Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Was it right?

[Rev7]

^

I saw this documentary a little while ago. I do remember that it talked about the victims skin being black. I know that the entire documentary was made with some of the survivors talking about their experiances. Trust me, this is REALLY bothering me. Perhaps the blackness was from a fire that came about because of the bomb. It was in a large building...that might have been why. Might have charred the peoples skin.

 

So sorry about the confusion.

[Marius Fett]

Blackness of skin could also have been caused by the intense light and heat being absorbed by the black cloth of peoples clothing and then fusing it to the skin?

 

This is possible I think because black absorbs heat VERY well.

[Jae Onasi]

The heat required to fuse cloth to skin would also have burned people so badly they wouldn't be walking around anywhere.

 

Anyway, we're starting to get off on a tangent with this blackened skin thing and need to get back on track with the ethics of dropping the bomb and the factors surrounding that decision.

 

edit at DDD below: And she's not walking around anywhere now, is she? She's lucky (theoretically) to have survived that long with that amount of surface area burned.

[Marius Fett]

The heat required to fuse cloth to skin would also have burned people so badly they wouldn't be walking around anywhere.

 

Just got this from WikiPedia:

 

The energy released by the bomb was powerful enough to burn through clothing. The dark portions of the garments this victim wore at the time of the blast were emblazoned on to the flesh as scars, while skin underneath the lighter parts (which absorb less energy) was not damaged as badly.

 

It was accompanied by this image:

 

 

So I was a little off, but not much.

[Ray Jones]

I think what he is talking about is the fact that many people who survived tried to escape the fire and heat of the firestorm went to and into the river and drank of the contaminated water. As a result (if they haven't been contaminated before that already) they suffered from radiation poisoning to a level causing inner bleedings and bleeding out of the orifices and under the skin. The bleeding under the skin causes dark purple spots all over the body.

 

The flash and following heat (infrared) radiation of the bomb is so intense, it can cause heaviest burnings. Clothes (in case they're not dark coloured) or walls offer a good protection against that. However, that would not cause people to be all black, because typically only the side of the body that was directly exposed to the light is burned, except you were so near to the detonation (with 1.5 km range) that at least your skin was vaporised completely. Although I don't think you'd make it to any river then anymore.

 

Maybe it was dust. Black or not, the thing in a nuclear bomb scenario is that this dust is the nuclear fallout emitting mostly particle radiation, which can cause burnings on the skin's surface. These won't be black though.

 

 

Wikipedia offers a good overview on exposure levels and symptoms, and probably gives a good idea of the people's suffering (skin bleeding means 3 or 4 sievert at least):

 

0.05–0.2 Sv (5–20 REM)

 

No symptoms. Potential for cancer and mutation of genetic material, according to the LNT model: this is disputed. A few researchers contend that low dose radiation may be beneficial. 50 mSv is the yearly federal limit for radiation workers in the United States. In the UK the yearly limit for a classified radiation worker is 20 mSv. In Canada, the single-year maximum is 50 mSv, but the maximum 5-year dose is only 100 mSv. Company limits are usually stricter so as not to violate federal limits.

 

 

0.2–0.5 Sv (20–50 REM)

 

No noticeable symptoms. Red blood cell count decreases temporarily.

 

 

0.5–1 Sv (50–100 REM)

 

Mild radiation sickness with headache and increased risk of infection due to disruption of immunity cells. Temporary male sterility is possible.

 

 

1–2 Sv (100–200 REM)

 

Light radiation poisoning, 10% fatality after 30 days (LD 10/30). Typical symptoms include mild to moderate nausea (50% probability at 2 Sv), with occasional vomiting, beginning 3 to 6 hours after irradiation and lasting for up to one day. This is followed by a 10 to 14 day latent phase, after which light symptoms like general illness and fatigue appear (50% probability at 2 Sv). The immune system is depressed, with convalescence extended and increased risk of infection. Temporary male sterility is common. Spontaneous abortion or stillbirth will occur in pregnant women.

 

 

2–3 Sv (200–300 REM)

 

Moderate radiation poisoning, 35% fatality after 30 days (LD 35/30). Nausea is common (100% at 3 Sv), with 50% risk of vomiting at 2.8 Sv. Symptoms onset at 1 to 6 hours after irradiation and last for 1 to 2 days. After that, there is a 7 to 14 day latent phase, after which the following symptoms appear: loss of hair all over the body (50% probability at 3 Sv), fatigue and general illness. There is a massive loss of leukocytes (white blood cells), greatly increasing the risk of infection. Permanent female sterility is possible. Convalescence takes one to several months.

