MovieChat Forums > White Light/Black Rain: The Destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (2007) Discussion > Racist nonsense

Racist nonsense

posted 17 years ago by dante_Sh88
84 replies | jump to latest

Some posters on this board still spout the racist rubbish used to justify the bomb in in the first place. "The Japanese" were somehow all insane Kamakazees that would fight always to the last soldier and all brutalised POW's and so we had to do it....

Some American's use the time worn phrase "it saved american lives" - but it cost over 200,000 Japanese lives, not to mention the numerous other victims who died painfully and slowly afterwards. So that is racist assumption number one - Japanese lives are worth less than US lives.

Racist assumption number 2 - we had to do it to force them to surrender ignores any kind of serious study of what was going on in Japan at the time. It is well known for those who choose to look that serious sections of the Japanese government wanted to surrender, the emperor was even sympathetic to it, peace feelers had been sent out previously through Switzerland and so on. Sections of the military still wanted to fight however, and the problem was getting peace without the army launching a coup (which they tried anyway after the bombs were dropped). So the nonsense that 'the Japanese would have all fought until the last child threw the last stone at the invading American troops' is also racist rubbish. Would the American's fight until the last US child died throwing the last stone? Would every man in the USA of fighting age pick up a gun and fight? No - it is a fact that this never happens. I have been to Palestine and the racist view that all Palestinian children are gun wielding maniacs and all Palestinian men are suicide bombers is nonsense. It comes from a racist white view of foreigners that they are all fanatics.

The dropping of the atomic bombs on a civilian population was a war crime, carried out by the Truman administration because they wanted to prove to the world that their military might was the greatest in the world. Now the USA has gone down in history as the only country in the world to use a nuclear weapon on a civilian population.

People can view these pictures drawn by survivors
http://www.hbo.com/docs/programs/whitelightblackrain/slideshow.html

“People with no arms, no legs, their intestines spilling out, brains spilling out of their crushed skulls... And near ground zero, there were black, carbonized bodies burnt beyond recognition. People in unimaginable states.”

[–] jason626 17 years ago

SURE. Thats what they thought when they invaded Iwo Jima, and Okinawa. If the Japanese were ready to surrender, why didnt they? The Japanese should NEVER cry out for war crimes committed by any nation. They were never tried themselves.

I hate the desktop generals we have now. Everybody thinks they knew what the Japaese were thinking, and how close they were to surrendering. The fact is that America is at war with a nation with no morals, and fighting to the last man on almost every island we land on. They have not surrendered, and the Soviets now are involved. THAT MEANS THAT THEY WILL WANT HALF OF THE COUNTRY. Yes people that Soviets were hungry for land. If America ends it with a single blow then it saves them, and ends the war.

BUT. Since they were so close to surrendering 1 bomb did not do it. Ask yourself that. How is a country so close to surrendering not, after one of their cities is wiped off the map?

Its not racism at all, its war and we want to win, not play nice. We destroyed Dresden in almost the same fashion, and their white.

"It comes from a racist white view of foreigners that they are all fanatics."

They are just that!! Any enemy that has nothing to lose will become fanatical!

"Japanese lives are worth less than US lives."
The lives of my enemies are worth spit, and the lives of my countrymen are more valuable. Duh. Lets save the enemy and let them win.

I sense a troll

[–] someonegetsteve-1 15 years ago

Lots of misinformation in these comments. Your rant against "desktop(sic) generals" is 'interesting' to say the least: the need for dropping the bomb to defeat japan has by now been refuted by everyone from General Douglas McArthur to Admiral Ernest King, US Chief of Naval Operations, to Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson and yet it persists in the minds of many well-meaning Americans. It's important to bear in mind the ACTUAL condition of Japan in mid 1945...

- Almost nothing was left of the Imperial Navy
- Japan's air force had been all but totally destroyed.
- Antiaircraft defenses were "token", B29's operated in near impunity over Japan. General Curtis LeMay boasted that American bombers were "driving them [Japanese] back to the stone age."
- What was left of Japan's factories and workshops struggled fitfully to turn out weapons and other goods from inadequate raw materials.
- Oil supplies had not been available since April.
- By July about a quarter of all the houses in Japan had been destroyed,
- Food had become so scarce that most Japanese were subsisting on a sub-starvation diet.

