# Did 246,000 Japanese people save the world? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 3, 2012, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809 "2012-05-03T23:31:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Mr.Kobayashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4af34b/32.png) [@Mr.Kobayashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Kobayashi)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2012, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/1 "2012-05-03T23:31:56Z")
Number taken from the upper estimates of the [Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki casualties.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki) Let me say why I think an argument can be made that they saved the world. Basically, it hinges around Hiroshima and Nagasaki as examples of nuclear deployment in war, the aftermath, and the taste it left in people’s mouths. Without those two, the public perception of nuclear weapons would be widely different; no torched cities or radiation suffering survivors which are images instantly springing to mind when one thinks of ‘nuclear war’. In the military mind, before Hiroshima and Nagasaki the atomic bomb was just a really, really big bomb. It had none of the connotations we think of today. This is evident in the planning for Operation Downfall, the ground invasion of Japan - where nuclear weapons would have been used [in the initial stages](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall#Nuclear_weapons), U.S. troops marching through the fallout - still not fully understood despite testing. In Korea a few years later, even with things as they were, the U.S. was kicking around the idea of using nuclear weapons. “Truman traded MacArthur for his atomic policies. On 10 March 1951 MacArthur asked for a “D-Day atomic capability” to retain air superiority in the Korean theatre.” [http://hnn.us/articles/9245.html](http://hnn.us/articles/9245.html) By then, the USSR had atomic bombs. Without the previous examples, what was to stop the US thinking of the bomb as they did in 1945, leading the US and USSR turning the Korean peninsula into a radioactive wasteland? So, without Hiroshima and Nagasaki, would the perception of nuclear weapons in war be sufficiently different as to alter human history completely? ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2012, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/2 "2012-05-03T23:45:07Z")
> [@Mr.Kobayashi](#): > > So, without Hiroshima and Nagasaki, would the perception of nuclear weapons in war be sufficiently different as to alter human history completely? I think this is a very reasonable position. If you study books and movies from after the war, from Hersey’s Hiroshima to junky sf, the impact of the bomb on people was very clear, in a way that would not have been as clear by blowing up fake villages in Nevada. I’m not saying that nuclear war was inevitable, but considering the number of people who thought “a World War could be won”, to quote Dylan, it is possible that enough leaders would be willing to risk it. End of the world - probably not. Hundreds of millions dead, certainly. However, since I was living in New York and would have been one of the casualties, same thing as far as I’m concerned. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2012, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/3 "2012-05-03T23:59:43Z")
> [@Mr.Kobayashi](#): > > So, without Hiroshima and Nagasaki, would the perception of nuclear weapons in war be sufficiently different as to alter human history completely? I think any use of nuclear weapons during the first decade of their existence (including the Korean War) would have had a similar effect as an object lesson. And the numbers of weapons were small enough at first that there wasn’t any chance of a global catastrophe. I can imagine an alternate reality where the atomic bombing of Pyongyang is remembered the same way we remember the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. However, by the mid 1950’s both the United States and the Soviet Union had enough weapons, and sophisticated-enough delivery systems that a doomsday scenario began to become plausible. And I think that without Hiroshima and Nagasaki to put a human face on the terrible suffering caused by atomic weapons, it’s much more likely that the U.S. or the U.S.S.R. would have actually pushed the button. Careful calculations of estimated casualties are not as visceral an argument against nuclear war as a photograph of a girl with the pattern of her kimono seared into her skin. So in that respect, yes, think you can say the people killed and maimed in those two cities did help save humanity from committing suicide. ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/4 "2012-05-04T00:00:55Z")
