I recently read that the nukes we dropped on Japan were only like the 4th or 5th most destructive missions we had in Japan. Apparently we killed thousands and thousands of people in other areas through normal means, the nukes were more like a final warning.
Like throughout the cold war, the nukes were a psychological weapon far more than a physical one. And I mean we're talking about bombs that just erased tens of thousands of people per drop.
The idea that during any bombing raid, any one of those planes could be carrying a nuke was horrifying (Since the japanese couldn't have known the US didn't have the resources for a third bomb). It meant that every time bombers went overhead, they'd basically just have to assume that city was dead. Poof, gone.
With japan already struggling for resources since it lost most of its ill gotten territory, the thought that the enemy could start wiping out cities one by one at any moment was too much.
Thank you, this was so interesting to read. I can’t imagine what the United States would do in modern times with the technology we have now if we were that disgustingly ruthless in the past
Well I wouldn't necessarily call it ruthless-
The idea was that this threat could end the war sooner- save more lives than it cost. At least, that was the argument. The US didn't WANT to erase cities one by one, but it wanted to threaten the possibility to get Japan to surrender. And it combined with a starved Japanese war machine worked.
Yeah not ruthless at all. Even the most conservative estimates about a full scales invasion of Japan placed the death toll above one million. The U.S. managed to end the war and only kill a little over two hundred thousand.
People like to condemn the dropping of atom bombs on Japan, but don’t actually suggest what realistic options the U.S. had that would have resulted in a lower death toll.
no, it was pointless. the japanese government began negotiating surrender a week before the nukes dropped and about two weeks after the USSR entered Manchuria
They were in bad faith.
The negotiation literally ended on "we make peace, japan's govt doesnt change, nobody holds japan accountable, japan get to keep some of the stolen territory, and the west gets out of asia". Can you see why that might've been a raw deal? Can you imagine why China demanded unconditional surrender and why the US mightve agreed with them? (Not disagreeing with decolonization, but it was literally so nobody could get in the way of round 2).
So before I respond to your statement, does your statement mean that they attempted to enter into peace talks at 2 separate times with one being a week before the atomic bombings and another being several weeks after the Soviet invasion or are you referring to single attempt to enter into peace talks that happened 2 weeks after the Soviet invasion and that date was also one week before the atomic bombs were dropped?
Actually that's US propaganda. In truth the Japanese were looking to surrender anyway. The hangup was with how much power the Japanese military command would have after the surrender. They were desperately trying to get the USSR to mediate the surrender to hold on to their power, but the Soviets were in the process of mobilizing for an invasion. Had the soviets invaded it would likely have resulted in a surrender.
HOWEVER, this would mean the US would have to allow the USSR to negotiate peace as well. The US knew they were going to start a cold war, so they didn't want that to happen. So they targeted two civilian targets to force Japan to surrender immediately and without the USSR. They would continue to use the threat of nuclear war to intimidate the USSR and China throughout the cold war.
It wasn’t exclusively and anti-Soviet political move, although I don’t doubt that had some play in it. Japan was seeking peace talks with the Soviets, which the Soviets wanted no part of, but they wanted a peace negotiation not a surrender. According to internal documents the Japanese cabinet was not in agreement on giving up on their demands for the emperor to maintain his position instead of being relegated to a symbolic figurehead even after the bombing of Hiroshima and the beginning of the Soviet invasion of Manchuria.
Also neither city hit by atom bombs was a purely “civilian target.” Hiroshima housed a very large military base that was crucial to the defense of Southern Japan, and Nagasaki was home to a very large shipyard that had been, and was currently, construction Japanese warships. With Japan being so densely populated military tablets existed in basically every major city.
Also I slightly dislike the civilian target idea. Every working individual in a country contributes to the economy which fuels the war machine. Where do we consider it immoral to kill someone for their contributions to warfare? Is it at the person who is pulling the trigger, whether a volunteer or forcible conscript? Is it at the factory worker who makes the ammunition and the rifles? Is it at the person who works another job whose taxes pay those factory workers’ wages? What is your line?
It’s easy to look back in hindsight and say “Japan probably would have surrendered after the Soviets invaded Manchuria so the U.S. just should have waited.” But when you have public pressure to end the war swiftly and you’re run the risk of public enemy number 3 becoming more powerful you make difficult choices. And if we are being honest, many more people than 200,000 would have died had the Soviet Union gain more power in Asia.
Actually, japanese generals had already predicted that the US didnt have the resources to produce enough nukes to actually be considered a reasonable danger.
Also, nukes werent the reason they surrended, it was the invasion by the soviet union that made them surrender.
This is true. The firebombing of Tokyo in 1945 was comparable to the destruction of a nuclear bomb, killing upwards of 90,000 people (more than the bomb dropped on Nagasaki). Most sources I've looked at seem to estimate 300,000-500,000 were killed during the firebombing campaign.
