Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher
I don't really have a strongly formed opinion on the dropping of the bombs.
That said, the argument that it saved lives is a very utilitarian way of analyzing the situation. And while it makes sense to us in this situation, the same kind of logic applied to smaller scale cases doesn't resonate as well with us usually.
For example if we can kill a healthy person, harvest their organs and use those organs to save the lives of 7 people would it be justified? Most people wouldn't agree I don't think. But that is the same logic as saying if we kill 150,000 people it might save 1,000,000 lives.
|
Its not really the same kind of scenario, because at that point of the war, the American's don't really care as much about saving Japanese lives its all about saving American lives, possibly preventing a future confrontation with the Russians, preventing the Japanese government and high command from retaining their positions in the post war phase due to a negotiated settlement, and meeting the conditions set by the Allies at Malta in terms of nothing but an unconditional surrender from the Japanese.
This was also about national and global rage at the Japanese. The American's had a hatred of the Japanese at this point in the war that they didn't feel towards the Germans. The Japanese conduct throughout the war had been less then honorable by an American and British standard. They felt that the Japanese honor system, and the men in power had to be punished and finished off.
The American's also had a fear of losing a large portion of their best and brightest invading a relatively small Island teeming with hostile enemies who had shown throughout the war that they were fanatical and would never surrender. They also feared that the Japanese civilians would feel the same way. Why fight that battle.
The benefit in the American mind was even if the Japanese didn't surrender after the two bomb strikes, a land invasion might be an easier thing to accomplished if they didn't have to cut through those two large cities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher
Anyways not really weighing in on one side or the other, just more interested at poking holes in the justification that people often use to support it. Seems like we're more willing to use a utilitarian moral theory on large scales, but when talking on a smaller scale it appears horrific despite it being exactly the same logic.
|
Its easy to arm chair quarterback decisions in later generations, and that to me is a big whole in any kind of argument of justification, we can play with the numbers, apply modern moralities to any decision, but we can never get into the heads of the many men who made that decision, nor can we get into the heads of the average officer, GI or civilian of the time.
If we're going to talk about justifying the leadership of the United States and their decision to drop these bombs on civilian population centers, then you have to take on the difficult task of the Japanese military's treatment of civilians, or POW's, of their sneak attack on Pearl Harbor or their use of suicide soldiers. Then you have to put in the human element and define at certain points in the war how emotion played roles in the decision.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher
The US certainly took the road that minimized US casualties and equipment losses. I would guess that their decision making was based on national self-interest as you'd expect it would be. So they would apply a utilitarian calculus but only factoring in their own casualties. I'm not really sure why we'd think they would have picked a different option.
|
Its war, you go into it with the resolve of destroying your enemy and protecting your nation and its assets.
On December 7, 1941 after the attack on Pearl Harbor Admiral Bill "Bull" Halsey returned in his carrier and observed the destruction that had been wrought and stated
"When this war is over, the Japanese language will be spoken only in hell"
"It is fatal to enter any war without the will to win it" -- General Douglas MacArthur
"War is just when it is necessary; arms are permissible when there is no hope except in arms" -- Niccolo Macchiavelli
"No ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb die for his country" -- George Patton
"Sure, we want to go home. We want this war over with. The quickest way to get it over with is to go get the s who started it. The quicker they are whipped, the quicker we can go home. The shortest way home is through Berlin and Tokyo. And when we get to Berlin, I am personally going to shoot that paper hanging son-of-a-bitch Hitler. Just like I'd shoot a snake!" -- George Patton
War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over" -- Gen William T. Sherman
"I fear we have awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve" -- Yamamoto after Pearl Harbor
"The architects of this wickedness will find no safe harbor in this world. We will chase our enemies to the furthest corners of this Earth. It must be war without quarter, pursuit without rest, victory without qualification" -- Tom Delay
"We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. You ask, what is our policy? I say it is to wage war by land, sea and air--war with all our might and with all the strength God has given us--and to wage war against a monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark and lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy." -- Winston Churchill
