Its ok to kill millions of innocents because it will save a million American soldiers even though Japan already wants...

Yes, that's how total war works. There is no such thing as innocents.

Why are you being so annoying?

>save a million American soldiers
And however many Japanese would have died

>it's okay to kill millions of innocents because it will save millions of American soldiers

Kill around 200,000 (not one million) and end the war early vs. Follow through with Operation Downfall with the estimated death of literally millions of people from every country and extending the war by a year or two

>but muh innocent japanese civilians

They would have fought back too or killed themselves like they did earlier in the war.

>Imperial Japan
>innocents
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

Fuck off dumb weeb

Modern warfare isn't any more civilized than it was in earlier times.
Non-combated will be murdered the second it is advantageous to do so.

Attached: elephant.jpg (604x602, 174K)

you fucking gook nigger you're lucky hiroshito wasn't hung like mussolini and that we didn't drop more of truman's treats

>It's ok to kill millions of Germans because it will save a million. Jews even though they declared war on Germany.

Delusion

>kill millions of innocents
Barely over 200,000 in order to prevent the deaths of one million US soldiers and possibly untold thousands of Japanese civilians and soldiers.
>Japan already wants to surrender anyway
Nope. They were still looking for a "honorable" peace. Too bad the Japanese leadership were so delusional as to think we were about to let them off easy after the shit they put the world through.

>after the shit they put the world through
nanking and pearl harbor arent the world

Japanese used all their ooga booga on Allies, while Italian's saved it for Mussolini.

Nanking is notorious because because of how well documented the atrocities were. That shit was SOP for the Japanese military, which is why the invaded countries still hate japan to this day.

So were the American POW's they blew up as collateral, so I guess it's true

>millions of innocents
nice bait

> I'm 16: the post

Why do the atomic bombings draw so much debate anyway? Why is it even perceived as a big event that you had to decide to do or not to do? In context it wasn't actually any difference than the strategic bombing that had been going on since the war began first began and which every single major belligerent (except I guess China, France, and Italy) took part in. The only difference is the Americans only had to send 1 plan instead of 1,000. But the actual damage done was less than the biggest fire bomb raids.

Because they are the only cases of nuclear warfare in history so they are well documented and brainlets whose only other knowledge of WW2 consists of "Hitler, the holocaust, Pearl Harbor, Churchill and Normandy" also know about them and latch on to them as "war crimes" because they have no idea about the context, about the firebombings on Tokyo, about how fucking costly an invasion of Japan would be and about how the allies were trying to fucking win a war and not be pure moralfags that are too good to bomb places with civillians.

> they killed millions

to save billions

missing the point by a lightyear

Using that bomb was an act of cowardice, albeit against a ruthless country, and America should be brought to account for it.

The atomic bomb was nothing compared to the conventional bomb damage the USAAF did to the rest of Japan or the RAF to Germany

I can't bring up the quote.
but when ender talks to the two commander right before getting his monitor taken out after the fight with his classmates.

He said he needed to break the dudes arm to ensure that there would be no chance of retaliation in the future. Or how when you overthrow a monarchy you need to kill or imprison for life every single family member in the royal family, to prevent any future claims to the throne.

Using the nuke in this case against japan was the same thing. Ensuring the emperor wouldn't get so ambitious as to take on the rest of the world. Japs were pretty evil to chinese and shit.

I think in addition to trying to send japan to the infirmary for an extended stay, the atomic bomb also served a punctuation to the world war.

It was a message stating that if there would ever be another world war again, it would utterly wreck everything fucking thing on the goddamned planet. So we should probably not strive for worldwide conquest.

Quite an effective message, if theres some sort of NWO government already ruling the world.
The A- bomb basically says that no one else should try to rule the world by themselves.

>America could have ended the war a year earlier even with significant Japanese territorial losses.

Not significant enough.
They were not willing to give up their chinese possessions for instance, which is part of the reason the war started in the first place. So fuck off, japanese apologist

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were a signal to Stalin - Do NOT fuck with us. It may have singlehandedly prevented WW3.