Japan's earlier bids for peace to the Americans had as the following terms:
- Complete surrender of all Japanese forces and arms, at home, on island possessions, and in occupied countries.
- Occupation of Japan and its possessions by Allied troops under American direction.
- Japanese relinquishment of all territory seized during the war, as well as Manchuria, Korea and Taiwan.
- Regulation of Japanese industry to halt production of any weapons and other tools of war.
- Release of all prisoners of war and internees.
- Surrender of designated war criminals.
- NOTE: the lack of forfeiture of the role of Emperor

In the light of this, in most historians' opinions it was partly good old fashion spite by the Americans, a chance to "seal the deal" of claiming Japan over the Soviets, and a working test of the new H-bomb. Why did they find it morally ok to act in this way? Simply: the attitudes at the time among the American public were that the Japanese were genetically, racially, morally, ethnically inferior to Anglo-Saxon races. This was much more pronounced than it is now and much more accepted and acceptable, in fact you can still see it in some of the comments from older Americans here.

Admiral Leahy (another "desktop general" I suppose?):
It is my opinion that the use of the barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan ... The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons ... My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children.

[–] jason626 15 years ago

Funny you should mention General Douglas McArthur. Considering he wanted to use nuclear weapons against North Korea and China.

You mention that Japan was wanting to surrender. Why were they training their civilians to strap explosives to their bodies to attack American troops if they invaded. As for war criminals, how many Japanese war criminals were brought to trial?

Japan was warned that their refusal of the Potsdam Ultimatium would destroy them. Still they persisted with fighting America. A country that warned them that we would rain destruction on their cities. As for the arguement of racial inferior; we destroyed Dresden a European city.

If we did not drop the bomb, the bombing of their cities would have continued. Then we would have invaded. Count up the lives of a continued airwar with the deaths of an invasion on both sides. Simple math will tell you that more death would have happened the conventional way.

"The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons."

If they were ready to surrender they would have. Ready to surrender is not an option for Japan at the time. Were the soldiers ready to surrender at Iwo Jima?

"It is my opinion that the use of the barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan"

Are you kidding me. The bomb was dropped over a weapons plant in Nagasaki. Hiroshima also had a weapons plant.

"I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children."

Very noble thought. I just wish the world had the same view. How many wars were fought with the same logic?

"War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over." General Sherman (Desktop General right?)

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jason626 15 years ago

There is a tree that you need to hug somewhere.

Let me guess, your going to say America started the war because we refused to sell Japan oil right?

The whole Dresden arguement was the fact a white city was completly destroyed. Thus when a Japanese city is destroyed there can be no racial motivation behind it. Please keep up with the arguement though.

Glad to see you studied Japanese military. Why was Japan ready to fight to the last man? Oh wait you said they had nothing left right. Please read some textbooks so you can keep up.

"Actually WWII was the first war -EVER- where civilians were targeted and systematically exterminated by both sides"

You are so right on this. America had loads of concentration camps. lol

Let me guess, you never studied any other wars in other centuries. The Crusades was all about a simple relgious dispute right? With no harm to anyone in there way right? They would never target civilians right? Or better yet Genghis Khan would never kill Chinese civilians right? Or the Assyrians would never harm those innocent civilians in captured cities right? I would never dare mention the Romans, they were to peaceful of a socitey to do anything bad. The Spanish trying to expel all non-Christians during the Reconquista was a simple please leave right?

"Your country has commited crimes that make Hitler look like a Saint."

America has comitted a terrible atrocity in the past on itself. But can you name it? or is it just a blanket statement that you hate America? And whatever your country is never did harm right?

"You have imposed sanctions resulting in millions of deaths in Iraq."

We refuse to sell or buy so that country dies right. Please stay on the subject of dropping the Atomic Bomb.