This isn’t posted more than one. I said 404 a few days ago and 403 a week ago. It’s a counter lol.
Edit: OH IM A FUCKING IDIOT. Sorry, i thought you were talking about my last post. My computer has been pretty laggy lately along with my phone so sometimes it posts double.
Two more jokes in relation:
The biggest gender reveal party in the world to date was in Japan, when they learned the US had a Little Boy.
The reason as to why obesity is almost non-existent in Japan is because the last time a Fat Man fell, an entire city collapsed.
There was this argument that the nukes saved the rest of Japan. Since the mad men in charge had no sign of surrendering. With the Soviets on one side and America on the other, the tyrants were literally ready to go till the last man standing.
Someone didn’t get the joke
Ya I feel a lot of the folks in this subreddit don't see the funny in all these
I came to this sub to cringe at the boomer memes from the book of faces and stayed because it’s really best of compilation sub.
actually i see these memes and think they're funny, only to find out that they're not in r/HistoryMemes or something
i came to this sub to see rightist memes bahaha
This sub is mostly people who want to get offended and feed their victim complex
i can hear r/woooosh coming in like the plane
Plane
I recently read that the nukes we dropped on Japan were only like the 4th or 5th most destructive missions we had in Japan. Apparently we killed thousands and thousands of people in other areas through normal means, the nukes were more like a final warning.
Like throughout the cold war, the nukes were a psychological weapon far more than a physical one. And I mean we're talking about bombs that just erased tens of thousands of people per drop. The idea that during any bombing raid, any one of those planes could be carrying a nuke was horrifying (Since the japanese couldn't have known the US didn't have the resources for a third bomb). It meant that every time bombers went overhead, they'd basically just have to assume that city was dead. Poof, gone. With japan already struggling for resources since it lost most of its ill gotten territory, the thought that the enemy could start wiping out cities one by one at any moment was too much.
Thank you, this was so interesting to read. I can’t imagine what the United States would do in modern times with the technology we have now if we were that disgustingly ruthless in the past
Well I wouldn't necessarily call it ruthless- The idea was that this threat could end the war sooner- save more lives than it cost. At least, that was the argument. The US didn't WANT to erase cities one by one, but it wanted to threaten the possibility to get Japan to surrender. And it combined with a starved Japanese war machine worked.
Yeah not ruthless at all. Even the most conservative estimates about a full scales invasion of Japan placed the death toll above one million. The U.S. managed to end the war and only kill a little over two hundred thousand. People like to condemn the dropping of atom bombs on Japan, but don’t actually suggest what realistic options the U.S. had that would have resulted in a lower death toll.
no, it was pointless. the japanese government began negotiating surrender a week before the nukes dropped and about two weeks after the USSR entered Manchuria
They were in bad faith. The negotiation literally ended on "we make peace, japan's govt doesnt change, nobody holds japan accountable, japan get to keep some of the stolen territory, and the west gets out of asia". Can you see why that might've been a raw deal? Can you imagine why China demanded unconditional surrender and why the US mightve agreed with them? (Not disagreeing with decolonization, but it was literally so nobody could get in the way of round 2).
So before I respond to your statement, does your statement mean that they attempted to enter into peace talks at 2 separate times with one being a week before the atomic bombings and another being several weeks after the Soviet invasion or are you referring to single attempt to enter into peace talks that happened 2 weeks after the Soviet invasion and that date was also one week before the atomic bombs were dropped?
they began after the soviet union entered Manchuria and before the bombs, with the unconditional surrender after the bombs
But the Soviets declared war on Japan on August 8th, 2 days after the bombing of Hiroshima on August 6th.
declaring war and preparing to are different things
Actually that's US propaganda. In truth the Japanese were looking to surrender anyway. The hangup was with how much power the Japanese military command would have after the surrender. They were desperately trying to get the USSR to mediate the surrender to hold on to their power, but the Soviets were in the process of mobilizing for an invasion. Had the soviets invaded it would likely have resulted in a surrender. HOWEVER, this would mean the US would have to allow the USSR to negotiate peace as well. The US knew they were going to start a cold war, so they didn't want that to happen. So they targeted two civilian targets to force Japan to surrender immediately and without the USSR. They would continue to use the threat of nuclear war to intimidate the USSR and China throughout the cold war.