>its ok to kill millions of innocents
>millions

Hmm...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

>Total: 129,000–226,000+ killed

At max a quarter of a million in exchange for skipping about a million dead American soldiers, 2 to 3 million dead Japanese soldiers, and a debatable but likely very high number of dead Japanese civilians.

You sound extremely ignorant.

Imperial Japan killed 11 million civilians, in China, Indonesia, the Philippines, Burma, Indochina and the Pacific. They would take entire populations to the beach and execute them in cold blood. They used civilians for medical experiments and as lab rats for bioweapons. They raped women ane children or used them as "comfort women" for their troops.

Japan was as deadly and genocidal as Nazi Germany, and the firebombing of Tokyo was more deadly than the atomic bombs. A mass campaign of strategic bombing, terror bombing, and land invasion would have killed both more Japanese and more Americans.

Attached: 1520082365026.jpg (850x1236, 809K)

>>its ok to kill millions of innocents
200,000
>because it will save a million American soldiers
About 200,000 US, but millions of Japanese
>even though Japan already wants to surrender anyway
lol no

Chinese actually started the atrocities in China, by mutilating some Japanese officers in 1937. Both sides were pretty bad and neither took prisoners, if you know what I mean.
Read 'Shanghai 1937: Stalingrad on the Yangtze' if you're interested in learning more.

>Chinese actually started the atrocities in China, by mutilating some Japanese officers in 1937
That doesn't really justify the massacre of entire cities. You've been eating too much Japanese propaganda.

Attached: IMG_5083.jpg (3024x4032, 2.12M)

>Thinking the Invasion of Japan would have happened
>Not realizing the Soviet invasion of Manchuria and the firebombing of Tokyo were the deciding factors in the High Commands surrender
>Not realizing forcing Japan to surrender was a game between the US and Soviets to see who could do it first.
>Not realizing Truman just wanted to test his shiny new bombs and show the Soviets who was boss

"we killed people to save lives" is such a poor excuse for using the bombs, at least be realistic and say "we killed people to show off our new weapon".

Attached: maopolar disorder.gif (256x188, 3.56M)

Why is everyone so upset about this? As if plenty of other countries haven't killed 11 million civilians. As if plenty of other counties didn't execute civilians in cold blood. As of plenty of other countries haven't used civilians for medical experiments. As if plenty of other countries didn't rape women and children. It's war. If you don't want to die, make sure you kill the other guy, before he kills you. I hate this moral change of heart as if killing others to take what you want hasn't been something humans have been doing for hundreds of thousands of years. Get over it. War isn't fun.

Sure, Japan was naughty, but the Chinese weren't exactly saints.

Edgy.

Attached: 6eb4a63fc101e2c987d501c4f8279ac3.jpg (600x600, 71K)

...

It's a good thing your pudgy ass can sit on Veeky Forums all day.

That's the defenders privilege though. Don't invade a country and then whine about your officers being killed by partisans.

Attached: russo japanese war 5.jpg (500x368, 54K)

I post from work while on my bathroom break, actually. But please do continue telling us how the deaths of 11 million people are irrelevant, edgelord.

It’s okay to kill gooks to save whites ftfy

As if you read the obituaries every day. Get the fuck out of here. 55.3 million of people die every year and you don't give a single shit about a single one of them unless it gives you a soap box to stand on. Stop preaching.

There is a big difference between unavoidable deaths and state sanctioned mass murder.

The intention was to deter the USSR. A completely red Asia would be bad for America and the west

First off, morality is subjective, stop trying to argue at if your view on murder is somehow more just than anyone else's.
Second, Death is death. Everyone that is born dies. Get over it. 2+2=4, 1+3=4. The result is still the same, it doesn't matter how you get there.

Japanese war crimes are justified because they wanted to break Allied morale.

So you wouldn't mind if I dragged you out into your yard, beheaded your mother in front of you, burned down your house and shot you in the head?

Yes, I would mind. That's why I would fight back. If you happened to over power me and kill me anyway, then there's not much I could do about it. It's almost as if war is about killing the other person more efficiently than they kill you. What a crazy concept.

Then the allied bombing campaigns were completely justified

Like you said, death is death.
More death is worse than less death.
State sanctioned genocide is preventable death. Ass cancer is unavoidable death.

