Interactive Documentary Shows What It Was Like to Drop A-Bomb on Hiroshima

Dropping the Atomic Bomb: Video Game Documentary from Gizmodo on Vimeo.

A project for an Interactive Documentary class at NYU lets viewers assume the roles of crew members of the Enola Gay; the B-29 dropped the atom bomb on Hiroshoma in August, 1945.

Hidezaku Furuya’s work requires each "player" to wear a headset, reading the lines required to execute the Enola Gay’s horrific and world-changing mission. Afterward, the documentary plays back, allowing participants to hear themselves as participants in the recreated death of more than 100,000 people.

Furuya writes about his work:

I want to ask the audience about “justice”. Might is right, or winning is everything. But are victors always right? Also, are losers in all the wrong? Is it right to do anything for justice? Justice for whom? What is Justice? …

This is the inscription on the Hiroshima Atomic Bomb Memorial Monument: “Rest in peace, because the same mistake will not be repeated”. By whom? Of course, by we human beings, not only by Japan.

I believe human beings can lead to the realization of real peaceful world by learning from history beyond generations, cultural gap or religious conflict.

Via: Gizmodo

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. 0
    Necromancerxd says:

    My point is you seem to be on the whole bad USA bad USA band wagon. I’m not even American and i can see how Japan is on a little sympathy trip.

    Here’s what i got out of your statement. "Man why did the US have to drop the Nuke?? All Japan did was bomb their harbor and kill a few innocent people. The US went too far."

    What annoys me is people that keep saying that the US over reacted!!! Were we supposed to telegraph an angry letter?? "Hey Japan why did you do that? That wasn’t nice." No.

    Plus that wasn’t a crime…. It was a global police action.

  2. 0
    Torven says:

    One of the other problems was that the majority of Japan’s industrial capacity, particularly light industry (firearms, ammunition, machine parts and small vehicle components), was not centralized; Japan did not have something similar to Germany’s Rurh.  Instead they used small, almost cottage-industry, workshops spread around residential and commercial zones.  Precision bombing was not well developed at that point; our best precision bombers could put a bomb within 400 feet of the target about half the time.  On a good day, a bomb was going to land somewhere within a quater-mile of the target about half the time.  That meant that in order to attack Japan’s wartime production, we were going to have to drop a large number of highly inaccurate bombs in areas populated by civilians.

    You can argue that an invasion might have directly resulted in fewer civilian deaths than the bomb, though it is doubtful, as Japan had conscripted 28 million civilians into the "volunteer" militia.  Our estimates at the time suggested that as many as 9 million of them could be killed in the taking of the Home Islands.

    On top of that, under the Sanko Sakusen, Chinese civilians were dying at a rate of almost 2,000 per day.  Even if we had done nothing, and managed somehow only to attack military targets, we would have had 4 months to force the Japanese surrender before the decision not to use the atomic bombs cost more civilian lives than the decision to drop them (Note, this is only taking into account civilian deaths in northern China, and does not include civilian deaths in southern China, French Indochina or the Dutch East Indies).

  3. 0
    Zooperman says:

    I’m tired of the hysterical historical revisionists. Read a history book sometime people. The battle of Okinawa was fought from March until late June 1945. Over 50,000 US troops were casualties (including 12,000 dead), and over 100,000 Japanese troops died fighting almost to the last man. In addition, a further 100,000 or so civilians died by crossfire or suicide. Does that sound "on the verge of surrender" to you?

    Even after the A-bombs were dropped, members of the Japanese War Cabinet, backed by loyalists, tried to storm the palace and seize control once Hirohito’s desire to surrender was made known.

    My uncle was due to take part in Operation Olympic, the invasion of the Japanese home islands. Most historical experts agree that Japanese soldiers and civilians were planning to fight a protracted guerilla war, which would have resulted in hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded on both sides. American planners were expecting 1 million US casualties in the first month alone. But luckily, the sudden disappearance of 2 whole cities in mushroom clouds made them rethink. My uncle became a member of the US occupation force instead, and now is a father of 4 and a grandfather of 11. I absolutely think the A-bomb saved his life as well as those of countless thousands, and I support the decision to use it.

  4. 0
    BearDogg-X says:

    Invading Japan would have meant not only fighting Japanese soldiers, but also Japanese civilians who obviously wouldn’t take kindly to enemy invasion.

    The Allies(U.S., Britain, U.S.S.R.) needed a quick surrender to avoid an invasion in the fall of 1945 that would have caused an estimated 250,000 to 1,000,000 Allied casualities, with even greater Japanese losses.

    The A-Bomb was basically a Trump card, a weapon of last resort. Before dropping the bombs and knowing the gravity of the decision, the Allies gave Japan a chance to surrender on July 25th. Three days later, Japan refused.

