USA Actions in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justified? Or There was another peaceful Solution to end the conflict?

USA Actions in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justified? Or There was another peaceful Solution to end the conflict?

>America should have backed out of the war and dropped everything on Moscow.

The existence of america is yet to be justified.

Anyone who has sympathy for Japan in WW2 is a fucking idiot.

it was meant to show the russians

Anyone who has sympathy for Japan is a fucking idiot.

The Japanese were not going to surrender unless prompted by an act of god - two nuclear weapons fit the bill.

Was it better to destroy two cities, or invade Japan costing 500,000+ allied casualties alone, razing Japan in the process and leaving the islands a heap of rubble and corpses

and no, the Russians could not have invaded or put any serious pressure on Japan outside the territory it annexed in Manchuria

I agree, but the WW2 'booism is really something else

The people who complain about the atomic bombings fail to realize one key lesson of history.

Even sane people can not react to insane situations without looking crazy.

The Japanese in 1945 were crazy.

Or, more specifically, they were governed by a cabinet, which was constitutionally required to have a representative of the army present.

In order to make peace, this cabinet would have to vote unanimously, which would include the representative from the army.

The Army would not accept any peace offer that did not allow them to hold onto Korea, conduct their own war crimes tribunals, and maintain their current system of government.

By this time, the United States had committed to achieving unconditional surrender.

People, including anons here, assume that the Japanese would have folded without an atomic bombing or a ground invasion, because they assume the Japanese were like them.

1940s Japanese despots behaved nothing like 2010s American NEETs.

>america should have dropped both nukes on the USSR

fixed

At the time? yes, dropping the bombs seemed like the best decision. In hindsight? Yes, even more so, considering that we now know the japanese were preparing to launch a chemical/biological attack on california

Preemptive warcrimes are still warcrimes Britain gave out gas masks and didn't use gas on civillian centers.

There were laws against gassing people.

No laws against nuking people.

At the time, there were no proportionality requirements for strategic bombing at all.

This is why none of the people responsible for the Blitz or Guernica were ever tried at Nuremberg.

The bombing of civillian targets wasn't a warcrime during the second world war

anyone who merges "aboo" with something besides "we" is a retard

talk normal faggot

It's fine if people are using it right.

Sometimes you have people call Americans burgerboos without realizing that the -aboo suffix denotes a foreigner and not a native.

Also, Ouiaboux is simply a funny pun.

>USA Actions in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justified?
No, but they were necessary.
>Or There was another peaceful Solution to end the conflict?
No. The japanese would have fought to (figuratively) their very last man (Who knows, those japs might have done it literally).

I don't condone dropping the bombs on civilians, but who cares at this point. It ended the war and showed everyone that the US was a force to be reckoned with and should not be fucked with.

I can only imagine the shame the emperor faced as the last true emperor.

>i can only imagine the shame hirohito faced as the last true emperor
IDK, but his son's a pretty chill dude, which is surprising when you consider his father was responsible for some of the worst war crimes ever committed.

One of the main reasons for the atomic bombs was so we could get to japan before the Russians did.

As horrific as the atomic bombings were, remember that for the previous year, the US had been firebombing Japanese population centers, including a single raid on Tokyo that killed nearly as many people as both atomic bombs combined. The Bomb was effectively the same action, but this time resulted in an end to hostilities.

>being this much of an autismoboo

A facebookfuck thread. Of course.

Anyone who has sympathy is a fucking idiot.

>USA Actions in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justified?
As much as any war can be justified, yes. If you are going to complain about the nuclear bombings then I think you should also feel similar outrage for the many, many other bombing campaigns carried out during the war by the US and her allies which killed even more civilians.
>Or There was another peaceful Solution to end the conflict?
HAHAHAHA