the japanese they wanted to take over the phillipines and unprovokedly attacked US bases. The bombs were a retaliation and a neccesary evil, many more lives would have been lost if that hadnt happened. Lets hope nukes are never used again
@@lucianoarebalo41 You mean the Japanese attacked military targets? Yes, that happens in war. And the US had been helping the Allies before the US officially entered the war so it wasn't unprovoked. What the US did as a response are war crimes.
@@rolandgonzales3343 We don't use them now because everybody has them, and they are much bigger and their use is harder to justify, the little boy was weak and stopped the deaths of millions, one nuke NOW would result in a regional/global holocaust tsar bomba for example.
@@jamesyount2423 United States only intervention in the Pacific for Japan was freezing their American assets and embargoes Japan cared less about what was going on in Europe Japan thought the USA was going to interfere with them directly so tried to destroy the American navy at a suprise attack, what the United States did while being proactive to a regard isn't enough to warrant a suprise bombing without a formal declaration of war.
China, Russia, Iran and North Korea should enhance their nuclear capabilities. This is the best strategy to eliminate the possibilities of being destroyed by the US like it did to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
mohammed aidara we wouldn’t just attack them anyway because in probably less than one day North Korea could completely take out the South Korean capital who is one of our greatest allies.
Exactly, but what worse is that the Japanese still want to fight and refused to surrender even after the Second Atomic Bomb and were still committed to winning or total annihilation.
@@Camisthenics the people could have protested, much like the US citizens in Vietnam. The public lost the will to fight which caused the Government to pull out
@@michaeltaylor2121 actually both cities were major hubs of manufacturing and construction to support the Japanese war effort, the two cities were almost completely unscathed by the war until August 1945, destroying both cities had an astounding crippling impact on the abilities of the Japanese to continue the war, and certainly played a big role in their capitulation. They were both recognised as important military targets, though the civilian death toll is definitely a very upsetting repercussion of the bombings.
@@usersrt46flooding of china killed millions. The comfort women from Korea are still waiting for an apology. How many civilians were killed from 1900-1945 in east asia from imperial Japan?
@@samueljohnston3931 Japan has already apologized more than five times on that matter. This has been acknowledged by the President of South Korea as well. So, why do people only seem to know about Japan's war crimes and never mention the war crimes of South Korea and China, such as the Jeju massacre, the Bodo Yeonmaeng Sageon incident, the Tongzhou mutiny, and the Uyghur genocide?
@@usersrt46 jeju massacre was also horrible. But maybe not as many people know about it because 30 thousand died as opposed to over 6 million with the Japanese invasions and flooding of mainland China. Thats probably why more people know about it. And Japanese still whine about comfort women memorials put up in American cities. Japan government never gave money to the victims. Germany has outlawed the swatzika but you can still see the rising sun flag waved proudly at international soccer matches. No country is innocent of war crimes. But some ignore their history.
@@sergiopabon1387 True. I dont think it was about us'. My worry is that it got deleted beause of the original comment. My reply to your last reply-comment btw was this : 'foreign aid' hahaha!.. thats like robbing ten dollars and dropping back a nickel and call it 'aid'. You need to read more, research more and step out of that silly tiny paradigm bro. Start with watching 'stealing From Africa. Why Poverty?' Please check that out. And no need to hold on to your beliefs out of fear for dissonance. Just let it go, and know that what is, is... Anyway, i hope you watch that documentary to start with.. and learn from it and expand your view. Like we all need to to do, every day. peace
Yeah I've tried to comment on this video a lot of times and my comments are almost instantly removed. If you have a different opinion than them then you are not allowed to speak.
My Grandfather went to Hiroshima 2 days after the bomb was dropped because of his position in the Army and by doing so he was exposed to toxic level of radiation! My grandfather became what is known as The Atomic Veterans aka "Forgotten Veterans" The military has long denied my grandfather's existence and by 1989 he was DEAD! Today, The U.S Miltary is giving "HUSH MONEY" but only to the remaining living Atomic Veterans;however, most of The Atomic Veterans died in the Mid 70s through the Mid 90s! And considering how many health problems my grandfather had and his descentant $90,000 isn't good enough!!
Never even told the troops about the radioactivity anywhere. Never told the Japanese about it as a ton of people went to rebuild and then also got radiation poisoning. Terrible
America lied to America about all their deliberate Radiation of Soldiers _everywhere._ Including soldiers sent to the radiation polluted Marshall Islands and the islanders. In 1972 unprotected soldiers were made to build a plutonium landfill, 18'' concreted over. Dome's now cracking up (just like the concrete of the 1986 Chernobil sarcophagus was cracking up in 2016) The 'plutonium filled dome on Runit Island contains all the chunks of plutonium from the failed *'Castle Bravo'* nuclear test *gone very wrong* which was 1000 times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb. The sealevel's rising at the Marshall Islands - the plutonium will end up in the sea. Most of the soldiers handling the plutonium under orders were not deemed Atomic Forces, have radiation related diseases, and are not covered by health insurance by the military. It's bloody awful what happened to your dad back then. It's revolting that it's been a Govt habit to treat their own soldiers that way from the 40's and 70's all the way to the Gulf War. 😞
Conventional bombs actually were more devastating when dropped on Dresden by the Royal Airforce and United States Airforce, it was a calculated measure against a civilian population
@@_bofu Fair enough. I think its acceptable to criticize use of the nuke. However what has happened in these comment sections is peoples trying to justify every of Japan’s actions in the war which for me is disgusting. Why can’t we acknowledge Japanese crimes against humanity while simultaneously questioning if the nuke was necessary? I saw comments of peoples who tried to vindicate Japan as somehow innocent of everything while accusing USA of being the worst criminal in modern history for the nuke.
@@Zulu2020 Not a stupid question if the Jap never acknowledge the atrocities by teaching their future generations of what their country had done in WWII. For eg. history text books in Jap call the invasion of China the China Incident.
WWII was unique in that it was and remains the largest "total" war ever fought. Civilians were viewed as legitimate targets. No nation or individual was prosecuted for bombardment of civilian towns or cities.
What? Plenty of guys got tried for war crimes after WWII. A lot of the Japanese got away though due to cooperating with the US via providing data from human experiments
World War 2 was the first war in which civilian deaths were far more than combat deaths. It was also a war in which the side that killed the most people (Axis) was defeated by the side that produced the most stuff (Allies).
What the Japanese did to the city of Nanking was a war crime but when I was in the military and I was stationed over in Japan they downplay it to the point that they don't even talk about it, as a matter of fact they consider themselves victims because of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
yea they edited their history textbooks to either not mention it or gloss over japanese military aggression completely. many young japanese people know so little about ww2 that they don't even recognize what the swastika is
While you're correct that they do downplay they're own atrocities committed during the war, that still doesn't make it okay what we did to those people. They didn't deserve it
The US is a nation built upon the graves of millions of Native Americans. It raised its economy by kidnapping and enslaving millions of people from other part of the globe. It has committed all kinds of atrocity and crimes against humanity during its history. These stuff have also been dramatically downplayed in the official narrative as well as textbooks.
@@NO1xANIMExFAN think of a hundred and fifty ways you could do horrible things and I bet you the Japanese could triple that of the things they did in the city of Nanking. And that's the truth RUclips and I don't give a damn if you don't like the truth.
Yes! Also what Japan did at Pearl harbor and WWⅡ was wrong too. As a Japanese , I am really sad about seeing many english comments saying that Atomic bomb was right. We don't need any apologies, But I hope more and more Americans learn the evilness of nuclear bomb, and what happened to people living in Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. Also, we Japanese should know about , what we did at Pearl Harbor and WWⅡ was not right too! We don't need war anymore.
Yes the atomic bomb wasn't right, but it was necessary to bring an end to the war. Why should Japan get away with murdering millions of innocent people across Asia and not experience any retaliation. America should not apologise for dropping the atomic bomb.
Neither was Unit 731, Nanking, Manchuria, Korea, Pearl Harbor, etc. Japanese imperialism did not just commit war crimes, they committed crimes against humanity A land invasion would have killed millions of people, it was the best decision to make at the time, Japan was not surrendering.
Also, General McArthur gave inmunity to the imperial family, so the government responsible for those crimes is the same government that rules today in Japan, unlike today's Germany who is still apolozing for Nazi Germany...
@@handsome_steff7951 it's a lot easier to say that 77 years later Japan was the last country standing in a war that killed 60 million people and lasted 6 years they were completely beaten, but didn't want to surrender because it was seen as dishonor. The U.S could've A. Invaded japan, causing a potentially even higher death count for both civilians and military, for both sides B. not use the atomic bombs, they tried that on tokyo, killed around 100k people ( more than the two bombs individually), and still, no surrender C. Use the atomic bombs on key locations (military bases), i.e. Hiroshima and Nagasaki, limiting the potential losses because the us didn't lose any men Was it a war crime? maybe, though not at the time I don't think so, but was it necessary? probably
@markaron9356 if the other side had won, we can look at games like wolfenstein to give a glimpse of what would have happened had things turned out differently.
Doing war crimes and stating that 'it speeds up the path to peace' legalizes all atrocities of the war. I mean every country can use that as a justification. The ends doesn't justify the means.
@@spduff11 --- Doing war crimes and stating that 'it speeds up the path to peace' legalizes all atrocities of the war. Wayne Patterson --- The air bombardments of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were lawful acts of war which did not qualify as war crimes. So, you accusations are false accusations with no basis in the laws of war.
@sethevans5318 you mean be the better man by sending massive amounts of money to help the most absolutely horrifying empire since the Mongols killed 10% of all humans immediately after the war were they committed some of the worst warcrimes in modern history back to back
@@_bofu it is but if nobody attacks you after your eye for an eye nothing happens,in war invading back is the least you can do because what else are you meant to do give up all your land?
It isn’t a matter of holding an individual nation responsible, but the bigger picture of the world’s elite class and political leaders clashing while leaving the every day civilian, just trying to get by day to day, to suffer and lose their own and their children’s lives
While I agree with you in principle, that ship has long since sailed. If we are establishing courts to Judge Bosnia/Serbia/Croatia etc, then we judge the US in those same courts. It's not like the dictators are the ones paying reparations anyway. It's billions of $ coming out of the working classes of a country recovering from war.
I think it’s wrong to kill anyone. That being said Hiroshima and Nagasaki were terrible tragedies as well as the occupation of Nanking (were Japan killed and massacred the Chinese)Japan and the US both committed horrible crimes during WW2. Killing soldiers is one thing and killing civilians is another.
LeMay leaflets Read this carefully as it may save your life or the life of a relative or friend. In the next few days, some or all of the cities named on the reverse side will be destroyed by American bombs. These cities contain military installations and workshops or factories which produce military goods. We are determined to destroy all of the tools of the military clique which they are using to prolong this useless war. But, unfortunately, bombs have no eyes. So, in accordance with America's humanitarian policies, the American Air Force, which does not wish to injure innocent people, now gives you warning to evacuate the cities named and save your lives. America is not fighting the Japanese people but is fighting the military clique which has enslaved the Japanese people. The peace which America will bring will free the people from the oppression of the military clique and mean the emergence of a new and better Japan. You can restore peace by demanding new and good leaders who will end the war. We cannot promise that only these cities will be among those attacked but some or all of them will be, so heed this warning and evacuate these cities immediately.
Hiroshima leaflets (main text) TO THE JAPANESE PEOPLE: America asks that you take immediate heed of what we say on this leaflet. We are in possession of the most destructive explosive ever devised by man. A single one of our newly developed atomic bombs is actually the equivalent in explosive power to what 2000 of our giant B-29s can carry on a single mission. This awful fact is one for you to ponder and we solemnly assure you it is grimly accurate. We have just begun to use this weapon against your homeland. If you still have any doubt, make inquiry as to what happened to Hiroshima when just one atomic bomb fell on that city. Before using this bomb to destroy every resource of the military by which they are prolonging this useless war, we ask that you now petition the Emperor to end the war. Our president has outlined for you the thirteen consequences of an honorable surrender. We urge that you accept these consequences and begin the work of building a new, better and peace-loving Japan. You should take steps now to cease military resistance. Otherwise, we shall resolutely employ this bomb and all our other superior weapons to promptly and forcefully end the war. EVACUATE YOUR CITIES. ATTENTION JAPANESE PEOPLE. EVACUATE YOUR CITIES. Because your military leaders have rejected the thirteen part surrender declaration, two momentous events have occurred in the last few days. The Soviet Union, because of this rejection on the part of the military has notified your Ambassador Sato that it has declared war on your nation. Thus, all powerful countries of the world are now at war with you. Also, because of your leaders' refusal to accept the surrender declaration that would enable Japan to honorably end this useless war, we have employed our atomic bomb. A single one of our newly developed atomic bombs is actually the equivalent in explosive power to what 2000 of our giant B-29s could have carried on a single mission. Radio Tokyo has told you that with the first use of this weapon of total destruction, Hiroshima was virtually destroyed. Before we use this bomb again and again to destroy every resource of the military by which they are prolonging this useless war, petition the emperor now to end the war. Our president has outlined for you the thirteen consequences of an honorable surrender. We urge that you accept these consequences and begin the work of building a new, better, and peace-loving Japan. Act at once or we shall resolutely employ this bomb and all our other superior weapons to promptly and forcefully end the war. EVACUATE YOUR CITIES.
@@dienomo the us mainly wanted to scare the Russians. The Japanese military committed the nanjing massacre because they were frustrated with the unexpected amount of resistance the Chinese put up and wanted to exact revenge on the civilians for that. This is not by any means a justification but an explanation.
Read a book jackass. Not only did the Japanese war council and the emperor ask for this it could have been a lot worse. Imagine the Allies invade the home island. Not only do millions of Japanese die (including brainwashed six year olds), the war goes on for two more years. Keep in mind the US detonated the bomb where they did to minimize loss of life.