    Nagasaki actually was not the first target of the second bomb(Fat Man). The Allies originally targeted Kokura and originally planned the mission for later than August 9th, but a typhoon was approaching, causing the mission to be pushed up. Plus, because of cloudcover and haze from the firebombing of another location the previous evening as well as a dwindling fuel supply, they gave up after three passes on Kokura and chose Nagasaki, their second choice. Ironically, the munitions facility they bombed made the torpedoes used at Pearl Harbor. The term Kokura’s Luck(escaping a terrible occurrence without being aware of the danger) is coined.

    A day later, Emperor Hirohito had to force his own Cabinet and military leaders(who still refused to surrender) to admit defeat, and specifically mentioned the Atomic bomb("a new and terrible weapon") as part of his reasoning for surrender in an address to the entire nation on August 15th.

    The person that dropped Fat Man always hoped that it was the last atomic weapon used, saying "I don’t regret dropping the bomb, but I do regret having to drop it."

    The bottom line: Japan wouldn’t have surrendered any other way. To the Japanese, running away from a fight is worse than dying in that same fight. And just bombing Tokyo, Osaka, etc. with regular bombs wouldn’t have mattered, since London was being bombed by Germany just a few years earlier and the British didn’t surrender then.

    So, yeah, it was the case.

    Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.

    Proud supporter of the New Orleans Saints, LSU, 1st Amendment; Real American; Hound of Justice; Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always

    Saints(0-3), LSU(3-0)

  5. 0
    tibuka says:

    "It’s obvious your thinking is coming from an emotional viewpoint here, and not a logical one."

    – Yes. I TRY to be also rational. Not easy.

    " So no, it wasn’t ok, but it was necessary and the best way to end it." – … which would make it ok, wouldn’t? You just said it was NOT ok, then rationalized it.

    – "Your naivete is disturbing." – Thank you. So is your coldness.

    – " But after 50+ years, people need to stop thinking emotionally about these kinds of things." – You should NEVER think completely emotionless about war. That would make it too way to easy to justify.

    I can’t proof there would have been a better way. I can’t argue military decisions, i’m not an expert. But i find it highly unlikely. Your scenario sounds bad, but can you PROOF that it would have played out like that? Can you PROOF that there was no thrid option that COULD have resulted in less deaths (in total)? Unless you do so, i stand by my opinion.

    One should always take that course of action that, to your knowledge, has the best chance to generate in the least harm. I don’t think that was the case here.

  6. 0
    tibuka says:

    Okay, i wasn’t aware of this in detail. It still doesn’t change much about my opinion. The insane amount of collateral damage was willingly accepted, probably even a part of the goal.

    Also my comment wasn’t an appeal to emotion, it entirely came from emotion.

  7. 0
    tibuka says:

    You completely missed my point: You can’t justify a crime with another crime. That’s just revenge.

    I would argue even more against any person that would justify the peral harbor attack.


  8. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:

    Or the Abomb…send 50-100 planes and hundreds of bombs to those 2 city’s the devastation would have been the same and the land war would have been atrocious, so in the end the Abomb was not the worst chain of events to happen since the furor over God Emporer would have had most of the civialain populace in the streets fighting off  the invaders .


    I am a criminal because I purchase media,I am a criminal because I use media, I am a criminal because I chose to own media..We shall remain criminals until Corporate stay’s outside our bedrooms..

  9. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    And that makes it ok to gloss over the west activities does it? "Yes we did but THEY WERE WORSE"? Something like that? History is written by the winners? Something like that?


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  10. 0
    Wormdundee says:

     It’s obvious your thinking is coming from an emotional viewpoint here, and not a logical one. Was it ok? No, I don’t think any rational human being would say it’s fine and dandy to kill hundreds of thousands of people. So no, it wasn’t ok, but it was necessary and the best way to end it.

    They weighed the pros and cons and dropping the bombs was the most efficient and least costly way to end the war. Do you really think it would have been better to send in a land invasion of Japan and attempt to not harm civilians? At this point, the Japanese would have been defending their homeland, I have no doubt they would have been fighting from civilian buildings. A land invasion would have resulted in the deaths of millions of soldiers and civilians instead of the mere couple hundred thousand from the bombs.

    It sounds harsh, but war is harsh and there’s no such thing as fair. Your naivete is disturbing. You think people back home were laughing and having a good time after the bomb hit? I guarantee grown men were crying at the horror they had wrought.

    This post will probably anger you even more. But after 50+ years, people need to stop thinking emotionally about these kinds of things. It only breeds hatred and intolerance towards men that were following orders that the leaders wished they didn’t have to hand out. 

  11. 0
    11zxcvb11 says:

    "Targeting civilians deliberately is just terrorism."