 

 

3–4 Sv (300–400 REM)

 

Severe radiation poisoning, 50% fatality after 30 days (LD 50/30). Other symptoms are similar to the 2–3 Sv dose, with uncontrollable bleeding in the mouth, under the skin and in the kidneys (50% probability at 4 Sv) after the latent phase.

 

 

4–6 Sv (400–600 REM)

 

Acute radiation poisoning, 60% fatality after 30 days (LD 60/30). Fatality increases from 60% at 4.5 Sv to 90% at 6 Sv (unless there is intense medical care). Symptoms start half an hour to two hours after irradiation and last for up to 2 days. After that, there is a 7 to 14 day latent phase, after which generally the same symptoms appear as with 3-4 Sv irradiation, with increased intensity. Female sterility is common at this point. Convalescence takes several months to a year. The primary causes of death (in general 2 to 12 weeks after irradiation) are infections and internal bleeding.

 

 

6–10 Sv (600–1,000 REM)

 

Acute radiation poisoning, near 100% fatality after 14 days (LD 100/14). Survival depends on intense medical care. Bone marrow is nearly or completely destroyed, so a bone marrow transplant is required. Gastric and intestinal tissue are severely damaged. Symptoms start 15 to 30 minutes after irradiation and last for up to 2 days. Subsequently, there is a 5 to 10 day latent phase, after which the person dies of infection or internal bleeding. Recovery would take several years and probably would never be complete.

 

 

10–50 Sv (1,000–5,000 REM)

 

Acute radiation poisoning, 100% fatality after 7 days (LD 100/7). An exposure this high leads to spontaneous symptoms after 5 to 30 minutes. After powerful fatigue and immediate nausea caused by direct activation of chemical receptors in the brain by the irradiation, there is a period of several days of comparative well-being, called the latent (or "walking ghost") phase. After that, cell death in the gastric and intestinal tissue, causing massive diarrhea, intestinal bleeding and loss of water, leads to water-electrolyte imbalance. Death sets in with delirium and coma due to breakdown of circulation. Death is currently inevitable; the only treatment that can be offered is pain therapy.

 

 

More than 50 Sv (>5,000 REM)

 

A worker receiving 100 Sv (10,000 REM) in an accident at Wood River, Rhode Island, USA on 24 July 1964 survived for 49 hours after exposure, and an operator receiving between 60 and 180 Sv (18,000 REM) to his upper body in an accident at Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA on 30 December 1958 survived for 36 hours; details of this accident can be found on page 16 (page 30 in the PDF version) of Los Alamos' 2000 Review of Criticality Accidents.

 

 

This is a man who was exposed to a radiation of 10 sievert or more in an civil nuclear accident:

[Corinthian]

Yes, it WAS right.

 

I'm not going to mince words here. The Japanese got what they deserved. You thought the Nazis were horrifying? Take a look at this..

 

Besides that, Operation Downfall was going to be a nightmare. Conservative estimates for the casualties go easily into the hundreds of thousands and casualty estimate range as high as several million Japanese Soldiers and Civilians as well as Allied soldiers dead. It would have been a bloodbath.

 

Furthermore, Hiroshima and Nagasaki taught the Japanese something. A lot of people have suggested we should have detonated Fat Man or Little Boy out at sea so they could see the Mushroom Cloud. WRONG. That just shows that 'Oh, hey, Japan, we've got an awesome superweapon, but we're not going to use it because we're too concerned about the lives of our ENEMIES.'

 

It was the only way it could have gone down, unless you consider the total shattering of everything on Kyushu and the slaughter of just about everyone on it to be a better alternative. I suppose hypothetically we could have surrounded Japan with our fleets and just starved them out, but this is the same nation that thinks that anytime your honor has been injured it's a good excuse to take your Wakizashi and slice your own gut open.

[Gargoyle King]

Also remember that the majority of the population had no say in that (or any other) military decision. I think a distinct difference needs to be drawn between anti-[insert-country-here] and anti-[insert-country-here]'s government.

Yeah, i totally agree with this Inyri. It's like with the German Nation, was it really the people's fault that the Nazi regime was thrust upon them? No. You are right Inyri, i don't blame America as a nation, rather you're government's decision at the time. Blaming a country in itself is narrow minded and doesn't explain how decisions like this are ever made.

Yes, it WAS right.

 

I'm not going to mince words here. The Japanese got what they deserved. You thought the Nazis were horrifying? Take a look at this..