@@Brodie--lw6eb They detonated them in cities focusing on civilian casualties. By this time, they had realized that indiscriminate bombing in the hope of causing terror was actually not effective in countries with such authoritarian governments (as had been demonstrated in Germany). They knew, by this point, that it was more effective to focus on industrial and military targets. They originally stated that they would launch the bombs first on these targets, or in a demonstration before the Japanese government. While they may have stated that their goal was minimal loss of innocent life, this simply does not align with history. One of the major motivations here was the entrance of the Soviet Union in the war. Not to mention that the Japanese government themselves stated that they would surrender, if they could keep the imperial office in some form. The Japanese were not intent on winning at this point. They wanted to keep their god, their emperor, alive and safe from U.S occupation. The u.s nearly allowed this concession, but decided against it, likely because by that point the S.U would have been in the war, and would have bargaining power. The primary goal of the use of the bombs was larger than the conflict in Japan. Obviously, that doesn't mean that they didn't influence the course of the war.
@@peanuttasty247 I absolutely agree dropping the bombs when they did was to keep the Soviets away from the bargaining table. Had they let the war go on to the point of home island land invasion maybe the Soviets are no longer “allies”. Two different ideologies invading one country, who gets to write the new constitution? Hmmmmm
History is written by the victors. Gen Lemay targeted innocent civilians in the firebombing of tokyo stated "if japan had one the war i would be charged with war crimes."
To determine what is right and what is wrong, it's essential to see "who did it/doing it" because the rule is, some people do wrong but it's right, some people do right but it's wrong! That's how planet Earth is running!
unfortunately for the world some "humans" still "believe" it was necessary and even have ossified "justification" for it. one of the reason the world is still in a bad place despite the evidence is because of these "humans" their "beliefs" and their propaganda.
@@jimjumaa2277 most people are devastated and have our eyes open for those "humans" and their anti humanity nuclear weapons positions and their anti humanity arguments that keep sensible informed people asking those anti humanity "humans" the same question......will you concede that what was done to our fellow humans was a war crime? we keep asking.....and we will until they concede....
Lets not forget when they attacked Pearl harbor not only did they kill military members they killed civilians and honestly Japanese war crimes was way worse than ours we dropped the nuke to end war and have peace what was japan doing trying to take over the western hemisphere
“Aerial bombardment for the purpose of terrorizing the civilian populations or destroying or damaging private property not of military character, or of injuring non-combatants, is prohibited”. Article XXII of the Hague Convention of 1923 I like how people just throw shit out of their mouth without actually reading international law to define if it is or not a warcrime
“Aerial bombardment for the purpose of terrorizing the civilian populations or destroying or damaging private property not of military character, or of injuring non-combatants, is prohibited”. Article XXII of the Hague Convention of 1923 I like how people just throw shit out of their mouth without actually reading international law to define if it is or not a warcrime Wayne Patterson --- Note how The Hague Draft Rules of Air Warfare of 1922-1923 were rejected and never adopted or ratifies by the member States because the rules proposed by the armchair lawyers were deemed to be too unrealistic to be implemented in an actual war. Consequently, the draft rules did not become a positive international law. Even if the draft rules had been adopted, they authorized the air bombardment of "a military objective...military forces, military works, military establishments or depots, manufacturing plants constituting important and well-known centres for the production of arms, ammunition or characterized military supplies, lines of communication or of transport which are used for military purposes." Note, the MARK I Little Boy atomic bomb was used to attack the military objective known as the Imperial Japanese Army Second General Army and Headquarters and other military objectives located within Hiroshima; and the MARK III Fat Man atomic bomb was used to attack the Mitsubishi Arsenals and many other military objectives within Nagasaki. The destruction of those military objectives did "constitute an obvious military advantage for the belligerent" and led to a prompt Japanese surrender that ended Japan's continued waging of war upon the United States and Allies as proposed by The Hague Draft Rules of Air Warfare of 1922-1923; see: Rules concerning the Control of Wireless Telegraphy in Time of War and Air Warfare. Drafted by a Commission of Jurists at the Hague, December 1922 - February 1923. Part II: Rules of Air Warfare#Chapter IV: Hostilities#Bombardment. - Art. 24. Art. 24. 1. An air bombardment is legitimate only when is directed against a military objective, i.e. an objective whereof the total or partial destruction would constitute an obvious military advantage for the belligerent; 2. Such bombardment is legitimate only when directed exclusively against the following objectives: military forces, military works, military establishments or depots, manufacturing plants constituting important and well-known centres for the production of arms, ammunition or characterized military supplies, lines of communication or of transport which are used for military purposes. 3. Any bombardment of cities, towns, villages, habitations and building which are not situated in the immediate vicinity of the operations of the land forces, is forbidden. Should the objectives specified in paragraph 2 be so situated that they could not be bombed but that an undiscriminating bombardment of the civil population would result therefrom, the aircraft must abstain from bombing; 4. In the immediate vicinity of the operations of the land forces, the bombardment of cities, towns, villages, habitations and buildings is legitimate, provided there is a reasonable presumption that the military concentration is important enough to justify the bombardment, taking into account the danger to which the civil population will thus be exposed; 5. The belligerent State is bound to pay compensation for damage caused to persons or property, in violation of the provisions of this Article, by any one of his agents or any one of its military forces.
@@vince8901 War is a crime against humanity, for whatever it is worth. Although in this case the bombings weren't technically considered a war crime as there wasn't an internationally recognized treaty or anything regarding strategic bombing and it was widely carried out across all sides on all fronts of the war. Just another tragedy of human barbarity, but that is the whole thing about war, isn't it? it's not a duel.
@@victoriacocoz Of course it is. But does that make the civilian bombings any less of a war crime? Incidentally, the US never prosecuted the Unit 731 scientists. They were treated very well indeed by them.
@@EsJam_es Unfortunately that is not true. Both bombs were aimed at civilian areas. You only need to check how many civilian casualties there are to confirm this.
@@dashong8912 If they didn't nucked the cities, more casualties will come out because of the Operation downfall. "In late July 1945, the War Department provided an estimate that the entire Downfall operations would cause between 1.7 to 4 million U.S. casualties, including 400-800,000 U.S. dead, and 5 to 10 million Japanese dead.7 Jan 2021"
Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of Chinese, Korean, Taiwanese, Filipinos, and more that suffered at the hands of Japan and the hundreds of thousands more than would have suffered had the war went on for years after 1945(The war would have went way longer had it not been for the nukes). Not to mention the hundreds of American soldiers AND Japanese soldiers + civilians that would have died had it not been for the nukes. The idiotic take of Westerns who have the privilege of living in the 21st century who don't realize the true gravity of the situation astounds me.
Mike Louw --- 250 000 innocent people sorry that is a massive war crime but yes the US did it so it is okay Wayne Patterson --- Your comment is a lie, and you know it is a lie because you already know that you cannot and will not quote and cite so much as a single valid and criminal law of war which prohibited the American use of the atomic bombs to attack those military targets and thereby save tens of millions of Allied and Japanese lives. Your comment is a lie because the official estimate of 110,000 plus deaths is nowhere near your grossly false claim of "250 000 innocent people." Your comment is also lie because the atomic bombs did not kill "innocent [Japanese] people. All of the Japanese casualties were combatants, because all of the Japanese people regardless of age, sex, and condition were conscripted, armed, and/or trained to serve as suicidal combatants in the service of the Japanese armies by August 1945. So, with respect to the Laws of War and international law, there were no longer any "innocent" Japanese people in Japan by August 1945. Your comment was a lie, because The American acts of war cannot constitute a "war crime" as you falsely accused until and unless a criminal Law/s of War have been violated. The Japanese acts of war did constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity due to their numerous criminal violations of the Laws of War and international laws, conventions, and treaties.
Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of Chinese, Korean, Taiwanese, Filipinos, and more that suffered at the hands of Japan and the hundreds of thousands more than would have suffered had the war went on for years after 1945(The war would have went way longer had it not been for the nukes). Not to mention the hundreds of American soldiers AND Japanese soldiers + civilians that would have died had it not been for the nukes. The idiotic take of Westerns who have the privilege of living in the 21st century who don't realize the true gravity of the situation astounds me.
@@ozymandias8523no it isn’t. Hiroshima was a city with military institutions. Regardless a ground invasion of Japan would have killed more. Remember we are talking about ww2 so massive casualties are a given
@@Zoink888 Japan already did, most of ww2 movies the enemy is Germany & japan played the victim of nuclear weapons. Propaganda against Japan stopped after the bombs.
It’s a bit more complex than that. Full scale invasion of Japan would have undoubtedly killed more Japanese. Not to mention hundreds of thousands of US solders. Keep in mind. The US had been fire bombing Japanese cities long before the atomic bomb. Japan wasn’t giving up.
No, Japan is most definitely not innocent in their history. Yes, the US committed a war crime against Japan. This video is not about what Japan has done; it is about what the US has done. The US still perceives itself as morally superior. They are in for a very rude awakening, which I suspect has already begun.
@@matttheripper2652"LMAO" ? "Cry harder." ?? I guess I don't communicate with fourth graders that often but the ones I have interacted with are more coherent than you. Probably more intelligent too, considering they don't live in the Deluded States of America.
Troops and civilians are both innocent lives. Millions died to war, Hiroshima shouldn't get special treatment because they got messed up harder for starting a war senselessly attacking pearl Harbour for no reason.
Let us forget that Japan refused to negotiate for peace and that they were involved in a brutal war with china for over 10 years, leaving the league of nations after being condemned for its war crimes. Oh, and they attacked the U.S.A first. Say what you want, but let's keep in mind what the considerations were that prompted the bomb.
Consider this: Japan had killed 20 million civilians in China alone by 1945, not including civilians in other parts of Asia and allied combat deaths. The Japanese worked POWs to death on projects like the Burma railway, beat them to death, cut their heads off and subjected them to medical experiments. It was estimated that up to 1 million casualties were expected in the invasion of Japan against a highly hostile population with up to a quarter of which drafted into the IJ army. Every island the US had captured was done so with high casualties since the Japanese almost exclusively fought to the death. You have a weapon that can destroy the enemies ability and will to fight. What do you do?
Exactly, but what worse is that the Japanese still want to fight and refused to surrender even after the Second Atomic Bomb and were still committed to winning or total annihilation.
It wasn't the ruling class, it was the whole country. The general populace was so brainwashed that they jumped off cliffs when the Americans advanced through Okinawa. Thousands upon thousands of soldiers charged headfirst into machine gun fire in banzai charges. If we had invaded the mainland, we would have been met by swarms of women and children with bamboo spears.
Art Thou Dull I know, and the point I am raising is, by your words, Hiroshima being a military base means it’s justified to nuclear bomb it, isn’t it interesting that the US did Not do so for the other military bases of Japan, but used regular bombings in those places.
Art Thou Dull It appears you have conceded your previous point about Hiroshima being a military base. Now, whether a country surrender or not has nothing to do with whether an action is a war crime or not,
It's a bit more complex then that. If you see the wider picture, there was no "good" side, only colonial empires. In history winners are the "good guys" and losers are the "bad guys". Ideologys are an another story, which made possible by humilating WW1 "peace" (mean truce). If USA had been the good, they offer a peace when japanese was defeated, instead of nuke them. They wanted japan to capitulate, to be able to force their own interests. (Yes, Japan was defeated they only hold the main islands with industry bombed to the ground, but they would never capitulate whitout total occupation) Every side commited some war crimes, every nation admitted it. Except the USA, you heard it, it was OK until you don't apology. WTF?!
@Anatiest Do you think Japan was innocent?? They also committed atrocities. If anything, the blame falls more on Japan since they were warned and asked to surrender before the dropping of the bombs. They chose not to and continued fighting. Clearly a decision based on pride and a lack of care for the civilians that would then pay the price. Before you expect the US government to take into account Japanese civilians, what about the Japanese government and Emperor doing everything they can to avoid something like this?? They didn't do that though and that should show you just who exactly was on the wrong side of history. This is the same government that worked alongside Nazis and also the same government the supported and gave army personnel to Unit 731, who committed some of the most vile and disturbing war crimes you've ever heard. Would you have preferred they win? Don't try it dear.
Not the same bombing a military base than a whole city. Civilians were innocent. The US could have wiped out all the military power using nukes, but they decided to bomb cities. The most stupid decision.
you dont drop it on buildings and equipment it just doesnt work that way 1 bomb=1 whole city no matter which city has the most military the whole city and everyone in it burns....
The bomb btw doesnt hit the ground when it explodes, it explodes mid air, also Hiroshima and Nagisaki were cities that had military building and stuff.
@@______-795 Dont forget it was war....any military that places it central command among civilians places that population at risk....using people as human shields gets people killed...Hiroshima was also very important from a military perspective since it was home to the 2nd Army Headquarters, which were responsible for the defense of southern Japan. It was an important center of storage, communications, and assembly of soldiers.
@@allanjones1680 so, you can argue everyone in Washington DC are also human shields? Whether they had military buildings or not doesn't matter, they knew if they dropped the bombs, it was going to kill many civilians and they did it anyways, that's a clear intention to kill civilians, it may not have been their primary goal, but they knew it was going to happen
The bomb was dropped to save lives. Don't be fooled. Japan civilians would have fought to the last and we'd have lost 100s of thousands trying to invade.
That is why Operation Downfall was already in place and waiting for the go ahead. Had the bomb failed it is very possible that Japan would have chosen to fight on. Some people discard the fact that this was a contingency plan for the allies. Even though Trinity had worked, there was always a certain chance Little Boy could fail. The crew members of the Enola Gay took off with an unarmed bomb. Once they were in the air and away from Tinian they arm the bomb in two stages. The first one being the insertion of the core and then later the swapping of the firing pins. My point is that even though these men were scientists, they are still humans. Humans are error prone. A failure would have been a huge slap in the face to the morale of the Allied military including the US.
It definitely was, and we all know it.. *now.*. At the time it just seemed to be a way to end the war, not thinking not comprehending its horrors of the radiation.
@Hunie u know who got killed with that nuke?! Kids, old man,pregnant woman and others Theyre unarmed civilians They're not kill people But got killed by the USA In my perspective This is a warning from the usa for the other countries "if you mess up with us you dead"
For the longest, I used ask myself how can we(U.S.) be so heartless? Then I learned about Nanking and unit 731 and I never felt bad about it ever again.