    Yes, this is entirely true, however, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not bombed because of the civilian population residing there. Nagasaki was an important industrial center and port, home to the Mitsubishi Steel and Arms Works and the Mitsubishi-Urakami Torpedo Works; Hiroshima was an important military center and shipping route, housing around 40ooo miliraty personnel along with the Second Army HQ and Army Marine HQ.

    The other two targets were Kokura Arsenal and Niigata, both chosen for their military and/or industrial value. It should also be noted that Kyoto was also proposed to be considered among the first four targets, but Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson vetoed it as it was Japan’s most cherished cultural center and Nagasaki replaced Kyoto on the target list.

    The last part of your post was just an appeal to emmotion, so I won’t comment upon that.

  12. 0
    Wysgy says:

    I don’t know, from the odd camera angle of the clip, it kinda reminded me of Mystery Science Theater 3000… I almost expected sarcastic comments during the commentary

  13. 0
    tibuka says:

    Intentionally killing more than 200,000 civilians (many by radiation poisoning) can never be justified. Even if japan hadn’t been almost defeated, civilians should never be harmed on purpose in an act of war. I’m not talking about the inevitable collateral damage. Targeting enemy forces and hitting civilians is unfortunate. Targeting civilians deliberately is just terrorism.

    Yeah, japan did bad things. But does that make it ok? Had it been the people of Nagasaki and Hiroshima that did these things? You (the usa) were supposed to be the good guys. Yet you killed these people out of curiosity, revenge, convenience and to intimidate your enemy-to-come. What the hell, they were the enemy! Fuck them!

    Think of it like that: It was pure luck that you weren’t born in the wrong place on the wrong time to get an a-bomb dropped on your head on your sixth birthday. I’m sorry. I didn’t want write something at first, but many of these comments made me very angry.


  14. 0
    Brokenscope says:

    Were not discussing random un-targeted brutality by individual soldiers. We are talking about targeted, systematic, organized brutality, sanctioned and performed by the military and the government.

    The Western Allies were guilty of that, but never on the level that the Germans or the Japanese were.

  15. 0
    Torven says:

    Wow, DarkSaber, that was a compelling argument in defense of your previous comments.  Or are you saying you shouldn’t have been corrected because you feel your fiction is more interesting than reality?

  16. 0
    11zxcvb11 says:

    Maybe it would be a fitting response for some chinese student to make a game entitled "Unit 731". In this game you would run a prison/reseach facility where you could test chemical and biological weapons on inmates (a bit like the "test a weapon on a stormtrooper" feature from that old interactive Star Wars encyclopedia). Depending on your luck at the end of the game, you might end up in a prison, a Siberian labor camp or become the head of a Japanese pharmaceutical company (in case you were granted immunity for selling your research to the Americans).

    Don´t get me wrong, I´m not saying "they were bad so they deserved what they got", merely pointing out that it would be ironic if such a game got made and it would be interesting to see the response of the Japanese public.

  17. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    On the other hand, they also gloss over the unsavoury activities Allied soldiers got up to in the war too.


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  18. 0

    A lot of people pretty much gloss over what Japan did during WWII and the impact it had on that part of the world, it seems a lot of them think that all Japan was responsible for was bombing Pearl Harbor. But eh, it probably doesn’t help that a lot of school history books gloss over Japan and focus more on Germany.

  19. 0
    Ashton says:

    Japan killed millions of Chinese and Koreans during World War 2. They deny it. Some Americans deny it. When a Chinese woman wrote about it, she got bombarded by death threats from Japanese nationalists until she finally commited suicide. But I’m not here to lay blame. There is no question that many, many Chinese still harbor animosity towards the Japanese. I’m not one of them. I wasn’t there when they decided to invade China. I wasn’t there when they murdered civilians in cold blood. Honestly? Even some Japanese back then were horrified their own ‘honorable’ soldiers would do such a thing.

    I want to try to promote the thought that bygones should be bygones. It should be recorded, but it shouldn’t color how we interact now. That’s like if I was bullied by white kids as a child; should I hate all white people now? That’s just a chain of hatred that’ll never be broken. But though many people are saying "Look, China should get the fuck over it," a few years back during the whole history textbook furor, but these same people are siding with the Japanese when they complain about being nuked. This type of double standard is fucking bullshit. If you want to let the past be the past, then it should apply to everyone, not just who you think is on ‘your side’ and who isn’t.

    World War II was bloody as hell and nobody got out without blood on their hands. You’d think that now the more important things would be to focus on how to move past this shit instead of bringing it up every time a Chinese person talks about the Japanese, or every time a Japanese talks about an American. In fact, I’ve be discriminated against by Japanese more often for being American rather than being Chinese.