I have seen no evidence that the use of nuclear weapons in Japan changed anything at all. People developed a paranoia about nuclear weapons due to 1950s B-movies and TV shows. These owed nothing at all to the use of the bombs on Hiroshima. They were almost entirely based (loosely) on the work of western scientists concerning fallout, the effects of radiation in terms of mutations and the fact that “really big bombs” could literally destroy civilisation. From what I have seen, the only role that the Japan bombings played in any of this was that it provided a dramatic focus point in the minds of the western public. However it was completely overshadowed in the public mind by the H-bomb tests in the early 50s, so it’s impact was fleeting at best. As for the use of the bomb in Korea, that had nothing to do with events in Japan. It was down to not wanting the deaths of millions of civilians. The decision to bomb Japan was not taken lightly, but was seen as the only way to end the war without massive losses of life. In stark contrast nobody in 1950 believed that nuclear weapons would be needed to win the war. As you note, not wanting to risk a nuclear exchange with Russia also played a role. As far as the effects of fallout, troops were still being ordered into areas around nuclear blasts within a few hours[into the 1950s](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_nuclear_tests_at_Maralinga). that was the standard tactic for the use of tactical nuclear weapons: bomb the area and send in enough troops to control the area within hours. Everyone new that the casualties amongst these troops would be high. they new that when planning their use in Japan. this wasn’t something that was learned from the Japan bombings. It was already well researched and documented by that time. Basically, I think you have an overblown sense of the effect on the Japan bombings outside of Japan. Most people in the 50s were aware that they had occurred, but they contributed little to either public or scientific knowledge or perceptions of nuclear weapons that I have seen. I would be interested if you have any evidence that anybody in the 1950s gave more than passing consideration to the Japan bombings. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_the\_Immortal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6de8d8/32.png) [@Max\_the\_Immortal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_the_Immortal)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/5 "2012-05-04T00:02:22Z")
I’ve occasionally thought of writing a sci-fi short story where time travelers repeatedly try and fail to alter history to prevent a nuclear apocalypse. The best they can manage is a timeline where “only” two cities are destroyed by nuclear weapons. Has that been done already? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/6 "2012-05-04T00:10:32Z")
> [@Blake](#): > > I would be interested if you have any evidence that anybody in the 1950s gave more than passing consideration to the Japan bombings. John Hersey’s book [Hiroshima](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiroshima_%28book%29)was published in the New Yorker in 1946. It made up the entire August issue and caused a major stir. The Book of the Month Club distributed it free to all of its members. Informed Americans in the late 1940’s were well-aware of the horrors of the atomic bombings. ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/7 "2012-05-04T00:19:13Z")
> [@The\_Hamster\_King](#): > > John Hersey’s book [Hiroshima](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiroshima_%28book%29)was published in the New Yorker in 1946. It made up the entire August issue and caused a major stir. I think you are missing the point. Of course there were books published on the subject, just as there were books published on every other major event of the war. > [@](#): > > Informed Americans in the late 1940’s were well-aware of the horrors of the atomic bombings. Yes, to quote myself: most people in the 50s were aware that they had occurred, but they contributed little to either public or scientific knowledge or perceptions of nuclear weapons that I have seen. None of this indicates that people gave the Hiroshima bombings more than passing consideration when it came to their opinions about nuclear weapons. ---
**Author:** ![appleciders](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85f322/32.png) [@appleciders](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/appleciders)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/8 "2012-05-04T00:20:18Z")
> [@Max\_the\_Immortal](#): > > I’ve occasionally thought of writing a sci-fi short story where time travelers repeatedly try and fail to alter history to prevent a nuclear apocalypse. The best they can manage is a timeline where “only” two cities are destroyed by nuclear weapons. Has that been done already? Not that I’m aware of. There’s a book called _The Proteus Operation_ that deals with a group of time travelers who go back to WWII Europe to try to keep Hitler from winning the war. However, they only make a single attempt at changing the past, and the book is mostly limited to Europe, and it’s mostly an action book, not a philosophical look at how bad it could have been. ---
