why were the people who decided to drop the atom-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki not tried as war criminals as Nazi leaders were? They did the same thing.....
why? slanted education. because we are americans that got the american side of the story. we learned about WWII from american written history books. im pretty sure eleswhere in the world, they are considered war criminals. good q.
i think we are war criminals to them. lol next time a jap brings up pearl harbor reply with hiroshima and see how pissed off he gets.
There were atrocities on both sides. We had internment camps. They had internment camps. We killed civilians. They killed civilians. We just buried a great uncle of mine who was a POW and was on the Bataan Death March. Claude Hatch. He saw things and survived things we couldn't possibly imagine. War is evil. Claude Arthur Hatch, New Mexico's Oldest Survivor of Bataan Death March Has Died He suffered with the memories until the day he died.
No, The Nazis imprisoned and tortured literally millions of people for no good reason. The US dropped the bombs to end the war quickly and with the least amount of casualties. They did not do the same thing.
Well the nazis started the whole thing, japan fucked with us first. And we had to do what we had to do to end the war.
War is just horrible, bombing for peace is like having sex to get your virginity, it just doesn't work.
Consequences are still seen today, like people being born with deformities because of the radiation. It was bad, but not the same as the nazis. And they are not considered war criminals because they won the war!
Everybody who participated in any war is a criminal, war is a crime against humanity, as well as the rest of the world.
It's grammatics, but yes war is bad But I dont agree on the first part. Many people were recluted and didn't have a choice. They went through things you can't even imagine because their government forced them.
I really don't agree with that, by your logic, i am a criminal for participating in a war. Did i ever kill anyone? No, i mainly had a desk job and fired off maybe 3 magazines total(90 rounds) in combat fire. And for dropping the bombs, i do believe it was justified. Japan bombed first at pearl harbor, and then we bombed japan. Our bombs were just more advanced and had longer effects, but it was justified, and it was a bluff. We didn't have any more nukes in our arsenal as Japan was led to believe, and it was a giant bluff of them assuming we did, which also caused Japan to surrender. If the nukes were not dropped, who knows if Japan would have ever gave up and how many American and Japanese lives would have been taken there? Japanese people are very prideful and were not about to just surrender without a good reasoning, and the way a lot of the battles were going in their favor, it looked to be a very long time before they would have given up, if ever. And on the Japanese internment camps, I have been told they were absolutely horrible. Very inhumane living conditions, not to mention when u went to the camp, you lost almost all of your possessions such as your house, and most personal belongings. My grandparents were in an internment camp, as well as some other relatives. I know when my grandparents were offered the reparation money for being in the internment camps, they declined it out of pride, as a lot of Japanese people did who were there. On a brighter side though, and random, my Grandparents actually met at an internment camp, and they were happily married for 50+ years till my grandfather passed away. Oh, and I am half Japanese, and half Russian, just to show that i don't have a complete biased opinion, but I also served in the army.
I don't think my friend who just went to Afghanistan is a criminal, unless fighting for your country is a crime.
It was either kill 100,000's of civilians or lose millions of soldiers on each side to invade the country....which option is better??? Japan wasn't going to surrender, they were willing to sacrifice every last soldier if we tried to invade Japan. The only way to end the war quickly and limit casualties, both civilian and otherwise, was to drop the atomic bombs. Then they were still so defiant that they didn't surrender after the first one and we needed to drop a 2nd one to finally get them to surrender. But like i said if we didn't it probably would of cost another million american lives to invade japan. 200,000 or so civilians sounds alot better then 500,000-1,000,000 american lives not to mention how many japanese soldiers would of been killed.
We fucking destroyed two fucking cities. thats like fucking leveling NYC and Chicago in a matter of minutes. don't tell me anything about "least amount of casualties". we fucking dropped the bombs on fucking innocent people that had nothing to do with the war. goddamnit, no body should be allowed to have a-bombs. whoever invented the a-bomb deserves to get kicked in the balls while someone chops off their fingers one by one as they're getting water tortured. then leave them in the desert. and when they come to, drop an a-bomb that'll explode near them and they'll be scared shitless. after that, drop the 2nd one above his head. also....we should have the power and the right to kick the president in the nutsack if he fucks up and doesn't apologize for it.
uhh well we didnt drop them at the same time we took out hiroshima they still didnt surrender (showing how willing to fight they were) so we took out nagasaki hundreds of casualties compared to millions of casualties a necessary evil.
Why would we put our own people on trial for something we told them to do? So it would have been better if the Nazis beat us in the Atomic race and blew up two of our cities?