Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hiroshima (1946)

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 196 posts

Re: Hiroshima (1946)

#151

Post by dmfdmf »

krapp wrote: post #136
dmfdmf wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only a Sith deals in absolutes. Isn't this an absolute? So you tend to disagree with yourself or do you make exceptions for self-contradiction?

It was a joke, but to be honest, I always make exceptions for self-contradiction and the possibility that I am unaware of my own ignorance. I believe humans are by nature contradictory, we're wired for bias confirmation, not truth. A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.

"I was just joking" ...always the refrain of the scoundrel when called on their BS, at least in my experience.

It is a strawman to imply that my position is that no one is allowed any contradiction or errors whatsoever. The issue is not errors of knowledge or mistakes but the failure to correct such errors when they are found. An honest man works to correct his errors and contradictions, i.e. is consistent, while the dishonest like to wallow in them or pretend they don't exist or rationalize them by misquoting Emerson.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-Reliance

Re: Hiroshima (1946)

#152

Post by fatman13gg »

cletus wrote: post #69
badminton1 wrote: post #59

There are many views on the bombing. The difference is that Americans do not hide it. It's controversial, but people know about it. Same with Germans. People know about how the Germans behaved in WW2, they're not proud about it, it's learned in schools, and they do not hide it. Japan on the other side, actively hide their actions. Japanese schools present a revisionist version of history in which all their horrible a…

I came here to say pretty much exactly this. There are a lot of Japanophiles (be it culture, food, anime or whatever). Much of it seems to spring from disaffection for the West. All of that's fine but this revisionist view of history is one thing that's always bothered me about Japan. Now we have China and Japan squaring off over some uninhabited rocks in the South China Sea and I think it's at least in part a byprod…

The "rock" is actually located in East China sea.

Re: Hiroshima (1946)

#154

Post by sangnoir »

ksou32 wrote: post #40

It's very easy to judge past America 60 years from the moment. Say you're about to be shipped out to run up a hill and killed by Japanese machine guns. Wouldn't you prefer Truman use a super weapon to end the war ?

Added additional context to your question:

> Say as an armed soldier, you're about to be shipped out to run up a hill and killed by Japanese machine guns.

> Wouldn't you prefer Truman use a super weapon on civilians to end the war ?

I know WWII blurred the lines on what counts a legitimate target (military installations, civilian-manned factories, entire towns like the firebombing of Dresden). As a soldier, would you be able to justify indiscriminate targeting of unarmed civilians? I suspect some Americans lack empathy on that part because the US homeland has never had a hot war in a very long time to the extent that is not imaginable.

Re: Hiroshima (1946)

#155

Post by kbart »

freemore wrote: post #109
badminton1 wrote: post #59

There are many views on the bombing. The difference is that Americans do not hide it. It's controversial, but people know about it. Same with Germans. People know about how the Germans behaved in WW2, they're not proud about it, it's learned in schools, and they do not hide it. Japan on the other side, actively hide their actions. Japanese schools present a revisionist version of history in which all their horrible a…

Today, Chinese government says that Japanese army killed 300,000 people in Nanking. In reality, Nanking's population had been doubled at that time. Plus, there were only 200,000 people from the beginning. I still think there had been something small massacres though, why can't we find dead bodies for 300,000 people? Talking about comfort women, the system was not only Japan. USA and South Korea had also introduced ex…

I didn't downvote you, but such claims really require good sources.

Re: Hiroshima (1946)

#156

Post by kbart »

ck2 wrote: post #9
mevile wrote: post #3

> In the street, the first thing he saw was a squad of soldiers who had been burrowing into the hillside opposite, making one of the thousands of dugouts in which the Japanese apparently intended to resist invasion, hill by hill, life for life; the soldiers were coming out of the hole, where they should have been safe, and blood was running from their heads, chests, and backs. They were silent and dazed. However I ma…

By this logic, the US should just nuke any area causing problems for it. Iraq invades Kuwait? Nuke it. North Korea developing weapons of mass destruction? Nuke it. Why mess around with invasions. Note the scientists who developed the bomb begged the US government to first drop one off the coast of Japan to demonstrate to them what they were facing. Instead we killed tens of thousands of civilians on purpose, not once…

I'm not sure why this post gets downvoted as it makes a really good point I see from time to time when discussing this matter: why drop the first nuke on heavily populated city? Dropping few on the biggest military bases or naval fleets, would be enough to scare the shit out of anyone. Why shooting civilians is considered a war crime, but deliberately nuking (Hiroshima Nagasaki) or mass bombing (Dresden, Tokyo, Iraq, Afghanistan etc.) them somehow makes it acceptable?

Re: Hiroshima (1946)

#157

Post by kbart »

afterburner wrote: post #61
eceppda wrote: post #58

The US started targeting defenseless civilians in Japan via fire bombing, and the majority of the Japan's cities had already been destroyed by the time they deployed the atomic bombs. The attacks on civilians in Japan were the first examples of what is now standard procedure in the air force, now known as "strategic bombing". Mark Selden, a researcher at Cornell University, wrote an excellent article detailing this:…

This ignores the changes since Iraq War I though. Carpet bombing is no longer standard procedure, because more accurate bombing became a lot cheaper.

