Should the nuclear bombing of japan in WW2 be considered a war crime?

The use of nuclear weapons against Japan, was horrible. It, however, was but one of the many horrible, inhumane things that occurred during WWII.

Japan's civilians, did not need to suffer, but the fact is, Japan's population, was not really aware of how badly the war effort was going, and were going to fight to the last person.

Both of my dad's first cousins, were Marine gunners, stationed in Pearl Harbor, when the Japanese attacked. I got first person accounts, of how everyone, civilians included, was targeted by the Japanese pilots. Americans, at the time, were left thinking that there is only one way to stop the war: total victory.

For those who think that Japan was about to surrender, I would like you to consider Okinawa. The action, culminating in our takeover of the island, was only a preview of what was to come. We suffered nearly 75,000 casualties, and the Japanese military suffered about 90,000 casualties. In addition, 150,000 out of pre-war 300,000 civilians, were killed during the battle, most committed suicide, or attempted to kill themselves, while attacking US troops.

There was no reason, at the time, to believe that this would not be the same, for the rest of Japan.

You need to take the context into consideration, specifically the mentality, and absolute devotion to traditions, that no longer exist.

In 1937, the Japanese, over a period of 6 weeks, systematically raped, tortured, and massacred in the most awful ways, 300,000 civilians in Nanking. They were not fighting, they were unarmed civilians. This was about twice as many people who were killed in the Hiroshima and Nagazaki. They did not behave like human beings.

I am glad WWII is behind us, and people have (sort of) evolved.

I have been to the Hiroshima memorial museum and it’s horrible to see all the burned and torn dresses of young girls and school uniforms of young boys who got burned alive. 140,000 people died in Hiroshima.

Here is a quote from a senior US official on why they bombed us, even [b]after japan was already talking about surrendering:[/b]

"The bomb simply had to be used -- so much money had been expended on it. Had it failed, how would we have explained the huge expenditure? Think of the public outcry there would have been . . . The relief to everyone concerned when the bomb was finished and dropped was enormous."

Should the beheading of prisoners of war by Japan be considered a war crime too?
What about the Japanese making their own women and children jump off cliffs to their death so they will not be captured by American forces?
What about the Japanese invasion of Manchuria which is the reason behind Pearl Harbour as the U.S. stopped the supply of materials to Japan.The Japanese wanted to take materials and oil from the Dutch East Indies but knew the American Pacific fleet would prevent that,hence the attack on the Pacific fleet at Pearl Harbour first.
You reap what you sow.

We were just in Japan, and did go to Hiroshima. Somethings about the history of WWII for you. The average Japanese citizen was impoverished and many were conscripted into service. The US firebombed many cities during which hundreds of thousands died, so the deaths from the Atom bomb were not that much greater. True, it carried more long term psychological and physical problems. At the peace museum the entire discussion dealt with the bomb, very little dealt with the horrors of war.

We will never be able to settle the issue of would firebombing of the city have been as successful in ending the war. But, we should all admit that what is wanted is no more war, only peace.

No. Clearly. The American alternative was to continue Island hopping and absorbing massive casualties themselves on each island, while The Japanese including civilians often chose suicide before surrender, with footage of mothers throwing infants from cliffs then jumping themselves.
Yes. The populations of Hiroshima were sacrificed in a brutal and horrendous way. But that led to the surrender that saved the bulk of the population , plus countless thousands of Americans.
President Truman would have been run out of town if he had taken the other non nuclear option and it came out he had those bombs and didnt use them.

December 7th...😔

The atomic bombings that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians were regrettably and truly horrible events. However, Japan was not going to surrender easily. If the atomic bomb had not been used as a strategic weapon, an invasion of Japan, Operation Downfall, was planned, which would have been the largest military operation in history. Americans would have fought the Japanese on their home soil, and the Japanese knew right where the invasion forces would be landing. U.S. casualties would very likely have been massive, in the hundreds of thousands. American intelligence thought that the Japanese had about 2,600 aircraft to use against the U.S. Navy ships. However, after the surrender, almost 13,000 planes were found. Most of them were hidden, including 25 to 35 jet aircraft. The Japanese strategy would have been to send wave after wave of kamikazes, 300 to 400 at a time, to inflict heavy casualties on the troop ships before a single American soldier or Marine ever set foot on the beach. General George Marshall (at that time the equivalent of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) wanted to wait and use several atomic bombs as battlefield tactical weapons prior to the invasion, which would have resulted in tens if not hundreds of thousands of American troops being exposed to radiation, giving them radiation sickness. The invasion would have been a logistical nightmare, and could have collapsed under its own weight. So, President Harry Truman decided on the use of the atomic bombs because of the enormous cost in life from an invasion.