 

Besides that, Operation Downfall was going to be a nightmare. Conservative estimates for the casualties go easily into the hundreds of thousands and casualty estimate range as high as several million Japanese Soldiers and Civilians as well as Allied soldiers dead. It would have been a bloodbath.

 

Furthermore, Hiroshima and Nagasaki taught the Japanese something. A lot of people have suggested we should have detonated Fat Man or Little Boy out at sea so they could see the Mushroom Cloud. WRONG. That just shows that 'Oh, hey, Japan, we've got an awesome superweapon, but we're not going to use it because we're too concerned about the lives of our ENEMIES.'

 

It was the only way it could have gone down, unless you consider the total shattering of everything on Kyushu and the slaughter of just about everyone on it to be a better alternative. I suppose hypothetically we could have surrounded Japan with our fleets and just starved them out, but this is the same nation that thinks that anytime your honor has been injured it's a good excuse to take your Wakizashi and slice your own gut open.

Yeh, Unit 731 was bad, but on the scale of Nazism? Oh I don't think so. Oh, yeah and the comment on estimates of casualties, that's exactly the point, they are estimates hence you can never judge this. Oh and how exactly is bombing 100,000's of civilian's TWICE an enemy target? I must have missed that somehow .............

There's no excuse for it, as civilians aren't the enemy; unless you're a sociopath of course. The Japanese would have never surrendered had America not had used the bombs because that's just the way they are; no fear of death in battle or the belief that it is honorable to die in battle. The American Government just seen this as an easy way out of an expensive war. Oh and who are you to judge the Japanese tradition of Seppuku? Because what America's government did can be described as damn right dishonorable. Don't judge what you don't understand.

 

Wow, haven't had a rant like this in ages!

[Q]

@Corinthian:

Linky no worky, but the address does.

 

I'd forgotten about Unit 731.

[Jae Onasi]

The Germans and Russians already were working on a-bombs, too, and I don't know if Japan was or not. If Germany or Russia had been able to, I have no doubt they would have deployed their a-bombs, too.

[Taak Farst]

@Corinthian

 

How can u be so heartless?

 

in 1 sec. more Civilians than soldiers died in hiroshima.

About 12.000 children died and maximum 1500- 2000 soldiers.

The rest of 160.000 people were civilians

I think the americans are not better than other war terrorsts.

 

In conclusion I think America only care for their own sorry ~snipped~ "gr8" nation. They acted like terrorists. A lot more civilians died than soldiers. To be hnest I think america would bomb anyone who even thought about attacking.

 

Keep the language clean here--please use regular English instead of IM speak, also. We have a lot of people from other countries reading the boards and IM makes it too confusing for non-English speakers. --Jae

[Corinthian]

The Nazis just worked people to death, if they didn't gas them first. The Japanese liked to kill people in the most horrific ways possible. I can read about Auschwitz and I just get angry. I read about Unit 731 and I want to vomit.

 

Japan's Civilians weren't innocent. Their lack of any effort to stop their government shows support for the local status quo. Thus, they were our enemies.

[Ray Jones]

The Germans and Russians already were working on a-bombs, too, and I don't know if Japan was or not. If Germany or Russia had been able to, I have no doubt they would have deployed their a-bombs, too.

They would have, indeed.

[Corinthian]

Yeah, the only real question there is who would have gotten a taste of their particular brand of atomic fire first.

[Astor]

Japan's Civilians weren't innocent.

 

So a two year old who doesn't know any better can therefore be blamed for the work of a government he can't even comprehend?

[Ray Jones]

Japan's Civilians weren't innocent. Their lack of any effort to stop their government shows support for the local status quo. Thus, they were our enemies.

Innocence or not. There is a reason why there is a difference between military personal and civilians.

[Q]

If the Nazis had developed a workable nuclear bomb, it would have been a disaster.

 

They already had the perfect delivery system in the form of the V-2 missle.

 

London would have been wiped off the map, and the Red Army would have been vaporized.

[Ray Jones]

If the Nazis had developed a workable nuclear bomb, it would have been a disaster.

 

They already had the perfect delivery system in the form of the V-2 missle.

 

London would have been wiped off the map, and the Red Army would have been vaporized.

With 9000 pound the a-bomb was to heavy for the V-2, which could carry only a 2000 pound warhead. Its range of only 300 kilometres is not very convincing, too. I doubt the Nazis would have been dumb enough to drop a bunch of nuclear weapons within that distance.