  20. 0
    Zaruka says:

    ever country does horrable things in war, it not just the US or japan, hell during the war britin was firebombing citys while the usa tried to do bombings are oil fields and stuff.  Being part of a contry we try to defiend are actions yet we are blind to see that war brings out the worst of all people dont matter what type of country, It just happens differnt. We must go and forgive the mastakes of the past and try to become friends to are fomer enemys. It not easy and stuff  like the 3rd right did can never be forgiven that why their was warcrimes.


    Thanks Zaruka

  21. 0
    F__ked up says:

    The author throws out many questions and it seems everyone on here has decided not to use those questions in the discourse. The comments seem to avoided it. Is it because we all know the answers to these questions but rather not address it? Or is it because when we give the answer we want give we may come off as selfish and conceded?

    Might is right?

    Like a Bully?

    winning is everything?

    thats what they say about sports

    But are victors always right?

    Win the battles but lose the war?

    are losers in all the wrong?

    yup, according to our legal system

    Is it right to do anything for justice? Justice for whom? What is Justice?

    I wonder myself sometimes. They say justice is blind, but it is not deaf. Can things really be fair, eye for an eye? stealing food to stay alive?

    “Rest in peace, because the same mistake will not be repeated”. By whom?

    I want to believe that the human race can and are willing to learn from their past but in this world of information overload sometimes I just dont know. As the saying goes, "Those who fail to learn from their mistakes are doomed to repeat it"

  22. 0
    JDKJ says:

    It is true that over the last 50 years or so Americans have shown a tendency to be less racist — at least beyond the comfort of their own living rooms.

  23. 0
    londinio says:

    Ideal, but wishy washy. We have stigmatized race issues and religious disdain.


    We should find a way to stigmatize going to war. Doing so will not get rid of war, but there is little right to hate another person cause of their race and as such, doing so is not common in public as it once was.


    Stigmatize war and politicians will put it at the bottom of their agendas.

  24. 0
    TBoneTony says:

    It seems to me that politicians are the ones who started wars, and therefore they hide behind the front lines in their warm heated houses while so many people go to war and die in the name of their country.

    If politicians really wanted wars, perhaps if they were the ones to be forced to fight in a war they wanted, then perhaps there would be less wars in the world.

    But in all honesty, a politician will never fight in a war that they wanted, because they control the power of the majority of people who voted for them, so they are more likely to send people into wars to fight for them.


    I don’t think people ever really learn from their mistakes, because the biggest mistake is to do everything that a politician says even if they don’t want to.

    I am not anti-war, I am also not pro-war, I am just neutral just understanding the verry concepts of war.


    I’d rather experience war in a videogame than to do so in real life.

    That is just me, as a gamer, understanding from games like Fire Emblem that when one person dies, they are lost forever.



  25. 0
    TBoneTony says:

    War will always happen.

    People do learn from their mistakes, but the next genertion who have not learned yet will always make those same mistakes and then they will finally learn, until the next generation comes into and makes those same mistakes again.


    That is why I will keep on saying, war will always happen, no matter how many people learn from their mistakes.


  26. 0
    Torven says:

    Curtis LeMay is on record as saying he has no doubt the Japanese would have executed him for war crimes had they won the war.  And the firebombing campaigns probably wouldn’t have been a blip on the radar compared to a full-scale invasion.

  27. 0
    Torven says:

    After reading the posts, I think some facts need clarification.

    1.  Japan did not send it’s declaration of war before the attack on Pearl Harbor; they never had any intention of declaring war before the attack.  An encrypted document was sent to the Japanese embassy in 14 parts, the last of which arrived the night of December 6, and was meant to be delivered to Cordell Hull just before the attack.  This document is sometimes depicted as a declaration of war but it was not.  All it stated was that Japan was formally breaking off diplomatic negotiations with the United States regarding China and the oil embargo.  The declaration of war was not released by the Japanese government until several hours after the attack had finished.

    2.  The United States was not working on an atomic bomb before the attack on Pearl Harbor.  In 1940, the government began funding research into atomic fission.  The British tried to get the US to start an atomic bomb program throughout 1941, finally succeeding in mid-december, after the US had entered the war.

    3.  Japan was not preparing to surrender.  Japan never expected to win WWII; their goal was a negotiated peace that removed the oil embargo and, hopefully, permitted them to keep some of the territories they had taken from us.  By the time we were fighting on Okinawa, they were looking for a separate peace that would take us out of the war and leave the emperor in power.  Agreements made between Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin, however, did not allow us to seek anything but an unconditional surrender to all the allies.  Japan was well aware of this, but neither they nor the allies were willing to budge on the post-war status of the emperor.  In addition, Japan channeled all their communications to the US through the Soviet Union, who was a neutral party in the Pacific war.  The Soviets intentionally impeded those communications to prevent a peace settlement before they could enter the war and gain concessions from Japan.