"Carpet bombing is no longer standard procedure"

Really?

0. http://cursor.org/stories/casualty_count.htm 1. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/nov/01/afghanistan.ter... 2. https://warisboring.com/b-52s-in-massive-mid-east-carpet-bom...

etc.

Re: Hiroshima (1946)

#158

Post by chx »

refurb wrote: post #89
Scirra_Tom wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think many people doubt that a land invasion to the bitter end would kill more people than dropping the bombs, but the argument is was the bomb necessary? Some higher ups in the military at the time thought Japan was on the brink of total surrender. "...the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing." - DWIGHT EISENHOWER (in 1963) "It is my opinion that the use…

If the Japanese were so willing to surrender, why did it take two atomics bombs before they finally did? And keep in mind they tooks days to surrender after the second one.

Japan surrendered because of the Soviet attack. Horrible devastation with larger number of casualties already happened due to firebombing and yet they held. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_a...

> Admiral Soemu Toyoda, the Chief of the Naval General Staff, estimated that no more than one or two additional bombs could be readied, so they decided to endure the remaining attacks, acknowledging "there would be more destruction but the war would go on"

Re: Hiroshima (1946)

#159

Post by nihonde »

krapp wrote: post #147
nihonde wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please elaborate. I'd like to know which of America's wars or conflicts since WWII were fought on Japan's behalf?

None. But AFAIK the US is obligated by treaty to defend Japan against any external military threats, meaning any potential conflicts Japan might have with its neighbors would be fought on Japan's behalf by the US. Japan is ostensibly pacifist because it's "military" isn't Japanese, it's American.

I guarantee you that "Japan is ostensibly pacifist" because the people who live here right now have no interest in war. The only signals of war and conflict here are American.

No normal people in Japan are interested in the territorial conflicts with China, or constitutional debates about self-defense, or where to stage American military hardware, except that they would like all of that nonsense to end so that they can get on with their lives.

Your 'Pax Americana' is doublespeak on the highest order, as Americans go around the world setting and lighting their own powder kegs.

Yesterday, a V-22 Osprey flew low over my house, and while it is a marvelous sight on many levels it is ultimately the only emblem of death and destruction on a landscape of almost unimaginable serenity. My neighborhood is all bamboo swaying in the wind, old people on bicycles running errands, kids playing baseball and catching beetles, some lazy cats and a lazy river...and here comes a fucking V-22 Osprey overhead.

Meanwhile, a Marine in Okinawa is accused of killing a young Japanese girl. These things just simply do not happen very often in Japan, so the attention on this murder is intense. Okinawa is a really nice place, and the people there would prefer not to deal with this cyclone of...death and destruction in their midst. It made sense at one time, but it really is not that time anymore.

I know that you have a hard time overcoming the urge (programming) to see America as the great liberator of the world, policing the wild streets of lesser, unruly regions that would be lost without Uncle Sam, but...at some point, the big bully protecting the block becomes the only problem that anyone on the block is having.

Re: Hiroshima (1946)

#160

Post by nihonde »

avallet wrote: post #138
nihonde wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the record, this doesn't reflect my personal experience in Japan in any way whatsoever. People here are quite well aware of their history, but they don't understand some people's focus on Japan's most recent expansion into China and Korea any more than Americans would understand someone whose sole concern is the eradication of native Americans. This kind of "they're not sorry enough for me" discussion is fruitles…

I've been living in Japan for a couple years, and this reflects my experience too with regards to most people I've met. However, it's not just the government, but also a powerful and ageing elite which shares these views. Admittedly not people you'll meet everyday, yet they wield obvious political influence. Anecdotally, I hadn't met any such people until yesterday, where I had to attend a rotary international confer…

Scary indeed. Those were the same people who dragged Japan into imperialism. I guess waters in Japan run deep, and there have those small-minded people in the ruling class that you find everywhere else, too.

I certainly don't see the current government of Japan reflecting the sentiments of normal people in any way whatsoever, but I think a lot of working class people feel like the government exists in a compromised world where influences of powerful nations like America and Russia use Japan as a proxy. Japan is not a passive player in that game, but the game itself doesn't seem to interest the average person. The people I know are just working hard to make ends meet and do a good job, raise a good family, etc.——normal human stuff.

I'm not so naive to think that Japanese people aren't capable of being racist assholes, but I would say the prevailing sentiment here is more humility than arrogance or conniving. I'm a white American who married into a Japanese family with a (very) distinguished naval history. My ancestry here is definitely elite, but the money and power are a shadow of what they once were——and that's probably a good thing. There's no room for hubris when you're on the ropes. Everyone just has their focus at the human scale.

Post reply on HN