**Author:** ![Esox\_Lucius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/848f3c/32.png) [@Esox\_Lucius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esox_Lucius)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/9 "2012-05-04T00:22:30Z")
**Did 246,000 Japanese people save the world?** I think you’re right that the terrifying effects of nuclear weapons had to be demonstrated on real people before they were fully appreciated, but “saving the world” implies intent, and the Japanese victims certainly never intended to die like they did. But I think it can be said that their deaths weren’t in vain for the reasons you gave, though its small consolation to them. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/10 "2012-05-04T00:41:23Z")
> [@Mr.Kobayashi](#): > > Let me say why I think an argument can be made that they saved the world. Basically, it hinges around Hiroshima and Nagasaki as examples of nuclear deployment in war, the aftermath, and the taste it left in people’s mouths. Without those two, the public perception of nuclear weapons would be widely different; no torched cities or radiation suffering survivors which are images instantly springing to mind when one thinks of ‘nuclear war’. In the military mind, before Hiroshima and Nagasaki the atomic bomb was just a really, really big bomb. It had none of the connotations we think of today. Reminds me of an argument I’ve heard for how lucky humanity was in the timing of WWII and nukes. The argument goes that if nukes had been invented long enough before WWII, both sides would have had arsenals of them without the Cold War terror of _using_ them, and so _would_ have used them; Europe is laid waste. If invented after WWII you have a similar scenario; the knowledge proliferates, arsenals of them are built, and lacking experience of just how bad they are a nuclear exchange occurs. But having them invented just as WWII is nearing the end means that there’s no large arsenals and only two are used. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Kobayashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4af34b/32.png) [@Mr.Kobayashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Kobayashi)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/11 "2012-05-04T00:47:33Z")
> [@Blake](#): > > I would be interested if you have any evidence that anybody in the 1950s gave more than passing consideration to the Japan bombings. Snipped your quote for size, but I’ll try and address your points, in reverse order. In hindsight it’s very hard to separate the unfolding narrative of nuclear warfare with specific references to Hiroshima, but I think as early as 1946 the horror was ingrained in public minds as a result of Hiroshima due to official reports; > [@](#): > > The Bombing Survey released some preliminary findings in late February 1946, which were reported in such magazines as Time and Life. The March 4, 1946, issue of Time lists a number of effects on human bodies by atomic bombs and notes that the Bombing Survey’s findings contradict earlier comments by “military conservatives” (“What Happened” 90). An article entitled “Atom Bomb Effects” in the March 11, 1946, issue of Life shows medical drawings of the human body being penetrated by gamma rays and lists a number of the symptoms of radiation sickness…On June 30, 1946, the Bombing Survey released its final report, entitled The Effects of Atomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The complete text of the report was republished in the July 5, 1946, issue of U.S. News and received a fair amount of publicity. However, as Lifton and Mitchell point out, the publicity for the report was overshadowed by the atomic bomb tests at Bikini atoll in early July (83). > > The Bombing Survey report reinforced much of the official narrative in its representation of the Japanese as an anonymous herd and its discussion of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as military targets. Nonetheless, the findings of the report were startling and clearly refuted the dismissive claims of military conservatives regarding radiation. The first part of [the quoted article](http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0403/is_4_46/ai_75141043/) also discusses the effects of Hersey’s book. More broadly, you have stuff things like the clear analogy in 1954’s Gozilla, produced in the nation struck by the weapons; > [@](#): > > Amid a flurry of urgent news-bulletin references to nuclear contamination, fallout, bomb shelters, and the wartime incineration of Nagasaki, a gigantic, hyperdestructive dinosaur lizard rises from the depths of Tokyo Bay. Magnificent and absurd, the humongous radioactive reptile known as Gojira—Godzilla, to us—is the great movie monster of the post–World War II period, in part because Honda seems to have conceived this primordial force of nature as a living mushroom cloud. > … > Then, with the end of the American occupation, came two Japan metaphors that would be impossible to ignore: Godzilla and its art-house twin, Akira Kurosawa’s I Live in Fear (1955), both produced by Toho Studios, with overlapping casts, and both articulating a new attitude—namely, an acute nuclear anxiety regarding the possibility of collective extinction, or