    4.  The alternative to the atomic bombs was even more horrifying.  Casualty estimates were all over the board because nobody really knew how the civilian population would react.  Capturing Okinawa, had cost 155 casualties, with 40 KIA or MIA, per square mile of ground taken, and while it was assumed the casualty count for taking the home islands would not be that severe, prospects were not good.  In addition, the invasion of Japan would have resulted in a blockade of the islands, which would rapidly have resulted in food shortages and starvation.  Finally, in response to the Battle of Changde, we were planning a massive gas attack on the island of Kyushu; the hope was to prevent the same kind of landing and battle we had at Iwo Jima.  Perhaps the most chilling fact, however, is that in spite of all the wars, conflicts and police actions we have been involved in since WWII, we still have 100,000 of the purple hearts made in anticipation of the invasion of Japan left in surplus (and have only manufactured about 10,000 new ones during that time).

  28. 0
    wii_charles says:

    It’s interesting.  A student makes an interactive piece about Hiroshima, but apparently just the idea of such a piece in itself leads to a lively discussion.  Perhaps we could just make up historical recreation games and then argue about them?  How about a game where you have to write a legal justification for waterboarding?

    Charles Herold

    Wii Guide

  29. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:

    People want a reason to to exclaim the A bomb is/was a evil device that did more damage to the world than anyhtign else.

    They don’t want to consider the facts of a ground/air war would have been 100 times worse….


    I am a criminal because I purchase media,I am a criminal because I use media, I am a criminal because I chose to own media..We shall remain criminals until Corporate stay’s outside our bedrooms..

  30. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:

    Do they have one where it shows what the the fire bombings,land war and urban warfare to house to house killing hunderds of thousands of more on both sides would have been?


    I am a criminal because I purchase media,I am a criminal because I use media, I am a criminal because I chose to own media..We shall remain criminals until Corporate stay’s outside our bedrooms..

  31. 0
    USMC Colonel James Slate says:

    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.

    – Robert E. Lee

    That’s all I have to say on the matter

  32. 0
    EvilTikiMan says:

    Fact-Facts are not always pleasant things. No one ever said that they would. Facts are not meant to have any sort of connotation, or implication, or bias. Fact is truth, regardless of what the fact may be.

    Fact- Every powerful nation have skeletons in its closet. Japan raped and killed thousands if not millions of chinese people durring WW2(a detail that I know first hand that some chinese have not forgotten nor forgiven). Americans have killed native americans and taken their land, largely without remorse. Are these terrible things? Yes! No one can nor should deny any of the things they have done when looking back at them. To do so is just as bad as to committing them all over again. 

    Fact-People can and will do terrible things when they are angry. Think about fights you have had in the past; I am willing to bet you have said and done things out of anger and felt justified for doing so at the time. The same thing goes for entire countries. When one country attacks another, particularly a large one who is as connected as america, a feeling of Nationalism Will grip the country and the people will no doubt cry out for justice and/or payback. Take 9/11 for example. Regardless of what kind of retaliatory actions are taken, they should always be expected when dealing with any living thing, particularly Humans.

    Big Fact-WW2 is over. It is done. It is past tense. It is no more. We are a good 50+ years past those troubled times. We, the people of the current age had nothing to do with any decissions and actions taken by the people around WW2 since most of us were not alive, and thus can and should not be held accountable for the choices of those at time. And even those who where alive and did serve durring WW2, most were just soldiers and were simply following orders. Any blame for acts belong to those who issued the order, and shall take it to their grave. This goes for every country!

    Whats more is placing blame, villianizing and victimising, and all related acts are quite frankly pointless. It serves no point. It will not help us solve current problems. It will not fix anything. While it Might make some people feel a bit better about some things, it Will also drudge up memories and feelings that can fuel conflict and resentment. These feelings can be passed on to future generations who have the power to reignite those old flames, thus causing the old conflict to begin anew.

    Final Fact- We should not forget what we (japan, america, germany, russia, and every other contry) has done in the past. To do so will run the risk of forgetting the mistakes we made and to make them once again. Instead set them aside, placing the cold, hard, unbias, Unspun facts of what we have done in their place. Accept that we had done them and use the gained knowledge to create a better world. We can not change the past; and that is a fact.


    Responsibility: Its time that the next generation takes up the reigns of power in our government, before the old fools who hold them steer this country of ours closer to capsizing. We must act before its to late to repair the damage.

  33. 0
    hellfire7885 says:

    "I believe human beings can lead to the realization of real peaceful world by learning from history beyond generations, cultural gap or religious conflict."

