4 ms·

> It was agreed that psychological factors in the target selection were of great importance. Two aspects of this are (1) obtaining the greatest psychological ef

> It was agreed that psychological factors in the target selection were of great importance. Two aspects of this are (1) obtaining the greatest psychological effect against Japan and (2) making the initial use sufficiently spectacular for the importance of the weapon to be internationally recognized when publicity on it is released. Nice when people are honest enough about their own terrorism. (Like "shock and awe".)

hasenj 11y ago
Your comment does not deserve a down vote.
- qmalxp 11y ago
  Agreed, though I would genuinely like to see a rebuttal.
  - yareally 11y ago
    Wouldn't be too hard to rebut. Just do some skimming over the Second Sino-Japanese War and Japanese actions/attitudes/writings towards the Chinese at the time. If one's time is short, just look up Japan's infamous Unit 731, who were involved in Japan's own "shock and awe" through providing the means (and gruesome testing) of carrying out Japan's chemical and biological warfare. All countries do awful things during war, just some more deliberate and unethical than others. As William Tecumseh Sherman once said, "War is Hell."
rhino369 11y ago
I think terror bombing was unquestionably terrorism but I'd disagree about shock and awe. That is just trying to break the enemy armed forces moral with quick overwhelming strength. The cavalry charge of the modern war.
- calibraxis 11y ago
  We can read about the "shock and awe" doctrine, because such concepts are carefully developed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_and_awe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_and_awe): "Shutting the country down would entail both the physical destruction of appropriate infrastructure and the shutdown and control of the flow of all vital information and associated commerce so rapidly as to achieve a level of national shock akin to the effect that dropping nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had on the Japanese. " "The second example is 'Hiroshima and Nagasaki' noted earlier. The intent here is to impose a regime of Shock and Awe through delivery of instant, nearly incomprehensible levels of massive destruction directed at influencing society writ large, meaning its leadership and public, rather than targeting directly against military or strategic objectives even with relatively few numbers or systems. The employment of this capability against society and its values, called 'counter-value' in the nuclear deterrent jargon, is massively destructive strikes directly at the public will of the adversary to resist and, ideally or theoretically, would instantly or quickly incapacitate that will over the space of a few hours or days." (Disclaimer: I read those quotes in the original context, to guard against taking them out of context. But I haven't read the whole thing.)

hasenj 11y ago

Your comment does not deserve a down vote.

qmalxp 11y ago
Agreed, though I would genuinely like to see a rebuttal.
- yareally 11y ago
  Wouldn't be too hard to rebut. Just do some skimming over the Second Sino-Japanese War and Japanese actions/attitudes/writings towards the Chinese at the time. If one's time is short, just look up Japan's infamous Unit 731, who were involved in Japan's own "shock and awe" through providing the means (and gruesome testing) of carrying out Japan's chemical and biological warfare. All countries do awful things during war, just some more deliberate and unethical than others. As William Tecumseh Sherman once said, "War is Hell."

rhino369 11y ago

I think terror bombing was unquestionably terrorism but I'd disagree about shock and awe. That is just trying to break the enemy armed forces moral with quick overwhelming strength. The cavalry charge of the modern war.

calibraxis 11y ago
We can read about the "shock and awe" doctrine, because such concepts are carefully developed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_and_awe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_and_awe): "Shutting the country down would entail both the physical destruction of appropriate infrastructure and the shutdown and control of the flow of all vital information and associated commerce so rapidly as to achieve a level of national shock akin to the effect that dropping nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had on the Japanese. " "The second example is 'Hiroshima and Nagasaki' noted earlier. The intent here is to impose a regime of Shock and Awe through delivery of instant, nearly incomprehensible levels of massive destruction directed at influencing society writ large, meaning its leadership and public, rather than targeting directly against military or strategic objectives even with relatively few numbers or systems. The employment of this capability against society and its values, called 'counter-value' in the nuclear deterrent jargon, is massively destructive strikes directly at the public will of the adversary to resist and, ideally or theoretically, would instantly or quickly incapacitate that will over the space of a few hours or days." (Disclaimer: I read those quotes in the original context, to guard against taking them out of context. But I haven't read the whole thing.)