"In WWII you placed American-Japanese citizens to POW camps simply because they were "guilty" of being Japanese."

POW camps? Glad to see your American history is up to snuff. That was only one state and it was done because of greed not race. If it was race it would have been done in Hawaii, where Pearl Harbor is.

"You have funded and sold weapons to Sadam to fight Iran and the Kurds. You have funded and given weapons to Bin Laden to fight the Soviets. Some 4 million men women and children died as a result of the US wars in Indochina - where you performed some of the worst attrocities the world has ever seen in any war. You are the only country that has bombed two cities with atomic bombs. And the list goes on...and on... "

Stay on the subject here. What does this have anything to do with WWII. Your anti-American rant gets in the way.

Try reading about why Japan took so long to surrender and then think was it worth it. Did America warn them something bad was going to happen? Yea

The gem of your whole arguement is based on Would Japan have dropped the bomb on the US if they had it. Because Japan was researching the bomb along with Germany, Britain and the US. War is hell. If the US is such a vial ,nasty fighting country willing to do anything to win a war, WHY GO TO WAR AGAINST THEM. The Sherman arguement, which you seem to know nothing abou was the fact an American general was willing to burn American cities to win. DO you think America was going to spare Japanese cities?

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jason626 15 years ago

Its funny that the news of D-Day veterans getting awards for being slaves to the Nazis was not read by you.

You bring up the fact that the concept of civilans was not around prior to WWII. Yet it was Japan training it's civilans to fight the Americans when they landed for an invasion. Please tell me what a partisan is.

The interment camps used in America were based in other states but the people were from California. Yet America has done what Germany did before they did it. All Japanese Americans that were in the camps were given restitution with an apology. It is still a stain on America but admitting to it is better than other countries who cover up bad acts.

You still did not answer the question of what Japan would do if they had the bomb. Or does the fact your limited knowledge of Japanese military hold you back. They had subs that were capable of carring planes. Please visit the Smithsonian if you want to see it.

Thanks for giving me someone elses credit on WOW and Halo but that person is not me.
You still need to answer a few of these.
Why was Japan ready to fight to the last man?
Why did Japan take so long to surrender?
Did America warn them something bad was going to happen?
Britain was getting bombed and bombing German cities, should we not charge Churchhill with crimes?
Why should Japanese cities be so sacred? American cities were burned by the British and other Americans. Or is it a new weapon was used?

please tell me how killing a man with a swaord is different then dropping a bomb on them. Death is going to happen either which way. Or using cannon or catapult is worse than using a spear.

"Are you implying that America wanted to CONQUER Japan or Italy?"

If we were going to take them over it would have happened don't you think?
Or was it other countries asking us for help in fighting Germany?

"Like the Crusaders wanted to conquer the Holy Land? Is that why the US became involved in WWII? -- -- -- -- -- WOW! I mean how can you even compare the two?"

I have no idea what you wrote and it makes no sense.

"Are you implying that the majority of the civilians that were killed in WWII were considered a major threat and that is the ONLY reason they were targeted by bombers and long range artillery?"

The concept of total war flew over head on this one. Tell me which side did not target civillians? Are you complaining to them too?

"Are you aware that both sides INVENTED new weapons and technologies to SPECIFICALLY target civilians?"

Did I not just say that. Why are you repeating stuff we already know?

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jason626 15 years ago

Before you respond please READ some history books. Go back to school and learn something. Please read about WWI, The American Civil War, The War of 1812, WWII and then comeback with a well thought out statement.
Yes America was subjected to chemical weapons in WWI.
Yes many American cities were destroyed in war. War of 1812 and the American Civil War.
Yes Americans were used as slave labor in WWII.
Yes we were invaded by a foreign country. War of 1812 and Japan landed on American territories in WWII.
No other nuclear bomb was dropped after WWII as a specific target.
The US was hit with fines and penalties by the UN.

So go back and respond to some of my questions, or is your whole arguement based on you hating America for invading Iraq. If it is your not the only one, but go whine on another message board.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jason626 15 years ago

Again please read before you think you know something. What country are you from that is so high and mighty?

Get off Halo or WoW and read a book. I can answer your arguements all day but you have not gotten back with a coherent response to my questions. Like I said before, go to a message board pertaining to the war in Iraq but don't whine on this one. Your level of understanding does not comprehend basic logic and military history.

By your level of thought you should be a American fan and supporter.

"You know that the US is the UN right?"
"Why do you reckon the US gave the finger to the UN decision NOT to invade Iraq?"

This alone confuses me. You say the US is the UN. So why would the US have to ask the UN anything. Why should we be sanctioned either. America is going to fine itself?

Your basic knowledge of history and geography need some work too.

I said "Japan landed on American territories in WWII."
You said "Japan had troops on mainland USA in WWII? WOW! Which State? When? Was it California as well?"

A state is not a territory. A territory can become a state but it has no powers that a state has. Thus no state got invaded nor did I ever say that. Nor did any other state. Nor did I elaborate on which territory got invaded.

How is the War of 1812 shameful on America? Is it because there was no clear victory? We did get invaded and cities were burned by British troops. Or did you not know that?

"American civilians were targeted with chemicals in mainland USA? WOW! Which American cities? By whom?"

Last time I checked chemical weapons were used in WWI. I never said chemical weapons were used on American soil. You did. Oh wait, did America fight in that war? Go read a book and find out.

If the American Civil War does not count, please go and blame Europe for killing themselves in two world wars.

"Americans do not know what war is. Never have."

Big words! Next time put your country next to it so I know if you can back that statement up.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jason626 15 years ago

AGAIN AND AGAIN YOU NEED TO READ MORE BOOKS.

Just because the US has not been invaded since the War of 1812 does not mean the US has not seen warfare. Its like blaming Britain for not being invaded since 1066.

Washington DC was burned to the ground by foreign troops.

Becareful when you use the year 1780. The US was at war with Britain and they were on American soil. Thus war refugees and civilians were being harmed.

Then again if you want to stay in every other war other than WWII we could delve into the Crusades, Roman Imperialism, Napoleonic Wars, WWI, Spanish Imperialism, Britsh Imperialism(including the Opium Wars), French and Indian War, The Hundred Years War, The Conquest of Arfica, South America, and every other war that Europe was involved in. Please elaborate on each of these wars and who should be punished. Then add the number of deaths for each war as well as all the civilains that died too. Then go complain about all those countries that are responsible for them. Until then stop complaing on a WWII involved site about current events.

Then again your focused on news form more then a few years ago with the link of terrorism to the war in Iraq. Thus America's current administration has already started withdrawing troops.

As for genocide you still could not figure out who America committed it on, could you? There are a few online European @#$% sites that offer such info. Any European or Middle East Country that you think of is wrong. Try our own Native Americans.

As for chemical weapons, how many times was Iraq sanctioned for their use against the Kurds? Then again the US was not loading planes with the stuff and dropping it on helpless civilians either.

You speak of mass executions too. I suppose that you have note read up on the Japanese during WWII then. Go to a Chinese site and tell them that Japan was right in invading them. Your last few posts dealt with nothing with the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan either so I am asking a lot from you on this. But then again you still try to hide what great country your from.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jason626 15 years ago

We also dropped posioned food after WWII right? And all the European countries fell ill and caused a epidemic called HIV right?

You can not even stay on a single topic, and venture into every war and still you get it wrong. All you information is biased and wrong. Maybe America should send more money to whatever country you live in for a better education.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] scout6179 17 years ago

What was the difference between the ‘peace feelers’ sent by Japan in June 1945 to the U.S. vs. those delivered by Rudolph Hess (3rd in command of NAZI Germany) to Great Britain on 10 May 1941?

1. No occupation.
2. No War Crime trials.
3. Keep the military as is.
4. Keep existing territory.
5. Keep present political system.
6. Stop the war.

[–] robcw3w 17 years ago

If you believe this to be true, please go live somewhere else, like Palestine and see if you can make a difference! Again, another arm chair quaterback trying to defend the ememy. I just wish people like you could have been alive back then and put in the same situation, like being shot at or tortured by the Japaneese, I would like to know what tune you would of been whistling then!

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] robertchayman 15 years ago

I agree with robcw3w.
There are not many of us left to even state our opinions on this tragedy.You would have to have lived in that time era to even know what either side went through.You can't be age 1-60 to even remotely be able to leave a legitimate comment here.

We...UNLESS YOU WERE THERE.... have no Idea what EXACTLY happened during this time period.Like the bible it was written (Like a childrens diary)Full of facts mixed with fairy tales.
I really feel like this is why the world is in the terrible shape that it is in today.

of course with George bush just leading us into a recession for the last 8 years then leaving obama AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE to clean up his mess.(I APOLOGIZE IF YOU ARE A FAN OF GEORGE BUSH).i AM ENTITLED TO MY OPINION...RIGHT?

Of course I am just a 37 year old man that has never been to war but of course all of the males in my family have been to SOME war OR ARE IN THE MILITARY.

And also again I AM NOT ALLOWED TO FIGHT FOR MY COUNTRY BECAUSE I AM GAY AND TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH TO BE AMERICAN TO ME IS TO BE TRUTHFUL ABOUT WHO YOU ARE.
IT IS A SHAME THAT AMERICA HAS BEEN BUILT ON SO MANY MISCONCEPTIONS BECAUSE I LOVE MY COUNTRY AND I WILL UNTIL THE DAY I DIE AND I WISH I COULD FIGHT FOR HER BUT I WON'T LIE TO DO IT.WHY CAN'T GAY MEN BE IN THE MILITARY AGAIN..OH THEY ARE PUSSIES...COME SAY THAT TO MY FACE I WILL SHOW YOU WHO THE PUSSY IS!!!

I would DIE FOR my family...MOM,DAD,SISTER AND NEFEW WITHOUT EVEN A THOUGHT.
IF ANYONE HAS MADE IT THIS FAR IN MY REPLY AND IS OLDER AND MUCH WISER THAN ME COULD YOU LEAD ME IN THE RIGHT PATH TO A MOVIE THAT EXPLAINS THE BEST PORTRAIL OF WHAT HAPPENED DURING THESE TIMES IN AN UNBIASED WAY!!!I WOULD BE VERY GRATEFUL FOR THIS.

[–] tomok97 17 years ago

"Japanese lives are worth less than US lives."

That is not a "racist assumption" within the confines of a war. We were fighting the Japanese. So, yes, their lives were worth less than our's. As were German lives. And I'm sure if you asked a Japanese citizen (circa 1944) who's lives were more valuable they would have replied their own. That's not racism, that's self-preservation.

While you can argue whether or not "the bomb" should have been used, the act of using it was no more racist than the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Not every inter-ethnic act of violence is racially motivated.

[–] pudz_budz 17 years ago

I think were getting a little carried away here, yeah it was an atrocity but hey it happened just pray it don't happen again which it probably will so don't be in that country when its gonna happen duh lol you internet types sheesh

[–] Beetle1 17 years ago

You are an ignorant shmuck.
A US invasion of the Japanese mainland would have cost far more Japanese lives than 200,000. So, considering only Japanese lives and nothing else, dropping the bomb was still the best option for saving as many lives as possible.
Wake up and face facts.
Regarding your "war crimes" claim.
The 4th Geneva convention that outlined the rules "relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War" occurred in 1949....after WWII.

Don't bother responding, because I won't be revisiting your posting due to its complete and total lack of merit.

[–] pyota 16 years ago

nice post, i mostly agree. i'm frankly amazed that people could watch this film and still maintain that dropping the bombs was a moral act. minor correction: truman arrived on the scene late in the game, i doubt his administration had much say in dropping the bomb. an enormous amount of resources was sunk into the manhatten project, they weren't going to then just let this thing sit around. for more on this, see: http://www.wnyc.org/shows/lopate/episodes/2005/08/02#segment50100

[–] stomperrob 16 years ago

People also overlook the fact that the firebombing of Japanese and German cities was nearly as devastating. The firebombing of Tokyo killed 80,000 people, and the firebombing of Dresden & Hamburg in Germany created infernos that killed over 75,000 people. Numerous other Japanese cities were firebombed. With the atomic bomb, only one plane & one bomb were required to do what previously took countless aircraft & crews and resulted in many losses of planes & crews.

[–] James_Dorman 16 years ago

The only crime in war is failure, and victory is the all forgiving acquittal.

War is limitless violence in the pursuit of the state's goals and if two planes can destroy two cities with no losses of pilots or planes, then why not?

I'd try to spend more time to convince you people, but there is no point and no need, people like you rarely make it to positions of power, and when you do people with more nerve take it back from you.

[–] HyperPup 16 years ago

Nevermind the fact that the Germans were working on their own atomic weapons program along with the Japanese. The Germans stopped funding on it because they needed something workable before they were forced to surrender and unfortunately Heisenburg didn't have as much time as we did. The Japanese had more luck and along with Sen Toku subs could have had an atomic weapon to dump on San Fransico around the same time we hit Hiroshima. So though it is tragic, like all the other aspects of war it is after all war. The Japanese knew our intentions and if they were really intent on surrendering before we used the bombs they would have signed on the dotted line. The fact was they were looking to save face in the stark reality of defeat. The Emperor was essentially a God to the people of Japan. If he said fight to the last then every life would be committed, no arguements and that is what he was prepared to commit to.

[–] Greenland 16 years ago

========The only crime in war is failure, and victory is the all forgiving acquittal.

War is limitless violence in the pursuit of the state's goals and if two planes can destroy two cities with no losses of pilots or planes, then why not?

I'd try to spend more time to convince you people, but there is no point and no need, people like you rarely make it to positions of power, and when you do people with more nerve take it back from you.=========

Says crazyjim1986. I'm guessing 1986 is your birth year, which makes you some 21-22 years old. You have seen one real war in your life and since you are on IMDb I doubt you have done more than watched it on TV. It is the brashness of a young fool like yourself to proclaim something like "the only crime in war is failure" and other such *beep* that might fly in an intro to philosophy class but only goes so far as to demonstrate how ignorant of any real conflict you are. Honestly, why would any young man who only knows war through books and shows open their mouth onto something they know nothing of.

I'm also curious as to what positions of power you've achieved so far, since you seem to know so much about what it takes to gain and maintain power.

[–] James_Dorman 16 years ago

++++Says crazyjim1986. I'm guessing 1986 is your birth year, which makes you some 21-22 years old. You have seen one real war in your life and since you are on IMDb I doubt you have done more than watched it on TV. It is the brashness of a young fool like yourself to proclaim something like "the only crime in war is failure" and other such *beep* that might fly in an intro to philosophy class but only goes so far as to demonstrate how ignorant of any real conflict you are. Honestly, why would any young man who only knows war through books and shows open their mouth onto something they know nothing of.

I'm also curious as to what positions of power you've achieved so far, since you seem to know so much about what it takes to gain and maintain power.+++

I'm the one who is ignorant of real conflict? It doesn't take much knowledge of history to realize that the victors never pay. At Nuremburg, a German general would be automatically acquitted of any charge if he could show that an Allied general had done the same thing. And how is what I'm saying from an intro to philosophy class. I'm merely stating that during war, most people don't care about philosophy and ethics. I had the supreme displeasure of having a philosophy class in high school with types like you who loved to debate the ethics of extreme conditions such as war, when ethics fall silent.

Don't take my word for it, all the vets I've spoken with, from either World War II, Vietnam, Korea, or some of the younger ones from Iraq would agree. To them at least, everything but winning becomes extremely irrelevant when battle starts.

[–] fightingcrayons 16 years ago

well, i understand what you're trying to say, but if everyone thought like a soldier (fighting in the war or not) we'd all be doomed. just because an official "war" is in progress, doesn't make all actions 'right'...especially since most wars shouldn't be fought at all in the first place.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jason626 15 years ago

Are you still trolling for an arguement?
Troll needs food!

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]