    I realyl wish I still had that much faith in humanity.

  34. 0
    nighstalker160 says:

    Casuality estimates for a conventional invasion of Japan?

    1,000,000 American Soliders

    Several millions Japanese civilians

    Casualties from both atomic bomb droppings put together?

    Less than 1,000,000

  35. 0
    Wormdundee says:

     You are pretty naive if you think war is going to go anywhere anytime soon. Sure, it would be nice but I seriously doubt it’s going to happen in my lifetime.

  36. 0
    londinio says:

    We lit the families of Japan on fire during the fire storms. Don’t worry…the servicemen the Japanese killed in Pearl Harbor were certainly avenged.


    Most humans agree war is wrong. Justifying war is equally wrong.


    Soon we’ll live in an age where war isn’t justified. Then we’ll live in an age where there’s no war and humans will look back much like we look back on history. We look at the dark ages and think wow so horrible.

    The future versions of ourselves will look back on our time and say, Wow…we were lost.

  37. 0
    Vake Xeacons says:

    I want to ask the audience something about “revenge.” Strong is evil, and retrobution is inhuman. But are the victors always evil? Are the losers always victims? Is it wrong to do something for revenge? Revenge for whom? What is Revenge?

  38. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    Yep, the U.S. has got REALLY efficient at bombing civilians since WW2.


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  39. 0
    Orelup says:

    Yep, dropping a million dollar bomb on a billion dollar city is totally the same as today, where we drop a 50thousand dollar bomb to try and blow up a thousand dollar shack in a city so we don’t hit the school next door.

    I mean that’s why we called in the b-52s to glass falujah instead of sending in people on the ground.

  40. 0
    Nitherean says:

    That has always been the big debate.


    Drop the atomic bombs, OR, invade.  Neither one was the right way.  But, that was the US’s choice at the time.  But in war, everyone loses. 

  41. 0
    Elestia says:

    Kamikaze or "Divine Wind" was the most notorious tactic used by the Japanese during WW II. If the US did not use the Atomic Bomb, a land invasion would be the only solution to force them to surrender. We would have expected a larger number of casualties than the the two atomic bombs dropped in Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

  42. 0
    londinio says:

     I don’t think our bases in Japan even come close to the army sizes of china and north korea. Not much of a point in being there if you ask me. When the time comes those bases are just easy targets anyway. 



    We’d have to send our guys from home. 

  43. 0
    Nitherean says:

    If I read the full accounting of Dec 7th.  The Japanesse Warlords sent word to their embassy in Washington, D.C. three hours before the attack on Pearl Harbor.  However, due to machinical and translation problems, the message did not arrive in US hands until AFTER the attack.


    When the US dropped the first bomb, it was not known to the US, that Japan wished to surrender.  When the second bomb was dropped, we STILL did not know.  Since, at that moment, the US knew it did not have another bomb (even though some where in production at the time); Japan, however, did not know this, and REALLY did not want to find out the hard way.


    BTW, between the part where Japan attacked the US, and the US dropping the atomic bombs; there was about 4 years of intense warfare all over the Pacific Ocean.  Yeah, lets try not to past over that part.



  44. 0
    Shadow D. Darkman says:



    "The sun will always rise tomorrow. We can only live for today, and hope more days will come." -Unknown

  45. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:



    I am a criminal because I purchase media,I am a criminal because I use media, I am a criminal because I chose to own media..We shall remain criminals until Corporate stay’s outside our bedrooms..

  46. 0
    chadachada321 says:

    Prior to dropping the bomb, Japan said that they had no problems with surrendering, on one condition. That the Emperor was not captured/harmed/charged with war crimes. The US wouldn’t allow that, however; they wanted unconditional surrender. So the US dropped the two bombs in order to force unconditional surrender. And then we left the emperor alone anyways.

    In conclusion, the US overreacted. Still, I can understand how the US feels. "You ATTACKED US WITHOUT WARNING AND FOR NO REASON, of course we’ll BOMB THE SHIT OUTTA YOU."

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  47. 0
    Shadow D. Darkman says:

    Help! Help! I’m being compressed! 


    "The sun will always rise tomorrow. We can only live for today, and hope more days will come." -Unknown

  48. 0
    SS says:

    ummm no,

    read the US Strategic Bombing Survey of 1946 in its entirety.  It’s a document written by the US government and itself implies that the bombings were not neccasary and Japan was about to surrender.

    Also wouldn’t demonstrating the atomic bomb be a better idea so that Japan could see its power and surrender?

    Face it, the US wanted to intimidate the soveits and also to test the bomb on a civilian population.

  49. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    Nah, 500,000 dead humans is a great start but they never followed through.