what, in his review of I Live in Fear, Parker Tyler calls “atomophobia.” [http://www.criterion.com/current/posts/2127-godzilla-poetry-after-the-a-bomb/](http://www.criterion.com/current/posts/2127-godzilla-poetry-after-the-a-bomb/) Could that have been produced and populated the popular culture without the effects being seen first hand? Then you have stuff like _On The Beach_ - could the bleak radiation poisoned world be imagined without two bleak radiation poisoned cities? Atomic bomb use at the end of the war was also significant, it was sealed forever in the mind as a game changer, a war ender. Something that would change the course of history. Without that final underscore to go with the radiation, wouldn’t they have been seen more…casually? As simply just another weapon to be used in conventional war? H-Bombs in the popular conciousness were riding on the coattails of this reputation, I think. Who would be interested in nuclear weapons if they hadn’t finished the war? Who would even know about them besides science and military buffs? This is why I believe the example was so crucial. It showed what would happen if nuclear weapons were used on cities, and more specifically what happened to the populations of those cities. Something that would never be learned in tests - which catches the eye more, the images of Hiroshima victims suffering from radiation sickness or mannequins being destroyed? Let’s face it, after being developed it was only a matter of time before somebody used it. That’s why I think it was a case of ‘the sooner the better’ - particularly before the USSR got hold of it and developed a doctrine without seeing what it was capable of doing to cities. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Kobayashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4af34b/32.png) [@Mr.Kobayashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Kobayashi)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/12 "2012-05-04T00:49:54Z")
> [@Esox\_Lucius](#): > > **Did 246,000 Japanese people save the world?** > > I think you’re right that the terrifying effects of nuclear weapons had to be demonstrated on real people before they were fully appreciated, but “saving the world” implies intent, and the Japanese victims certainly never intended to die like they did. But I think it can be said that their deaths weren’t in vain for the reasons you gave, though its small consolation to them. Oh, don’t get me wrong - I’m not saying that anyone would be jumping for joy at dying from radiation so that the world could see it and be warned not to do it on a larger scale. My point is that, unwilling and unaware, their deaths were and should be seen as ultimately sacrifices which prevented larger calamity. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/13 "2012-05-04T01:07:07Z")
> [@Blake](#): > > None of this indicates that people gave the Hiroshima bombings more than passing consideration when it came to their opinions about nuclear weapons. Five years to the day after the bombing of Hiroshima, [Collier’s magazine](http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/paleofuture/2012/03/hiroshima-u-s-a/) published a special issue about the atomic destruction of New York. The cover showed a mushroom cloud rising over Manhattan with the headline **“Hiroshima, U.S.A. – Can Anything Be Done About It?”** From that the accompanying article: > [@](#): > > The opening account of an A-bombing of Manhattan Island may seem highly imaginative. Actually, little of it is invention. Incidents are related in circumstances identical with or extremely close to those which really happened elsewhere in World War II. Property damage is described as it occurred in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, with allowance for differences between Oriental and Occidental standards of building. Collier’s, like the New Yorker, was a major national magazine. The image of Hiroshima happening in the United States (not just nuclear war … Hiroshima) was a powerful idea during the Cold War. > [@Blake](#): > > I think you are missing the point. Of course there were books published on the subject, just as there were books published on every other major event of the war \*Hiroshima \*wasn’t just any book about the war. Radio stations read it over the air in its entirety as a public service. It was given away for free so people could learn about the dangers of nuclear war. The specter of nuclear annihilation loomed large over America in the 1950’s, and the story of Hiroshima in particular was a significant element of the zeitgeist. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Man\_With\_The\_Golden\_Gun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/dc4da7/32.png) [@The\_Man\_With\_The\_Golden\_Gun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Man_With_The_Golden_Gun)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/14 "2012-05-04T02:52:06Z")
I just wonder about what it says about humanity that it takes 246,000 people killed, countless more injured, and two major cities obliterated to make us think that raining nuclear fire on the entire planet might not be such a good idea. ---