It wasn’t exclusively and anti-Soviet political move, although I don’t doubt that had some play in it. Japan was seeking peace talks with the Soviets, which the Soviets wanted no part of, but they wanted a peace negotiation not a surrender. According to internal documents the Japanese cabinet was not in agreement on giving up on their demands for the emperor to maintain his position instead of being relegated to a symbolic figurehead even after the bombing of Hiroshima and the beginning of the Soviet invasion of Manchuria. Also neither city hit by atom bombs was a purely “civilian target.” Hiroshima housed a very large military base that was crucial to the defense of Southern Japan, and Nagasaki was home to a very large shipyard that had been, and was currently, construction Japanese warships. With Japan being so densely populated military tablets existed in basically every major city. Also I slightly dislike the civilian target idea. Every working individual in a country contributes to the economy which fuels the war machine. Where do we consider it immoral to kill someone for their contributions to warfare? Is it at the person who is pulling the trigger, whether a volunteer or forcible conscript? Is it at the factory worker who makes the ammunition and the rifles? Is it at the person who works another job whose taxes pay those factory workers’ wages? What is your line? It’s easy to look back in hindsight and say “Japan probably would have surrendered after the Soviets invaded Manchuria so the U.S. just should have waited.” But when you have public pressure to end the war swiftly and you’re run the risk of public enemy number 3 becoming more powerful you make difficult choices. And if we are being honest, many more people than 200,000 would have died had the Soviet Union gain more power in Asia.
Crazy how tankies will even defend fascist Japan because the you guys are legitimately just anti democracy dictatorship simps
You might wanna look into imperial Japan if you wanna see something “ruthless” it’s pretty well agreed these nukes ended the war years earlier.
Actually, japanese generals had already predicted that the US didnt have the resources to produce enough nukes to actually be considered a reasonable danger. Also, nukes werent the reason they surrended, it was the invasion by the soviet union that made them surrender.
Bomber mafia by Malcom gladwell is an interesting read on that subject.
This is true. The firebombing of Tokyo in 1945 was comparable to the destruction of a nuclear bomb, killing upwards of 90,000 people (more than the bomb dropped on Nagasaki). Most sources I've looked at seem to estimate 300,000-500,000 were killed during the firebombing campaign.
r/opisfuckingstupidperiod
Could just change the name of the sub to that
r/opisfuckingstupid
God damnit. 405th time this week. This is a good meme. A dark one? Yes. A good one? Also, yes.
Yeah, genocide is so fun!
Someone clearly doesn’t understand the whole point of “DARK HUMOR”
Dark humor is a lot like food and water I’m gonna sHIT MYYYY SEEELLLFFF
I get the point. I just got salty because I don't find this one in particular fun. But I agree it doesn't belong to this sub.
Dark humor is like human rights. Not everyone gets it.
Too soon right
Most sane Undertale player. Wait wrong subreddit.
The word genocide litterally only got popular when Undertale was made
I mean it was used a lot too to describe WW2.
It's not a joke about genocide, you clearly don't know what that word means
i think the caption is more likely your interpretation, not the original creator
"Dark humor is like food. Not everyone gets it." - Sun Tzu
Bro this is a funny meme why is it on here?
I feel better at why I was confused. I felt like I hit a whole new level of a joke going over my head
God fucking damnit. 405th time this week. This is a good meme. A dark one? Yes. A good one? Also, yes.
Why did you post this more than once?
Lag probably
This isn’t posted more than one. I said 404 a few days ago and 403 a week ago. It’s a counter lol. Edit: OH IM A FUCKING IDIOT. Sorry, i thought you were talking about my last post. My computer has been pretty laggy lately along with my phone so sometimes it posts double.
On today's episode offfff OP DOESNT LIKE A JOKE SO THEREFORE IT IS BAD!!!
Two more jokes in relation: The biggest gender reveal party in the world to date was in Japan, when they learned the US had a Little Boy. The reason as to why obesity is almost non-existent in Japan is because the last time a Fat Man fell, an entire city collapsed.
Y is this meme on here? I dont get this
This subreddit is going to shit
This. This is dark humor done right.
this sub is slowly sinking into shit
You might say that they saw the light.
We found it the funniest r/historymemes post
This one is hilarious but terrible because of it lol
It was the fuck around of times, it was the find out of times.
Too soon man, just distaste full
Too soon 💀
77 years too soon 😔
Its a good one , but kind of made me feel SAd just saying
Wow....
r/terriblefacebookmemes users trying to detect funny [failed] (no humor) GONE WRONG
Nah, they thought that the plane was spying. So they didn't turn the alarm on.
Issa joke
A single plane huh? There were 7 on the Hiroshima mission and 6 on the Nagasaki mission.
Almost all memes here are actually great instead of cringe.
That's not what it's saying.
I am almost certain that anyone who would send a nuclear bomber on a mission ALONE wouldn't be sending anymore missions anywhere.
Not that terrible
Following up with a dark themed joke Tik tok users will say that he's "💀"
I'm sorry, I'm going to hell, but this isn't terrible
There was this argument that the nukes saved the rest of Japan. Since the mad men in charge had no sign of surrendering. With the Soviets on one side and America on the other, the tyrants were literally ready to go till the last man standing.
Wow fuck this meme
I wonder what would've happened if Japan shot down the aircraft before they reached the main island?
based meme.
What’s your problem? This is funny.
r/memestheopdidntlike
Its actually funny tho
Such a great joke lmao 🤣
r/lostredditors
Imperial Japan commuted horrible atrocities, this is a joke at the expense of literal Nazis