- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
What If: Would America Have Nuked Nazi Germany?
Posted on 6/23/16 at 2:36 pm
Posted on 6/23/16 at 2:36 pm
Let's say we developed two working nuclear bombs in March 1945 instead of August 1945. Just as Japan was going to be defeated by the Allies in the summer of 1945, it was clear the Nazis were finished by March. Russia was advancing on Berlin and we were mopping up resistance in western Germany/the Netherlands.
England and the United States felt that the Soviets were already empire building but Eisenhower opted for the cautious approach anyhow. Would having nuclear weapons changed that strategy? Also, do you feel we nuked Japan but may not have nuked Germany under similar circumstances due to racial opinions of Japanese people at the time?
England and the United States felt that the Soviets were already empire building but Eisenhower opted for the cautious approach anyhow. Would having nuclear weapons changed that strategy? Also, do you feel we nuked Japan but may not have nuked Germany under similar circumstances due to racial opinions of Japanese people at the time?
16
Posted on 6/23/16 at 2:38 pm to ClientNumber9
quote:
Would having nuclear weapons changed that strategy? Also, do you feel we nuked Japan but may not have nuked Germany under similar circumstances due to racial opinions of Japanese people at the time?
Really? Have a downvote.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 2:40 pm to ClientNumber9
We should have nuked all other countries back then and it would just be us now. By this time the dust would have settled over the radioactive material and America would be the world. 
Posted on 6/23/16 at 2:46 pm to ClientNumber9
of course we'd have used them. If you think we wouldn't have, then what do you think the US 8th Air Force had been doing the entire war up to that point?
This post was edited on 6/23/16 at 2:49 pm
Posted on 6/23/16 at 2:47 pm to ClientNumber9
Moscow would've been better, saved 30 million more lives.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 2:49 pm to ClientNumber9
quote:
Also, do you feel we nuked Japan but may not have nuked Germany under similar circumstances due to racial opinions of Japanese people at the time?
Massive troop landings had already taken place in Europe...one of the motivations for the bomb was to keep from having to do a D-Day type invasion of Japan (which would have cost a shite-load of U.S. lives).
Posted on 6/23/16 at 2:52 pm to ClientNumber9
quote:
Also, do you feel we nuked Japan but may not have nuked Germany under similar circumstances due to racial opinions of Japanese people at the time
:sigh:
Of course. Sure. Why not. Everything is always about race so why not this too.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 2:53 pm to ClientNumber9
frick everyone that isn't us.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 2:53 pm to ClientNumber9
Probably, but I'd imagine it was much easier to pull the trigger on Japan considering A) Pearl Harbor and B) a different culture/race. The Japanese didn't look like most of us and they attacked us first without a declaration of war.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 2:56 pm to ClientNumber9
We were working on the bomb in order to beat Germany to the punch. So, I reject the racist element to these revisionist comments. Germany surrendered before we even had a device to test.
Japan, in the face of stubborn resistance, refused to capitulate. Their efforts in places like Iwo Jima and Okinawa put them on the wrong side of the cost-benefit analysis. Hell, there is a solid argument Japan nuked themselves, in a manner of speaking.
Race had nothing to do with the decision. Race had everything to do with the Anti-Japanese propaganda, but what is often ignored is that China was our ally.
You know what's really ironic about all this? The Japanese were/are extremely racist, even against other Asians, particularly before August 1945 when they got a double dose of instant humility.
Japan, in the face of stubborn resistance, refused to capitulate. Their efforts in places like Iwo Jima and Okinawa put them on the wrong side of the cost-benefit analysis. Hell, there is a solid argument Japan nuked themselves, in a manner of speaking.
Race had nothing to do with the decision. Race had everything to do with the Anti-Japanese propaganda, but what is often ignored is that China was our ally.
You know what's really ironic about all this? The Japanese were/are extremely racist, even against other Asians, particularly before August 1945 when they got a double dose of instant humility.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 2:56 pm to slackster
Obama would have apologized to Berlin instead of Hiroshima
Posted on 6/23/16 at 2:56 pm to biglego
quote:
Of course. Sure. Why not. Everything is always about race so why not this too.
I'm not sure why people are acting like race was irrelevant to the discussion. Do I think it was a primary factor? No, but I also think it makes it a bit easier to green light a nuclear weapon when the opposition is of a different race and culture.