@@Unholy_Triforce Support the government, get rekt. Japan entered WWII thinking it would be the Master of East Asia. And they carried out some of the most heinous crimes possible with the support of the populace as a whole. And now they claim we were the bad guys. Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.
@@squeaky206 The innocents never really had a choice. Guns were not available to citizens regularly. They were conditioned to follow thier country without question as well. Similar to a parent conditioning a child to believe a specific thing for 18 years
@@Unholy_Triforce I'm sure the Japanese thought the same thing when they threw babies onto their bayonets in cities and villages in their occupied territories, or occasionally slaughtered entire settlements. Let's be real son, the Japanese would've used the nuke on us if they had the means and the ability to deliver it. They would kill way more civillians with way less afterthought. Every civillian in war is a potential combatant or saboteur, even the younger ones.
And the fact the Japan had planned to used every man, woman, and child to fend off a mainland invasion. They were insane. Still are, just suppressed now.
Depends on the situation, prevailing at the particular point in time,and the decision maker. It's to one conscience one have to Live and answer with for all time.
The nazis were already defeated, and the Japanese were already declining rapidly. The only reason it got used is because it got made and the US wanted to test their new toy.
When they bring all the Japanese war crimes to the table, and the country actually acknowledged it happen and apologize then we can talk about nuclear bomb been a war crime.
@@gokthetaxman6622 ...No point of apologies when Japanese officials STILL go to shrines that honor war criminals, deny or whitewash war crimes, take no responsibilities... ...And leave their younger generations clueless to say things like, "whatever atrocities were committed, we don't care, our politicians say they're lies anyhow... Anyhow, War is bad, let's just avoid it."
This video is out of the context of the war. When you consider the hell of combat fighting the Japanese and their war crimes that we knew of at the time we were absolutely justified in their use. Still it doesn’t make any less tragic.
This whole idea that war should be 'fair and friendly'is asinine. In the past 60 years it seems every nation is pushing for 'fair warfare'. War is war, there is supposed to be no boundaries or segregation of peoples. That is why its more important than ever to reach solutions to wars instead of make them 'safer.' I have great respect for our veterans and service members, but they days of both war and this ideology that we can make it more socially acceptable by being nicer should be over! War should be the same disgusting, repulsive, unwated suffering it has always been, and we shouldnt try to make it more 'acceptable in public opinion.'
@@nnass262 --- Pretty sure that targeting cities full of civilians is a massive war crime Wayne Patterson --- Wrong...and dead wrong to be more precise. The war crime, if any, was any Japanese use of civilians to shield military objectives without acknowledging their participation in the hostilities were no longer protected by the laws of war. The Commander's Handbook on the Law of Land Warfare Law of War Manual...5.16 PROHIBITION ON USING PROTECTED PERSONS AND OBJECTS TO SHIELD, FAVOR, OR IMPEDE MILITARY OPERATIONS Parties to a conflict may not use the presence or movement of protected persons or objects: (1) to attempt to make certain points or areas immune from seizure or attack; (2) to shield military objectives from attack; or (3) otherwise to shield or favor one’s own military operations or to impede the adversary’s military operations. Protected Persons and Objects. In particular, the civilian 5.16.1 population, protected persons under the GC, POWs, fixed medical establishments and medical units, parlementaires and other persons protected by a flag of truce, and cultural property are protected persons and objects that may not be used for the above purposes. Although persons and objects that are protected by the law of war may not be used in these ways, this rule does not prohibit a party from using what would otherwise be a civilian object for military purposes and thereby converting it to a military objective that is not protected by the law of war. For example, a building that previously was a civilian object could be used for military purposes (including as cover) and would not implicate this rule because it would no longer be a protected object. Similarly, this rule does not prohibit persons who would otherwise be civilians from participating in hostilities or otherwise assuming the risks inherent in supporting military operations.
@@waynepatterson5843 yes, but the Japanese were not using civilians as shields in Hiroshima, under the rules of the war intentionally harming civilians was a war crime. It is true that this was a necessary evil and that when you break the rules of war you are no longer protected by them, but that doesn't mean that the USA should not apologize for what they did.
This is the mentality of people with no honor and mercy for human life. War is between combatants without involving the elderly, children and non combatants.
Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of Chinese, Korean, Taiwanese, Filipinos, and more that suffered at the hands of Japan and the hundreds of thousands more than would have suffered had the war went on for years after 1945(The war would have went way longer had it not been for the nukes). Not to mention the hundreds of American soldiers AND Japanese soldiers + civilians that would have died had it not been for the nukes. The idiotic take of Westerns who have the privilege of living in the 21st century who don't realize the true gravity of the situation astounds me.
Well it is because "killing civilian". Even if it "not consider as a war crime" there's still "The fire bombing of tokyo". Wayne Patterson --- Those air bombardments were lawul acts of war and not war crimes.
@@Silvergalaxy7383 So, Japan committed war crimes and now everybody else can commit war crimes because of that? The Nuke killed WOMEN AND CHILDREN, do you get that?
I think the more important and intreaging question would be "was it necessary?" killing hundreds of thousands of civilians is definitely immoral even if they belong to a nation that was commiting war crimes at the time (let's not pretend Japan is blameless ) but the US claims it was justified because this cruel act supposedly saved more lives than it took , if your bringing this to prevent the use of more nuclear bombs than I'm with you but if you're just digging up America's war crimes just to ask for an apology I think it's pointless as both countries are guilty of too many war crimes to count just like most countries of the world so let's not be hypocrites and pretend that the US is alone in this , either call everyone out for their shit or no one
The argument is often that the bomb would have been what had prompted Japan to surrender. It wasn't. More people had been killed in fire-bombings of other cities. What made Japan surrender to the US was that Japan had been losing big to the USSR in the North, and surrendering to the US was considered the lesser of two evils.
@@FindecanorNotGmail we will never know for sure. the imperial japanese command was full of mad men who would've pushed forever until the entire country was bankrupt. there is one view that civilian deaths did nothing to move the imperial commanders (although it may have prompted the royals to act more independently). with that in mind... why _TWO_ bombs? why not one bomb in a far less populated area first? if the US chose a symbolic bomb site - say Mt Fuji - and destroyed it with minimal human casualties... the same intended effect could've been achieved. they can then ramp it up to a _military_ target next - say, a navy dock, after the same dropping of leaflets to warn soldiers of the imminent destruction. a civilian target was always morally bankrupt. the ends do not justify the means.
This what-aboutism is silly. The facts are that Japan has been called out for decades, went through war-crime trials, and has paid a price for the atrocities they committed, acting like they haven't is just you being ignorant. On the other hand, is the United States who is only considered to be some bastion of all that is good that is somehow incapable of committing any wrong and has never been held to account for atrocities it committed like choosing densely populated cities to demonstrate their new nuclear weapons instead of the countryside as a show of potential force.
@@ProjectShamrock "this what-aboutism is silly" - proceeds to apply what-aboutism in a self-defeating argument. they didn't "pay a price for the atrocities they committed" because those were addressed in the war crimes tribunal. if you assign "justice" without using the proper institutional channels, then anyone can seek vengeance however they like. terrorists think they are making the west "pay the price for their atrocities" by killing random civilians. the saudis think the same for yemen. the KKK thinks the same for non-whites. the UN's ICJ is a very high ideal and most countries refuse to submit 100% to it; but it is the closest we can get to an impartial justice organ at the international level. the war tribunals are similar.
Deploying weapons in the service of winning a war is a necessary evil, but massacring two whole towns full of innocent people who wanted nothing but the end to the war is beyond vile.
Those who justify the atomic bombing in Hiroshima/Nagasaki are not qualified to criticize Putin and Hitler. It was a premeditated and large-scale crime that indiscriminately killed civilians.
@mike flames ？ That is no justification for massacring Hiroshima/Nagasaki citizens. War is a duel between soldiers of each other, civilians are not the opponents of the duel.
As a Japanese, I can say that our textbooks act a bit too much like victims. Certainly, as Japanese, we cannot forgive the atomic bombings, but it is important to think and reflect on why they happened.
@@andywehre7912 It is a war crime. It is unjustifiable. So was the attack on Pearl Harbour. The massacre in Nanjing however, no one talks about - let alone Japan.
@@j-cynsoon7088 A lot of people here mention Nanjing, and its not even a topic. Of course Nanjing also was a warcrime, but you shouldn´t relative one warcrime with another. Make a video about Nanjing and I´ll gladly share it (and if in that vid someone does a whataboutism by asking for an apology for hiroshima I´ll also speak out against that)
In my personal opinion this was a war crime, same for allied bombing of german cities like Dresden. Considering the war crimes Nazi Germany and Japan did, I kind of understand why such actions were taken, still in my opinion these were war crimes, no matter what Japan or Germany did before, because the allies knew they would kill many civilians.
@@eman2093 because the military bases were located inside civilian zones. Hiroshima was the headquarters of the 2nd General Army which was responsible of the defense of much of Southern Japan, especially Kyushu. The bomb effectively decapitated the 2nd General Army, and killed 20,000 troops. The hard truth is that there are no civilians in Imperial Japan. Everyone was expected to fight and die to defend the islands.
Back then bombing entire cities and killing enemy civilians was not was not abhorred like it is today and it certainly wasn’t regarded as a crime. In all wars when elephants clash , the grass gets trampled.
It is not a war crime. The Japanese wouldn't surrender unless a large enough consequence would occur. Beaten to submission. Japanese were brutal fighters to the very end. Dangerous enemy
@@grunt117 --- So killing innocent civilians is okay to do? K 🤡 Wayne Patterson --- Your pretense that the casualties were "innocent civilians" is a lie. The casualties were not "innocent civilians" under the Laws of War which you pretend to employ.
@@waynepatterson5843 there is no such thing as ‘law of war’. The only rules are to survive by any means necessary; that’s it. There are ‘no rules’ if your life is on the line. War is fkn awful
@@grunt117 --- there is no such thing as ‘law of war’. Wayne Patterson --- LOL! You just cannot keep from uttering yet another absurd lie. Perhaps it's because you want to continue advocating the commission of a war crime/s. Law of War Manual...5.16 PROHIBITION ON USING PROTECTED PERSONS AND OBJECTS TO SHIELD, FAVOR, OR IMPEDE MILITARY OPERATIONS...Parties to a conflict may not use the presence or movement of protected persons or objects: (1) to attempt to make certain points or areas immune from seizure or attack; (2) to shield military objectives from attack; or (3) otherwise to shield or favor one’s own military operations or to impede the adversary’s military operations... Although persons and objects that are protected by the law of war may not be used in these ways, this rule does not prohibit a party from using what would otherwise be a civilian object for military purposes and thereby converting it to a military objective that is not protected by the law of war.
Why should US apologize for the knock out blow when Japan was the initiator in pearl harbor and the aggressor? Post-war japan animations and books play themselves as a victim because of these two bombs while they never truly acknowledged and apologized to millions of Asians for their crimes. All the while still negating much more inhumane and deadlier mass killings and slaveries were ever done by themselves while there exists a concrete documents e.g.)Dissection on pregnant civilian women w/o anesthesia after raping them by unit 731 in Manchuria - for a single page out of series of books of crimes against humanity Japan is not the victim of WW2.
PEARL HARBOR WAS AGAINST OTHER SOLDIERS THAT SIGNED UP FOT THAT STUFF. WAR IS WAR. THE BOMBINGS HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI ON THE OTHER HAND KILLED HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT CIVILIANS GOING ABOUT THEIR DAY. THAT IS WAR CRIME YOU BLIND? AND THE DISSECTION, THAT WAS JAPANESE SOLDIERS, NOT CITIZENS.
@@MohamedMohamed-br1xv Are there greater numbers of Innocent civilians killed by the Japanese army or more by the US army or two atomic bombs? Read and enlighten yourself with de factos before commenting. Was the war started by US? Fashion in which civilians of many other nations killed by the Japanese imperial army is more of a bizarre horror movie. A blind man assumes the others are blind as well.
I love how they constantly comment on the US never apologizing, while Japan refuses to acknowledge or apologize for it’s outright ignoring of the Geneva convention. Japan was by far the most brutal and intentionally cruel force in the war.
Both needs to apologize for the bat sht things they did to humanity, just because one side won, doesn't make them more righteous, it just makes them just
stilldownwiththemutantunderground The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings killed between 90,000 and 146,000. The Nanking Massacre *ALONE* killed at least 200,000. And that doesn’t even count Korea or Manchuria.
Love Japan but they haven't apologized for their war crimes either. Especially in being part of the start of WW2. It's the pot calling the kettle black.
yea Ikr if they don’t apologize why TF should the United States using the bombs were justified given that they attacked first any other country would have attacked back too
2:27 of course the approval rating would go down because the people in 2005 didn’t have to face the brutality of Japanese soldiers fighting to the death for their emperor
The US is a nation built upon the graves of millions of Native Americans. It raised its economy by kidnapping and enslaving millions of people from other part of the globe. It has committed all kinds of atrocity and crimes against humanity during its history. These stuff have also been dramatically downplayed in the official narrative as well as textbooks.
The US shouldn’t ever apologize either. Japan refused to surrender even after the first bomb was dropped so they definitely weren’t ready to surrender. The entire population was preparing to fight to the death to defend Japan and the emperor who they considered a god. The US government had a responsibility to its citizens and military to protect American life and as unpopular as it is it saved American lives as well as Japanese lives. The Americans fire bombed Tokyo which I believed killed more people and then dropped a nuke and japan still refused to surrender. It wasn’t until the 2nd bomb was dropped that japan surrendered facing the potential destruction of the entire country.
"Americans may be convinced of their intention not to start a war of aggression or preventativeness. Thus, they may perhaps believe that it is superfluous to publicly announce that in the future they will not be the first to use the atomic bomb. But this country has been solemnly urged to renounce the use of the bomb, that is, to ban it, and has refused to do so unless its conditions on international control are accepted." _Albert Einstein
A lot of Americans today still think bombing civilians of Taiwan and Japan was “best decision ever made”. Their ancestors killed thousands of thousands innocent civilians, but insisted that they were no innocence in Japan. War actions were all bad. But winners can always get away with it.
