History of World War II: Hiroshima

History of World War II: HiroshimaIt was the defining moment of the 20th Century - the scientific, technological, military, and political gamble of the first atomic attack. This drama-documentary attempts to do what no other film has done before - to show what it is like to live through a nuclear explosion.

Set in the three weeks from the test explosion in New Mexico to the dropping of the bomb, the action takes viewers into the room where the crucial political decisions are made; on board the Enola Gay; inside the bomb as it explodes; and on the streets of Hiroshima.

For six months, the United States had made use of intense strategic fire-bombing of 67 Japanese cities. Together with the United Kingdom, and the Republic of China the United States called for a surrender of Japan in the Potsdam Declaration.

The Japanese government ignored this ultimatum. By executive order of President Harry S. Truman, the U.S. dropped the nuclear weapon Little Boy on the city of Hiroshima on Monday, August 6, 1945, followed by the detonation of Fat Man over Nagasaki on August 9.

These two events are the only active deployments of nuclear weapons in war. The target of Hiroshima was a city of considerable military importance, containing Japan’s Second Army Headquarters, as well as being a communications center and storage depot.

Watch the full documentary now

Part 1

 

Part 2

612
8.05
12345678910
Ratings: 8.05/10 from 41 users.
  • Nakor420

    I wish these weapons were never developed, even though the invasion of mainland Japan would have been a slaughter un equaled in human history, the world would be better off without such doomsday devices. Now, I know this thread is just going to degenerate into an America bashing event.

  • Nick Pwnsauce

    if it werent nuclear weapons it would have been a "mega chemical" or some other new weapon that we have already developed and havent seen because we already have the nuclear deterant that seems to be working just fine for now. You never show all of your cards.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1449036614 DeeJay Pickles

    we should be using nuclear techs for fuel in space not to kill I mean how backwards a species are we that we would rather strike fear into our enemy's (the same species) than embark on a exploration never before achieved by an earth dwelling creature? I think we need a good kick up the backside to letgo of the things we do not need and indeed do usno favours such as a dependency on fossil fuels and landfill etc etc, Maybe a global nuclear holocaust would be the catalyst for that considering it was the race for rocket techs that got us to space in the first place.

    It always takes either profit or fear to inspire these technological advances and the common man hardly profits these days.

  • NaoCat

    No matter how you look at it us@ i$ demon (or at least is run by them)

    Why did they kill CIVILIANS?! I mean the Japanese for all the reasons that they had attacked the navy and those working for/with the navy, away from their women and children.

    What do americ@ns do in response? They destroy a city! You can argue about it's military importance but I think it was beside the point now that they had a nuke. Aren't all war( or likewise action ) movies about saving civilians, those who are unarmed and not involved in the conflict like the children? >.>

    I honestly feel bad that none of the cities in the us were destroyed or had civilians killed or just so much as attacked, just to taste their own medicine, pisses me off >.<

  • Jack1952

    You apparently have never heard of the rape of Nanking. The Japanese military made it quite clear that they would never surrender. The allies had decided not to engage in a ground war in Japan. This would have meant an embargo and incredible hardship and a long and miserable death for millions of Japanese citizens. After the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, the Japanese warlords still refused to surrender. The bomb was dropped on Nagasaki and the emperor had to force the Japanese military to accept a reluctant surrender. As perverse as it may sound, those 2 bombs may have saved millions of Japanese and Allied lives. Remember that the Nazis would not surrender until the Russians were a few blocks from Hitler's bunker. The Japanese Kamikaze attacks demonstrated the determination and the commitment of the Japanese military. The world was exhausted after the most brutal war ever fought and the worst 5 years of human history. Brutal times could only result in a brutal end. Thankfully it wasn't worse. Had you been serving in the allied military of were even a civilian in those times, the dropping of those bombs may have elicited a sigh of relief and happiness. 50 million deaths or more on both sides was enough.

  • Jack1952

    I should add that you obviously hate the United States. They have a lot to answer for but the WW2 was not the fault of the United States and the Nazi powers are the greatest destructive force we have ever seen on Earth. Don't let your emotions prevent you from acknowledging this fact.

  • Sertsis

    How about low level incendiary bombings like the one that killed 80,000 people in Tokyo on March 9th, 1945

  • wald0

    Your post makes absolutely no sense. You abhor the killing of civilians so you want more killing of civilians? You call this some kind of poetic justice? The truth is you hate America to the point that you are perfectly willing for their citizens to be killed, innocent or not. Once you start justifying the death of any people for any reason you are guilty of the same simple kind of thinking that caused ww2. The Germans felt completely justified in their actions, just as America and Japan did and every one of these nations is guilty of horrible atrocities against innocent peaceful peoples. If you studied history you would know this. Here is a sample for you though-

    "...between 1937 and 1945, the Japanese military murdered from nearly 3,000,000 to over 10,000,000 people, most likely 6,000,000 Chinese, Indonesians, Koreans, Filipinos, and Indochinese, among others, including Western prisoners of war. "This democide was due to a morally bankrupt political and military strategy, military expediency and custom, and national culture."[36] According to Rummel, in China alone, during 1937-45, approximately 3.9 million Chinese were killed, mostly civilians, as a direct result of the Japanese operations and 10.2 millions in the course of the war.[37] The most infamous incident during this period was the Nanking Massacre of 1937-38, when, according to the findings of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, the Japanese Army massacred as many as 300,000 civilians and prisoners of war, although the accepted figure is somewhere in the hundreds of thousands.[38] In Southeast Asia, the Manila massacre, resulted in the death of 100,000 civilians in the Philippines. It is estimated that at least one out of every 20 Filipinos died at the hand of the Japanese during the occupation.[39][40] In the Sook Ching massacre, Lee Kuan Yew, the ex-Prime Minister of Singapore, said during an interview on with National Geographic that there were between 50,000 and 90,000 casualties[41] while according to Major General Kawamura Saburo, there were 5000 casualties in total.[42] There were other massacres of civilians e.g. the Kalagong massacre.
    Historian Mitsuyoshi Himeta reports that a "Three Alls Policy" (Sank? Sakusen) was implemented in China from 1942 to 1945 and was in itself responsible for the deaths of "more than 2.7 million" Chinese civilians. This scorched earth strategy, sanctioned by Hirohito himself, directed Japanese forces to "Kill All, Burn All, and Loot All."

    This doesn't even address the biological weapons and unspeakable experiments tested on civilians and prisoners of war by the Japanese. Here is a piece taken from the confession of one of the Japanese soldiers that helped carry out these horrible things.

    "To determine the treatment of frostbite, prisoners were taken outside in freezing weather and left with exposed arms, periodically drenched with water until frozen solid. The arm was later amputated; the doctor would repeat the process on the victim's upper arm to the shoulder. After both arms were gone, the doctors moved on to the legs until only a head and torso remained. The victim was then used for plague and pathogens experiments."

    The Japanese admitted that no anesthesia was used as it would have effected the outcome of their experiment.

    Now this in no way makes dropping the bombs o.k. What took place in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was absolutely horrible. But if we used your logic it was completely justified. You can paint any nation up as a demon, they all have sorted and war like pasts. If we operated this way we could justify attacking anyone at anytime. The key to moving forward is to realize that killing is never justified by any reason. No matter what horrible things someone has done, if we kill them we commit a horrible act ourselves- and two wrongs never make a right.