**Author:** ![Esox\_Lucius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/848f3c/32.png) [@Esox\_Lucius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esox_Lucius)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 8:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/15 "2012-05-04T08:05:36Z")
> [@Mr.Kobayashi](#): > > Oh, don’t get me wrong - I’m not saying that anyone would be jumping for joy at dying from radiation so that the world could see it and be warned not to do it on a larger scale. My point is that, unwilling and unaware, their deaths were and should be seen as ultimately sacrifices which prevented larger calamity. Ah, okay. I made that point only because the title sounds a bit melodramatic. Otherwise, your OP makes a lot of sense and made me look at the bombings from a perspective I hadn’t considered before. Good thread. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/16 "2012-05-04T16:47:54Z")
> [@Blake](#): > > I think you are missing the point. Of course there were books published on the subject, just as there were books published on every other major event of the war. The New Yorker had never before devoted an entire issue to a book. I think I read that they didn’t have advertising running with the text because it was inappropriate, but I’m not certain. > [@](#): > > Yes, to quote myself: most people in the 50s were aware that they had occurred, but they contributed little to either public or scientific knowledge or perceptions of nuclear weapons that I have seen. > > None of this indicates that people gave the Hiroshima bombings more than passing consideration when it came to their opinions about nuclear weapons. I have an extensive collection of early 1950s SF books and magazines, and this is just crazy. It is true that more people died in various fire-bombings during the war than did in Hiroshima, but I challenge you to find any stories about fire bombing. There have been end of the world stories from Mary Shelley. L. Ron Hubbard had a post-war apocalypse - no nuclear weapons - called Final Blackout around 1940. The number of books and stories around this theme exploded after Hiroshima. (Pardon the expression.) After the war novels were not just done by sf writers, but by “respectable” main stream writers. Reading contemporary accounts, the thing that was different was that an entire city was destroyed by one bomb dropped by one plane. That was pure science fiction before, and it got sf some respect, kind of like after Sputnik. The nuclear testing museum in Las Vegas has an exhibit of the atomic themed merchandise that popped up after the war. I think I have the Astounding with Campbell’s editorial about this - I’ll see if I can dig it up to give a real contemporary opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/17 "2012-05-04T16:49:16Z")
> [@The\_Man\_With\_The\_Golden\_Gun](#): > > I just wonder about what it says about humanity that it takes 246,000 people killed, countless more injured, and two major cities obliterated to make us think that raining nuclear fire on the entire planet might not be such a good idea. We work best on images, not concepts? We shouldn’t laugh though - it might take half of Bangladesh being flooded before some people will admit there is a climate problem. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/18 "2012-05-04T17:48:26Z")
Was Hiroshima/Nagasaki any worse that the firebombing of Tokyo? Or the firebombing of Hamburg? All were terrible tragedies, all were the result of fanatical leadership. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/19 "2012-05-04T18:57:24Z")
It’s always been my opinion that if A-bombs had not been used in 1945, they would have been used relatively soon thereafter, perhaps in Korea. Whether the destruction in that case would have been much worse, in toto, than the 1945 bombs I won’t speculate, but since total deaths in the Korean War are already estimated at over 2 million, “save the world” in OP’s title seems exaggerated. > [@ralph124c](#): > > Was Hiroshima/Nagasaki any worse that the firebombing of Tokyo? Or the firebombing of Hamburg? All were terrible tragedies, all were the result of fanatical leadership. Axis behavior was not overly benevolent either. :rolleyes: I was surprised to read recently that the Japanese massacred 250,000 Chinese just in retaliation for Chinese assistance to downed U.S. airmen from Doolittle’s raid. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2012, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809/20 "2012-05-04T19:24:57Z")
I definitely subscribe to the theory that Der Trihs mentions about the timing actually being incredibly fortuitous. I think there’s some similar sick and morbid luck in the timing of the rise to power of Hitler and Stalin, two powerful and evil and capable men who, fortunately for the rest of us (although not for 40 million or so dead people) largely exhausted themselves fighting each other. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-246-000-japanese-people-save-the-world/620809.md?page=2)