100,000 Japanese Civilians Burnt in Single Night

[doodle]

Stumbled on this youtube video linked to report of recent Japanese quake and nuclear plant radiation victims. Is this claim really factual that 100,000 Japanese civilians were burnt to death in single night way before this incidence and before nuke attack on Japan?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfPwR00HXM0&feature=related

Do you agree with lesson being taught that proportionality should be a guide to war?

[acptulsa]

Not loading for me. WWII Tokyo firebombing raids, I presume.

I could do with some proportionality in war. Like, for instance, bombing Pearl Harbor is a good reason to go to war, we want a pipeline, a petrodollar or a Rothschilds central bank is not.

[libertyjam]

http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/tokyo.htm

[doodle]

Not loading for me. WWII Tokyo firebombing raids, I presume.



It's a clip from "Fog of war". Very opening claim being made there is, "in one single night, we burnt to death 100,000 Japanese civillians in Tokyo, men, women and children".

I'm doubting this claim because it doesn't mesh at all with our way of waging wars, spreading freedom.

[acptulsa]

I'm doubting this claim because it doesn't mesh at all with our way of waging wars, spreading freedom.

It happened. And we napalmed villages of women and children in Vietnam, too.

[cswake]

The Dresden fire bombings were claimed to be 100k civilian casualties, but recent estimates put it along the lines of 25k. I wouldn't be surprised if the estimates here fall prey to the same error. To keep things in perspective, I don't like putting a number to the deaths since it seems to marginalize life and communicate that there is some magic formula for an acceptable "collateral damage" number.

[Vessol]

It's a clip from "Fog of war". Very opening claim being made there is, "in one single night, we burnt to death 100,000 Japanese civillians in Tokyo, men, women and children".

I'm doubting this claim because it doesn't mesh at all with our way of waging wars, spreading freedom.

In b4 people freak out and don't realize you're trolling.

[doodle]

To keep things in perspective, I don't like putting a number to the deaths since it seems to marginalize life and communicate that there is some magic formula for an acceptable "collateral damage" number.

Without numbers, OKC and WTC building attacks would be equal tragedies?

[acptulsa]

In b4 people freak out and don't realize you're trolling.

It's doodle. What else would he be doing?

[doodle]

In b4 people freak out

If it is true, people should freak out. I am a bit shocked, never heard of these numbers about Tokyo. I thought Nagasaki and Heroshima was the only major mass collateral damage done in Japan.

[doodle]

It happened. And we napalmed villages of women and children in Vietnam, too.

To save them from socialism?

I'm beginning to think bomb making industry should be made "non profit" so profit motive is taken out.

[Vessol]

If it is true, people should freak out. I am a bit shocked, never heard of these numbers about Tokyo. I thought Nagasaki and Heroshima was the only major mass collateral damage done in Japan.

Pictures speak louder than words.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/db/Tokyo_kushu_1945-3.jpg/800px-Tokyo_kushu_1945-3.jpg

[ExPatPaki]

I am a bit shocked, never heard of these numbers about Tokyo. I thought Nagasaki and Heroshima was the only major mass collateral damage done in Japan.

I hadn't heard of it either till I saw Fog of War; high school history in US suburbia doesn't mention the firebombings, only the atomic attacks. I wasn't really shocked though.

[ds21089]

If it is true, people should freak out. I am a bit shocked, never heard of these numbers about Tokyo. I thought Nagasaki and Heroshima was the only major mass collateral damage done in Japan.

Niigata was also attacked by the U.S. via HAARP. Is it just a huge coincidence that two nuclear power plants were the epicenters of earthquakes, both politically timed? Niigata took place directly after the Japanese Finance Minister handed control of the Japanese Financial System to a group of American and European oligarchs and Fukushima took place right before the war in Libya. Now even though Libya is being reported more on the news, think about what they can do with this. Once things get really rough in Libya, we'll turn coverage over to the power plants and radiation infecting the U.S. (probably incorrect data claiming more radiation than normal) Now, everyone will be in a state of panic, too worried for themselves to worry about what's going on in Libya.

http://current.com/news/89003708_teslas-earthquake-machine-haarp.htm (made in 2008, so obviously it doesnt mention Fukushima, but is that a HUGE "coincidence" or what?)

[acptulsa]

Yeah, and we have a Doomsday Machine Gap, too.

