Coming up on the 71st anniversary of Iwo Jima

[Camp]

So, kill every civilian? Is that your position?

Civilians, last I checked the nation of Japan was at war with us, civilians literally making bullets, guns, bombs, to kill us with, actively participating in the War machine. Acting as one united, not as individuals.

But hey, we did not kill every civilian. Not even close, we actually saved at least a million Japanese lives or more.

So your position is thus, that the USA should of surrendered the West Coast of California after Pearl Harbor was bombed.

The Japanese people lived under a dictatorial regime. If you refuse to do as you are told, by the regime, you die. So, if you were a Japanese civilian in 1945, you would support the war effort or be executed. For this they deserve death, in your blood lust mind.

The belief that the a-bombs saved lives, because they made invasion unnecessary, is bull shit. That theory was trotted out by the Truman administration AFTER the a-bombs and criticism mounted for wantonly murdering civilians. Many members of the US military leadership and administration disapproved of the a-bombing.

You must come to realize Japan had nothing left to fight with, in summer '45. Their people were starving and their nation defenseless. Yet, Truman went ahead an incinerated defenseless women, children, and old men when he dropped the a-bombs. Like most politicians, he was lying fool.

www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/macarthur%20reports/macarthur%20v1%20sup/ch5.htm

The idea that Japan was finished and had nothing left to fight with is a myth. They had well over a million man standing army ready to fight in Japan and a huge surplus of stored weapons and munitions to mount a defense.

 

[regent]

So, kill every civilian? Is that your position?

Civilians, last I checked the nation of Japan was at war with us, civilians literally making bullets, guns, bombs, to kill us with, actively participating in the War machine. Acting as one united, not as individuals.

But hey, we did not kill every civilian. Not even close, we actually saved at least a million Japanese lives or more.

So your position is thus, that the USA should of surrendered the West Coast of California after Pearl Harbor was bombed.

The Japanese people lived under a dictatorial regime. If you refuse to do as you are told, by the regime, you die. So, if you were a Japanese civilian in 1945, you would support the war effort or be executed. For this they deserve death, in your blood lust mind.

The belief that the a-bombs saved lives, because they made invasion unnecessary, is bull shit. That theory was trotted out by the Truman administration AFTER the a-bombs and criticism mounted for wantonly murdering civilians. Many members of the US military leadership and administration disapproved of the a-bombing.

You must come to realize Japan had nothing left to fight with, in summer '45. Their people were starving and their nation defenseless. Yet, Truman went ahead an incinerated defenseless women, children, and old men when he dropped the a-bombs. Like most politicians, he was lying fool.

So, kill every civilian? Is that your position?

Civilians, last I checked the nation of Japan was at war with us, civilians literally making bullets, guns, bombs, to kill us with, actively participating in the War machine. Acting as one united, not as individuals.

But hey, we did not kill every civilian. Not even close, we actually saved at least a million Japanese lives or more.

So your position is thus, that the USA should of surrendered the West Coast of California after Pearl Harbor was bombed.

The Japanese people lived under a dictatorial regime. If you refuse to do as you are told, by the regime, you die. So, if you were a Japanese civilian in 1945, you would support the war effort or be executed. For this they deserve death, in your blood lust mind.

The belief that the a-bombs saved lives, because they made invasion unnecessary, is bull shit. That theory was trotted out by the Truman administration AFTER the a-bombs and criticism mounted for wantonly murdering civilians. Many members of the US military leadership and administration disapproved of the a-bombing.

You must come to realize Japan had nothing left to fight with, in summer '45. Their people were starving and their nation defenseless. Yet, Truman went ahead an incinerated defenseless women, children, and old men when he dropped the a-bombs. Like most politicians, he was lying fool.

If the Japanese had nothing to fight with why didn't they surrender? Why did the Japanese keep a war going, they could not win, and their civilians were being fire-bombed almost every night? The Japanese had ample supplies to cause thousands of allied casualties but not enough to win the war. How much Japanese supplies did it take to cause those American casualties on Iwo and Okinawa?

