Agree or Disagree - The Bombing of Hiroshima/Nagasaki is a black and white issue.

[el_bryanto]

By a black and white issue I mean that people who disagree with your position are being willfully obtuse or are morally compromised.

Bryant

18 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
	I support the bombing and it's black and white
	6 (33%)
	I support the bombing and it's somewhat clear that I am right
	3 (17%)
	I support the bombing but I can see how other can come to a different conclusion
	4 (22%)
	I oppose the bombing and it's black and white
	3 (17%)
	I oppose the bombing and it's somewhat clear that I am right
	0 (0%)
	I oppose the bombing but I can see how other can come to a different conclusion
	0 (0%)
	None of the above - i haven't made up my mind on whether or not we should have bombed.
	2 (11%)
	Please don't post such bullshit polls
	0 (0%)
	I like to vote!
	0 (0%)
	1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[ananda]

1. It was either that or firebomb Tokyo.

...

[Posteritatis]

4. Again, you mean? (nt)

[godai]

8. US firebombed Tokyo in March 1945. n/t

[CBGLuthier]

2. More like Yellow and White

Good thing we did not have to decide to use those weapons on the good white people of Germany.

Personally I think debating something that happened before I was born is a waste of time.

[Posteritatis]

9. Considering they surrendered unconditionally ten weeks before Trinity, that would be silly. (nt)

[branford]

13. Do you really believe that we would not have used the Bomb on Germany if they had not surrendered?

Also, discussion about history are essential.

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." George Santayama, 1905.

[Kurska]

16. It probably would have been in bad taste to nuke people who had surrendered weeks prior.

Just as an FYI

[GreenStormCloud]

23. It was being developed to drop on Berlin.

That war ended before it could be used. We didn't have any qualms about Dresden.

[Orrex]

3. If we're talking about bombing them again, I certainly don't support that.

What kind of monster are you?

[el_bryanto]

7. Well I would think that would be clear - the bombing kind of monster. nt

[dipsydoodle]

5. They were used to make a statement

We're the big I am - now fucking watch it.

[rrneck]

6. Killing people is always wrong

no matter why or how. Don't expect those fine moral distinctions regarding the methods of warfare to be at the forefront of peoples thought. It was a fight, and that's how fights get won.

[zipplewrath]

10. Which immoral act was the alternative

War is a collection of immoral acts. The whole question tends to rest upon whether one wants to pick and choose which immoral acts should, or should not be committed. War is immoral. After that it's just a question of style.

[The Link]

11. Fully support. Black and white.

[hlthe2b]

12. I've never thought it fair nor particularly representative to render a hindsight opinion.

I can say without reservation that I opposed the Iraq War--an event I was fully present for and which I can put in context... Obviously I still oppose it.

I think it is very hard to say what one might think about an event and related decision one never experienced, during a time one never lived.

I've had occasion to visit/work in some of the sites in the Pacific that tourists don't tend to find--but aging WWII seek out one last time--to remember. Through them I learned some of the horror that even Spielberg and Hanks haven't captured on film. That doesn't excuse the horror of HIroshima and Nagasaki, by any means, nor that of Dresden, but it does underscore how damn difficult that decision would be for those in power at the time, versus those of us not then alive, but looking back.

[MrSlayer]

14. Other: Who cares?

It was nearly 70 fucking years ago, it's nothing more than historical event to me. I didn't live through it, it has had zero effect on my life and will never have an effect on it. It's not like anything can be done about it now. Seriously, who cares?

[oldhippie]

15. +1

[branford]

19. If you believe it had no effect on your life, I truly pity you.

We study and understand history in order that we may attempt to avoid the mistakes of the past.

The decisions that led to the bombing ushered in the Cold War, and innumerable political, economic and cultural choices that effect life to this day for us all.

I wonder, do you feel the same way about the Holocaust or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?

If so, you teachers have failed you.

[MrSlayer]

21. Save your pity for someone that wants or needs it.

I understand the historical implications quite well thank you.

I just don't see the point of agonizing and handwringing over it. What's done is done. Should we learn from history? Of course. Will we? Haha! Not likely.

[LWolf]

17. I oppose the bombing,

and of course it is not black and white.

[Marrah_G]

18. I think it was a horrible thing

But I can understand why others feel differently.

[One_Life_To_Give]

20. only the sith deal in absolutes

We argue because there is no perfect answer. Choice A these people die and Choice B those people die. It's an imperfect world and I am glad that I didn't have to make the decision. Officially the cold war hadn't started but it might as well have. The allies were perhaps Frenimies? I doubt it was any one particular thing that tipped the scales despite that being how it's remembered. We clearly had goals to block Soviet expansion that were as important as ending the war.

In the end I will settle for some people were lost so that we would learn to avoid creating an even greater evil later. Would it have been Korea, Vietnam, Czechoslovakia? Who knows but it would have been bigger than 6kt.

[tumtum]

24. Black and white for me.

My dad was a Marine slated for the first invasion wave and probably wouldn't have survived and I wouldn't be here to post.
I'm not elated it happened, but I'm also positive it was the right decision.

[JVS]

25. Do you realize that your definition of black and white issue logically forces...

the person to also say they "can see how other can come to a different conclusion"?

If people who disagree with your position are being willfully obtuse or are morally compromised then you must be able to see how they came to the that conclusion. It's a result of them being willfully obtuse or morally compromised.

[jberryhill]

26. "It's a result of them being willfully obtuse or morally compromised"

Well, most of DU reaches that conclusion with regard to anyone who disagrees with them about anything.

[el_bryanto]

27. I guess it could have been made more clear

When I say see how others can come to a different conclusion - I meant see how other intelligent moral people can come to a different conclusion. If the issue is black and white, than reasonable people should be one side of the issue.

Bryant

[joshcryer]

28. I don't know.

If it's true that the Soviets ended the war perhaps it would've been better had Stalin got a nuke shoved up his totalitarian ass.