Where the fuck did I even insinuate that? No one is justifying the killing of civilians, get your head out of the clouds. Stop acting like you know better than the people that actually had to be apart of that war. EVERYONE can be this douchbag because all it requires is waiting for all the info years later to come out and any average joe that can read would be able to see a better solution.
I said they were cowards because, throughout history, that seems to be their mo. They always attack without any rime or reason and then act like the victims. Seriously, see the shit they say about what they did to China. They genuinely believed it was the Chinese that attacked first and started the conflict. Hence their justification in butchering hundreds of thousands of innocents. As for the bombings, most cities other than major ones still were situated in green zones. Or, heavily forested areas. They couldn't get to Tokyo or Kyoto. So they had to stay on the coast or jungle-type areas. As for your point, ya I see what you mean about post-midway. So, for that, I am indeed wrong.
And? I'm still waiting for where I said it was justified. Or even insinuated it. I straight up said that even though the nukes were fucked up, Japan still did worse. And it's a FACT the nukes ended the war. It's not even an opinion, that's factually the truth. So I don't need to justify it.
I already did. I quoted the post where you said it. Your current post is doing it as well. You're justifying the killing of civilians because of what the soldiers did. Furthermore, it's not a FACT the nukes ended the war. Scholars and historians are still debating over this and you've already ended the debate all on your own? Impressive! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debat...Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki#Militarily_unnecessary
I know all about the ww2 actions and post-war justification of the Japanese, I even know of Abe and his political cohorts attempt at historical revisionism (Which is somewhat the U.S fault btw.) Honestly, I am still not sure as to what you mean by heavily forested areas. I may just have read it wrong, the Americans didn't stay in the green zones. They had bombed Tokyo a number of times and Operation Meetinghouse was the most destructive one. On that operation, 330 bombers dropped 1665 tons of bombs on Tokyo and killed some 100.000 people and set the city ablaze. I don't know if Kyoto was bombed, but it probably was. Japan post-midway had no airplanes nor pilots good enough of stopping an American bombing campaign.
The fuck? Who gives a damn what scholars think, did Japan surrender or not, after the bombs dropping? If so, the war ended because of the nukes, get over yourself. I am not talking about a scenario that could have ended the war without the bombs, stop thinking I am. The war ended literally just after the second bombing of the nuke because Japan surrendered. That's the reality. Hence, the WAR ENDED because of the bombs. How is that justification? These are events that happened and all we're doing is talking about it. Holy hell. Edit: If anything, my "justification" stems from the fact it's "war".
The coast, where the US was heavily attacking, was full of forests and farmers. I already said you were right, I myself had read the info wrong. The cities were more "city" then I gave Japan credit for, lmao.
Did you even click the link? The WAR ALREADY ENDED before the bombs were even dropped. Eh, honestly, I am not sure why you're so upset. I am just pointing out that people shouldn't be using whatever war crimes that Japanese soldiers as a justification for the atomic bombings. I am not saying that YOU out of everyone that says it is responsible or anything.
The war was not ended. Japan "ready to surrender" doesn't mean anything until they actual DO surrender. I find it hilarious you think that there was no definitive "we surrender" until AFTER the bombs, and that to you means they "were going to". My whole points is that the bombs, without question, without a chance to back out, forced them to surrender. Hence, whether you like it or not, it put a definitive end to the conflict. I'm not angry so much as I am annoyed you act like some saint despite not having lived during an era of war like WW II. We can make all the speculations we want because we were lucky enough to not experience it. Either way, history doesn't care about the feelings of those in the present. It happened and all we can do is HOPE to learn from it.
Actually IMO it did because while at the present time a lot of people separate the "government" and the "people", that is the current world and not the world of the 1940s. The Japanese people have been brought up in an environment that extols the emperor and the military and while there were dissenters, the fraction is much, much lower than that of a comparable Western country which is unfortunately the standard taken by revisionist historians. During the closing days of the war, there were even courses for "final suicidal defence" where they were arming even women to attack American GIs. The degree of fanaticism is something like the current day ISIS because like ISIS, WWII was as much a religious conflict to them as a political one and that isn't including the propaganda of "foreign animals invading us". An example of how bad the situation was is that one of their former Prime Ministers was an advocate for peace. The military assassinate him and when the assassins were put on trial massive public support was to let them go, complete with people sending in their chopped off little fingers as a sign of support. I ask you, what cause do you believe in so much that you would chop off your little finger for it? Well, the Japanese did it. People keep separating "the military was evil and forced everyone else", which is a false narrative because at that time, due to nationalism and the pride of victories that the military brought Japan, the population actually supported them massively. It was not "military vs people" but "military AND people". And by the way, the Japanese reaction to the Portsdam Declaration to ask them to surrender was to ignore it. So the war still continued because they NEVER at that point in time even transmitted a desire to even negotiate a surrender, much less unconditionally do so.
Yeah no, the war wasn't over in the slightest. Japanese morale was still strong, and the generals and military were actually quite adamant in continuing the fight. They were so adamant in fact, that they had begun training middle schoolers to become suicide bombers. They didn't even relent after having the first nuke dropped on Hiroshima. It was only after America dropped the second bomb and alluded to possessing more that the generals voted on whether to sue for peace or continue with the war. The voting came to a deadlock and was only broken when the emperor arrived and voted for peace. So, the war hadn't ended. The nukes did end the war.
In addition to this, the surrender declaration actually had to be smuggled out in a laundry basket for fear of it being discovered and destroyed. It was only a maid that delivered the declaration to the radio station that is was successfully broadcasted or the generals would have continued fighting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyūjō_incident PS: And this is why I said can of worms opened. lol. One of the surefire topics to cause argument and controversy.
As much as i enjoy the discussion, ill be that annoying guy who reminds you that the discussion is going off topic.
Technically it is still partially on topic because the anime is part of Japan's ongoing efforts to redefine themselves as the victim of the war instead of the aggressors.
No, it doesn't. From what I know the film just attempts to show how the war took a toll on the general populace. It isn't one of those nationalistic war films that glory Imperial Japan. EDIT: And with that I end my involvement in this discussion.
Right back at you. The bombs forced them to surrender? No, it was the Soviet Union. Japan wanted to surrender before that but they didn't want an unconditional surrender. So, they turned to the Soviets and wanted them to act as the mediator to get more favorable terms for their surrender. Unfortunately, the Soviets were already planning to attack them. The Japan surrendered when they realized they had no other choice. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/08/06/commentary/japan-surrender-world-war-ii/ How am I acting like some saint when we're just talking about it? That was what you said. I doubt that. You can't fight a war without workers. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/08/06/commentary/japan-surrender-world-war-ii/ There's no fanaticism, just fear and terror. Isn't the whole point of "final suicidal defence" course just for self defence? Also, civilians were already fleeing the countryside. There weren't millions of civilians armed with weapons to defend against American soldiers if they had landed. Erm, I think you're misunderstanding the meaning of an unconditional surrender. They didn't surrender exactly because America demanded an unconditional surrender.