 

[gipper]

So, kill every civilian? Is that your position?

Civilians, last I checked the nation of Japan was at war with us, civilians literally making bullets, guns, bombs, to kill us with, actively participating in the War machine. Acting as one united, not as individuals.

But hey, we did not kill every civilian. Not even close, we actually saved at least a million Japanese lives or more.

So your position is thus, that the USA should of surrendered the West Coast of California after Pearl Harbor was bombed.

The Japanese people lived under a dictatorial regime. If you refuse to do as you are told, by the regime, you die. So, if you were a Japanese civilian in 1945, you would support the war effort or be executed. For this they deserve death, in your blood lust mind.

The belief that the a-bombs saved lives, because they made invasion unnecessary, is bull shit. That theory was trotted out by the Truman administration AFTER the a-bombs and criticism mounted for wantonly murdering civilians. Many members of the US military leadership and administration disapproved of the a-bombing.

You must come to realize Japan had nothing left to fight with, in summer '45. Their people were starving and their nation defenseless. Yet, Truman went ahead an incinerated defenseless women, children, and old men when he dropped the a-bombs. Like most politicians, he was lying fool.

So, kill every civilian? Is that your position?

Civilians, last I checked the nation of Japan was at war with us, civilians literally making bullets, guns, bombs, to kill us with, actively participating in the War machine. Acting as one united, not as individuals.

But hey, we did not kill every civilian. Not even close, we actually saved at least a million Japanese lives or more.

So your position is thus, that the USA should of surrendered the West Coast of California after Pearl Harbor was bombed.

The Japanese people lived under a dictatorial regime. If you refuse to do as you are told, by the regime, you die. So, if you were a Japanese civilian in 1945, you would support the war effort or be executed. For this they deserve death, in your blood lust mind.

The belief that the a-bombs saved lives, because they made invasion unnecessary, is bull shit. That theory was trotted out by the Truman administration AFTER the a-bombs and criticism mounted for wantonly murdering civilians. Many members of the US military leadership and administration disapproved of the a-bombing.

You must come to realize Japan had nothing left to fight with, in summer '45. Their people were starving and their nation defenseless. Yet, Truman went ahead an incinerated defenseless women, children, and old men when he dropped the a-bombs. Like most politicians, he was lying fool.

If the Japanese had nothing to fight with why didn't they surrender? Why did the Japanese keep a war going, they could not win, and their civilians were being fire-bombed almost every night? The Japanese had ample supplies to cause thousands of allied casualties but not enough to win the war. How much Japanese supplies did it take to cause those American casualties on Iwo and Okinawa?

Really? You ask such a foolish question.

Must we go over this ground EVERY time we debate this issue?

The Japanese people were starving and had nothing to fight with by August '45. However, their stinking tyrannical leadership controlled the nation. Do you fail to see the distinction? Do your really think the Japanese people wanted the war to continue resulting in 100s of thousand of civilian deaths, when they knew the outcome? Much like the Germans, they had no choice and the allies gave them no choice.

 

[Camp]

So, kill every civilian? Is that your position?

Civilians, last I checked the nation of Japan was at war with us, civilians literally making bullets, guns, bombs, to kill us with, actively participating in the War machine. Acting as one united, not as individuals.

But hey, we did not kill every civilian. Not even close, we actually saved at least a million Japanese lives or more.

So your position is thus, that the USA should of surrendered the West Coast of California after Pearl Harbor was bombed.

The Japanese people lived under a dictatorial regime. If you refuse to do as you are told, by the regime, you die. So, if you were a Japanese civilian in 1945, you would support the war effort or be executed. For this they deserve death, in your blood lust mind.