[speciallyblend]

If it is true, people should freak out. I am a bit shocked, never heard of these numbers about Tokyo. I thought Nagasaki and Heroshima was the only major mass collateral damage done in Japan.

no surprise to me,bottom line is before we nuked ,firebombing was a tactic used by both sides! I could easily see deaths ranging from 25,000-100,000 . it is all just estimates but no one should be surprised if you have done an ounce of research on ww2!!! In war people are just ants waiting to be crushed. nothing new here, war kills people civilians and military!

[Vessol]

Pictures speak louder than words.

To those who only glanced at it. Those are husks of burned people who were collected.

[speciallyblend]

To those who only glanced at it. Those are husks of burned people who were collected.

I saw that, very disturbing! my grandfather was part of the original seal teams aka UDT in the pacific!!!! The books i read and the stories he told me were very disturbing!!! if the fire bombing didn't kill you the lack of oxygen did!! He also mentioned dresden etc and if the fire bomb didn't kill you then many just suffocated under the rubble or in the bomb shelters!!!

[TexanRudeBoy]

To save them from socialism?

I'm beginning to think bomb making industry should be made "non profit" so profit motive is taken out.

"WAR is a racket. It always has been." (http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm)

[South Park Fan]

If it is true, people should freak out. I am a bit shocked, never heard of these numbers about Tokyo. I thought Nagasaki and Heroshima was the only major mass collateral damage done in Japan.

IIRC, the firebombings actually had a higher civilian death toll than the atomic bombings.

[doodle]

Did not know that, thanks all for useful historic info. I need to read up WW I guess.

[LibertyRevolution]

Yes Tokyo was a city built of wood. We firebombed it. Wanted to show them what war meant nowadays. They were still thinking fighting with swords to the last man.

[Vessol]

Yes Tokyo was a city built of wood. We firebombed it. Wanted to show them what war meant nowadays. They were still thinking fighting with swords to the last man.

I love people who try to sit there and justify 100,000 deaths.

[LibertyRevolution]

I love people who try to sit there and justify 100,000 deaths.

We firebombed Tokyo in hopes to avoid having to nuke them... They failed to surrender.. so we opened a can of nuclear whoopass on them.
And they thanks sir, may I have another? So we obliged them.
Then they finally got the hint, we could obliterate them without stepping foot in japan.
I am sorry it took their leaders the burning of 67 cities, and the nuclear irradiation of 2 others, to get a clue.

Do I feel bad about the 100,000? NO, they attacked us first. It is possibly the one war that I feel we had full justification in being in.
What I do feel bad about is the fact that we didn't just take over japan.
We won, why did we not declare it all ours and impose a 50% flat tax on them...
Take their land, enslave their people through taxation. If they refuse, or rebel, kill them all and offer the land to Americans as free homestead.

If we are going to be this war like empire.. why are the costs of this empire not payed for by the labor of countries we conquered?

War is hell. You kill. You kill them all. You take their land. This is what war should be.
Now we do peacekeeping.... nation building ... we limit civilian casualties. You cannot win a war like this...
If you go to war, go to win.. firebomb all their cities. Take out their farm land, starve there people, make them die of exposure to the elements.
Make life so miserable for the average joe that he either kills his leaders or himself...

[South Park Fan]

If you go to war, go to win.. firebomb all their cities. Take out their farm land, starve there people, make them die of exposure to the elements.
Make life so miserable for the average joe that he either kills his leaders or himself...

Because that worked so well in Vietnam, right?

[doodle]

Yes Tokyo was a city built of wood. We firebombed it. Wanted to show them what war meant nowadays. They were still thinking fighting with swords to the last man.

Are there ever ANY justifiable reasons to target and firebomb civilian population centers?

[Zippyjuan]

To quote Robert E Lee I believe it was: Wars should be terrible- lest we should grow too fond of them.

He also said

What a cruel thing is war: to separate and destroy families and friends, and mar the purest joys and happiness God has granted us in this world; to fill our hearts with hatred instead of love for our neighbors, and to devastate the fair face of this beautiful world.



http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/Notable%20Lee%20Quotes.htm

[Anti Federalist]

America - Fuck Yeah!

*facepalm*

A pretty flip attitude to have. I'll suggest it will change when the time comes for somebody, or a bunch of somebodies, to pre-empt us.