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  50. 0
    Mad_Scientist says:

    But you seem to be acting like the decision to drop the bomb was the wrong decision, or that was the impression I got, based on some of your other comments. At the very least, in one of your comments you acted like the reason you gave was the only reason the bomb was dropped.

  51. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    I was ADDING to his points, not refuting them.


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  52. 0
    Wraith108 says:

    Umm, did you go live in a cave for 8 years. 😉

    But yeah, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the lesser of 2 terrible evils. Those bombs took maybe 500,000 lives at most. An invasion would probably have cost many millions of lives due to the determination of the Japanese to fight.

  53. 0
    Mad_Scientist says:

    You didn’t bother to try and refute his points, which makes your own point meaningless. If there are good, legitimate reasons to take a certain course of action, then the fact that there might also be some less savory reasons to take that same course of action does not invalidate the legitimate reasons, nor does it automatically make it the wrong course of action.

    It does not matter whether or not some people wanted to drop the bomb just to test it, and send a message to Russia. What matters is whether or not dropping the bomb was the best course of action regardless of that. And AC gave numerous points arguing that it was.

  54. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    WTF? The U.S. only attacked Japan to test their weapon?! HAHA. Never said that, I said they tested their weapon on an enemy they KNEW were about to surrender, both because they wanted hard data on what happens when you nuke a civilian city instead of some chipboard test site in the middle of the desert, and because they wanted to send a ‘Mess with us and you;re gonna lose a city’ message to anyone else who might have had ideas (with eyes staring very fixedly at Russia as they did so). 


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  55. 0
    Ratros says:

    A buck fiddy and/or a daughter.

    I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"

  56. 0
    Ratros says:

    *sigh*  Once again, you miss the point.  You keep spouting off that the US only attacked Japan because they wanted to test the weapon they used.  I said there was more to it.  Then you say that they were working on the weapon before the war……your logic is confounding, confusing, and so circular that I don’t even see how you come up with your hair brained theories. 

    I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"

  57. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    Oh yes, I was shocked, SHOCKED I tell you. You said it, so I must have been!


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  58. 0
    Ratros says:

    Says the fool that’s shocked that a nation was working on weapons outside of war time.  I mean, its not like every nation isn’t trying to get the bigger gun or something. 

    I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"

  59. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    Nah, you just pulled some facetious BS ‘What’s that got to do with the price of tea in China" because you needed a strawman.


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  60. 0
    Archgabe says:

    Well, we wanted to drop the bomb on Berlin at first but Germany surrendered before we could and the only nation we were at war with at the time was Japan…  They were on the wrong side at the wrong time and us American have a dislike for getting attacked when we don’t expect it.

    I will be the first to admit…  We overreacted just a bit.  But it is really hard to be sympathetic when you walk into a Japanese museum about WWII and read their distorted version of history.  THey make us Americans out to have provoked the attack on Pearl Harbor just because we didn’t like them.  And we kicked over their sand castle.  Also the Japanese government still has yet to admit they did ANYTHING wrong during WWII.  They when so far as to force out any politician who was even precived as thinking "yeah, maybe we pissed off the wrong people and were kinda asking for trouble."

    I love Japan and love to go there at least once a year but the victimized attitude and tinted view of history around WWII is a bit too much to swallow.

  61. 0
    Ratros says:

    Actually I asked you what your point was first.  As for the price of tea in China…well that was just the price, get over it.

    I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"

  62. 0
    Ratros says:

    Prove it, and prove your point while your at it.

    I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"

  63. 0
    Ratros says:

    And the price of tea in China at the time was 3 cents.  What’s your point?

    I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"

  64. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    The U.S were working on nuclear bombs before Japan declared war.


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  65. 0
    Ratros says:

    So the war had nothing to do with it?  The fact that Japan had just attacked Pearl Harbor had nothing to do with it?  The fact that the citizens probably wanted revenge had nothing to do with?  The fact we were in a War at the time had nothing to with it? 


    If you focus to much on the large picture, you miss the things that make it up.

    I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"

  66. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    The U.S. didn’t give a shit about any of that. They wanted to test the effects of a nuke on a heavily populated city or two, and send the rest of world a ‘Mess with us and get THIS’ message.


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  67. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    No, but they spin the hell out of the bad stuff to make themselves look good.


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  68. 0
    Ratros says:

    Strange, I remember it a bit differently, but meh, whatever you say.  So I guess that if I went up and hit a guy and said sorry, I give up, everything would be okay?  And even if the attack had been going off during talk of them surrendering, they hadn’t surrendered as of yet, so it would also speed up the process and save the lives of soldiers on our side, whilst making our enemies think twice of attacking again.