  • Sertsis

    Watching this doc made me dig up another old doc on the same subject. From the old series from 1973 called 'The World At War', the episode simply called 'The Bomb' had a lot of similarities to this doc, used some of the same images, and even spoke to some of the same people, such as Col. Tibbits. There are some interesting differences though. The reason given that it was to save American lives may have been true, but it's not the only reason. The A-bomb was to be used by some in the American govt as a bargaining chip in it's negotiations with Stalin in post war Europe, only it back-fired on them.
    In the months leading up to Hiroshima, the Americans ruled the skies over Japan, launching B-29s from Tinian, they could bomb at will, and Gen. LeMay thought he would be out of targets there by Sept 1st , just by these bombing raids alone.(coincidentally 1 day before Japan's surrender was accepted aboard the Missouri) Adm Nimitz, who thought that the A-bomb was unnecessary would have preferred to blockade, rather than invade Japan, and that would have undoubtedly saved some lives.

  • NaoCat

    "You are right, I completely forgot about the whole picture! Sheer hatred for the usa clouded my mind" >.<

    Now I feel like the whole world should go up in flames to purify itself for what it did...

  • NaoCat

    "You are right, I completely forgot about the whole picture! Sheer hatred for the usa clouded my mind"

    I suppose this apology suits every reply that I got. ^.^

  • Achems_Razor

    Seems like war cares nothing for collateral damage.

  • NaoCat

    "You are right, I completely forgot about the whole picture! Sheer hatred for the usa clouded my mind"

    And that is true but somehow I don't like the way you present the whole thing as if usa had not provoked Japan into entering the war, but that's just probably my conspiracy ridden fantasies talking.

  • SONNYCORBI

    Hind sight is 20/20

  • Robert Millette

    ... Always the same answer about China! NaoCat reply was correct, Usa purposely use Japan as a target to use their new toy! I do not agree with what Japan did in the two Sino-Japanese war but did they drop "little boy" on the Japanese army camped in Manchuria? No! They dropped it on civilians...

    Here on Top Documentary, or at Documentary Heaven, its always the same answers... It look like if it was ok to drop that bomb on Japan. Do you really think, for exemple that those civilians where aware of the atrocities perpetuated by Shiro Ishii in Cina?

    NaoCat reply was not as complex as yours but at least it was logic!

  • wald0

    @ Robert Millete

    Maybe you should re-read my post, I clearly stated that dropping the bomb was wrong. My point was that it doesn't justify wishing harm on American citizens, not that it was excused by the atrocities Japan committed. In fact the whole point of my post was that killing is wrong period, no justification period. Did the U.S. drop the bomb out of a genuine interest in ending the war and saving lives, I don't know. Perhaps they did simply want to show everyone what they had or find out for themselves, but that's beside the point. Like I said every country has done similar things, Japan included. So what- we are going to start weighing it all up in order to justify mistreating more people? If you genuinely have an interest in seeing the least amount of suffering and death in this world that is the wrong mind set to start with. It seems to me you guys are still caught up in whose to blame, who do we punish, GROW UP ALREADY!!

    The Japanese nor the American government will ever officially admit to the things they have done, and it would not accomplish anything if they did. What will accomplish something is for the people of this world to realize these divisions and distinctions are superficial. We are all one people, the human race. As such we are capable of great tragedies and horrible cruelty but, we are also capable of the most wonderful creativity and compassion. It is up to us which dominates this globe. If we insist on revenge and holding whole races of people responsible for the actions of their fathers and grandfathers, well you see where that has got us. We can't look at it like 10,000 Japanese died at the hands of x amount of Americans. We must see it as 10,000 humans dieing at the hands of fellow humans, we are killing our own. If we exact revenge for that we will only kill more of our own.

  • Jack1952

    This is how the United States provoked Japan.
    - in 1931 Japan invaded Manchuria.
    - in 1932 Japan annexed Rehe province into Manchuria.
    - in 1937 Japan invades China.
    - in 1938 Japan invades the USSR.
    - in 1939 Japan attacks Mongolia.

  • Jack1952

    Here is how the United States provoked Japan.

    - In 1931 Japan invades Manchuria.
    - In 1932 Japan invades Rehe province and annex it into Manchuria.
    - In 1935 Japan establishes the Hebei Autonomous council from the Chinese provinces of Hebei and Chakar and sends troops to occupy the region.
    - In 1937 Japan invades China.
    - In 1938 Japan invades the USSR.
    - In 1939 Japan attacks Mongolia.
    - Losses against the Soviets lead the Japanese to decide to concentrate on its war in China and expansion into the Pacific.
    - In 1940 Japan enters French Indochina.
    - In 1940 Japan institute the 3 Alls act. A scorched earth policy; the three Alls being "Kill all, Burn all, Loot all".
    - The Dutch agree to supply Japan with oil from the East Indies but would not give them political control.
    - In response to Japan's invasion of Indochina the United States cut off all oil. 80% of Japan's oil came from America until then. This effectively would have put an end to Japanes adventures in the Pacific.
    - On Dec. 7, 1941 Japan attacks Pearl Harbour. The following day Japan attacks Thailand, Malaya and Hong Kong.

    The United States engineered the whole thing so they could go to war. Nice provoking.

    I'm Canadian and we have our own reasons for not liking the Americans. This just isn't one of them. Incredibly, this time they were the good guys.

  • Jack1952

    @ Robert Millette.

    You jump from the Sino-Japanese war to the dropping of the bomb. There were 8 years of intense fighting in the mean time. You center on one action without trying to understand the horror of the times and how exhausted everyone was of this war. It brought an abrupt end to the conflict...a conflict that would have lasted years bringing a slow and tortuous death for even more Japanese civilians. A terrible decision in a terrible time.

  • misterwong

    NaoCat seems to be a very commited Anti-American.This does'nt explain the misinformed and irresponsible posts.Fervent Yank-Bashers all over the world stereotype us as ignorant,warlike oafs because of our agressive military foreign policies.We're the bullies of the world instead of its protectors.The decision to bomb Hiroshima is the beginning of this dark legacy.As for NaoCat,I wonder what country the Cat is from?.(Let's bomb it....)

  • Robert Millette

    no no I agree with you and I am not looking for a guilty country... I was just disapointed by the beginning of your reply to NeoCat, the "Your post makes absolutely no sense" thing...

    What NeoCat expressed is what most foreign people feel about USA today and I believe its not so far from the truth... Every time they wish to enter in a war they accelerate things and provoke conflicts. Look at the early Vietnam war "The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident"; Look at Ww2 "Attack on Pearl Harbor"; Look at the 1st Gulf war "Sadam Hussein killing kids & baby"; Look at the 2nd Gulf war "Sadam Hussein build Nuke missile in hidden labs"...

    All of these where never really proven and where clearly organized military and political tactics to join in any conflict in which they could sell weapons and equipment.

    I am as much as you disappointing about the end result of any wars but I believe that most of the time USA should stay home! But there is money to make so...

    That being said, I understand NeoCat point of view. I do not think she or he wish USA to be attacked but wish for them to be more aware of what they do to other country, for oil or politico-tactical reasons.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bill-Cameron/566545188 Bill Cameron

    I agree with you totally. What generation will see the end of Mans Inhumanity to Man? Since I am now 73, I doubt it will happen in my lifetime, but I do have Faith in the younger generations.

  • wald0

    I don't think Pearl was a staged attack, but I'll give you the other examples. That said, it is no excuse for America bashing and hating a whole nation of people. The only Americans that can't see that our government has been hi-jacked by special interests directly connected to big banking and corporate U.S.A. are the ones that intentionally ignore it. These people you will never get to open their eyes, no matter how many documentaries you make or how many people bash America. At some point we, the every day people of the world, have to start promoting a better society, a more inclusive world. Our goal should be to eventually let go of nationality all together, to become one people. If we look to the truly long term future its the only hope for the survival of the human race. Not only because we would eventually destroy ourselves but because we will face threats in the future that can only be solved if we work together in intimate ways.