@@preachinhell2580 are you dumb or misinformed? The bombings were to get Japan to surrender. Sure it’s an atrocity that civilians died but how many more would have died if the US full on invaded? It’s not even comparable but Japan wasn’t innocent either, look at their war crimes against the Chinese. Sure blame the US for bombing 2 cities but at least we weren’t dissecting humans while they were alive or freezing body parts then smashing them with a hammer to see what would happen.
Remember that it took TWO atomic bombs for the Japanese military to surrender. So even after the first one, the Japanese military/government was still intent to continue the war while knowing full well the casualties its civilians will suffer will be immense.
It was a war-crime; we attacked non-combatants and tried to lie to generations of Americans that “it was justified to save American lives”. We’ve already lost thousands of Americans, and to say “what about *insert county for *insert atrocity/incident” doesn’t change the fact that we, the United States, committed a war-crime for attacking innocent civilians.
@@grunt117 --- It was a war-crime; we attacked non-combatants and tried to lie to generations of Americans that “it was justified to save American lives”. Wayne Patterson --- On the contrary it is you who is the person publishing lies and defamatory disinformation about the atomic bombs. The atomic bombs were lawfully used to attack military objectives/targets and combatants as stated by the Laws of War and did not harm Japanese noncombatants. Law of War Manual...5.16 PROHIBITION ON USING PROTECTED PERSONS AND OBJECTS TO SHIELD, FAVOR, OR IMPEDE MILITARY OPERATIONS...Parties to a conflict may not use the presence or movement of protected persons or objects: (1) to attempt to make certain points or areas immune from seizure or attack; (2) to shield military objectives from attack; or (3) otherwise to shield or favor one’s own military operations or to impede the adversary’s military operations... Although persons and objects that are protected by the law of war may not be used in these ways, this rule does not prohibit a party from using what would otherwise be a civilian object for military purposes and thereby converting it to a military objective that is not protected by the law of war. Roman Avila --- We’ve already lost thousands of Americans, and to say “what about *insert county for *insert atrocity/incident” doesn’t change the fact that we, the United States, committed a war-crime for attacking innocent civilians. Wayne Patterson --- The atomic bombs were not used to attack "innocent civilians" as proven by the actual Laws of War. Law of War Manual...5.16 PROHIBITION ON USING PROTECTED PERSONS AND OBJECTS TO SHIELD, FAVOR, OR IMPEDE MILITARY OPERATIONS...Parties to a conflict may not use the presence or movement of protected persons or objects: (1) to attempt to make certain points or areas immune from seizure or attack; (2) to shield military objectives from attack; or (3) otherwise to shield or favor one’s own military operations or to impede the adversary’s military operations... Although persons and objects that are protected by the law of war may not be used in these ways, this rule does not prohibit a party from using what would otherwise be a civilian object for military purposes and thereby converting it to a military objective that is not protected by the law of war. "Geneva Convention (IV) Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, August 12, 1949Art. 28. The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations."
After 3 days man?? After les than 3 days they throw the 2nd bomb! It’s not enough time to assess your loses and surrender! Japan didn’t attack during these 3 days!! And 6 days after the 2nd bomb they surrender! While US was planing to throw a 3rd one
4:57 Japan was teaching their school aged kids to sharpen bamboo to stab the lesser Americans….. Japan believed their emperor was a living good….. everyone was a combative.
regardless whether it was strategically the best move or ended the war it was still a war crime, the nazis had the ability to drop chemical gas bombs on london an yet didnt
@@ScubaShark--8964 The Germans didn't use the atomic bomb because they never figured out how to build one. The tragedy of the atomic bombs is that they were not ready in Dec 1941.
Not really. Here is one that actually talks about the two bombings and why they happened. Not a bunch of hyperbole about how bad nukes are. Cheers. ruclips.net/video/l6WWHIwVk8k/видео.html
The irony is this saved more lives given a land invasion of the Japanese mainland would have been a bloodbath. Or a blockade to starve Japan into surrender. Its trendy and woke to call Truman a war criminal, but you reveal your ignorance on the matter.
Really do you know what would have happened if you didnt nuke them wow u see future but really you guys killed a lot of poeple i dont care if bombing them is better than invading but what i care about is that you guys killed them in inhumain ways imagine youre eating suddently youre son has cancer my point is we dont care if it's "an efficient way" but we care about the lost lives and injured and if U.S is really powerful why was it scared of japan a contry thats so small compared to them hmphh
Imperial Japan committed unspeakable atrocities in Asia. Perhaps the dropping of the atomic bombs was wrong, but the Japanese civilians should blame their government first.
How can a human being possibly justify incinerating 60000 people instantly. If this is your view you are very sick. I would rather lose 50000 of my countrymen's troops before incinerating innocent civilians.
@@ProfessionalCow1 the casualty’s would had been MILLIONS not 50.000. no human being wants to hurt another one but If you read history you will realized Japanese’s we’re doing kamikaze and after not having planes left that we’re planning going to the mountains and fight a guerrilla war that could have last decades. JUSTIFIED
Purposely killing civilians is always a war crime.
the japanese they wanted to take over the phillipines and unprovokedly attacked US bases. The bombs were a retaliation and a neccesary evil, many more lives would have been lost if that hadnt happened. Lets hope nukes are never used again
@@lucianoarebalo41 if nukes save lives then why should we not use them?
@@lucianoarebalo41 You mean the Japanese attacked military targets? Yes, that happens in war. And the US had been helping the Allies before the US officially entered the war so it wasn't unprovoked. What the US did as a response are war crimes.
@@rolandgonzales3343 We don't use them now because everybody has them, and they are much bigger and their use is harder to justify, the little boy was weak and stopped the deaths of millions, one nuke NOW would result in a regional/global holocaust tsar bomba for example.
@@jamesyount2423 United States only intervention in the Pacific for Japan was freezing their American assets and embargoes Japan cared less about what was going on in Europe Japan thought the USA was going to interfere with them directly so tried to destroy the American navy at a suprise attack, what the United States did while being proactive to a regard isn't enough to warrant a suprise bombing without a formal declaration of war.
One of the reason why Kim Jong-un won't give up his nuke.
@mohammed aidara hahah yes
China, Russia, Iran and North Korea should enhance their nuclear capabilities. This is the best strategy to eliminate the possibilities of being destroyed by the US like it did to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
mohammed aidara we wouldn’t just attack them anyway because in probably less than one day North Korea could completely take out the South Korean capital who is one of our greatest allies.
Anonymous America has war crimes if you didn’t know
@@margarethawinarto3931 yea ikr why get rid of them when having them saves lives
Just like the Japanese never apologize for the Nanjing Massacre.
Exactly, but what worse is that the Japanese still want to fight and refused to surrender even after the Second Atomic Bomb and were still committed to winning or total annihilation.
That’s the government not the people
@@shawnwarrynn8609The U.S. should have obliged. If you're going to be honorable in defeat, go all the way through it.
@@Camisthenics the people could have protested, much like the US citizens in Vietnam. The public lost the will to fight which caused the Government to pull out
@@K_masters If Russia invaded then Russia would have claimed part of Japan, that was part of it. The Emperor didn't care about his people,
" They say truth is the first casualty of war but who defines what is true. "
- Captain John Price
True
God
@@Gilvids god is dead
Cod fanboy had to ruin this. Take your games out of this.
@@Jenny_Myers yes they talking like they understand it. But they just copy paste it to look cool and like
People must have thought that the world was ending.
For them all it definitely did.
So many things happening. WW2 was insane, world really was changing so fast.
For the people under the bomb the world did end
The Chinese and Koreans had been thinking that since 1932
@@michaeltaylor2121 actually both cities were major hubs of manufacturing and construction to support the Japanese war effort, the two cities were almost completely unscathed by the war until August 1945, destroying both cities had an astounding crippling impact on the abilities of the Japanese to continue the war, and certainly played a big role in their capitulation.
They were both recognised as important military targets, though the civilian death toll is definitely a very upsetting repercussion of the bombings.
"History is written by the victors" - General Shepperd
"History is filled with liars" - Captain Price
@@NarutoOSTRemix True that !
The millions of dead disagree
@Christopher Strimbu chill bro it was just a statement from a frigging video game. it shows how easy it is to trigger someone these days
Thank you
"A brilliant man would find a way not to fight a war." - Isoroku Yamamoto.
Isoroku Yamamoto? An Imperial Japanese pilot?
Be for real now bro
@@ligondesenuts769 Like he had a choice back then genius
@fggonzalez5503 so he wasn't a brilliant man.
@@fggonzalez5503
So he’s contradicting his own quote
@@ligondesenuts769 Nah, he just admitting that he ain't brilliant.
Let’s turn the camera back on Japans atrocities
Finally someone who knows his stuff
We all know that, so don't speak ill of Japan one way or the other. And the people of Hiroshima are all innocent.
@@usersrt46flooding of china killed millions. The comfort women from Korea are still waiting for an apology. How many civilians were killed from 1900-1945 in east asia from imperial Japan?
@@samueljohnston3931 Japan has already apologized more than five times on that matter. This has been acknowledged by the President of South Korea as well. So, why do people only seem to know about Japan's war crimes and never mention the war crimes of South Korea and China, such as the Jeju massacre, the Bodo Yeonmaeng Sageon incident, the Tongzhou mutiny, and the Uyghur genocide?
@@usersrt46 jeju massacre was also horrible. But maybe not as many people know about it because 30 thousand died as opposed to over 6 million with the Japanese invasions and flooding of mainland China. Thats probably why more people know about it. And Japanese still whine about comfort women memorials put up in American cities. Japan government never gave money to the victims. Germany has outlawed the swatzika but you can still see the rising sun flag waved proudly at international soccer matches. No country is innocent of war crimes. But some ignore their history.
No one win in war
Both sides losses
Fact is that one losses more than other
Really
Are you sure
Im with you with no one wins a war but one loses more than another im not sure about that
Yeah. They're called the losers. You know, the gys who surrendered on the deck of The U.S.S. Missouri in Tokyo Bay?
-Tom
Nonsense. If the Nazis and the Japanese militarists had won it would have been the end of world civilization at worst, a dystopian nightmare at best.
Weird how many comments have been completely removed...one of myself, and like 5 of other people. What the hell is this?? censorhip
@@sergiopabon1387 True. I dont think it was about us'. My worry is that it got deleted beause of the original comment.
My reply to your last reply-comment btw was this : 'foreign aid' hahaha!.. thats like robbing ten dollars and dropping back a nickel and call it 'aid'.
You need to read more, research more and step out of that silly tiny paradigm bro.
Start with watching 'stealing From Africa. Why Poverty?' Please check that out.
And no need to hold on to your beliefs out of fear for dissonance. Just let it go, and know that what is, is...
Anyway, i hope you watch that documentary to start with.. and learn from it and expand your view. Like we all need to to do, every day.
peace
Yeah I've tried to comment on this video a lot of times and my comments are almost instantly removed. If you have a different opinion than them then you are not allowed to speak.
@@Stoney-Jacksman the comment you replied to got deleted to 😂
Comments are moved down the list
My Grandfather went to Hiroshima 2 days after the bomb was dropped because of his position in the Army and by doing so he was exposed to toxic level of radiation! My grandfather became what is known as The Atomic Veterans aka "Forgotten Veterans" The military has long denied my grandfather's existence and by 1989 he was DEAD! Today, The U.S Miltary is giving "HUSH MONEY" but only to the remaining living Atomic Veterans;however, most of The Atomic Veterans died in the Mid 70s through the Mid 90s! And considering how many health problems my grandfather had and his descentant $90,000 isn't good enough!!
Never even told the troops about the radioactivity anywhere. Never told the Japanese about it as a ton of people went to rebuild and then also got radiation poisoning. Terrible
America lied to America about all their deliberate Radiation of Soldiers _everywhere._ Including soldiers sent to the radiation polluted Marshall Islands and the islanders. In 1972 unprotected soldiers were made to build a plutonium landfill, 18'' concreted over. Dome's now cracking up (just like the concrete of the 1986 Chernobil sarcophagus was cracking up in 2016) The 'plutonium filled dome on Runit Island contains all the chunks of plutonium from the failed *'Castle Bravo'* nuclear test *gone very wrong* which was 1000 times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb.
The sealevel's rising at the Marshall Islands - the plutonium will end up in the sea. Most of the soldiers handling the plutonium under orders were not deemed Atomic Forces, have radiation related diseases, and are not covered by health insurance by the military.
It's bloody awful what happened to your dad back then. It's revolting that it's been a Govt habit to treat their own soldiers that way from the 40's and 70's all the way to the Gulf War.
😞
Conventional bombs actually were more devastating when dropped on Dresden by the Royal Airforce and United States Airforce, it was a calculated measure against a civilian population
@@blake9358 Dresden was bombed with fire bombs, not conventional bombs.
Yeah just like Japan, up to this day, still pushes their atrocities under the rug.
United States has absolutely nothing to apologize for.
Agreed.
😑
You sure about that?
God will make US apologize and beg for mercy
Was bayoneting babies a war crime?
Of course. The Japanese used to throw live babies into the air and bayonet them as they came down.
Teachers always told me that are no stupid questions I think I failed my first stupid question
Be the better man, don’t go for an eye for eye. 🤦♂️ retribution is childish
@@_bofu
Fair enough. I think its acceptable to criticize use of the nuke.
However what has happened in these comment sections is peoples trying to justify every of Japan’s actions in the war which for me is disgusting. Why can’t we acknowledge Japanese crimes against humanity while simultaneously questioning if the nuke was necessary?
I saw comments of peoples who tried to vindicate Japan as somehow innocent of everything while accusing USA of being the worst criminal in modern history for the nuke.
@@Zulu2020 Not a stupid question if the Jap never acknowledge the atrocities by teaching their future generations of what their country had done in WWII. For eg. history text books in Jap call the invasion of China the China Incident.
