An Event Forgotten


Well-Known Member
Reaction score
9/11 is a water shed event, so was the dropping of Atomic Bomb , on Aug 6 and on Aug 9th , about 60 years ago, it took the lives of over 150,000 humans withing 3 days and over 400,000 within the next two and half year, because of it, People are still born with strong doses of radiation in Hiroshima and Nagasaki , even after 60 years.It defined the future Morality and moral standards for the world.

" One of the prominent critics of the bombings was Albert Einstein. Leo Szilard, a scientist who played a major role in the development of the atomic bomb, argued:
"If the Germans had dropped atomic bombs on cities instead of us, we would have defined the dropping of atomic bombs on cities as a war crime, and we would have sentenced the Germans who were guilty of this crime to death at Nuremberg and hanged them."

I agree it was a failure of Mankind Had they tried the then Americans , in a proper War Crime Trial ,and hanged a few of them , many more American Attrocites would not have happened.

When American Got away with the Killing of over 150,000 people within 3 days and subsequently of over 400,000 in the next 2 and a half year , It defined their future psychology, their way of thinking, and their perceptions about the REST of the world . For them Now the Rest of the World is disposable , and any damage is " Collatereal Damage ". even if it has crossed the 100,000 mark of civilian lives lost during carpet Bombing, and daisy cutting of entire cities.
Time has not been Lost , Some one still should Put forward a case of War Crimes against them , and try the Responsibles for their Killing of Millions of Innocent Civilians....

I am sorry I do not want to appear anti-anything except anti-War,But had some one been tried then for WAR CRIMES, things would have been different, it would have defined a defination of Humanity, and whats not humanity.
Actions speak louder then words, ....and so far all the actions, be they in
Gutunama Bay, Afghanistan,Iraq and DAFUR, where the perpetuators are muslims agains muslims...or else where speak other wise, irrespective of the rhetoric.
aquaris said:
"If the Germans had dropped atomic bombs on cities instead of us, we would have defined the dropping of atomic bombs on cities as a war crime, and we would have sentenced the Germans who were guilty of this crime to death at Nuremberg and hanged them."

Perhaps the distinction lies in the motives.

America used it's nuclear weapons to win the war and preserve it's freedom. Japan wanted to expand and conquer the USA, it had to be stopped, and to do so by conventional means would have meant an estimated loss of 1,000,000 troops by America alone.

The Germans did indeed have a nuclear weapons program and if they had achieved their goal first they would have used nuclear weapons to terrorise the rest of the world into submission.
To win the War, Yes.
The list of Truman’s military aides that believed the bombings were not a military necessity reads like a who’s who list of top US brass: Generals MacArthur and Eisenhower along with Under Secretaries of State and the Navy Grew and Bard respectively all dissented from the necessity logic. In 1963, an aging Eisenhower forcefully reiterated his position to Newsweek, saying, "The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing."
Perhaps the most startling condemnation of Truman’s decision from a US military leader came from Admiral William D. Leahy, the president’s chief of staff. In his memoirs, Leahy denounced the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki – an action he described as "not worth of Christian man" – as "of no material assistance in our war against Japan. By using it Leahy said the US had descended to "an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages."

But there was more to it, Its on record, Japan was nearly devasted, the motive was more than that, It was to show the possible competitiors for world domination like USSR and possibly France, the Sheer Killing Power of the USA,and make an example of a sort, The future role of USA was to be defined....
That even shaped the Mental approach of USA to the rest of the world, and even if it hurts, it provided basis for their arrogance which we see today.
though off topic, But the way they completely Ignored world Opinion, the UN, and even their own anti-war citizens , while Attacking Afghanishtan and Iraq, based to half-truths and Unsubstantiated evidences, shows it.
The result is 100,000 more lives lost , mostly civilians , in the two countries, due to carpet bombing and Cluster bombing , and raising whole cities into piles of dust , death and destruction , during these bombing, and all called " Collatereal damage ". Plus the way they treated the Priznors , not classifiying them as PRISNORS OF WAR though captured in an invisisble WAR against and invisible enemy , in the various Prisner camps like Gautuname Bay, etc..etc..etc...
The trouble I have with claims that Japan was near to surrendering, is that these seem to be sourced primarily from the US side - which really has no right to be able to claim to know and understand the exact position that Japan was about to take against them - especially when the Japanese predilection to honourable death over dishonourable surrender is well reported from WWII.

If we're going to see an argument that the Japanese were ready to surrender before Hiroshima, then we need to see unbiased Japanese reports to that effect - though then we have the extended problem of an agenda to push blame against an historical enemy.

Trying to apply the general concerns to the modern world effectively seems to be stating that the US is the most powerful military power in the world, and where this has been used, it has been abused.

However, it is worth pointing out that I see no argument claiming any other country with military dominance can be regarded as an egalitarian dream of human rights protections, and really the core of the argument is answered by way that war is a dirty business - regardless of who conducts it, yes?