  • Xbow

    I guess the Japanese figured that they could attack the United States, murder 2.5 million Chinese, Koreans, and South East Asians (that they considered to be sub human by the way). Test a variety of biological weapons on untold thousands of Korean and Chinese civilians, chop the heads off of prisoners of war for sport, and near the end of the war roast thousands of Allied prisoners alive when they got too weak to do any more slave labor and get away with it. They figured wrong.

    The biggest tragedy of WW2 wasn't Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Hell the Japanese butchered +200,000 people during the Nanjing Massacre and let their troops systematically rape +50,000 Chinese women and young girls. In may ways the Japanese made the Nazis look civilized.

    The real tragedy was that while the war crimes trials in Germany were extensive the war crimes trials in Japan were a small time joke by comparison. And to not hang Hirohito by his skinny neck and let him do a rope dance along with every senior member of his government was a travesty of justice. Some say that Hirohito was a figurehead and a sensitive kind man that had a disdain for war..bullshit. He could have ended the war with a single word at any time. And it seems clear that his disdain for violence began when the war turned against Japan, about the time that General Le May's B-29's started flattening Japanese cities one after another.

    Yeah, its a shame civilians have to pay for the actions of their government but that's just the way it is for the Human Race...the Killer Species.

  • theshlaay

    Most annoying statement from this video:

    "The final decision that resulted in the two bombs, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, was not made in Podstam, it wasn't made by Truman, it was made by the Japanese militarists when they rejected any opportunity to surrender just their armed forces and save further massive loss of life."

    Anyone who knows anything about international relations knows that that is bullshit. That "opportunity" was given as show. There was no explicit warning of "we are going to drop nuclear weapons on you, kill hundreds of thousands, and destroy entire cities, as well as leave lasting radiation effects that will go on killing for decades to come."

    Sorry but American militarists knew damn well that that "opportunity" would not be accepted - what reason did Japan have to surrender at that point!? None.

    Hiroshima was a plan set in motion for reasons other than "ending the war." But if that is how those involved choose to look at it, so that they can sleep at night, than so be it. Ignorance is bliss and what's done is done, buttrying to say that by not accepting surrender the Japanese accepted nuclear annihilation is disgusting, and outrageous

  • PavolvsBitch

    As then, as now; this time through covert means via electromagnetic frequency weapons and most likely, hydroexplosives. FDR was a Jew as were the other players as are the players now.

  • Sertsis

    FDR was dead at the time, Truman was the player. I don't know or care whether either was Jewish, but you sound like a hillbilly!

  • Norm

    Name a country that isn't involved in the deaths of innocent people. I will bet that you can't. As several other comments have mentioned, killing our fellow human beings is not exclusive to the US nor is the US the instigator in all of the atrocities all over the world. Look at your own country. If you can say that it's not now nor ever was responsible for the needless death of innocent civilians then you, sir/madam, are from a different planet.

  • Sertsis

    Iceland?

  • http://twitter.com/panthera_f panthera f

    Even now Tibbits is deluting himself.

  • Norm

    @ Sertsis

    Thank you for answering for IzirAtig.
    I stand by the statement. Iceland has its skeletons.

  • Sertsis

    LOL, Maybe so, I couldn't really say for sure, just putting it out there.

  • Norm

    @Sertsis
    I believe that if there was a decent example for countries to follow it would be Iceland. Any atrocities committed there were probably due to their civil war. My knowledge there is quite limited. My original comment was based on how humans have historically treated each other. It seems that we are just living in a modern form of barbarism. Leaders today are no more civilized than Attila and his like.

  • wald0

    Inbred Jed, LOL!! I'll give you the benefit of the doubt though DaftAida, can you explain further what you are talking about. I mean about the "via electromagnetic frequency weapons and most likely, hydroexplosives..." part in particular. Oh, and of course how exactly the Jewish religion ties in with all this. Maybe you know something the rest of the world doesn't, lay it on us man. If nothing else it sounds entertaining.

  • Sertsis

    Ok Norman, I'm gonna have to give this one to you, as I have no info on a civil war in Iceland, your first 'like' to that msg is on me. I do agree with your original sentiment that we humans have spent all of history clashing with one another and we only seem to get better at it with time. Our dislike for the the events in history, while useful in discussions like these, cannot change the past. The past can only stand to shape our future. As terrible as Hiroshima might have been, it gave humanity an object lesson in why it should never happen again.

  • Xbow

    Do you always spray such meaningless tripe like that around? Not only are your views based on pure conjecture but they are also tainted with your immature, sophomoric and tiresome anti American world view.

    Facts and Questions:
    1) [Fact] The atomic bomb's did kick Japan in the ass hard enough to make them surrender on terms that were acceptable to the USA+the Allies.
    2) [Fact] Japan made the decision to go to the distance with the USA on the day they attacked Pearl Harbor. A miscalculation that cost them ? 2 million military KIA's and ? one million civilian deaths and the ruin of their nation.
    3) [Fact] Japan's absurd position that they be allowed to dictate the terms of their own surrender was ridiculous. When do losers dictate anything to the victor?
    4) [Fact] That Truman did warn them prior to the first bang is nothing less than amazing especially since he did so against the advise of the a large portion of the Military.
    5)[Quiz] In all of history name a time when a new revolutionary weapon wasn't used to produce the most shocking and demoralizing effect on the enemy?
    6)[Quiz]If the Japanese had been bright enough to develop a similar weapon would they have given the USA a warning? Or chosen not to use it?
    7)[Quiz] If Japan had won the war (what an absurd thought) would they have been as kind as the USA was to Japan in the aftermath or would they have ground the life out of their conquered territories for the benefit of the Japanese empire. Read up on how the Japanese dealt with conquered people.

    Opinion: With the delusional Japanese militants gearing up for an apocalyptic final defense of their homeland the use of nuclear weapons against them was justified on both military and moral grounds.

    Opinion: Your childish notion that the Japanese did not 'choose' their fate through their actions and inactions and thus trigger a chain of events that led to nuclear bombardment quite honestly makes you look rather ignorant and perhaps even delusional.

    •The only thing this film misrepresented was the meaning of the word ‘Mokusatsu’ with respect to prime minister Suzuki’s tacit rejection of the Potsdam Declaration.
    Mokusatsu can have two meanings depending on who uses it. An old highly educated elite member of an ancient Samurai family like prime minister Suzuki probably meant ‘ignore’ or ‘I didn’t hear you’. With the overall meaning being ’I need better terms than you have offered‘.
    From a younger man not so well educated and not so elite the word ‘Mokusatsu’ would probably have meant, “I ignore with contempt“ which is a form of ‘fu-k off’.
    Truman was briefed on both usages of ‘Mokusatsu’ and ‘chose’ to believe the harshest meaning of the word, ‘I ignore with contempt’ And this despite the knowledge that Suzuki was opposed to Japan's war with the United States, before and all through the conflict.

    But don't be too hard on old Harry he was after all facing the prospect of the million or casualties that an invasion of Japan would have cost and that would have included ? 300,000 allied KIA's. An invasion that would have also killed and wounded a minimum of 10% of the entire Japanese civilian population along with three million more Japanese KIA's.

  • theshlaay

    Alright simmer down now.Well organized little rebuttal there.

    While Japan's military elite were probably slightly insane, my comment was in regards to the statement made with such certainty at the end of the documentary. And my main point is that Truman did not NEED to drop the bomb.

    I don't know where your fervour towards this issue stems from - to the extent that you would compile such a response on a documentary board - but from your profile it seems that you are very active on these comment boards... so...at least you have your priorities in order. Mine do not lie in extensive response and rebuttal on documentary boards, as I like to go outside from time to time. lol.

    You are entitled to your opinions. I stand by my statement as there was nothing "ignorant" or "delusional" about it. The only one who seems a little mental and/or overly impassioned here is you. But again, that's just my opinion.