The US isn't the only country that publishes history books. What do the other countries have to say about it?
I'm not trying to judge. I'm just curious what the other countries have to say about it.
USA should not apologized
@geo science I have my reasons
🤐
@geo science 😁😁😁😁
@geo science why should we? Japan never apologised for theyre war crimes
WWII was unique in that it was and remains the largest "total" war ever fought. Civilians were viewed as legitimate targets. No nation or individual was prosecuted for bombardment of civilian towns or cities.
Major cities and population centres still remain targets today
What? Plenty of guys got tried for war crimes after WWII. A lot of the Japanese got away though due to cooperating with the US via providing data from human experiments
No, Certain important Japanese figures were executed as war criminals after the war.
Why aren't people in the US being judged?
World War 2 was the first war in which civilian deaths were far more than combat deaths. It was also a war in which the side that killed the most people (Axis) was defeated by the side that produced the most stuff (Allies).
Many of these civilians were war workers producing bombs, guns and other implements of war.
I don't think Japan wants to start any conversations about war crimes. They own the title.
The japanese military murdered tortured etc. other people, so now the US can murder the civilians? Great logic
@@Precipiceofwind Not what I said. Learn to read and stop straw manning.
Japan should face and acknowledge their war crimes and so should the US. Japans war crimes do not justify America's war crimes.
@@TrampMachine what america did is uncomparable too japan its sick
@@TrampMachine What war crimes? Killing civilians, prisoners?
What the Japanese did to the city of Nanking was a war crime but when I was in the military and I was stationed over in Japan they downplay it to the point that they don't even talk about it, as a matter of fact they consider themselves victims because of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
yea they edited their history textbooks to either not mention it or gloss over japanese military aggression completely. many young japanese people know so little about ww2 that they don't even recognize what the swastika is
While you're correct that they do downplay they're own atrocities committed during the war, that still doesn't make it okay what we did to those people. They didn't deserve it
The US is a nation built upon the graves of millions of Native Americans. It raised its economy by kidnapping and enslaving millions of people from other part of the globe. It has committed all kinds of atrocity and crimes against humanity during its history. These stuff have also been dramatically downplayed in the official narrative as well as textbooks.
@@MR.Mehran61 So true
@@NO1xANIMExFAN think of a hundred and fifty ways you could do horrible things and I bet you the Japanese could triple that of the things they did in the city of Nanking. And that's the truth RUclips and I don't give a damn if you don't like the truth.
Yes! Also what Japan did at Pearl harbor and WWⅡ was wrong too. As a Japanese , I am really sad about seeing many english comments saying that Atomic bomb was right. We don't need any apologies, But I hope more and more Americans learn the evilness of nuclear bomb, and what happened to people living in Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. Also, we Japanese should know about , what we did at Pearl Harbor and WWⅡ was not right too! We don't need war anymore.
I'm with you brother we both were wrong
LIKE MY ICE I'm just saying what we must do is to remember and know what happened to the innocent people. You're missing the point.
Yes the atomic bomb wasn't right, but it was necessary to bring an end to the war. Why should Japan get away with murdering millions of innocent people across Asia and not experience any retaliation. America should not apologise for dropping the atomic bomb.
Neither was Unit 731, Nanking, Manchuria, Korea, Pearl Harbor, etc.
Japanese imperialism did not just commit war crimes, they committed crimes against humanity
A land invasion would have killed millions of people, it was the best decision to make at the time, Japan was not surrendering.
Also, General McArthur gave inmunity to the imperial family, so the government responsible for those crimes is the same government that rules today in Japan, unlike today's Germany who is still apolozing for Nazi Germany...
Just because something is necessary doesn't mean it's not a war crime.
It wasnt neccesary.
@@cooldude-mi9wz yea im ngl it was not neccesary to drop those bombs
@@handsome_steff7951 it's a lot easier to say that 77 years later
Japan was the last country standing in a war that killed 60 million people and lasted 6 years
they were completely beaten, but didn't want to surrender because it was seen as dishonor.
The U.S could've
A. Invaded japan, causing a potentially even higher death count for both civilians and military, for both sides
B. not use the atomic bombs, they tried that on tokyo, killed around 100k people ( more than the two bombs individually), and still, no surrender
C. Use the atomic bombs on key locations (military bases), i.e. Hiroshima and Nagasaki, limiting the potential losses because the us didn't lose any men
Was it a war crime? maybe, though not at the time I don't think so, but was it necessary? probably
@@prodICYN I rather a soldier die in battle then a kid get vaporized in a playground
@@prodICYN Even though Hiroshima and Nagasaki have strategic military importance, it was still populated by civilians which they intentionally bombed.
_"War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it; the crueler it is, the sooner it will be over."_ - William Tecumseh Sherman
"Were going to make Georgia howl"
"...war is HELL".
And the Japanese were quite literally no better
dude u maybe u didnt know what happened at that tym the u.s. never wanted a war they were forced to go to war
and he was right... wars of attrition go on forever
every countries engauged in war crimes in ww2.
Of course everyone wanted to make as much damage as possible to one another that's the point of War.
but only one side got punished
@markaron9356 if the other side had won, we can look at games like wolfenstein to give a glimpse of what would have happened had things turned out differently.
@@CoryRayGordonMusic that's not in the conversation, I said that only one side was punished for their war crimes
@@markaron9356are you so sure? Japan got off pretty easy for their extreme war crimes.
Doing war crimes and stating that 'it speeds up the path to peace' legalizes all atrocities of the war.
I mean every country can use that as a justification. The ends doesn't justify the means.
Well don’t attack the U.S and you won’t have to worry about getting massacred.
@@manimal2866 and murders millions of Latinos and in POW
Just remember, you could be speaking either German, Japanese, Italian; or all of them now.
-Tom
@@spduff11 --- Doing war crimes and stating that 'it speeds up the path to peace' legalizes all atrocities of the war.
Wayne Patterson --- The air bombardments of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were lawful acts of war which did not qualify as war crimes. So, you accusations are false accusations with no basis in the laws of war.
@Loo well Japan should of thought about that before they decided to start a war with the United States
Japan never apologized for even starting the war, why would the US?
Be the better man🤷
@@sethevans5318 it was war Japan started it so attacking them back is fine also not a war crime because no laws that where accepted said that
@sethevans5318 you mean be the better man by sending massive amounts of money to help the most absolutely horrifying empire since the Mongols killed 10% of all humans immediately after the war were they committed some of the worst warcrimes in modern history back to back
Did your mother never teach you that an eye for an eye is bad and you should be the better person lol. So childish
@@_bofu it is but if nobody attacks you after your eye for an eye nothing happens,in war invading back is the least you can do because what else are you meant to do give up all your land?
It isn’t a matter of holding an individual nation responsible, but the bigger picture of the world’s elite class and political leaders clashing while leaving the every day civilian, just trying to get by day to day, to suffer and lose their own and their children’s lives
While I agree with you in principle, that ship has long since sailed. If we are establishing courts to Judge Bosnia/Serbia/Croatia etc, then we judge the US in those same courts. It's not like the dictators are the ones paying reparations anyway. It's billions of $ coming out of the working classes of a country recovering from war.
@@vtheman1850the Japanese would have to pay far greater reparations than any damage that any country has done to it ^^.
I think it’s wrong to kill anyone. That being said Hiroshima and Nagasaki were terrible tragedies as well as the occupation of Nanking (were Japan killed and massacred the Chinese)Japan and the US both committed horrible crimes during WW2. Killing soldiers is one thing and killing civilians is another.
LeMay leaflets
Read this carefully as it may save your life or the life of a relative or friend. In the next few days, some or all of the cities named on the reverse side will be destroyed by American bombs. These cities contain military installations and workshops or factories which produce military goods. We are determined to destroy all of the tools of the military clique which they are using to prolong this useless war. But, unfortunately, bombs have no eyes. So, in accordance with America's humanitarian policies, the American Air Force, which does not wish to injure innocent people, now gives you warning to evacuate the cities named and save your lives. America is not fighting the Japanese people but is fighting the military clique which has enslaved the Japanese people. The peace which America will bring will free the people from the oppression of the military clique and mean the emergence of a new and better Japan. You can restore peace by demanding new and good leaders who will end the war. We cannot promise that only these cities will be among those attacked but some or all of them will be, so heed this warning and evacuate these cities immediately.
Hiroshima leaflets (main text)
TO THE JAPANESE PEOPLE:
America asks that you take immediate heed of what we say on this leaflet.
We are in possession of the most destructive explosive ever devised by man. A single one of our newly developed atomic bombs is actually the equivalent in explosive power to what 2000 of our giant B-29s can carry on a single mission. This awful fact is one for you to ponder and we solemnly assure you it is grimly accurate.
We have just begun to use this weapon against your homeland. If you still have any doubt, make inquiry as to what happened to Hiroshima when just one atomic bomb fell on that city.
Before using this bomb to destroy every resource of the military by which they are prolonging this useless war, we ask that you now petition the Emperor to end the war. Our president has outlined for you the thirteen consequences of an honorable surrender. We urge that you accept these consequences and begin the work of building a new, better and peace-loving Japan.
You should take steps now to cease military resistance. Otherwise, we shall resolutely employ this bomb and all our other superior weapons to promptly and forcefully end the war.
EVACUATE YOUR CITIES.
ATTENTION JAPANESE PEOPLE. EVACUATE YOUR CITIES.
Because your military leaders have rejected the thirteen part surrender declaration, two momentous events have occurred in the last few days.
The Soviet Union, because of this rejection on the part of the military has notified your Ambassador Sato that it has declared war on your nation. Thus, all powerful countries of the world are now at war with you.
Also, because of your leaders' refusal to accept the surrender declaration that would enable Japan to honorably end this useless war, we have employed our atomic bomb.
A single one of our newly developed atomic bombs is actually the equivalent in explosive power to what 2000 of our giant B-29s could have carried on a single mission. Radio Tokyo has told you that with the first use of this weapon of total destruction, Hiroshima was virtually destroyed.
Before we use this bomb again and again to destroy every resource of the military by which they are prolonging this useless war, petition the emperor now to end the war. Our president has outlined for you the thirteen consequences of an honorable surrender. We urge that you accept these consequences and begin the work of building a new, better, and peace-loving Japan.
Act at once or we shall resolutely employ this bomb and all our other superior weapons to promptly and forcefully end the war.
EVACUATE YOUR CITIES.
I'm sure you have a smart bomb who only kills soldiers
Totally agree
The reasons that these crimes were committed is important. I know why the US did what they did. I don't know why the Japanese did what they did.
@@dienomo the us mainly wanted to scare the Russians. The Japanese military committed the nanjing massacre because they were frustrated with the unexpected amount of resistance the Chinese put up and wanted to exact revenge on the civilians for that. This is not by any means a justification but an explanation.
imagine if it had happened to the US, we would never hear the end of the evil.... it's easy to see who rules the world , in my opinion it was
Lol we never hear the end of this now
The bombs saved millions of Japanese lives.
Read a book jackass. Not only did the Japanese war council and the emperor ask for this it could have been a lot worse. Imagine the Allies invade the home island. Not only do millions of Japanese die (including brainwashed six year olds), the war goes on for two more years. Keep in mind the US detonated the bomb where they did to minimize loss of life.
@@Brodie--lw6eb They detonated them in cities focusing on civilian casualties. By this time, they had realized that indiscriminate bombing in the hope of causing terror was actually not effective in countries with such authoritarian governments (as had been demonstrated in Germany). They knew, by this point, that it was more effective to focus on industrial and military targets. They originally stated that they would launch the bombs first on these targets, or in a demonstration before the Japanese government. While they may have stated that their goal was minimal loss of innocent life, this simply does not align with history. One of the major motivations here was the entrance of the Soviet Union in the war. Not to mention that the Japanese government themselves stated that they would surrender, if they could keep the imperial office in some form. The Japanese were not intent on winning at this point. They wanted to keep their god, their emperor, alive and safe from U.S occupation. The u.s nearly allowed this concession, but decided against it, likely because by that point the S.U would have been in the war, and would have bargaining power. The primary goal of the use of the bombs was larger than the conflict in Japan. Obviously, that doesn't mean that they didn't influence the course of the war.
@@peanuttasty247 I absolutely agree dropping the bombs when they did was to keep the Soviets away from the bargaining table. Had they let the war go on to the point of home island land invasion maybe the Soviets are no longer “allies”. Two different ideologies invading one country, who gets to write the new constitution? Hmmmmm
History is written by the victors. Gen Lemay targeted innocent civilians in the firebombing of tokyo stated "if japan had one the war i would be charged with war crimes."
Yes I seen a video where he said just that
To determine what is right and what is wrong, it's essential to see "who did it/doing it" because the rule is, some people do wrong but it's right, some people do right but it's wrong! That's how planet Earth is running!
us surely the biggest evil hypocrites there.
Japan was not the victim by any means.
@@saturatedodin476civilians were
@@saturatedodin476china was
What in the hell you talking about is it summer college philosophy that you’ve learned
Is that even a question
unfortunately for the world some "humans" still "believe" it was necessary and even have ossified "justification" for it. one of the reason the world is still in a bad place despite the evidence is because of these "humans" their "beliefs" and their propaganda.
@@juniorcadizii306 only Americans believe that , I'm from the middle east and I'm devastated for what happened in Japan.
@@jimjumaa2277 most people are devastated and have our eyes open for those "humans" and their anti humanity nuclear weapons positions and their anti humanity arguments that keep sensible informed people asking those anti humanity "humans" the same question......will you concede that what was done to our fellow humans was a war crime? we keep asking.....and we will until they concede....
I think you really need to understand the war in the pacific to see this as a question
@@jimjumaa2277
If you are from Korea, China or Indonesia, maybe you'll have a totally different opinion about what happened in Japan.
This world is just like 😩😩😞
Cringe
@@ImperialZorn686 yes u r
I don't get what your saying?
