On the Japanese pre-planning about the invasion by the USSR, the work of Yukiko Koshiro has been eye-opening for me. On the timing of the bombs and etc., see esp. @GordinMichael 's "Five Days in August."
Show this thread
-
My point is that the "2 bombs on 2 cities in 3 days versus invasion" framework is inadequate, historically. It's a postwar creation meant to justify the bombings, not a reflection of how it was seen by anyone involved at the time.
You seem to be wanting to get into the moral question (which I've not really ventured into in this thread at all, just poked at), which is something a bit different from that.
-
-
But if I were to prod you on the moral question, here's how I'd frame it: Under what conditions is it moral act for a state to deliberately set hundreds of thousands of civilians on fire, by any means, to achieve its military or political aims?
-
I'm not saying there aren't any. Maybe they're the conditions you've outlined. But it refocuses attention around the specific means. Because in the end, if you are going to imply that the ends always justify the means in such a situation — that's a pretty dark road to go down.
-
But to your general point, in no way would I want to imply that the war wasn't hell, and especially for the peoples occupied or captured by the Japanese. I don't let them off the hook. I try to not let *anyone* off the hook.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Not at all. I'm adding a significant point of context in terms of information available to allied decision makers, adding pressure on them to get to a decisive result, which is important factually. Japan didn't look beaten to anyone looking *at the hemisphere* - merely isolated.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.