    P.s. Having said that, I did sift through some of your extensive past documentary commentary and agree with your position on some matters.
    On that note I bid you Adieu!

  • Xbow

    Good response...

    "I don't know where your fervour towards this issue stems from - to the extent that you would compile such a response on a documentary board."

    That 'long response' took all of fifteen minutes. And since its hot here in the desert I can't climb except in the early morning and late afternoon hence my inane annotations will be on the rise until it cools off.

    Now with respect to your initial post I am not saying that there weren't other factors involved in the nuking of Japan. First, the Navy believed that six more months of the blockade would have done the trick without the invasion, nukes or any further fire bombing raids.

    There are two factors that neither you or I mentioned: Racism and Revenge. If I were to look for alternate reasons for Nuking Japan when she was already surrounded, cut off, and essentially defeated I would look there. To the USA the Japanese people became, 'murderous little brown monkeys.' Not even the worst of Hitlers thugs or the German people as a whole ever achieved the level of dehumanization the Japanese received. As an example, German prisoners of war were given jobs as farm workers in the mid west and even paid while Japanese/American citizens of the USA were locked away in camps. It was very difficult for these citizens of Japanese descent to get permission to leave a camp for any reason. German POW's often received unsupervised weekend end 'liberty' from their minimum security living quarters.

    And as for the Revenge angle, that speaks for itself doesn't it.

    Caio

    composition time 7 min 30 sec

  • eugler

    An interessting doc, and one that provoked a lot of disturbing thoughts.
    The first one being that these bombs were just medium firecrackers compared to those developed in the years following the annhilation of the two cities. After all the fission bombs used in WW 2 are merely the detonators for the fusion bombs developed in the early fiftys. The first H Bomb tested in 1952 already multiplied the yield of the Hiroshima bomb by a factor of 800.

    That's already something to chew on but what really bothers me is that while the attacks were clearly a heinous war crime, there is a strong case to be made that without the bomb and without this ruthless demonstration of its power, the world probably wouldn't have taken long to descend into WW 3. Obviously the attacks were only the peak of the iceberg of the western allies' war crimes during the 1940s but ironically the only ones that are actually brought to the table as such. The deliberate and systematic mass murder of hundreds of thousands of civilians - for political, not tactical reasons - had been the rule not the exception during the conventional firebombings that had taken place. But as usually history is written by the victors and while most people know about the atrocities that the Japanese and the Nazis commited, there is already much less talk about the Sowjets contribution to the insanity of this conflict. And of course the only actions by the western allies that one can even dare to question openly are the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    Having said that, from my pov, the attacks were clearly morally wrong. The excuse that the bomb shortened the war is completely missing the point. It shortened the war significantly because the Japanese saw that there was no way left to win or at least to achieve a draw. But that's no reason to destroy an entire city, the effect on the Japanese high command would have been similar if the weapon had been used in a military context or simply put down in the bay of Hiroshima. Yet at the same time there is good chance that these events prevented the Sowjets to overrun its former Allies and drive them into the Atlantic, an eventuality that became a great concern to the western allies during the following months. Certainly during the later developments, namely the emergence of the Cold War, the bomb harshly dampened any attempt by either of the two blocks to engage in military operations against each other, effectively preventing WW 3.

    The paradoxon here is a derivative of the original paradoxon of the bomb. As soon as two partys have the capability to use it against each other, conventional military conflict becomes pointless. The less balanced the conventional conflict becomes the more incentive is given to the loosing side to go nuclear. And even if one side is a day away from defeat, it can still make sure that ultimately everybody is defeated, no need for a winning side. This way you should be more afraid of your own side's military succes than of the enemy's.
    So the bomb itself is a curse and a blessing at the same time. And of course its power would have been demonstrated at one point or another, just as every other weapon in the history of mankind before it, it was prone to be used eventually. And as zynical as it may sound, we are lucky it happened then when nobody could retaliate in a similar manner.

    Time has changed, the blocks don't exist any more, large scale conventional conflict seize to be a major concern. At the same time nuclear technology like all other technology has proliferated and become much easier to obtain. As Duerenmatt put it, the trouble is that mankind cannot unlearn what it has learned, man can create knowledge but he cannot destroy it. Chances are that at some point these weapons will be used again unless we find something even more destructive and monstrous to use against each other and that's not really comforting either.

  • theshlaay

    Right you are.

  • princesspatricia

    Absolutely horrific to think how far we have come in development of weaponry since then. If something nuclear were to happen now, I am sure there would be no survivors to make such documentaries on the devestation that a bomb would cause now.

  • Xbow

    "But that's no reason to destroy an entire city, the effect on the Japanese high command would have been similar if the weapon had been used in a military context or simply put down in the bay of Hiroshima."

    eugler
    No it wouldn't have had the same effect...unless you consider palm trees and sand crabs to be equal in value to human beings.

    There was in fact a great deal of debate within US government about staging just such a demonstration. However the government and military was split 50-50 over the issue.

    The primary opposition to a demonstration or announcing a city to be destroyed came from Robert Oppenheimer, General Leslie Groves and a large number of other scientists and military men involved with the Manhattan Project. The civilians were actually more hawkish on this issue than the top brass and several threatened to resign their commissions if a surprise attack was carried out on a civilian target without warning.

    The stated reasons for their objection to a demonstration or announcing a target were:
    •The devise could fail to function completely or fizzle and leave the Japanese unimpressed.
    •Even if it did function the Japanese might have taken the position that the demonstration was a stunt.
    •The stunt theory is supported by the fact that a small freighter load of 5000 tons of high explosives, magnesium powder and low grade radioactive materials would effectively simulate a small nuclear weapon if hidden effectively on a remote island and detonated.
    •There was a very critical shortage of U-235 and Plutonium U-239
    •The loss of the weapons primary effect of 'shock and awe'
    •Fear that the Japanese would move thousands of POW's into the target city to serve as a human shields. (they did this)

    The decision to nuke Japan was made for these reasons and the spirit of revenge for the 160,000 Americans killed and 300,000 seriously wounded in operations against Japan up to July 1945. And also in retribution for the 22,000,000 Asian and allied souls that died as a result of Japanese aggression.

    Was it a war crime to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Of course it was. But it must be remembered that during WW-2 massive attacks against civilian populations (war crimes) were the defining tactic of all participants. As an example the fire bombing of Tokyo in March of 1945 alone killed as many Japanese civilians outright as Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined. From 1937 to 1945 Japan waged a total war of genocide against china to the tune of 17,000,000 to 20,000,000 people killed...with rifles, high explosives and bayonets.

    War Is Hell

  • Xbow

    Sertsis, Wald0

    What about the dire possibility that nuclear weapons are a form of Iron Golem brought into existence by Dark Jewish mysticism as set down in Necronomicon & Book Of Creation?

    Inbred Jed knows! LMAO!

  • leonardobdas

    what beggars belief is to imagine all the fair skinned Jesus believers in the US dressed the same and fascinated by shrink wrap and corvettes in their cookie cutter subdivisions praying on the prosperity doctrines .... by the millions....probably 2 weeks after all this happened. Remember that they all believe what the radio says. Now somehow picture that all of them somehow put on their war pants for a number of years and suddenly switched to happy shorts and skirts in the conversion of farmland into houses. Now imagine that somehow still today, they cannot connect the dots and simply accept that 6 million people were roasted by another crazy jesus inspired guy and that their government dropped a nuclear egg over a city just for a fun and profitable revenge and that it is incredibly sad and unfair.

    Just saying that it is phony victories like this one, the lack of truth and the feeling that something terribly injust just happened that gets people to hate entire cultures and nations.... and shows that the christian god is not very good with prevention of big issues...

    sorry, this is a sore subject...i can't put myself through this doc.