@@tfl0wh0w45 He says he is sorry for 911.
why is killing 200 thousand civilians and children a question of is it a war crime. thats not a question thats a war crime its sickening and vile
Cry more
@@lezoomer7324 wholesale vaporization of innocent civilians at Hiroshima and Nagasaki is a war crime
Lets not forget when they attacked Pearl harbor not only did they kill military members they killed civilians and honestly Japanese war crimes was way worse than ours we dropped the nuke to end war and have peace what was japan doing trying to take over the western hemisphere
@@lezoomer7324 yikes.
bro do you even know what Japan did? 💀💀💀
“Aerial bombardment for the purpose of terrorizing the civilian populations or destroying or damaging private property not of military character, or of injuring non-combatants, is prohibited”.
Article XXII of the Hague Convention of 1923
I like how people just throw shit out of their mouth without actually reading international law to define if it is or not a warcrime
“Aerial bombardment for the purpose of terrorizing the civilian populations or destroying or damaging private property not of military character, or of injuring non-combatants, is prohibited”.
Article XXII of the Hague Convention of 1923
I like how people just throw shit out of their mouth without actually reading international law to define if it is or not a warcrime
Wayne Patterson --- Note how The Hague Draft Rules of Air Warfare of 1922-1923 were rejected and never adopted or ratifies by the member States because the rules proposed by the armchair lawyers were deemed to be too unrealistic to be implemented in an actual war. Consequently, the draft rules did not become a positive international law. Even if the draft rules had been adopted, they authorized the air bombardment of "a military objective...military forces, military works, military establishments or depots, manufacturing plants constituting important and well-known centres for the production of arms, ammunition or characterized military supplies, lines of communication or of transport which are used for military purposes." Note, the MARK I Little Boy atomic bomb was used to attack the military objective known as the Imperial Japanese Army Second General Army and Headquarters and other military objectives located within Hiroshima; and the MARK III Fat Man atomic bomb was used to attack the Mitsubishi Arsenals and many other military objectives within Nagasaki. The destruction of those military objectives did "constitute an obvious military advantage for the belligerent" and led to a prompt Japanese surrender that ended Japan's continued waging of war upon the United States and Allies as proposed by The Hague Draft Rules of Air Warfare of 1922-1923; see:
Rules concerning the Control of Wireless Telegraphy in Time of War and Air Warfare. Drafted by a Commission of Jurists at the Hague, December 1922 - February 1923.
Part II: Rules of Air Warfare#Chapter IV: Hostilities#Bombardment. - Art. 24.
Art. 24. 1. An air bombardment is legitimate only when is directed against a military objective, i.e. an objective whereof the total or partial destruction would constitute an obvious military advantage for the belligerent;
2. Such bombardment is legitimate only when directed exclusively against the following objectives: military forces, military works, military establishments or depots, manufacturing plants constituting important and well-known centres for the production of arms, ammunition or characterized military supplies, lines of communication or of transport which are used for military purposes.
3. Any bombardment of cities, towns, villages, habitations and building which are not situated in the immediate vicinity of the operations of the land forces, is forbidden. Should the objectives specified in paragraph 2 be so situated that they could not be bombed but that an undiscriminating bombardment of the civil population would result therefrom, the aircraft must abstain from bombing;
4. In the immediate vicinity of the operations of the land forces, the bombardment of cities, towns, villages, habitations and buildings is legitimate, provided there is a reasonable presumption that the military concentration is important enough to justify the bombardment, taking into account the danger to which the civil population will thus be exposed;
5. The belligerent State is bound to pay compensation for damage caused to persons or property, in violation of the provisions of this Article, by any one of his agents or any one of its military forces.
Saving the lives of a-million-and-a-quarter men- not prohibited, allowed, accepted; and done!
-Tom
Strategic bombing was commonplace in WWII.
@@charleshixon1458 and all of it was a war crime, every single bomb dropped over cities.
@@vince8901 War is a crime against humanity, for whatever it is worth. Although in this case the bombings weren't technically considered a war crime as there wasn't an internationally recognized treaty or anything regarding strategic bombing and it was widely carried out across all sides on all fronts of the war. Just another tragedy of human barbarity, but that is the whole thing about war, isn't it? it's not a duel.
I just noticed that they coloured Taiwan a part of China. AJ+ Taiwan is not a part of China. Taiwan is China.
You sound like an American zionist 🤔 looking for a crack in China's wall
@Canuk Kun did your white colonialists allies tell you that? 🤔 Tell me the history about Native Americans
@@stevenrodriguez3891 you sound like a commie sympathizer
It's because of one-china policy
Taiwan is an island, the government on Taiwan is called the republic of China. Different government from the communists but they are still china
Was bombing Pearl Harbor without first declaring war, a war crime? Live by the sword, die by the sword.
Andrew Birchley civilians shouldn’t suffer for the military’s actions. ever.
Yes, it was a war crime too.
the worst war crime in human history.
No, it wasn't a war crime and the USA should never apologize.
The target was civilians and that's a war crime.
And this isn't a war crime??
ruclips.net/video/Xe5zX71f6II/видео.html
It wasn't a target for civilans. Whoever related to tje Military industry and there were the factories over there so they bomb it.
@@victoriacocoz Of course it is. But does that make the civilian bombings any less of a war crime?
Incidentally, the US never prosecuted the Unit 731 scientists. They were treated very well indeed by them.
@@EsJam_es Unfortunately that is not true. Both bombs were aimed at civilian areas. You only need to check how many civilian casualties there are to confirm this.
@@dashong8912 If they didn't nucked the cities, more casualties will come out because of the Operation downfall.
"In late July 1945, the War Department provided an estimate that the entire Downfall operations would cause between 1.7 to 4 million U.S. casualties, including 400-800,000 U.S. dead, and 5 to 10 million Japanese dead.7 Jan 2021"
of course it's a War crimes. War crimes only imply to the losing countries, doesn't mean that the winning team is innocent.
No, it wasn't. They deserved to be wiped out.
@@dathip so do your countrymen
@@Vetgil nope
Definetly a war crime
Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of Chinese, Korean, Taiwanese, Filipinos, and more that suffered at the hands of Japan and the hundreds of thousands more than would have suffered had the war went on for years after 1945(The war would have went way longer had it not been for the nukes). Not to mention the hundreds of American soldiers AND Japanese soldiers + civilians that would have died had it not been for the nukes. The idiotic take of Westerns who have the privilege of living in the 21st century who don't realize the true gravity of the situation astounds me.
Japan worse
I suppose your father wasn’t over there or brother or uncle or any other man in your family
@@Zulu2020 bro did you even know what Japan did to Korea and China 💀💀💀
@@Justyouraveragecatlies of jews
250 000 innocent people sorry that is a massive war crime but yes the US did it so it is okay
Mike Louw --- 250 000 innocent people sorry that is a massive war crime but yes the US did it so it is okay
Wayne Patterson --- Your comment is a lie, and you know it is a lie because you already know that you cannot and will not quote and cite so much as a single valid and criminal law of war which prohibited the American use of the atomic bombs to attack those military targets and thereby save tens of millions of Allied and Japanese lives. Your comment is a lie because the official estimate of 110,000 plus deaths is nowhere near your grossly false claim of "250 000 innocent people." Your comment is also lie because the atomic bombs did not kill "innocent [Japanese] people. All of the Japanese casualties were combatants, because all of the Japanese people regardless of age, sex, and condition were conscripted, armed, and/or trained to serve as suicidal combatants in the service of the Japanese armies by August 1945. So, with respect to the Laws of War and international law, there were no longer any "innocent" Japanese people in Japan by August 1945. Your comment was a lie, because The American acts of war cannot constitute a "war crime" as you falsely accused until and unless a criminal Law/s of War have been violated. The Japanese acts of war did constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity due to their numerous criminal violations of the Laws of War and international laws, conventions, and treaties.
What better choice did Truman have?
Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of Chinese, Korean, Taiwanese, Filipinos, and more that suffered at the hands of Japan and the hundreds of thousands more than would have suffered had the war went on for years after 1945(The war would have went way longer had it not been for the nukes). Not to mention the hundreds of American soldiers AND Japanese soldiers + civilians that would have died had it not been for the nukes. The idiotic take of Westerns who have the privilege of living in the 21st century who don't realize the true gravity of the situation astounds me.
@@kentmitchell1510that just bringa a free pass for any other country to use atomic bombs again
@@ozymandias8523no it isn’t. Hiroshima was a city with military institutions. Regardless a ground invasion of Japan would have killed more. Remember we are talking about ww2 so massive casualties are a given
Yes. Next question.
Next question...how much money can we scam out of USA making them feel guilty 75 years later?
Mike Hunt Your bad faith question is blatant.
@@Zoink888
Japan already did, most of ww2 movies the enemy is Germany & japan played the victim of nuclear weapons.
Propaganda against Japan stopped after the bombs.
It’s a bit more complex than that. Full scale invasion of Japan would have undoubtedly killed more Japanese. Not to mention hundreds of thousands of US solders. Keep in mind. The US had been fire bombing Japanese cities long before the atomic bomb. Japan wasn’t giving up.
max marrero smart asses go sit in the corner
More people should talk about Japan's crimes against the Chinese and Koreans. China and Korea will never let that go.
No, Japan is most definitely not innocent in their history. Yes, the US committed a war crime against Japan. This video is not about what Japan has done; it is about what the US has done. The US still perceives itself as morally superior. They are in for a very rude awakening, which I suspect has already begun.
@@summerwest3099 LMAO. USA admits what they did now. Japan still covers it up. Cry harder.
@@matttheripper2652"LMAO" ? "Cry harder." ?? I guess I don't communicate with fourth graders that often but the ones I have interacted with are more coherent than you. Probably more intelligent too, considering they don't live in the Deluded States of America.
It would seem that@@summerwest3099 has been rekt.
;)
@Anna Tiest It's called karma, if you believe in such things.
Those who justify the crime here look
like totalitarians. Respect each person's right to life a little.
Japan was completely delusional. They didn't know they were being delusional. The bombs were a reality check.
Troops and civilians are both innocent lives. Millions died to war, Hiroshima shouldn't get special treatment because they got messed up harder for starting a war senselessly attacking pearl Harbour for no reason.
The reason was: Japan wanted conquer the territories that european colonial powers held in the "far east". They wanted to knock out USA navy.
So Hiroshima ‘attacked Pearl Harbor”
🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨
Are you dumb?
Just keep war in video games. We don't need that shit in real life.
Many video games were inspired by real wars.
a lot of people don't seem to get that two wrongs don't make a right
Let us forget that Japan refused to negotiate for peace and that they were involved in a brutal war with china for over 10 years, leaving the league of nations after being condemned for its war crimes. Oh, and they attacked the U.S.A first. Say what you want, but let's keep in mind what the considerations were that prompted the bomb.
@@deamn46 I'm from Bosnia lol
a lot of people don't seem to get that it was the best option the americans had
Then call both Pearl Harbour and hiroshima war crimes. There should be no debate.
@@nukesploder Not just China. Japan was committing genocide all across Asia, even forcing Koreans to fight in the front lines. let's not forget those.
Consider this: Japan had killed 20 million civilians in China alone by 1945, not including civilians in other parts of Asia and allied combat deaths. The Japanese worked POWs to death on projects like the Burma railway, beat them to death, cut their heads off and subjected them to medical experiments. It was estimated that up to 1 million casualties were expected in the invasion of Japan against a highly hostile population with up to a quarter of which drafted into the IJ army. Every island the US had captured was done so with high casualties since the Japanese almost exclusively fought to the death. You have a weapon that can destroy the enemies ability and will to fight. What do you do?
Thank you
Exactly, but what worse is that the Japanese still want to fight and refused to surrender even after the Second Atomic Bomb and were still committed to winning or total annihilation.
What do you do? You use it.
Yes.
Just because the Japanese ruling class was terrible doesn't absolve this crime.
It wasn't the ruling class, it was the whole country. The general populace was so brainwashed that they jumped off cliffs when the Americans advanced through Okinawa. Thousands upon thousands of soldiers charged headfirst into machine gun fire in banzai charges. If we had invaded the mainland, we would have been met by swarms of women and children with bamboo spears.
Art Thou Dull isn’t that interesting that instead of regular bombing with napalm the US has to use nuclear bomb on it?
Art Thou Dull I know, and the point I am raising is, by your words, Hiroshima being a military base means it’s justified to nuclear bomb it, isn’t it interesting that the US did Not do so for the other military bases of Japan, but used regular bombings in those places.
Art Thou Dull It appears you have conceded your previous point about Hiroshima being a military base.
Now, whether a country surrender or not has nothing to do with whether an action is a war crime or not,
Japan was the first one to pick a fight
It's a bit more complex then that. If you see the wider picture, there was no "good" side, only colonial empires. In history winners are the "good guys" and losers are the "bad guys". Ideologys are an another story, which made possible by humilating WW1 "peace" (mean truce). If USA had been the good, they offer a peace when japanese was defeated, instead of nuke them. They wanted japan to capitulate, to be able to force their own interests. (Yes, Japan was defeated they only hold the main islands with industry bombed to the ground, but they would never capitulate whitout total occupation) Every side commited some war crimes, every nation admitted it. Except the USA, you heard it, it was OK until you don't apology. WTF?!
FDR put them on an oil embargo first, meanwhile the west ignored the war in China for a whole decade. You're an ignorant idiot.
Hmm just like Afghanistan eh? Iraq too perhaps?
@@millabasset1710
Yes oil embargo = right to kill.
@Anatiest Do you think Japan was innocent?? They also committed atrocities. If anything, the blame falls more on Japan since they were warned and asked to surrender before the dropping of the bombs. They chose not to and continued fighting. Clearly a decision based on pride and a lack of care for the civilians that would then pay the price. Before you expect the US government to take into account Japanese civilians, what about the Japanese government and Emperor doing everything they can to avoid something like this?? They didn't do that though and that should show you just who exactly was on the wrong side of history. This is the same government that worked alongside Nazis and also the same government the supported and gave army personnel to Unit 731, who committed some of the most vile and disturbing war crimes you've ever heard. Would you have preferred they win?
Don't try it dear.
Well Japan never apologized for bombing pearl harbor and innocent at Hawaii and torturing the enemy
i thought they did?