We firebombed Tokyo in hopes to avoid having to nuke them... They failed to surrender.. so we opened a can of nuclear whoopass on them.
And they thanks sir, may I have another? So we obliged them.
Then they finally got the hint, we could obliterate them without stepping foot in japan.
I am sorry it took their leaders the burning of 67 cities, and the nuclear irradiation of 2 others, to get a clue.

Do I feel bad about the 100,000? NO, they attacked us first. It is possibly the one war that I feel we had full justification in being in.
What I do feel bad about is the fact that we didn't just take over japan.
We won, why did we not declare it all ours and impose a 50% flat tax on them...
Take their land, enslave their people through taxation. If they refuse, or rebel, kill them all and offer the land to Americans as free homestead.

If we are going to be this war like empire.. why are the costs of this empire not payed for by the labor of countries we conquered?

War is hell. You kill. You kill them all. You take their land. This is what war should be.
Now we do peacekeeping.... nation building ... we limit civilian casualties. You cannot win a war like this...
If you go to war, go to win.. firebomb all their cities. Take out their farm land, starve there people, make them die of exposure to the elements.
Make life so miserable for the average joe that he either kills his leaders or himself...

[Fox McCloud]

If it's talking about our incessant incendiary bombing of the Island of Japan, then that wouldn't surprise me; we burnt out entire cities with our bombing campaigns (their cities were primarily bunched together wood structures, so a small amount of planes could burn out huge swaths of a city at a time....only we didn't use a small amount of planes). We really like to hype how much damage we did with Fat Boy and Little Man...and it was impressive, considering the amount of energy and damage released in a short period of time---but, apparently, Japan's bigger concern was with our incendiary bombs--as they caused far more destruction and killed far more people.

It's a terrible mark on US foreign policy---all under the justification that "we have to beat them into submission" and that "every Japanese is a potential enemy"--just another horrifying invention the state has brought us; the concept of "Total War".

[acptulsa]

--just another horrifying invention the state has brought us; the concept of "Total War".

Is it more terrible, the concept of 'total war', or is it more terrible that we would go to war under circumstances so far, far removed from such a terrible and immediate necessity? I agree with Gen. Sherman--war should be terrible. That way, we might actually avoid it once in a while.

The phrase 'total war' implies that there's something else. And if there's something else, you're an empire, not a peaceful nation.

[doodle]

Is it more terrible, the concept of 'total war', or is it more terrible that we would go to war under circumstances so far, far removed from such a terrible and immediate necessity? I agree with Gen. Sherman--war should be terrible. That way, we might actually avoid it once in a while.

The phrase 'total war' implies that there's something else. And if there's something else, you're an empire, not a peaceful nation.

Under this "war should be terrible" doctrimne, targeting and firebombing civilan populations to death as happened in Tokyo or targetting and killing civilians by so calles "kill team" as happened in Afghanistan recently acceptable or not acceptable war conduct?

[acptulsa]

... acceptable or not acceptable war conduct?

Once you put half a dozen of my battleships on the mud, it's on buddy.

[Fox McCloud]

Is it more terrible, the concept of 'total war', or is it more terrible that we would go to war under circumstances so far, far removed from such a terrible and immediate necessity? I agree with Gen. Sherman--war should be terrible. That way, we might actually avoid it once in a while.

The phrase 'total war' implies that there's something else. And if there's something else, you're an empire, not a peaceful nation.

Might I recommend "The Myth of National Defense"? It's a great book that, in part, details the evolution of warfare--while war has never been "great" or something other than terrible, the concept of "Total War" is a fairly unique invention that emerged sometime between the last 19 and early 20th century; the concept of mobilizing and entire nation and classifying any/all peoples of the other nation you're facing as an "enemy" is a relatively new one, that, from what I could gather, was not the norm, especially prior to the rise of the state (1600s).

[acptulsa]

...the concept of mobilizing and entire nation and classifying any/all peoples of the other nation you're facing as an "enemy" is a relatively new one, that, from what I could gather, was [/not] the norm, especially prior to the rise of the state (1600s).

Well, the concept of going halfway around the world to kick some ass is certainly a more modern concept. And yet, the Romans sure managed to push their Empire far and wide. But, yeah, a border conflict in the Dark Ages was something different. And yet, until the wave of colonialization began in earnest, it tended to be close to home and fighting over actual incursions.

[Vessol]

Anyone who has any kind of positive thoughts on WW2, or any war for that matter, needs to watch the Grave Of The Fireflies.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxv9ghINEhs

This is the only movie that has literally brought me to a sobbing mess of tears.