If our goal is to minimize the amount of deaths, then from a utilitarian perspective, killing 200,000 people with nuclear weapons to prevent even more civilian deaths in firebombings, and to stop a government that killed 11 million civilians, is perfectly justifiable.

QED.

Yea, see there's the problem
I'm armed and I got my military buddies to help me while there is only one of you

>worse
There you go with those subjective terms again. What is so hard to understand? Morality is subjective. All of it is justified. It. Is. War. You don't go to war to stroke dicks and slap ass, you go to war to prove a point. Whatever that point may be.
Ok, then there's not a whole lot I can do about it, is there? I guess that means your side will win the war quicker. As a soldier that is your literal purpose. To kill them and not get killed in the process. This isn't a friendly competition with established rules. People still use gas to kill other people. People still torture non combat civilians. That's just the way war works. That's the way way has always worked.

Fuck you stupid
Death=bad

>you go to war to prove a point.
And the point was more than proven. Your pet Japs got their shit pushed in, and Western moral values won the day, you retarded apologist.

>Muh morality is relative, nothing matters
KYS nihilistic cuck.

Attached: v32cdps3yeqy.png (1178x952, 1.31M)

I think you have me confused with another poster. I'm not an apologist. I don't give a shit a bunch of nips were nuked. That's not my point.
Great sensible argument. Exactly what I expected from Veeky Forums.

Well I tried dumbing it down for you

Surrender? Are you demented? There have been Japanese soldiers hiding in the jungles for sixty years, perhaps more

Attached: 157164207134100693E49D503C0254CCf.png (443x316, 137K)

You have no point because you are a nihilistic piece of shit. If a band of Jap fascists was taking your familiy along with your fat ass to be executed at the beach I bet you'd feel different about morality.

how does that equal anything he said

He said that all death is the same

Bushido is one hell of a drug

No, I said the outcome is the same. Not all death is the same. Hence why I gave 3 different examples to show the same outcome. Are you stupid or something?
Yes I do. My point is, you don't need any justification in war. War in if itself is justification enough to kill millions of people. If you don't want to die, don't go to war. If war shows up on your doorstep and you don't want to die, you'd better grab a rifle and make sure you kill them faster than they kill you. Exactly what I've been saying for almost an hour now. I responded to the OP. Killing millions to save millions is not delusional, it's fucking war. If you don't want to play the game, then don't. If you're forced to play the game, make sure you're better than the other guy, or you'll lose. Christ, this isn't difficult.

>the result is still the same
From your own post

THE RESULT is the same.
1+3=4
2+2=4
The result is the same, that doesn't mean the equation is the same. You're dense as fuck. All death isn't the same, I can die in my sleep, I can fall off a building, I can crash a car. All death isn't the same. The outcome is. You can get there through many different avenues, but you end up in the same place.

the nukes only killed thousands faggot

Start shit get hit.

Oh fuck off, you said the same thing gere
Then immediately contradicted yourself here
Where you said you would fight if someone tried to kill you.
But why? We will all die anyway xddd

Hey man, I just wanted you to know. I typed out a long reply and then deleted it. You're right, it was bad. You win. Anyway, I'm off work now, so I'm going to go walk my dog. Have a good one.

The whole country actually surrendered once the emperor gave a speech declaring that it was. In the speech he never used the word "surrender", but people listening to him understood enough to lay down arms. Aside from a couple hundred autistic die-hards, the call for surrender was heard.

On a side note, most Japanese barely understood what he was saying because the emperor's dialect and vocabulary are only privy to those in the royal court and his handlers. The speech could've had the complete opposite effect because people would hear nothing but gibberish coming out of the radio, from someone that sounds like the emperor.

It's unironically true though, there is reason why we came up with the term manpower. It might be wrong from moral view point but from a statistic view point it makes both reasonable and strategically viable to target civilians.

>you don't need any justification in war.
>War in if itself is justification enough to kill millions of people.

Why do you care about death at all?

> millions of innocents
Nope.
>even though Japan already wants to surrender
Except they just didn't until they got nuked twice.

It's merely payback. They should do it again if necessary.

It was self-defense. Japan would have nuked the entire USA in a second if they'd been given the chance.