  • Jack1952

    What is also a tragedy is that somehow the Japanese have become the good guys in WW2 to some. To them it was the murderous Americans who provoked the Japanese into war ostensibly to profit from this action. It doesn't matter that the Japanese had been invading other countries since 1931. It doesn't matter that the Americans didn't even enter the war until late 1941 after millions had already been killed. As long as we can vilify the United States. It seems strange that no one has even mentioned that the United States was extremely isolationist until Pearl Harbour....but I suppose that will be written off as propaganda, anyway. That the bombs were dropped by gleeful, war profiteering Yankees is a ludicrous idea and could only be supported by those who were not alive at the time; or someone with their own personal agenda that really has nothing to do with WW2. Was the dropping of the bomb immoral? You bet. Any action in a war is immoral. Was it necessary? That can't really be known. It did appear that any other action would have meant a conflict that may have lasted for years. The war did end abruptly. Hundreds of millions of people were grateful at the time. It took 50 years for that gratitude to fade. I am very glad I didn't have to live through that horrific time. I am glad I didn't have to make those decisions.

  • Jack1952

    You're reading too many comic books.

  • Jack1952

    What reasons then?

  • Jack1952

    The Japanese start the war but the Americans are the bullies. If the Americans wanted true revenge, however, I would think the blockade would have much more effective. Millions of Japanese civilians slowly starving to death would have been much more gratifying in the end.

  • Jack1952

    Good post. I had to say something. Pushing the like button didn't seem quite effective enough.

  • eugler

    Well, I choose my words carefully when I wrote of a similar effect and not of the same. I can't remember proposing sandcraps and palmtrees as a valid alternative target either so all in all this is a textbook strawman argument. You will have to admit that even in war there is a lot of middleground between nuking crabs and nuking women and children at home.

    It's pretty far fetched to simply assume that the civilian victims of the Japanese military were wishing their fate to be used as a justification for atrocities against their equally innocent counterparts, yet - as you rightfully state -this is how the game was played on all sides. It is also the point I was trying to make when I was talking about Allied atrocities, taking the readers' knowledge of the Axis' atrocities as a given. I'll have to admit that you did a better job at that when you said:

    "But it must be remembered that during WW-2 massive attacks against civilian populations (war crimes) were the defining tactic of all participants."

    It is strange to read those numbers about the loss of human life while they are just that, numbers. The suffering they represent are already beyond comprehension long before we reach the last digit. "The death of an individual is a tragedy, the death of millions merely a statistic." is how Stalin put it. And in a way the truthfullnes of his point is a tragedy in itself.

  • Jack_Burton

    idiot

  • Jack_Burton

    Nuking them was the right thing to do. It prob ended up saving more lives by far would of there been an invasion of Japan.
    If we invaded Japan, millions of Japanese would of died, not to mention our own troops. Hell, I would of Nuked 3 more cities if it ment saving more American lives..

  • aivoton

    Wow. Americans; not only a nation of retards but also of pure
    evils. Hopefully one day a few nukes will strike back.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Art-Vinette/100002176783386 Art Vinette

    Well done documentary on the two atomic bombs dropped on Japan to end World War II. These two nuclear bombs what ever people might say did end World War II and saved a million lives or more had America been forced to invade Japan. The Japanese would not surrender and would have prefered to die fighting. So the two nuclear warheads were seen as the only alternative.

    Married to a Japanese woman for several years the anger of World War II is still very strong in the elder Japanese who endured the American Prison Camps of this time. Prejuidice is still very strong against any white person whether or not they are American, which I found to be interesting since I was from Canada.

    That Hiroshima has once again grown into a city of 1 million people in only 66 years time shows the resilence and toughness of the human race. A city that was once destroyed by an atomic weapon is now thriving and successful again.

    A well done documentary that shows the horrors of war and what people will do to end wars. May the two atomic weapons dropped on Japan be the only two such weapons dropped on a human civilization now that the horror of their destruction is known.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ND66NVRL3IAQDGRXQ5WNOILIVY Chris Halliday

    hi

  • NEDUNURI RANGARAO

    i pray this will not happen again any where in the world

  • melloyeyo

    I don’t know why many comments reflect an intention to justify war, death and destruction. From any human perspective, it’s impossible to validate war. “Saving people” killing other people is the most stupid justification there is. A philosopher from my country wrote: “when you want peace, you don’t prepare for war”. War is an anachronism, is uncivilized and inhuman from any point of view. If we are the only living being with highly developed communication, why the biggest part of our resources is destined to the industry of killing people? You may put the most beautiful patriotic music in the background, still, war is infantile and reflect underdeveloped societies.

  • AlfBeta

    I went to a public library 20? years ago and read Australian newspapers of the nuclear attacks on Japan. First, Uranium Hiroshima, 8.15 a.m aug6, second, Plutonium Nagasaki 10am aug9. Then I read the previous days paper, and the one before that and the one before that,and back and back. One thing was clear, 100 days!! of bombing raids on naval docks, airfields, military installations, factories, and no doubt other things not to be mentioned to delicate western ears, . BUT, one clear fact. By aug6 Japan had no plane that could fly, no ship that could sail. I since read a western source that Japan's first surrender note did not make it to President Truman (who replaced suddendeath President just in time to drop the Big One) on account of a telegram boy who got lost. Such is my flawed contribution to the collective memory of the truth

  • http://www.facebook.com/lioness.souljah Chanel Viner

    This is not a post of anger or a product of any offended emotions, it is one of sharing understanding in hope that you will see a different light.
    The problem is that there is still ignorant thinking people like you that allow hate to breed and that keep us from loving each other. All people are different from each other in this world in one way or another. It is our differences that make us uniquely beautiful, and it is also what makes our world an eternally interesting an amazing place to be. However different we are all the same in flesh; humans, animals and all beings. Those types of thoughts are what racism is built on and we are far too educated as conscious beings in our century to still be thinking in those ways. Each life was created equally, and each deserves the fullness of equality in all ways for all living life. For you to hold hate in your heart towards innocent beings is a crime of morality and value, against not only to yourself but to the natural essence of life and all of us. For you cannot love others if you dont love your self and I pray that love heals you and you find peace in your heart. Bless

  • His Forever

    Absolutely riveting!

  • ronnieron1759

    Originally intended for use against Nazi Germany? What a load of crap! Half of the technology they got from defected Nazi's and captured war criminals. Germany actually had the technology before the allies but didn't have a sufficient enough supply of hard water to implement it. I love how these kind of documentaries NEVER give enemies any credit for anything. As if the winning side thought it all up themselves, Hahahahaha!

  • Bojan Kverh

    Simply put, this was genocide of the worst kind. Too bad that people, who ordered this, won't be put to justice...

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001825191848 James del Valle

    within the 1st minute and 30 seconds you can realise why it did happen and why it is very likely to happen again, does glorification of death and Suicide Bombers justify using it?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_5QABDWCDWFQJP5Y3IOGHEJATG4 Mr. Japitana

    My great grandfather and grandfather were both killed by the Japanese. How many of your relatives were killed? I assume none. Easy for you to say.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_5QABDWCDWFQJP5Y3IOGHEJATG4 Mr. Japitana

    My great grandfather and grandfather were both killed by the Japanese. How many of your relatives were killed? I assume none. Easy for you to say.

  • Bojan Kverh

    What difference does it make?
    Since dropping an A bomb on innocent civilians seems such an noble act to you, why did you bother invading Afghanistan and Iraq on land? Shouldn't you just drop few A bombs and everything would be over in a matter of minutes? You know how many American lives this would save?
    I understand the reasons, why A bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but this doesn't mean this was not a genocide.

  • montu asrani

    A nuclear was bombed by nature this year(by nature) !!! japan u need more luck

  • xiahoudun

    interesting, u know about the sook ching, not many people know. In retrospect, the japanese do have a certain martial valour in them. I have never seen any example in history where the individuals gives up so much for the collective. Even as i hate yamashita i do give him credit for his commitment to his cause, as well as tacitical brillance.