This post was edited on 6/23/16 at 2:57 pm
Posted on 6/23/16 at 2:58 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
of course we'd have used them
I think the only way we would have used them is if we had a suspicion that Germany had a working bomb.
From everything I've read, the plan was always to bomb Japan... although that was because by the time the bomb was nearing completion we knew that the war in Germany was winding down.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 2:59 pm to ClientNumber9
Japan struck us first at Pearl Harbor on American soil so it was a necessary aggressive response nothing really with race.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 3:00 pm to madmaxvol
There was an immense amount of desire to not have to use them even against Japan. But as you said, the decision to drop them was based on the casualty estimation in Operation Downfall, which was estimated to be in the millions.
Additionally, Hiroshima (the first target) was very populated but still was a very cautious target. Then the follow-up action of giving the Japanese high command the option of surrender before Nagasaki shows that the US clearly did not want to continue using them.
There's no way the US would have used them in Europe, we had too many allies and interest in not obliterating Germany. We were virtually alone in the Pacific campaign and the strategic benefits of defending an island weighed heavily on that decision.
Additionally, Hiroshima (the first target) was very populated but still was a very cautious target. Then the follow-up action of giving the Japanese high command the option of surrender before Nagasaki shows that the US clearly did not want to continue using them.
There's no way the US would have used them in Europe, we had too many allies and interest in not obliterating Germany. We were virtually alone in the Pacific campaign and the strategic benefits of defending an island weighed heavily on that decision.
This post was edited on 6/23/16 at 3:03 pm
Posted on 6/23/16 at 3:00 pm to slackster
quote:
I also think it makes it a bit easier to green light a nuclear weapon when the opposition is of a different race and culture.
Meh. You're projecting your biases about your own people from that period, IMHO. Was there a racist component to the way we ran the propaganda campaign? Surely. That's always done - 100% of the time. But, we also used stereotypical tropes against the whiter than sour cream Germans, too. That's warfare.
The Japanese behavior under fire earned them those bombs, IMHO. It was deemed more cost effective to use the bombs and it was. Plus, those bombs actually saved Japanese lives, as well as American. That's pretty doggone racist if you ask me - saving Japanese lives.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 3:00 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
I reject the racist element to these revisionist comments
Not to mention we firebombed the shite out of Germany. It wasn't like German civilians got off easy. More Germans civilians were killed in the war than Japanese.
Posted on 6/23/16 at 3:03 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Japan, in the face of stubborn resistance, refused to capitulate. Their efforts in places like Iwo Jima and Okinawa put them on the wrong side of the cost-benefit analysis. Hell, there is a solid argument Japan nuked themselves, in a manner of speaking. Race had nothing to do with the decision. Race had everything to do with the Anti-Japanese propaganda, but what is often ignored is that China was our ally.
Yeah I mean I'm not going to argue that we would have spared Germany because they're Caucasians. I don't mean to suggest that race/culture played into the actual military decision, but in the cost/benefit analysis, public acceptance of the decision certainly plays a role. The American public in 1945 wasn't going to have any qualms about dropping a nuke on a country that attacked us and dragged us into the war, regardless of their race. The Anti-Japanese propaganda and completely different cultures certainly didn't hurt either.
This post was edited on 6/23/16 at 3:08 pm
Posted on 6/23/16 at 3:05 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Meh. You're projecting your biases about your own people from that period, IMHO.
Both of you are half-right. There was a social component to this, but it was not racism that made the decision more clear. The warrior culture of Japan was a factor in the US dropping the bombs. You have a devout culture that believed everything they were being told by their government and had a cultural heritage based on warfare. You have to resolutely defeat an enemy like that before you can even have peace.
This post was edited on 6/23/16 at 3:09 pm
Posted on 6/23/16 at 3:06 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
The Japanese behavior under fire earned them those bombs, IMHO. It was deemed more cost effective to use the bombs and it was. Plus, those bombs actually saved Japanese lives, as well as American. That's pretty doggone racist if you ask me - saving Japanese lives.
You'll see my point in my previous post, but I completely agree with you. I've never been an apologist for the nukes. I just think it is a bit naïve to act like bombing a different race and culture doesn't help people sleep a bit better at night.
ETA: I'm not really arguing there is anything wrong with this either. I think most of it is human nature.
This post was edited on 6/23/16 at 3:07 pm
Page 1 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News