[Corinthian]

The Civilians ran Japan's war machine! They kept the food and the bullets flowing to the front so that more psychos could fly their planes into Allied ships or shoot allied soldiers. They deserved everything they got.

[Astor]

By the same token, American, British and Russian Civilians who worked in the munitions industries, or ran farms etc deserved to have an A-bomb dropped on them for shooting axis soldiers.

[Corinthian]

Not exactly the way I'd put it, but in a sense, yes. Civilians are a viable target, strategically, in war. They're hardly 'innocent', unless they're huddling under a bed with a sack of grain, doing nothing but quietly whimpering. Hitting the enemy's supply lines is an old tactic, and it's absolutely devastating. Attacking civilians is just an extension of that, and it also has a nasty effect on morale.

[Q]

With 9000 pound the a-bomb was to heavy for the V-2, which could carry only a 2000 pound warhead. Its range of only 300 kilometres is not very convincing, too. I doubt the Nazis would have been dumb enough to drop a bunch of nuclear weapons within that distance.

I mis-typed, and I know it. The V-2's design could have been sufficiently enlarged to the point where it could have delivered the bomb, however.

[Web Rider]

By the same token, American, British and Russian Civilians who worked in the munitions industries, or ran farms etc deserved to have an A-bomb dropped on them for shooting axis soldiers.

 

As the saying goes, the winner writes the history. If the japanese or the Germans had won, then yes, Americans, Brits, and Russians would have "got what they deserve" too. Total War's are generally wars of attrition, simply put, who can take a bigger beating and still fight for it. Due to the location of the US relative to Germany and Japan, the US was able to take a "bigger beating" and keep on fighting.

 

As was the UK, who were consistently pummeled by the Germans, but kept on pushing due to aid and willpower and the Germans lost. The Russians were similar, they destroyed everything in the path of the Germans and threw troops at them like no tomorrow. The Russians won in a war of attrition, they took a bigger beating and kept on going.

 

The Japanese lost the war of attrition, they took a beating and couldn't keep on going, or chose not to.

 

I mis-typed, and I know it. The V-2's design could have been sufficiently enlarged to the point where it could have delivered the bomb, however.

As an interesting note, Wernher von Braun became a citizen of the US in 1955, 10 years after he entered the country(in 1945). Ironic no? The guy who developed the V2 enters as soon as the US has nukes.

 

[sings] call him a Nazi he won't even frown,

"Nazi-smatzi." says Wernher von Braun. [/sings]

[Totenkopf]

The Germans and Russians already were working on a-bombs, too, and I don't know if Japan was or not. If Germany or Russia had been able to, I have no doubt they would have deployed their a-bombs, too.

 

 

Yeah, they were working on one too.

http://www.kimsoft.com/korea/jp-hung.htm

http://www.fortfreedom.org/w08.htm

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20060804a2.html

 

 

They also planned to attack the US with bio weapons in the form of ballons carrying plague infected fleas. Interestingly enough, at least on the allied side, there was a predispostion against area bombing. Only, as the war ground on with little or no end in sight, attitudes began to change. Japan and Germany ultimately lost the war b/c they were at a disadvantage in terms of resources. In Japan's case, Admiral Yamamoto warned his government that they could "run wild in the Pacific" for about 6 months. If the US wasn't knocked out by then, they would lose. You have to wonder, though, if the Nazis hadn't crumbled before Aug of '45 (they surrendered that May), where a bomb would've been dropped against them. Peenemunde, perhaps?

 

@Bee--what, are you channeling Rodney King now (can't we all just get along?)? Seriously, I agree that it's most unfortunate that people can't get along and see the bigger picture. It's kind of hard, though, when so many people come from so many seemingly diametrically opposed povs. We may "get it right" someday, but most likely not in our lifetime.

[Corinthian]

That was the Japanese strategy all along, as I understand it. They wanted to grab as much territory as they could in the Pacific and then fight the United States so hard that we would come to peace accords that would allow the Japanese to hold onto parts of the territory they had seized. The Japanese, however, underestimated the power of the 'Sleeping Giant'.

[Totenkopf]

That was the Japanese strategy all along, as I understand it. They wanted to grab as much territory as they could in the Pacific and then fight the United States so hard that we would come to peace accords that would allow the Japanese to hold onto parts of the territory they had seized. The Japanese, however, underestimated the power of the 'Sleeping Giant'.

 

 

Yeah, having spent time in the US, Yamamoto knew just how big the "sleeping giant" actually was.