  • DanishHawaiian

    Oxbow you have forgotten or maybe you didn't know that Harry Truman was debriefed prior to the bombing of Pearl Harbor that the Japanese planned to attack Pearl Harbor. Harry chose to sit on this information and not let the Navy personnel stationed at PH know about the imminent attack so that the USA would have a reason to drop the Atomic bombs on Japan.
    Truman and his advisors knew that the American people would not be able to justify the attacks on Japan any other way than to believe that the Japanese had attacked us first... so, Harry and his military buddies kept hush hush about the imminent attack by the Japanese and sacrificed our soldiers on an early Sunday morning to "Justify" the use of atomic weapons. The USA even sold steel to the Japanese to help them build their military capabilities.
    The Japanese doctor said it correctly at the end of the documentary. The American military wanted to experiment with the "A" bomb to see what it was capable of and they wanted to test it on Humans. How is this any different from what the Nazi's did in Germany except that the Nazi's did it up close and personal???

  • DanishHawaiian

    The problem is that it is not the people of the countries, but the Governments of the countries. The Governments create wars to profit from them. The people do not for the most part. There may be jobs created in the government sector (the DOD and NASA and all military forces) because of war, but the benefits are not to the people whose tax dollars are funding the wars at a very high interest rate.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=773330034 James Parry

    True this was a horrible act but Pearl Harbour was also a brutal event... The Japanese, in terms of war during this period were a brutal force. If this had not happened there is a very strong chance the war would have continued for years down the line resulting in just as many if not more deaths.

    Although I find it difficult to accept the dropping of the bomb in many ways it had to happen not just for the war at the time but also for future times such as today. We look back at this event and know never to go there again / to try prevent it from occurring again.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Scott-Hegman/1001096640 Scott Hegman

    Reap the wind, sow the whirlwind. The people that brought this on the Japanese were the Japanese themselves.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Scott-Hegman/1001096640 Scott Hegman

    Suppose the Germans and the Japanese had the atomic bomb first. The US could have gone on on a world conquest that would have made many countries giddy. But they didn't and that says a lot more than you could fathom.

  • http://www.facebook.com/ElmoPutz David Foster

    Lots of things are easy to say, now that we have the internet. There's even a fairly good chance that we won't get knocked on our asses for saying it! :-)

  • http://www.facebook.com/ElmoPutz David Foster

    "Genocide" is when you set out to eradicate a particular group of people simply because they ARE a particular group of people. This was something completely different. We did not 'need' to bomb Hiroshima -- which only happened because we ran out of Germans. Rather, we 'took the opportunity' to show the rest of the world that WE would be in charge from now on.. Because, as we all know, the world is a MUCH safer place with only ONE bully on the playground!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UKLFZYXNGE3UPJEGWFVS5YP6XU el filibusterismo

    maaan... where do you get your weed, dude?? gimme some of that BC bud!
    but yeah, life and the human race is cool and shiz. youre right.

  • Jack1952

    What a lot of nonsense. The United States was not on a mission to kill Germans or Japanese. Most Americans at the time were isolationists and thought Europe should fight its own battles. Japan struck first.
    They did it because the United States finally decided not to sell the Japanese any more oil. The oil embargo was put in place because Japan invaded China, Mongolia, fought a short was against Russia, invaded French Indo-china and threatened Indonesia.
    The Americans should actually be criticized for selling them oil for as long as they did. With nearly 50,000,000 dead because of the war, everyone was glad at the time that those nuclear weapons were used and that every one could finally go home. As bad as things are in Iraq, it is a picnic compared to WW2.

    Of course, there may have been some who wanted to show off the weapons but the prime reason for dropping the bombs was to force Japan to end the war right away. Strangely enough, Japan did so nine days after the first bomb was dropped. Strange coincidence.

    People want to apply the wrong doings of America to every thing that they have ever done. The people who fought the Nazi alliance do not deserve this....unless, of course, you would have preferred the Nazis to win. That would explain your moral or immoral outrage.

  • Jack1952

    Some people claim, today, that the Japanese were about to surrender. There was no indication of this at the time. In fact, the Kamikaze raids seemed to show that the Japanese were prepared to fight till the bitter end. WW2 had already proved how stubborn some nations were prepared to be. England wouldn't quit, even when the situation seemed bleak. The Soviet Union incurred incredible losses and still refused to surrender. The Germans fought until enemy troops were just a few blocks from Hitler's bunker. The possibility of having to go through this again must have been frightening, especially since the Japanese soldiers have proven themselves to tough and determined combatants. Most of those criticizing the United States would not have been nearly as critical in Aug. 1945.

  • Guest

    This was much harder to watch than I expected it to be, and I didn't expect it to be easy. For those who haven't seen it yet, I recommend to anyone of you who have kids, or who genuinely care about them (in fact, probably nearly everyone, I guess...), to just take my word for it and skip from minute 56 to minute 59, unless you're capable of completely checking your empathy at the door. Don't bother letting this maybe arouse your interest... Just do it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mark-Willey/1635499118 Mark Willey

    It seems easy for many of us to pass judgments when we sit on our "thrones" and criticize. WE didn't struggle, WE didn't go through this hell, WE don't understand completely....and yet time after time I notice the "intelligent" or the "better informed" among us once again passing judgment. There is a comment here thought that I do appreciate....the focus that we should have is taking what we already know and preparing ourselves so that a tragedy like this (WWII, Hiroshima, Stalin, etc.) will NEVER happen again!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Philip-Protagonist-Wilson/550306565 Philip Protagonist Wilson

    I am thankful that you do or do not feel. People died on both sides. Nationality is not an identity. Neither act shows a love for those we bear genetic similarities with. Pearl harbor? Nagasaki? These are people who are dead to represent the futures we may hold. I cried. A "Jap" life versus an American one... what weight measurement are we using? Lives saved? Yes this war could have cost more... or was it just enough?
    -sad human.

  • ??? ??

    My grandfather and 3 other relatives on my mother's side were killed by the Americans.
    One relative on my father's was killed by the Japanese.

    Being in the position that I am I would like to say that it was a crazy world at a crazy time, it was a WORLD WAR.
    People around the world lost many loved ones no matter what side they were on.
    Everything isn't just a one side story man.
    Both sides had their reasons and the sense that they were the ones that was serving justice.

    The Japanese DID do a lot of shitty stuff and I admit it and am sorry that it all happened.
    I just think that it would be nice that some people would just grow up and admit that using the atomc bomb was a shitty move too.
    Why do you think nobody actually uses it now????

  • Gladius2

    correct is: si vis pacem para bellum! If you want peace prepare for war. Pacifism is an Utopian and stupid idea, there will never be peace on earth as long there are living creatures. War and violence is a part of nature - the strugel for life. There is always someone who wants something so badly that he will use force to get it and if you do not defend yourself you are going to lose everything including your life.

  • patriotbill

    In reply to Jack1952,I could not of said it better myself

  • Xbow

    Your commentary is proof that before posting a person should know something about the subject before he does so. You apparently don't. Your analyses and resulting commentary is both childish and trite. (not to mention just plain dumb)

    To Enlighten You
    Note: (I will use worst case KIA estimates throughout)
    There were several ways to end the War with Japan:
    ?1)Blockade and The War in China
    A) Continue and tighten the blockade and the conventional bombing of Japan. This would have amounted to a grand siege. The estimated death toll for a two year blockade of Japan and attacks on its transportation and agriculture infrastructures were estimated to be over 3,000,0000 from starvation 1,000,000 from bombardment.