    I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"

  69. 0
    londinio says:

     If it makes you feel better, over 500,000 rape cases have been reported in Japan. The United States officially recognizes that our own soldiers committed those acts of rape on Japanese citizens during peace time. It’s a good thing our government reports such things. That’s why America is such a great country. They aren’t afraid to report the bad stuff. 


    Dishonorable discharge. Go home soldier. 

  70. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    Almost right, but you forgot the part where the US wanted to observe the results of dropping an atomic bomb on a populated city. Lucky for them they were at war at the time eh?


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  71. 0
    londinio says:

     It’s well known that Japan was in talks with the United States to surrender. That bomb was to give Russia something to think about. Nothing more. 

  72. 0
    AC says:

    Nice revisionist history.  At the time Franklin Roosevelt wanted to get involved in the war due to the pressure that the Germans were putting on Great Britain, but the American opinion was to stay out of the war.  Roosevelt was supplying an abundance of material aid to Great Britain to make up for the lack of man support.  The official declaration of war on the US and Great Britain on Japan happened on Dec 8th Japanese time.  The attack on Pearl Harbor was pre-emptive and the official declaration wasn’t delivered to Roosevelt until after the attack had taken place.

    According to the Japanese, an enemy who surrended according to the code of Bushido was worse then a dog.  Hence the extreme punishment American POW’s received at the hands of their Japanese captors and also the very low number of Japanese to actually surrender.  It was known that in order to get Japan to capitulate that a full scale invasion of the main land was going to be required.  This would have meant major casualities on both sides as well as infrastructure damage.  The nuclear option was considered the best choice.  Also on a side note, it took two bombs to be dropped with the threat of more in order for the Japanese to surrender.

    Not sure what history books you are reading, but they aren’t based on factual evidence.

  73. 0
    Ratros says:

    It’s common policy that when you hit someone, you can expect them to hit you back before the fight is done.  But in most cases people are smart enough not to hit a freakin 500 pound weight lifter though.

    I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"

  74. 0
    Kojiro says:

    Better read your history book a bit closer.  The US was known to be about to enter the war.  Japan sent an official declaration of war the day before the bombing.  Then we dropped the atomic bombs when we knew damn well that Japan was already on the verge of surrendering.  It wasn’t necessary.

  75. 0
    Shadow D. Darkman says:

    Jack can take his accusations against us and shove them up his ass. Speaking of his ass, I hear it’s getting awfully compact up there, what with all the shit he’s had to shove up there.


    "The sun will always rise tomorrow. We can only live for today, and hope more days will come." -Unknown

  76. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    #Insert comparison to the recent conflict in Iraq here.#

    (Tasteless and inaccurate I know, but damn funny anyway.)


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  77. 0
    Wraith108 says:

    Yeah… I really hope He-who-shall-not-be-named-nor-practice-law-in-Florida doesn’t see that post. That’s the kind of attitude he thinks we actually have.

  78. 0
    DarkSaber says:



    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  79. 0
    londinio says:

     I’d like to play a war game where your objective is to kill civilians. 


    This hiroshima game should be the last level. 


    Honestly, I don’t think this game goes far enough. 

  80. 0
    thefremen says:

     The expansion pack will allow you to play as a citizen, you’ll say something like this:


    Captain: What happen ?
    Mechanic: Somebody set up us the bomb.


  81. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    Especially taking into consideration the fact that, if Japan hadn’t attacked Pearl Harbor, America’s involvement in WWII would have been very different, and we most likely would not have had to do it in the first place.

    In any case, if we didn’t attack with nuclear weapons, we would have had to invade Japan, and how many moe people would have had to die?



    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  82. 0
    Neeneko says:

    Talking about the bombing of hiroshima might have more effect if the japanese government (and population) did not downplay the 16 million chinese civilians that died in the same war.

    While true that the bomb left a significant cultural impact due to the high number of deaths at one time… SO many more people were killed in that conflict that I get alittle sadded at how much attention and glurge it gets.

  83. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    If this is a neutral exhibit, then I like the idea.  I think it’s a good idea to let people know that this is something not to be decided lightly (dropping an atomic bomb).  However, if this is supposed to make America out to be a horrible nation because we dropped atomic weapons on a nation that attacked us without provocation, in an attempt to end a horrific war, then I condemn the people who created this exhibit and all who support said organization.



    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  84. 0
    Icehawk says:

    Um ok.  Would bet alot of people would not sleep well that night when accused of the personal virtual death of 140K+ people.  

    What is done is done.  I am confused though what exactly is the point of this.  Is this an attempt to stave off war, harden those that experience it or try to spread more guilt around?

  85. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    "allowing participants to hear themselves as participants in the recreated death of more than 100,000 people."

    Or they could, y’know, play Dynasty Warriors for 10 stages?


    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

Leave a Reply