*Yes.*
But it's not considered a war crime if you are a major power and win.
It is still a war crime, you just refuse to call it that and BECAUSE you have enough power to do so people don't question it further
@@ElfieIvy”Muh Morals”
@@ElfieIvy Which is talked about more? The genocides in China or 2 nukings that needed to happen to end the war.
@@mr.gigagod9736pretty sure the crimes on china are talked a lot in china
Japan has never apologized to the US for attacking Pearl Harbor.
The US was not at war with Japan on December 7th, 1941.
We were the next day.
Not the same bombing a military base than a whole city. Civilians were innocent. The US could have wiped out all the military power using nukes, but they decided to bomb cities. The most stupid decision.
@@RC-rk2xs Yep, Japan should apologize. But never nuking!
@@RC-rk2xs You can disagree, but that does not justify nuking.
@@RC-rk2xs sufre, a big enough asteroid would end up all upcoming wars, HAHAHA
They started it.
We finished it.
Never pick a fight with someone bigger than you!
If they drop it on military buildings and equipment i would approve it but they didn’t
you dont drop it on buildings and equipment it just doesnt work that way 1 bomb=1 whole city no matter which city has the most military the whole city and everyone in it burns....
The bomb btw doesnt hit the ground when it explodes, it explodes mid air, also Hiroshima and Nagisaki were cities that had military building and stuff.
@@senorquack5182 don’t forget there were schools,hospitals religious places and stuff
@@______-795 Dont forget it was war....any military that places it central command among civilians places that population at risk....using people as human shields gets people killed...Hiroshima was also very important from a military perspective since it was home to the 2nd Army Headquarters, which were responsible for the defense of southern Japan. It was an important center of storage, communications, and assembly of soldiers.
@@allanjones1680 so, you can argue everyone in Washington DC are also human shields? Whether they had military buildings or not doesn't matter, they knew if they dropped the bombs, it was going to kill many civilians and they did it anyways, that's a clear intention to kill civilians, it may not have been their primary goal, but they knew it was going to happen
Ask Japan about war crimes. They practically pioneered it.
Doesn't matter who done it, who first or who a lot
War crime is a war crime
@@luklukfamous175 but some are justified
The bomb was dropped to save lives. Don't be fooled. Japan civilians would have fought to the last and we'd have lost 100s of thousands trying to invade.
That is why Operation Downfall was already in place and waiting for the go ahead. Had the bomb failed it is very possible that Japan would have chosen to fight on. Some people discard the fact that this was a contingency plan for the allies. Even though Trinity had worked, there was always a certain chance Little Boy could fail. The crew members of the Enola Gay took off with an unarmed bomb. Once they were in the air and away from Tinian they arm the bomb in two stages. The first one being the insertion of the core and then later the swapping of the firing pins. My point is that even though these men were scientists, they are still humans. Humans are error prone. A failure would have been a huge slap in the face to the morale of the Allied military including the US.
It definitely was, and we all know it.. *now.*. At the time it just seemed to be a way to end the war, not thinking not comprehending its horrors of the radiation.
Not to mention the firebombing
We all know it was necessary.
@@timw2479 nope it not a warcrime
@@timw2479 not a war crime. An advantage.
A huge proportion of what we know about radiation's effect on the body came from the bomb survivors
To the title: yes
And no
@Hunie u know who got killed with that nuke?!
Kids, old man,pregnant woman and others
Theyre unarmed civilians
They're not kill people
But got killed by the USA
In my perspective
This is a warning from the usa for the other countries
"if you mess up with us you dead"
No
For the longest, I used ask myself how can we(U.S.) be so heartless? Then I learned about Nanking and unit 731 and I never felt bad about it ever again.
Poor logic. You don't feel bad for innocents because their government commited henious crimes? Those who died had nothing to do with those things
@@Unholy_Triforce Support the government, get rekt. Japan entered WWII thinking it would be the Master of East Asia. And they carried out some of the most heinous crimes possible with the support of the populace as a whole. And now they claim we were the bad guys. Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.
@@squeaky206 The innocents never really had a choice. Guns were not available to citizens regularly. They were conditioned to follow thier country without question as well. Similar to a parent conditioning a child to believe a specific thing for 18 years
@@Unholy_Triforce I'm sure the Japanese thought the same thing when they threw babies onto their bayonets in cities and villages in their occupied territories, or occasionally slaughtered entire settlements. Let's be real son, the Japanese would've used the nuke on us if they had the means and the ability to deliver it. They would kill way more civillians with way less afterthought. Every civillian in war is a potential combatant or saboteur, even the younger ones.
And the fact the Japan had planned to used every man, woman, and child to fend off a mainland invasion. They were insane. Still are, just suppressed now.
Depends on the situation, prevailing
at the particular point in time,and the
decision maker.
It's to one conscience one have to
Live and answer with for all time.
I know that but it was a warcrime
The nazis were already defeated, and the Japanese were already declining rapidly. The only reason it got used is because it got made and the US wanted to test their new toy.
It was. Every other country acknowledges it as a war crime. Its only a debate between the propagandists and the truthers
When they bring all the Japanese war crimes to the table, and the country actually acknowledged it happen and apologize then we can talk about nuclear bomb been a war crime.
One war crime does not excuse an even bigger retaliatory war crime.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_apology_statements_issued_by_Japan
@@gokthetaxman6622 ...No point of apologies when Japanese officials STILL go to shrines that honor war criminals, deny or whitewash war crimes, take no responsibilities...
...And leave their younger generations clueless to say things like, "whatever atrocities were committed, we don't care, our politicians say they're lies anyhow... Anyhow, War is bad, let's just avoid it."
@@dannnsss8034 Americans go to statues that worship confederates
@@gokthetaxman6622 true
It's easier to judge the action was a war crime when we are living in this era.
Even in modern times Trump threatened to nuke a hurricane, North Korea and Iran. We are justified in calling the 2 bombings a war crime
@@quincyquincy4764 Did he bomb any of those places? You are not justified at all.
@@DeimosEclipse He didn't because others prevented that not because he didn't want to use nukes
@@quincyquincy4764 But they approved it in WWII? Maybe that should tell you that your comparison is wrong.
@@DeimosEclipse kudos for having a less scummy government.
This video is out of the context of the war. When you consider the hell of combat fighting the Japanese and their war crimes that we knew of at the time we were absolutely justified in their use. Still it doesn’t make any less tragic.
It's still a war crime
This whole idea that war should be 'fair and friendly'is asinine. In the past 60 years it seems every nation is pushing for 'fair warfare'. War is war, there is supposed to be no boundaries or segregation of peoples. That is why its more important than ever to reach solutions to wars instead of make them 'safer.' I have great respect for our veterans and service members, but they days of both war and this ideology that we can make it more socially acceptable by being nicer should be over! War should be the same disgusting, repulsive, unwated suffering it has always been, and we shouldnt try to make it more 'acceptable in public opinion.'
Pretty sure that targeting cities full of civilians is a massive war crime
@@nnass262 --- Pretty sure that targeting cities full of civilians is a massive war crime
Wayne Patterson --- Wrong...and dead wrong to be more precise. The war crime, if any, was any Japanese use of civilians to shield military objectives without acknowledging their participation in the hostilities were no longer protected by the laws of war.
The Commander's Handbook on the Law of Land Warfare
Law of War Manual...5.16 PROHIBITION ON USING PROTECTED PERSONS AND OBJECTS TO SHIELD, FAVOR, OR IMPEDE
MILITARY OPERATIONS
Parties to a conflict may not use the presence or movement of protected persons or objects: (1) to attempt to make certain points or areas immune from seizure or attack; (2) to shield military objectives from attack; or (3) otherwise to shield or favor one’s own military operations or to impede the adversary’s military operations. Protected Persons and Objects. In particular, the civilian 5.16.1 population, protected persons under the GC, POWs, fixed medical establishments and medical units, parlementaires and other persons protected by a flag of truce, and cultural property are protected persons and objects that may not be used for the above purposes. Although persons and objects that are protected by the law of war may not be used in these ways, this rule does not prohibit a party from using what would otherwise be a civilian object for military purposes and thereby converting it to a military objective that is not protected by the law of war. For example, a building that previously was a civilian object could be used for military purposes (including as cover) and would not implicate this rule because it would no longer be a protected object. Similarly, this rule does not prohibit persons who would otherwise be civilians from participating in hostilities or otherwise assuming the risks inherent in supporting military operations.
@@nnass262 Apparently not, lmao.
@@waynepatterson5843 yes, but the Japanese were not using civilians as shields in Hiroshima, under the rules of the war intentionally harming civilians was a war crime. It is true that this was a necessary evil and that when you break the rules of war you are no longer protected by them, but that doesn't mean that the USA should not apologize for what they did.
This is the mentality of people with no honor and mercy for human life. War is between combatants without involving the elderly, children and non combatants.
Not a warcrime, a crime vs humanity.
And the *PLANET!*
What been crime not to use it. Japanese were fanatics. All willing to die for a god of a emperor
Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of Chinese, Korean, Taiwanese, Filipinos, and more that suffered at the hands of Japan and the hundreds of thousands more than would have suffered had the war went on for years after 1945(The war would have went way longer had it not been for the nukes). Not to mention the hundreds of American soldiers AND Japanese soldiers + civilians that would have died had it not been for the nukes. The idiotic take of Westerns who have the privilege of living in the 21st century who don't realize the true gravity of the situation astounds me.
Well it is because "killing civilian". Even if it "not consider as a war crime" there's still "The fire bombing of tokyo".
Well it is because "killing civilian". Even if it "not consider as a war crime" there's still "The fire bombing of tokyo".
Wayne Patterson --- Those air bombardments were lawul acts of war and not war crimes.
But first you have to remember Nanking.
Obviously a war crime. What kind of question is that?
Japan killed millions in china so the japanese deserved it because they got a taste of what suffering taste like
@@Silvergalaxy7383 So, Japan committed war crimes and now everybody else can commit war crimes because of that? The Nuke killed WOMEN AND CHILDREN, do you get that?
@@Michael-it6gb 14 million Chinese against 350,000 japanese
Can you imagine that? Thank God the war ended quickly after that
I think the more important and intreaging question would be "was it necessary?" killing hundreds of thousands of civilians is definitely immoral even if they belong to a nation that was commiting war crimes at the time (let's not pretend Japan is blameless ) but the US claims it was justified because this cruel act supposedly saved more lives than it took , if your bringing this to prevent the use of more nuclear bombs than I'm with you but if you're just digging up America's war crimes just to ask for an apology I think it's pointless as both countries are guilty of too many war crimes to count just like most countries of the world so let's not be hypocrites and pretend that the US is alone in this , either call everyone out for their shit or no one
The argument is often that the bomb would have been what had prompted Japan to surrender. It wasn't. More people had been killed in fire-bombings of other cities.
What made Japan surrender to the US was that Japan had been losing big to the USSR in the North, and surrendering to the US was considered the lesser of two evils.
@@FindecanorNotGmail we will never know for sure. the imperial japanese command was full of mad men who would've pushed forever until the entire country was bankrupt. there is one view that civilian deaths did nothing to move the imperial commanders (although it may have prompted the royals to act more independently).
with that in mind... why _TWO_ bombs? why not one bomb in a far less populated area first? if the US chose a symbolic bomb site - say Mt Fuji - and destroyed it with minimal human casualties... the same intended effect could've been achieved. they can then ramp it up to a _military_ target next - say, a navy dock, after the same dropping of leaflets to warn soldiers of the imminent destruction.
a civilian target was always morally bankrupt. the ends do not justify the means.
ruclips.net/video/HKD-0mJ94B4/видео.html
This what-aboutism is silly. The facts are that Japan has been called out for decades, went through war-crime trials, and has paid a price for the atrocities they committed, acting like they haven't is just you being ignorant.
On the other hand, is the United States who is only considered to be some bastion of all that is good that is somehow incapable of committing any wrong and has never been held to account for atrocities it committed like choosing densely populated cities to demonstrate their new nuclear weapons instead of the countryside as a show of potential force.
@@ProjectShamrock "this what-aboutism is silly" - proceeds to apply what-aboutism in a self-defeating argument.
they didn't "pay a price for the atrocities they committed" because those were addressed in the war crimes tribunal. if you assign "justice" without using the proper institutional channels, then anyone can seek vengeance however they like.
terrorists think they are making the west "pay the price for their atrocities" by killing random civilians. the saudis think the same for yemen. the KKK thinks the same for non-whites.
the UN's ICJ is a very high ideal and most countries refuse to submit 100% to it; but it is the closest we can get to an impartial justice organ at the international level. the war tribunals are similar.
Deploying weapons in the service of winning a war is a necessary evil, but massacring two whole towns full of innocent people who wanted nothing but the end to the war is beyond vile.
I don’t think that many of them wanted the war to end, not in any way that would involve japanese defeat at least.
@@KalashVodka175 war is war, no matter where you are, if you're a civilian, you're gonna be on the sh*t end of it
They were military targets
Those who justify the atomic bombing in Hiroshima/Nagasaki are not qualified to criticize Putin and Hitler.
It was a premeditated and large-scale crime that indiscriminately killed civilians.
@mike flames ？
That is no justification for massacring Hiroshima/Nagasaki citizens.
War is a duel between soldiers of each other, civilians are not the opponents of the duel.
As a Japanese, I can say that our textbooks act a bit too much like victims.
Certainly, as Japanese, we cannot forgive the atomic bombings, but it is important to think and reflect on why they happened.
...and the massacre in Nanjing? Where's the apology?
So one warcrime justifies another? Thanks to this great example of whataboutism!
@@andywehre7912 It is a war crime. It is unjustifiable. So was the attack on Pearl Harbour. The massacre in Nanjing however, no one talks about - let alone Japan.
@@deamn46 so youre saying the virus is a direct intentional attempt at a massacre on civillians? Covid is a pandemic the last i heard ....