I would refer everyone to the following book:

Hell to Pay: Operation Downfall and the Invasion of Japan, 1945-1947 (Revised Edition), by D. M. Giangreco, published 2017

So many war crimes were committed in WW2 why only pick on the one which actually ended the war and saved many allied lives in the process. It is such a "what if" question it becomes impossible to answer it, i do not agree with nuclear weapons but then i do not agree with war either. One thing i do believe however is if the Japanese mentality had not been death before surrender then a conventional D-day style attack on Japan would have been a likely option rather than using the atomic bombs.

In WW2 civilian populations were targeted. Somewhere between 3% and 4% of the '40 world's population died. Around 80M people.

I think it's too easy to focus on one war atrocity.

Not that I defend the bombings. I spent a bit of time in Hiroshima in 95. I think nuclear weapons are an abomination.

It just seems we fixate on this one atrocity. For good reason. But other stories need told as well.

Nope

verses the cowardly attack at Pearl ?
And the fact that they could have surrendered before the first bomb / or after .
But had to be hit again ...sorry its war ...a war they started .[b][/b]

Day 2 = After Pearl Harbor Folks -- How did the families come to grips that many families were literally torn apart for absolutely no provoked reason. [image deleted][image deleted][image deleted]

an act of evil stays an evil dead even if you do it agaisnt another evil.

so no there is no justification for the nuclear bombings of japan or the bombings of cities in germany.

No they were warned - [b][c=#BF0000]https://www.atomicheritage.org/key-documents/warning-leaflets[/c][/b]

Its different in that it was a declared war, that they started. The taking of Iwo Jima was bloody and deadly.

It was studied and decided that the bombing would be decisive and incurr less casualties than taking the Japanese mainland in literal hand to hand, street to street combat.

Only God knows if that was a correct assessment.

Too bad the japanese have committed such heinous war crimes that will be in history books for a long time. I can not begin to list what the devils did to non military personal but look on the internet and you will find loads. Just google - japanese war crimes , sit back for a couple of days and read what those devils did. Teach your children what the devils did because it will not be taught in schools.

In August 1945, warning leaflets were dropped on several Japanese cities. ... on several Japanese cities (including, supposedly, Hiroshima and Nagasaki). ... or all of the cities named on the reverse side will be destroyed by American bombs.

I think we all need to consider the fact that Pikachu has cherry picked a single point in history .

If we look at the beginning that leads up to this its simple.

Japan struck America as it struggled to help save the free world from an evil .

They stabbed us in the back and then were beaten by anger .

They attacked Pearl and earned the outcome they got .

war is all about crimes... you do what you have to do to win a war. its nonsense to call soldiers honorable everyone involved in all wars ever fought is a criminal...

but thats ok... thats exactly what war is, just dont sugar coat it

So what if it was - and ? Now what.

The nuclear attacks saved both American and Japanese lives. It was not a war crime.

Provocative question. I suppose a good place to start would be what war crimes rules were in effect then? Although Japan broke many war crimes laws then in effect that doesn’t excuse any other country from doing so if any country or countries other than Germany did.

Yeah it was a war crime that they will never be punished for. Just like it was a war crime to target Dams in Korea and cities.

We have bombed civilians in every war since. Drone strikes across borders of non warring states. Yes, Virginia, the US does commit war crimes regularly.

Well Japan had a tactic of mixing their military and civilian populations into the same area in hopes that the US wouldn't bomb military targets. Should it be consider a war crime? No. War has no laws. Should it be a crime against humanity? Yes, cause war is a crime against humanity.

War crimes are only for the losers

of course it is... killing thousands of civilians to safe the lives of your own soldiers is as warcrimy as it can possibly get

Not at all. It saved lives.

Japan was on the point of surrendering when the bomb was dropped, the main purpose of bombing Nagasaki and Hiroshima was to demonstrate to Russia that the US had a viable atomic weapon.

Are you happy that the obvious was stated ? - lol you wasted my time arguing about something that we all know, a known fact - America did not commit WAR CRIMES --- crimes were committed but not specifically WAR CRIMES>

I hate war period. But if I remember, they really didn't know what the bomb was really capable of when they dropped it. Like typical American thinking.

Japan started the war -- we ended it by all means necessary - so in effect the Japanese were the cause of their own ppl being killed.

Killing people During a war is a crime. Interesting concept.

Should the surprise bombing of Pearl Harbor by the Japanese be considered a war crime?