    B)Expand the war in China and exterminate the ~1,000,000 Japanese troops that were still operating there in 1945.This would have resulted in a minimum of 1,000,000 more Chinese civilian deaths, the loss of 150,000 allied troops and as many as a 500,000 Chinese soldiers.

    VJ day 1947? total deaths from option 6,000,000 to 7,000,000.
    ?2)Invasion of the Japanese Home Islands by conventional forces and continued conventional bombardment.

    A) In that case the estimated Japanese military deaths were estimated at 2,000,000 and the civilian deaths at 10,000,000 or more. The allied deaths were estimated to have been at least 1,000,000 and twice that wounded.

    Note: These numbers were based on the battle for Okinawa. 13,000 allied killed, 100,000 IJA soldiers killed, 150,000 Japanese civilians killed.

    B) And in that case the Russians would have invaded the island of Hokkaido and the Northern quarter of Honshu estimated 2,000,000 Japanese Military and civilian deaths 500,000 Russian KIA's.
    VJ day 1947? Estimated total deaths from option 15,000,000 to 16,000,000.

    Note: This is what the Japanese High command wanted because they surmised that if they could bleed the USA enough we would accept their surrender on their terms.

    ?3) Nuclear bombing of Japanese cities
    250,000 -300,000 Japanese deaths TOTAL.
    *****Lets recap*****
    Blockade + China 6 to 7 megadeaths
    Invasion of Japan 15 to 16 megadeaths
    Nuclear Bombing 0.25 to 0.30 megadeaths

    Are you sure that we nuked Japan ONLY because we wanted to prove to the world how tough we were?

  • Robert Fletcher

    Another liberal response=idiocy and a perfidious philosophy of life.

  • http://www.facebook.com/PewerJenius Javier Cordero

    So .... Was this worth watching or not? Comments should be reserved to whether or not the video was interesting, or bad, or worth my time. Your opinions and such should be left to a forum ... Just rate the stupid movie and stfu.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1006929679 Sanat Kumara

    the fact is simple. it was the best way to stop the Japanese. Their attrocities was just getting too much.

  • hey_okay

    This must have been such a hard decision to make. Hundreds of thousands of civilians were killed, but if the Allied Forces had invaded Japan, there could possibly have been millions of civilians killed, and don't forget the Armed Forces. I wish it didn't happen, but it was the lesser of two evils you could say. The Japanese would not surrender, they fought to the death, which had been recorded so many times throughout all of the Pacific battles. Also for what its worth, I have heard many Japanese say that they don't hate Americans for what happened - it was war and it took something this drastic to stop it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/isindahowz Jakob Isindahowz

    I think they say they dropped the bombs for certain reasons BUT I really think that if they had bombed a much less populated area the messaged still would have come across very clearly. They really chose these 2 cities for real life tests on 2 very different cities in terms of structures and landscape etc. Americans chose to destroy not 1 but 2 cities full of innocent civilians strictly for cold scientific purpose with the excuse of ending the war. Had the Americans lost, they're country would likely have faced the same stigma as the germans for needlessly slaughtering half a million -mostly innocent civilian-people. It really just proves that those who win wars write the history books because there is no way anyone can convince me they had no choice but to do what they did. Mass murder is what it is and the fact that this is propagated like it was a good thing to end the war is disgusting and shows how naive people are to actually believe the official line of BS. Never in the history of the world have that many INNOCENT CIVILIANS been annihilated by an intentional act by a country in such a short period of time. One for the record books but somehow I doubt that it is mentioned in one. Just imagine the black eye any other country would have had they done this.

  • http://www.facebook.com/isindahowz Jakob Isindahowz

    Obviously there are alot of Americans trying to argue that they had no choice, and I agree the Japanese would fight to the death because they are/were a people of great honour. However, there is nothing you can say that can legitimize A bombing not 1 but 2 cities full of civilians, nothing. Its not like they couldn't have chosen a different target, say one without hundreds of thousands of people, to make their point. There is loads of evidence that they did this as a test but on a real city with real people. They immediatly sent scientists for evidence and tests etc. The Japs did some terrible things, as have most, but I wonder if they would have done what the Americans did given the choice. I don't think they would.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=689912261 John Christopher McDonald

    Video is blocked - Copyright claim

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002671611494 Delicate Doll

    Video is blocked - Copyright claim

  • ThePhilhw

    fully agree.
    well said.

  • L0LAW0NKA

    Of all places why Japan? It's such a beautiful country. What would our world be like without them?? No new technologies, no new cars, no anime?!? Nooooooo, the horror!!
    <333 Japan

  • tkdpirate

    Thanks to the dickhead who complained until this video was removed/

  • Freedom_Vigilance

    The Mitsubishi Arms Plant was a legitimate military target, AND the USA dropped thousands of flyers written in Japanese, warning the people to flee because this city was targeted to be bombed. This bomb ENDED the war and saved thousands, if not millions of lives -- Japanese as well as Allied. It was the RIGHT decision.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002476164900 Asakura Haru

    Japan was on the verge of defeat anyways. Japan knew, and the world knew. Dropping a bomb that wiped out an entire populated city in a 4km radius, killing hundreds of civilians and left thousands with psychological/physical sufferings is not necessary.

  • listen_fool

    You're kidding yourself if you think Japan was going to give up without more bloodshed. Dropping the bomb probably saved more Japanese lives than it cost.. not to mention the lives of more Americans, who didn't want a war in the first place.

  • Mark Kirkwood

    Most Japanese do not even know the true history of WW2. I have worked with many young Japanese who had never been told the truth about what Japan did in China, the pacific or to the US. ALL of the Japanese youth that have learned what really happened where very ashamed and shocked.

    Most have never seen the videos of whole families running off of rock clefts to save them selves from the American monsters who where going to eat them. They where so brain washed they had no IDEA what the real truth was.

    Japan would have never surrender Just as Germany never surrendered.
    That is the truth.

  • Mark Kirkwood

    LOL You are very wrong. If Japan had the bomb they would have started the war with it and used it every chance they had. They placed no value on life! Look at what they did in China and the Pacific. They where not nice people to put it kindly.

  • Mark Kirkwood

    Japan bombed and killed innocent people. War kills everyone. No one is safe in war. They would have all dies anyway. They where so brain washed with propaganda and honor that the street to street fighting would have decimated Japan to the point of no return. Far more peoples lives where saved by killing in this manner. The point of dropping the bomb what that it has to cost something for some people to get the point.

  • wt1776

    I think they would have used it first if they had had it, as would have the Germans. And if it didn't require the loss of so much life to get them to surrender, then why did it take TWO cities full of people to get them to surrender?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Brad-Whodat-Tomlinson/1812724587 Brad Whodat Tomlinson

    "Why did they kill CIVILIANS?! I mean the Japanese for all the reasons that they had attacked the navy and those working for/with the navy, away from their women and children."

    The Japanese SLAUGHTERED Chinese civilians by the ******* millions. And any invasion of Japan itself would have inevitably killed civilians. Its a certainty that lives on all sides and of all kinds were saved by these bombs. Had Japan's ruling elite been ready to surrender it would have been unnecessary. They were not.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Brad-Whodat-Tomlinson/1812724587 Brad Whodat Tomlinson

    "NaoCat reply was correct, Usa purposely use Japan as a target to use their new toy!"

    Against a nation had at that point no intention of surrendering and which would have fought to the death of many more of it's own civilians without the use of these toys.

    Some people are like children and just can not wrap there heads around some of the world's harsher realities. They abhor specific horrors of war and simply can not grasp how some of these horrors are often the only thing that will avoid even greater horrors.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Brad-Whodat-Tomlinson/1812724587 Brad Whodat Tomlinson

    "Sorry but American militarists knew damn well that that "opportunity" would not be accepted - what reason did Japan have to surrender at that point!? None."