@@j-cynsoon7088 A lot of people here mention Nanjing, and its not even a topic. Of course Nanjing also was a warcrime, but you shouldn´t relative one warcrime with another. Make a video about Nanjing and I´ll gladly share it (and if in that vid someone does a whataboutism by asking for an apology for hiroshima I´ll also speak out against that)
@@deamn46 www.britannica.com/event/Nanjing-Massacre 50,000 - 300,000 raped and murdered. (:
In my personal opinion this was a war crime, same for allied bombing of german cities like Dresden. Considering the war crimes Nazi Germany and Japan did, I kind of understand why such actions were taken, still in my opinion these were war crimes, no matter what Japan or Germany did before, because the allies knew they would kill many civilians.
I agree with what your saying but why not drop the nukes on military bases instead of on civilians
@@eman2093 because the military bases were located inside civilian zones. Hiroshima was the headquarters of the 2nd General Army which was responsible of the defense of much of Southern Japan, especially Kyushu. The bomb effectively decapitated the 2nd General Army, and killed 20,000 troops.
The hard truth is that there are no civilians in Imperial Japan. Everyone was expected to fight and die to defend the islands.
If someone in my neighborhood goes rogue, shot the man not the neighborhood.
@@eman2093 They were warned to evacuate. They didn't.
When we look at the way the World is going in 2023 .I wonder about WW2.
Back then bombing entire cities and killing enemy civilians was not was not abhorred like it is today and it certainly wasn’t regarded as a crime. In all wars when elephants clash , the grass gets trampled.
You say that like it's a bad thing they're considered war crimes these days?
The Korean city is hell, but the Japanese city is so peaceful I got goosebumps.
It's not a war crime , sincs you win the war...
If they lose japanese would do more atrocities than those 2 nuke does
It is not a war crime. The Japanese wouldn't surrender unless a large enough consequence would occur. Beaten to submission. Japanese were brutal fighters to the very end. Dangerous enemy
Shot answer NO
Japan started the war and AMERICA finished it… justifiable
So killing innocent civilians is okay to do? K 🤡
Btw, I bet you’ve never fired a weapon in your life
@@grunt117 --- So killing innocent civilians is okay to do? K 🤡
Wayne Patterson --- Your pretense that the casualties were "innocent civilians" is a lie. The casualties were not "innocent civilians" under the Laws of War which you pretend to employ.
@@waynepatterson5843 there is no such thing as ‘law of war’. The only rules are to survive by any means necessary; that’s it. There are ‘no rules’ if your life is on the line. War is fkn awful
@@grunt117 --- there is no such thing as ‘law of war’.
Wayne Patterson --- LOL! You just cannot keep from uttering yet another absurd lie. Perhaps it's because you want to continue advocating the commission of a war crime/s. Law of War Manual...5.16 PROHIBITION ON USING PROTECTED PERSONS AND OBJECTS TO SHIELD, FAVOR, OR IMPEDE MILITARY OPERATIONS...Parties to a conflict may not use the presence or movement of protected persons or objects: (1) to attempt to make certain points or areas immune from seizure or attack; (2) to shield military objectives from attack; or (3) otherwise to shield or favor one’s own military operations or to impede the adversary’s military operations... Although persons and objects that are protected by the law of war may not be used in these ways, this rule does not prohibit a party from using what would otherwise be a civilian object for military purposes and thereby converting it to a military objective that is not protected by the law of war.
Why should US apologize for the knock out blow when Japan was the initiator in pearl harbor and the aggressor?
Post-war japan animations and books play themselves as a victim because of these two bombs while they never truly acknowledged and apologized to millions of Asians for their crimes.
All the while still negating much more inhumane and deadlier mass killings and slaveries were ever done by themselves while there exists a concrete documents
e.g.)Dissection on pregnant civilian women w/o anesthesia after raping them by unit 731 in Manchuria - for a single page out of series of books of crimes against humanity
Japan is not the victim of WW2.
Only reason japan is not scrutinized more is because of their massive post-war transformation. Japan is now known as the land of kawaii anime.
Whataboutism at its best.
The bombing was a war crime.
PEARL HARBOR WAS AGAINST OTHER SOLDIERS THAT SIGNED UP FOT THAT STUFF. WAR IS WAR. THE BOMBINGS HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI ON THE OTHER HAND KILLED HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT CIVILIANS GOING ABOUT THEIR DAY. THAT IS WAR CRIME YOU BLIND?
AND THE DISSECTION, THAT WAS JAPANESE SOLDIERS, NOT CITIZENS.
@@MohamedMohamed-br1xv Are there greater numbers of Innocent civilians killed by the Japanese army or more by the US army or two atomic bombs? Read and enlighten yourself with de factos before commenting. Was the war started by US? Fashion in which civilians of many other nations killed by the Japanese imperial army is more of a bizarre horror movie. A blind man assumes the others are blind as well.
@@jdabull I don't care about the war or who started it. I'm just saying killing civilians is a war crime and should not be done.
I love how they constantly comment on the US never apologizing, while Japan refuses to acknowledge or apologize for it’s outright ignoring of the Geneva convention. Japan was by far the most brutal and intentionally cruel force in the war.
What a bunch of BS comments. America will NEVER apologize for crushing Japan.
No, it was not a war crime.
If Hiroshima is a War Crime, Japan needs to officially apologize to China for Nanking.
Both needs to apologize for the bat sht things they did to humanity, just because one side won, doesn't make them more righteous, it just makes them just
One war crime does not excuse an even bigger retaliatory war crime.
stilldownwiththemutantunderground The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings killed between 90,000 and 146,000. The Nanking Massacre *ALONE* killed at least 200,000. And that doesn’t even count Korea or Manchuria.
Love Japan but they haven't apologized for their war crimes either. Especially in being part of the start of WW2. It's the pot calling the kettle black.
ur literally just wrong.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_apology_statements_issued_by_Japan
yea Ikr if they don’t apologize why TF should the United States using the bombs were justified given that they attacked first any other country would have attacked back too
2020 Japan 😀😍😎
1940s Japan 😡🤬💀
@@jeremiahjewell3398 Hi weeb.
The USA, the country that has commited more war crimes since WW2 ended, I thought that America was a continent, not a country
2:27 of course the approval rating would go down because the people in 2005 didn’t have to face the brutality of Japanese soldiers fighting to the death for their emperor
I literally said that aloud when I heard that. Nice to know others think the same.
The US is a nation built upon the graves of millions of Native Americans. It raised its economy by kidnapping and enslaving millions of people from other part of the globe. It has committed all kinds of atrocity and crimes against humanity during its history. These stuff have also been dramatically downplayed in the official narrative as well as textbooks.
This what it looks like when you think you want the smoke but turns out it was a huge mistake.
the japanese empire was a brutal empire. they deserve no apology
The US shouldn’t ever apologize either. Japan refused to surrender even after the first bomb was dropped so they definitely weren’t ready to surrender. The entire population was preparing to fight to the death to defend Japan and the emperor who they considered a god. The US government had a responsibility to its citizens and military to protect American life and as unpopular as it is it saved American lives as well as Japanese lives.
The Americans fire bombed Tokyo which I believed killed more people and then dropped a nuke and japan still refused to surrender. It wasn’t until the 2nd bomb was dropped that japan surrendered facing the potential destruction of the entire country.
"Americans may be convinced of their intention not to start a war of aggression or preventativeness. Thus, they may perhaps believe that it is superfluous to publicly announce that in the future they will not be the first to use the atomic bomb. But this country has been solemnly urged to renounce the use of the bomb, that is, to ban it, and has refused to do so unless its conditions on international control are accepted."
_Albert Einstein
Private citizens have A-bombs; there is no true disarmament once the tech is invented.
The USSR would like to give Einstein a medal for making an effort to abolish nukes in the US while they keep manufacturing there’s.
A lot of Americans today still think bombing civilians of Taiwan and Japan was “best decision ever made”. Their ancestors killed thousands of thousands innocent civilians, but insisted that they were no innocence in Japan. War actions were all bad. But winners can always get away with it.
@@preachinhell2580 are you dumb or misinformed? The bombings were to get Japan to surrender. Sure it’s an atrocity that civilians died but how many more would have died if the US full on invaded? It’s not even comparable but Japan wasn’t innocent either, look at their war crimes against the Chinese. Sure blame the US for bombing 2 cities but at least we weren’t dissecting humans while they were alive or freezing body parts then smashing them with a hammer to see what would happen.
@@preachinhell2580 Yeah, they are all brainwashed by their goverment , they are just hypocrites
Remember that it took TWO atomic bombs for the Japanese military to surrender. So even after the first one, the Japanese military/government was still intent to continue the war while knowing full well the casualties its civilians will suffer will be immense.
It was a war-crime; we attacked non-combatants and tried to lie to generations of Americans that “it was justified to save American lives”.
We’ve already lost thousands of Americans, and to say “what about *insert county for *insert atrocity/incident” doesn’t change the fact that we, the United States, committed a war-crime for attacking innocent civilians.
@@grunt117 --- It was a war-crime; we attacked non-combatants and tried to lie to generations of Americans that “it was justified to save American lives”.
Wayne Patterson --- On the contrary it is you who is the person publishing lies and defamatory disinformation about the atomic bombs. The atomic bombs were lawfully used to attack military objectives/targets and combatants as stated by the Laws of War and did not harm Japanese noncombatants. Law of War Manual...5.16 PROHIBITION ON USING PROTECTED PERSONS AND OBJECTS TO SHIELD, FAVOR, OR IMPEDE MILITARY OPERATIONS...Parties to a conflict may not use the presence or movement of protected persons or objects: (1) to attempt to make certain points or areas immune from seizure or attack; (2) to shield military objectives from attack; or (3) otherwise to shield or favor one’s own military operations or to impede the adversary’s military operations... Although persons and objects that are protected by the law of war may not be used in these ways, this rule does not prohibit a party from using what would otherwise be a civilian object for military purposes and thereby converting it to a military objective that is not protected by the law of war.
Roman Avila --- We’ve already lost thousands of Americans, and to say “what about *insert county for *insert atrocity/incident” doesn’t change the fact that we, the United States, committed a war-crime for attacking innocent civilians.
Wayne Patterson --- The atomic bombs were not used to attack "innocent civilians" as proven by the actual Laws of War. Law of War Manual...5.16 PROHIBITION ON USING PROTECTED PERSONS AND OBJECTS TO SHIELD, FAVOR, OR IMPEDE MILITARY OPERATIONS...Parties to a conflict may not use the presence or movement of protected persons or objects: (1) to attempt to make certain points or areas immune from seizure or attack; (2) to shield military objectives from attack; or (3) otherwise to shield or favor one’s own military operations or to impede the adversary’s military operations... Although persons and objects that are protected by the law of war may not be used in these ways, this rule does not prohibit a party from using what would otherwise be a civilian object for military purposes and thereby converting it to a military objective that is not protected by the law of war. "Geneva Convention (IV) Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, August 12, 1949Art. 28. The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations."
After 3 days man?? After les than 3 days they throw the 2nd bomb!
It’s not enough time to assess your loses and surrender!
Japan didn’t attack during these 3 days!!
And 6 days after the 2nd bomb they surrender! While US was planing to throw a 3rd one
@@grunt117 collateral damage is not a war crime
@@TarekHabib who the f*** cares? They started the war. They knew at least the losses were a huge proportion.
4:57 Japan was teaching their school aged kids to sharpen bamboo to stab the lesser Americans….. Japan believed their emperor was a living good….. everyone was a combative.
Intentional when an American hates Japan during that time.. not a strategic move at all..
regardless whether it was strategically the best move or ended the war it was still a war crime, the nazis had the ability to drop chemical gas bombs on london an yet didnt
Fact. Also Einstein (from Germany) sent a letter about the dangers of the bombs, US dropped it right after.
Because they thought the Allies would respond in kind.
@@ScubaShark--8964 Einstein wrote his letter in 1939. Atomic used in Aug 1945.
@@kentmitchell1510 Not even the ''Evil'' German Troops dropped the Atomic Bomb on US, yet... The ''Justice'' dropped it.
@@ScubaShark--8964 The Germans didn't use the atomic bomb because they never figured out how to build one. The tragedy of the atomic bombs is that they were not ready in Dec 1941.
It is absolutely nice video, telling us so many things. Thank you.
Not really. Here is one that actually talks about the two bombings and why they happened. Not a bunch of hyperbole about how bad nukes are. Cheers. ruclips.net/video/l6WWHIwVk8k/видео.html
Shouldn't all war be considered a crime? What is right about killing someone who is apart of another group.
People criticize Hitler but never criticize U.S. and European countries' war crimes.
Cough Cough* Nanking happened *cough *cough
The irony is this saved more lives given a land invasion of the Japanese mainland would have been a bloodbath. Or a blockade to starve Japan into surrender.
Its trendy and woke to call Truman a war criminal, but you reveal your ignorance on the matter.
Thank you
What ???
Really do you know what would have happened if you didnt nuke them wow u see future but really you guys killed a lot of poeple i dont care if bombing them is better than invading but what i care about is that you guys killed them in inhumain ways imagine youre eating suddently youre son has cancer my point is we dont care if it's "an efficient way" but we care about the lost lives and injured and if U.S is really powerful why was it scared of japan a contry thats so small compared to them hmphh
The actual irony is that you are being stupid here.
Its ironic how its you revealing your ignorance...
its really true that stupid people think they are smart.
Imperial Japan committed unspeakable atrocities in Asia. Perhaps the dropping of the atomic bombs was wrong, but the Japanese civilians should blame their government first.
Nobody deserves to be vaporised to death
@@panagiotisnikiforou1323 no one deserves to be raped to death
And? If i horifically torture you to Death because of what your dad did, would you blame him?
Justified. Saved more lives at the end
How can a human being possibly justify incinerating 60000 people instantly. If this is your view you are very sick. I would rather lose 50000 of my countrymen's troops before incinerating innocent civilians.
@@ProfessionalCow1 the casualty’s would had been MILLIONS not 50.000. no human being wants to hurt another one but If you read history you will realized Japanese’s we’re doing kamikaze and after not having planes left that we’re planning going to the mountains and fight a guerrilla war that could have last decades. JUSTIFIED