There seems to be a general lack of knowledge regarding this. So, to clarify a point of history, In world war 2, which of the following cities suffered the greater number of deaths, Hiroshima, or Nagasaki, from the atomic bomb attack or Nanjing from wholesale mass murder? Ralph
THF20, if you're not interested in "that kind of history," what was the point of your post? I mean, it's one thing if you don't know and still participate, but it's rude if you post here telling us that you're not interested. It may be indirect, but I initially took it as an insult to the starter of this thread. Anyway, the highest number of deaths during WWII amongst the three is definitely the Nanking Massacre -- where the number of deaths is not even exactly known, but it approximated anywhere ranging from 150,000 - 300,000+ people. If I can remember correctly, the number of instant deaths from the Hiroshima bomb was approx. 80,000, give or take. The death toll for the Nagasaki bombing was very close to Hiroshima, which came out to be around 75,000 deaths, I think. The deaths resulting from the atomic bombs were only the approximated "instant" deaths, not including the deaths caused by radiation/other-related bombing diseases.
The reason that I started this thread was an outgrowth from the "should the Chinese forgive the Japanese..." and LOTS of respondents made the assumption that the atomic bombs must have killed so many more people simply because they were atomic bombs. Wrong. The Japanese army killed more Chinese with their swords, bayonets, and machineguns, than the Americans did by using two atomic bombs against the Japanese. So for the people who want to remain ignorant, that's your option. But don't allow your ignorance to be used against other Chinese who are looking for redress from the Japanese government; ie, saying that we should let bygones be bygones because they've suffered enough with the atomic bombs. In order to even the score, the US would need to drop four more atomic bombs on Japan. Both atomic bombs together killed about 105 thousand Japanese. The number of Chinese killed in Nanjing was more than 300 thousand. Ralph
In my opinion, I didn't exactly scale the weight based on the number of deaths, either. A significant part of my rationalization is based on how each side, the Chinese and the Japanese, were killed. As you mentioned, the Chinese were killed viciously through several inhumane methods (various cruel experimentation by Unit 731, torture, mowing down by machine guns, stabbed by bayonets, burned, raped, mutilated, forced incest, "100" beheading game, worked to death, starved etc. etc.). On the other hand, the Japanese were killed instantly, PROBABLY without pain (excluding the injured/diseased), through the drop of the atomic bomb. Now obviously, anyone can see that the Chinese deaths weigh much more heavily over the Japanese deaths, whether it be based on the death toll, method of killing, etc. What the Japanese did was unnecessary, cruel, unusual and definitely worthy of punishment. For those of who were against the atomic bombing, I understand the reasoning of not killing the innocent, but it's not half as devastating as the Nanking Massacre if you combined and contrast each aspect. Killing the innocent is not right, no matter how you look at it, though that's not to say that it makes it rational for the Japanese to commit the Nanking Massacre. And in regards of the ignorance of people, I'm irritated by the fact that most schools don't even shed light onto the "hidden Holocaust." Most people know of the drop of the atomic bombs, yet they don't even know that the Nanking Massacre even exists.
I remember when I first found out about it, I was floored. I mean, who would have suspected that the Imperial Japanese Army killed more Chinese than three times both combined atomic bombs. The numbers are simply staggering. And they didn't do this with the flick of a switch. They seriously worked at it, physically. It's was gruesome and cruel manual labor. And the defense that a lot of Japanese nationalists insist upon is that this was supposedly the work of a few undisciplined rogue soldiers who acted on their own. In the three month period that the Rape Of Nanjing covered, would it have been possible for only a few men, to manually kill so many by themselves? And if that were so, the Japanese army was one of the most disciplined and strict militaries in the world. And like the Germans, they were also meticulous record keepers, itemizing things with near fanaticism; where then, are the records of military police (Kempeitai) investigations of those crimes? There's a museum in Nanjing that details the horrors that the people of Nanjing suffered at the hands of the Japanese. Visitors have been known to have been so shaken by what they see in there that some have passed out. If anyone want's to read up more about this, look up the late Iris Chang's "Rape Of Nanjing" book. And for an impartial corroboration from another source, Suping Lu's "They Were In Nanjing." Here's a link to some more info: http://shininglight.us/archives/2005/04/the_rape_of_nanjing_drives_chinas_protests.php Ralph
I've read Iris Chang's "Rape of Nanking" book and it was definitely an interesting read (includes actual, disturbing images taken by photographers and was secretly sent outside Nanking). I haven't yet read Suping Lu's "They Were in Nanking" yet, but will try to get my hands on it. Thanks for the link and reference to Lu's book.
I don't believe this should even be a poll. It's obvious Nanjing had more casualties. The people who voted for the Japanese cities are probably Japanophiles anyway... Also, the fire bombings of Tokyo caused more casualties than the atom bombs...
It was an education tool, that's all. To get people to think about just how much killing one has to do to even come close to that of an atomic weapon, and then surpass it many times. Just to give people a sense of scale. And for the ones that vote for Hiroshima or Nagasaki? Doesn't matter. Res ipsa loquitor; the fact that one can even compare the two means that the IJA did something of a horrific nature. Ralph
It's really obvious that it's Nanking during The Rape of Nanking. I read the book by Iris Chang, 'The Rape of Nanking' It was a mass murder after all.
hmmm i never knew that either... but i do know of the nanking massacre but i didnt know the death toll for the atomic bomb...
they died more in mass murder i thought they died more in tha a-bomb in hiroshima, need to fully analze my history
A lot of people fail to mention that, I remember learning that in history class, but I don't recall how many people were affected.
okay let me throw the GREAT LEAP FORWARD by Mao Tse Tung. That killed around 20 million ppl. Stalin even more.
@larlarlar: I just did a quick search on the atomic bombings: According to the source, more than 123,000 people were affected by the atomic bombings, though the number could be much higher. I don't think we get an accurate estimate for something like this anyway. korx: You're way off the ball here. We are comparing the Nanking Massacre to the atomic bombings in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, not the civil war in China.
how many people died? Just read this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao:_The_Unknown_Story and read your Chinese history books again from 3000 BC to now and you will see instantly that the greatest enemies of the "Chinese" people come from inside (apart from Mongol and chosun invasions) . Also if you understand what it means by feudal system in a farming country and you will know instantly who had owned the land and who had to starved to death in the thousands of years of Chinese history. By the way, this is a popular asian entertainment sort of web site. This is really no call for racist or divisive threads that stirs up horror and hatred amongst the different races in Asian. This is www.dramasian.com and is not www.unpopularasians.com (!). A brief mention is adequate from time to time.