    Knowing that your enemy is resolved to be decimated before considering surrender does not place the burden on you to prevent it. And know one was sure what the long-term effects would be. It took years of testing to determine that. But it simply does not stand to reason that had they known everything there is to know about the effects of the atomic bomb they would have taken a different course. The most powerful members of the Japanese War Council were preparing for a ******* invasion that would have killed far more than were killed by the bombs and they KNEW just how bad that was going to be. We know they knew. They had already accepted the reality of something WORSE than the bombs. In other words, they were not thinking rationally but THEY WERE IN POWER.

    "There was no explicit warning of "we are going to drop nuclear weapons on you, kill hundreds of thousands, and destroy entire cities"

    Even after the first ******* bomb was dropped they resisted and at that point they SAW hundreds of thousands and an entire city destroyed in an instant. There was an attempted coup that was put down by these people. Hiroshima leveled in a minute and they still refused to surrender? It took TWO bombs, remember???

    Your opinion makes no sense. Learn more about the war please.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1096206214 Aidan Skillings

    Wow, there's a lot of controversy regarding the use of the Atomic bomb. I suppose that is to be expected though. Honestly, it's impossible to say what would have done more damage. There is no right or wrong here, it just happened, and may or may not have been right. I really wish people wouldn't declare war on one another, but what happens during the war happens I suppose. There's no use bitching about what's happened, and won't bring anyone back..

  • http://www.facebook.com/glen.hale2 Glen Hale

    Every USA president since the 1940's wanted war the big banks fund the enemy so they can keep the countries at war and make money from both sides. The Federal Reserve Bank is privately owned by big banks not the Feds.
    Wake up USA you are being used.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Russell-Cobb/747504060 Russell Cobb

    The Invasion of Japan was well known from other invasions and who they were fighting for the american government to expect just how many deaths there would be, from both sides. In fact the Army, as trinity was unkown and top secret from the rest of the world at this point, had millions of purple hearts made in preparation for the coming slaughter. This is why a new purple heart hasn't been made since because America has them on stockpile from this possible invasion. The Bomb had calculated risks and if we hadn't used them then, we would have used them at a later date, maybe in the korean war, vietnam war, or any other war we'v been in. having understood the possibilities of the bomb after hiroshima and nagasaki we now know they aren't the types of bombs you simply lob at an enemy.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/CPDI4WFIPI5MJC47Y7J3WFXKSA Neale Jr

    Many people seem to seek justification of the usage of nuclear weapons in Japan, racking it up to a necessary evil to quell a nation bent on war. This will be a question debated for generations past the one that actually fought. We must however accept the terrible truth that we caused innocent people to suffer horror upon horror upon pain regardless of the rationale. The real people that should have suffered were the generals and militarists that sought out war and fought it for the delusions of glory and honor. However the Japanese people have learned the hardest lesson that the rest of mankind should take notice of; war itself is the enemy, and it is a fruitless endeavor. This will be the lesson that we must learn if we are to survive as a species on a small planet in the vastness of the universe.

  • Kashif k

    I think we should realize that bombing a city would never end the war ……………………it would just move the energy from one point to another .

  • http://www.facebook.com/jamie.soule1 Jamie Soule

    Your advertising is RIDICULOUS! I just love how it cuts in at a vital point and then screws up the video. Awesome...

  • http://www.facebook.com/mike.chambers.9440 Mike Chambers

    I'm 29 this April, so as a part of the younger generations I would just like to say, don't count on it!

  • Obama

    In USA, we will kill innocent civilians around the world, be it Japan or Vietnam or Iraq, we will suck your blood for our benefit, you better shut your mouth because we are US of A!

  • Obama

    Yes only American know the truth, only our version of story is the ultimate truth, American media and politicians have the highest integrity!

  • Obama

    Yeah we Americans are the most innocent and good people! the rest of the world has weapons of mass destruction, we only save people!

  • Andrés Bascones Zamora

    Doesn´t matter how you put it, these two bombs are the biggest atrocity ever commited by human kind, period

  • martin

    How about a war that ends all wars?

  • awful_truth

    Commercials aside, (they suck) this was a good documentary, and well worth checking out for a look at the worst side of humanity. Note: the one flaw is the consensus that Japan had the chance to surrender at Potsdam, but didn't. (wrong) Scientists themselves agreed that the A-bomb should have been dropped off the Japanese coast to demonstrate what they really had in their possession, and were flat out ignored. (you don't spend 2 billion dollars for a demonstration) Furthermore, if the positions were reversed, would the U.S have just rolled over from Japanese threats of imminent destruction?
    Needless to say, there was a reason that the 2 remaining A-bombs were on route 2 hours after the successful Trinity test, (Pearl Harbor) and the justification of nuking cities to save lives is mere rhetoric for the love of war. These comments are not a support of Japanese behaviour, (especially in China) only recognition that killing innocents (as long as they are not yours) is acceptable, even when they have no chance to defend themselves. (Japan no longer had air support) As Bill Maher so eloquently put it, (I am paraphrasing) it is an act of cowardice to drop bombs from 60,000 feet; it takes balls to fly a jet into something knowing it will kill you)
    Besides, I have no doubt that the U.S, Russia, China, England, France, Germany, etc, etc love to sell their 2nd generation military hardware to brown people, so they can build them up as a future threat for the fifth generation onslaught they wish to test in the near future. For further insight, check out 'War is a racket' - Smedley Darlington Butler)

  • Matuvo Namikaze

    .....america did this...and they did not have to. there was more than one solution, this was just the most suitable to them, they could do less work, then by all means.

  • Matuvo Namikaze

    Ms. Kinoku, now THAT, is a strong woman

  • uwcb

    All the commercials kill the doc.

  • Ronald Biggs

    Really? The Japanese soldiers murdered more civilians in one night sometimes. You should read up on what they did to the civilians in Manila.

  • Ronald Biggs

    LOL No they did not drop flyers warning people to flee from Hiroshima or Nagasaki. They were bombed without warning, that was the whole point. If you warn people and they all run away then it's just a big firework.

  • Ronald Biggs

    If the bombs were dropped on a much less populated area then it just would have been a big firework and it would have made the Americans look as if they were afraid to use it. I am not arguing if dropping the bomb was right or wrong only that if you are going to use it you drop it on a city and you give no advanced warning.

  • Ronald Biggs

    Actually the Japanese were trying to get the Russians to help them negotiate a surrender.

  • Ronald Biggs

    The scientists came from all over the world. Do you realize the size of the program that was needed to build the bombs? Germany could never of done this during the war due to allied bombing even if they had the heavy water. And if no one was bombing them it still would have taken them at least a decade. The Americans had a much better infrastructure to make this program happen.

  • Elmo Putz

    As always, the proof is in the outcome, not the rhetoric.

  • Nathan Davies

    (Forgive my spelling mistakes if there are
    any). Whoever is responsible for this act should be taken to court and charged
    and even possibly executed for something as bad as this, we must set the
    example that we take the rules of wore seriously even if the Geneva
    conventions didn't exist then. The Geneva conventions where not signed at the
    time when the Nazis committed there wore crimes yet we were still able to
    charge them, so that means that the USA also are not excused for what they did
    because it was a time before the Geneva conventions where signed.

    We charged Hitler's men for wore crimes
    because they lost the wore but people who commit wore crimes even on the winning
    side should also be charged, a wore crime is still a wore crime. Japan should
    be charged for the wore crimes they committed as well, among other countries.
    We must set the example that we take wore crimes seriously if committed by either
    side.

    Don't get me started on Vietnam and Iraqi.
    This was after the Geneva conventions where signed but nowone where charged for
    the deliberate slaughter of civilians that happened there. What about Guantanamo
    bay and the list goes on. Do we even enforce the Geneva conventions, if we
    don't then what was the point in making them.