villa4europe Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 August 6th 1945... Probably saved lives in the long run though. history is written by the victors... without wanting to derail this thread with history, i think that's what makes it such a dark day in history the fact that the way its viewed now (and certainly the way i remember being taught it) is somewhere between acceptable and justifiable 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marka Ragnos Posted March 24, 2015 Author VT Supporter Share Posted March 24, 2015 (edited) August 6th 1945... Probably saved lives in the long run though. history is written by the victors... without wanting to derail this thread with history, i think that's what makes it such a dark day in history the fact that the way its viewed now (and certainly the way i remember being taught it) is somewhere between acceptable and justifiable I think it's debatable, too. We'll never know. I hope and pray it never happens again. Edited March 24, 2015 by Plastic Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 August 6th 1945... Probably saved lives in the long run though. history is written by the victors... without wanting to derail this thread with history, i think that's what makes it such a dark day in history the fact that the way its viewed now (and certainly the way i remember being taught it) is somewhere between acceptable and justifiable It's not exactly acceptable - all war is inherently evil. However, looking at it from a utilitarian point of view I'd say it was probably justified in light of the greater number of casualties (on all sides) that would likely have been incurred had the Allies proceeded with a ground invasion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 August 6th 1945... Probably saved lives in the long run though. history is written by the victors... without wanting to derail this thread with history, i think that's what makes it such a dark day in history the fact that the way its viewed now (and certainly the way i remember being taught it) is somewhere between acceptable and justifiable It's not exactly acceptable - all war is inherently evil. However, looking at it from a utilitarian point of view I'd say it was probably justified in light of the greater number of casualties (on all sides) that would likely have been incurred had the Allies proceeded with a ground invasion. the allies wouldnt, the russians would... they'd already done more damage and killed more people in operation meetinghouse, the japanese were on the brink of surrendering, the russians were on the brink of invading Hokkaido, like plasticman said i dont think we'll ever know, because the emperor blamed the bombs in his surrender and surrendered to the americans because they offered more favourable terms its understandable that we are taught that it was the bombs that ended the war but im becoming less convinced by them being the right thing to do and more convinced that it was more to do with the world we live in today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted March 24, 2015 Share Posted March 24, 2015 Based on Truemans statement that they picked Horishima due to it's industry and then promptly bombed the centre of town some way away from the industry , I always took the view that the bombs were more a form of revenge on Japan for pearl harbour ...:but also probably an ideal way to issue a warning to Russia to let them know what the US was capable of. Of course the other aim was probably to get The war with Japan over before Russia's agreed entry ( from Yalta ) a few months later 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rev Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I'm in the camp who thinks the nukes were good when you stop to consider the alternative. More civilians would have died in conventional bombing raids and the Japanese would have fought for every inch of ground had the US had to invade Honshu and Kyushu which meant the numbers of military dead would have gone through the roof too. The nukes were a hugely spectacular knockout blow and yes, they changed the world forever because all of a sudden you could destroy an entire city with a few men in less than five minutes but lets not pretend the war was any picnic before that. The atom bomb is scary as ****, but surely it's because of what it symbolises more than what it has actually done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddywhack Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Why don't you build a shrine to William Blake? Instead, you lost his body and now all he's got it this: Woah, don't blame me pal, I wasn't even born! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 ...looking at it from a utilitarian point of view...There's not much end to the kind of horrid stuff that one can justify 'from a Utilitarian point of view'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I'm in the camp who thinks the nukes were good when you stop to consider the alternative. More civilians would have died in conventional bombing raids and the Japanese would have fought for every inch of ground had the US had to invade Honshu and Kyushu which meant the numbers of military dead would have gone through the roof too. The nukes were a hugely spectacular knockout blow and yes, they changed the world forever because all of a sudden you could destroy an entire city with a few men in less than five minutes but lets not pretend the war was any picnic before that. The atom bomb is scary as ****, but surely it's because of what it symbolises more than what it has actually done. Japan's navy and airforce was pretty much destroyed , though it is possible (from experience ) that the US would have taken a lot of casualties along the way in a foot soldier campign However Japan had already changed its government and Suzuki had offered surrender terms months before the atomic bombs were dropped , terms that were deemed unacceptable .... And yet were virtually identical to the ones offered and signed after the bombs were dropped So on paper they didn't need to be dropped but in reality they were dropped most likely for the very reasons you outline in your last paragraph 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 ...looking at it from a utilitarian point of view... There's not much end to the kind of horrid stuff that one can justify 'from a Utilitarian point of view'. And yet the outcomes of adopting a moral absolutist position can often result in more suffering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 (edited) And yet the outcomes of adopting a moral absolutist position can often result in more suffering.Perhaps and perhaps not. Fortunately for me, I'm proposing neither.(edit: perhaps I am, actually - I never saw attempting to follow a Kantian ideal as 'moral absolutism' but I get that it could be).Still, back to that utilitarian standpoint. How many people are you proposing to kill to justify your position? Edited March 26, 2015 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 And yet the outcomes of adopting a moral absolutist position can often result in more suffering. Perhaps and perhaps not. Fortunately for me, I'm proposing neither. (edit: perhaps I am, actually - I never saw attempting to follow a Kantian ideal as 'moral absolutism' but I get that it could be). Still, back to that utilitarian standpoint. How many people are you proposing to kill to justify your position? I'm not proposing to kill anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 I'm not proposing to kill anyone.So the utilitarian thing was nonsense?Cheers for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PompeyVillan Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Let me ask a question. Bacon and maple syrup, I get that, but peanut butter an jelly/jam... wtf? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Let me ask a question. Bacon and maple syrup, I get that, but peanut butter an jelly/jam... wtf? I don't get either. Never understood the sugar/savoury convo. Also, American bacon is terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Bacon and syrup is good, peanut butter is good, never tried a P&J sandwich though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted March 26, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted March 26, 2015 Let me ask a question. Bacon and maple syrup, I get that, but peanut butter an jelly/jam... wtf? I don't get either. Never understood the sugar/savoury convo. Also, American bacon is terrible. Have you tried PB and J? It's delicious! (assuming you like both things individually, obviously) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Let me ask a question. Bacon and maple syrup, I get that, but peanut butter an jelly/jam... wtf? I don't get either. Never understood the sugar/savoury convo. Also, American bacon is terrible. Have you tried PB and J? It's delicious! (assuming you like both things individually, obviously) Is jelly just jam? I don't like either enough to love it but they're both passable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVPNXsc4wsQ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rev Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 As far as I am aware: Jelly (US) is Jam (UK) Jelly (UK) is Jello or gelatine (US) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts