ago

> Chomsky claims there was a bombing after the two atomic bombings. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s1h6wT91sc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s1h6wT91sc The Japanese took 'too long' to surrender, so by the time they contacted the US government on August 14th, because of communication delays the sorties had already gone out early August 15th and dropped their payloads: * https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14980968 https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14980968 > I think when the atomic bombs were dropped Japan basically didnt have any means of defense. The Japanese didn't think they were defenseless: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volunteer_Fighting_Corps https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volunteer_Fighting_Corps From a 1946 article: > About a week after V-J Day, I was one of a small group of scientists and engineers interrogating an intelligent, well-informed Japanese Army officer in Yokohama. We asked him what, in his opinion, would have been the next major move if the war had continued. He replied: "You would probably have tried to invade our homeland with a landing operation on Kyushu about November 1. I think the attack would have been made on such and such beaches." > "Could you have repelled this landing?" we asked, and he answered: "It would have been a very desperate fight, but I do not think we could have stopped you." > "What would have happened then?" we asked. > He replied: "We would have kept on fighting until all Japanese were killed, but we would not have been defeated," by which he meant that they would not have been disgraced by surrender. * https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1946/12/if-the-atomic-bomb-had-not-been-used/376238/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1946/12/if-the-...

petermcneeley 2y ago
> "At this stage of the war, the lack of modern weaponry and ammunition meant that most were armed with swords or even bamboo spears." So basically defenseless. I understand that your opinion is that at the time they did not think of themselves as defenseless but this actually doesnt matter to me in the moral claims. The fact is that they were defenseless and we nuked them twice. We nuke them because we wanted to test these weapons and AFAIK the USA kept these cities from bombing raids in order to test the effectiveness of the weapons. Also the Japanese being 'too long' to surrender because they were not a well organized fighting force by that time. I think it was days before they even understood what happened in Hiroshima. and to address your edit: The irony is that we actually gave them what they wanted. The wanted to keep the emperor and we caved.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- throw0101d 2y ago
  > So basically defenseless. It doesn't matter what "reality" is: it matters what (your enemy's) perception is. The Japanese did not think themselves defenseless. You have not beaten your enemy when you think you have: you have beaten your enemy when they think you have.