The belief that the a-bombs saved lives, because they made invasion unnecessary, is bull shit. That theory was trotted out by the Truman administration AFTER the a-bombs and criticism mounted for wantonly murdering civilians. Many members of the US military leadership and administration disapproved of the a-bombing.

You must come to realize Japan had nothing left to fight with, in summer '45. Their people were starving and their nation defenseless. Yet, Truman went ahead an incinerated defenseless women, children, and old men when he dropped the a-bombs. Like most politicians, he was lying fool.

So, kill every civilian? Is that your position?

Civilians, last I checked the nation of Japan was at war with us, civilians literally making bullets, guns, bombs, to kill us with, actively participating in the War machine. Acting as one united, not as individuals.

But hey, we did not kill every civilian. Not even close, we actually saved at least a million Japanese lives or more.

So your position is thus, that the USA should of surrendered the West Coast of California after Pearl Harbor was bombed.

The Japanese people lived under a dictatorial regime. If you refuse to do as you are told, by the regime, you die. So, if you were a Japanese civilian in 1945, you would support the war effort or be executed. For this they deserve death, in your blood lust mind.

The belief that the a-bombs saved lives, because they made invasion unnecessary, is bull shit. That theory was trotted out by the Truman administration AFTER the a-bombs and criticism mounted for wantonly murdering civilians. Many members of the US military leadership and administration disapproved of the a-bombing.

You must come to realize Japan had nothing left to fight with, in summer '45. Their people were starving and their nation defenseless. Yet, Truman went ahead an incinerated defenseless women, children, and old men when he dropped the a-bombs. Like most politicians, he was lying fool.

If the Japanese had nothing to fight with why didn't they surrender? Why did the Japanese keep a war going, they could not win, and their civilians were being fire-bombed almost every night? The Japanese had ample supplies to cause thousands of allied casualties but not enough to win the war. How much Japanese supplies did it take to cause those American casualties on Iwo and Okinawa?

In the link provided in the previous post, you can read about the amazing amount of weaponry stockpiled by the Japanese for the invasion. After the surrender, occupation forces collected 2,486,665 rifles and carbines and 51,000,000 mortar rounds and 393 midget subs on the main island just as examples. The one million troops mentioned on the main island was just the tip of the iceberg. The home islands combined had 3,532,000 troops with an equal number dispersed outside Japanese borders from China to the Solomons, many of which could have made it back to Japan or remained as fighting forces as holdouts if orders were not given to surrender. That brings the total to over seven million men in arms.

 

[mudwhistle]

Pretty much puts the kabosh on all of the anti-nuke protesters complaining about Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

 

[gipper]

So, kill every civilian? Is that your position?

Civilians, last I checked the nation of Japan was at war with us, civilians literally making bullets, guns, bombs, to kill us with, actively participating in the War machine. Acting as one united, not as individuals.

But hey, we did not kill every civilian. Not even close, we actually saved at least a million Japanese lives or more.

So your position is thus, that the USA should of surrendered the West Coast of California after Pearl Harbor was bombed.

The Japanese people lived under a dictatorial regime. If you refuse to do as you are told, by the regime, you die. So, if you were a Japanese civilian in 1945, you would support the war effort or be executed. For this they deserve death, in your blood lust mind.

The belief that the a-bombs saved lives, because they made invasion unnecessary, is bull shit. That theory was trotted out by the Truman administration AFTER the a-bombs and criticism mounted for wantonly murdering civilians. Many members of the US military leadership and administration disapproved of the a-bombing.

You must come to realize Japan had nothing left to fight with, in summer '45. Their people were starving and their nation defenseless. Yet, Truman went ahead an incinerated defenseless women, children, and old men when he dropped the a-bombs. Like most politicians, he was lying fool.

www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/macarthur%20reports/macarthur%20v1%20sup/ch5.htm

The idea that Japan was finished and had nothing left to fight with is a myth. They had well over a million man standing army ready to fight in Japan and a huge surplus of stored weapons and munitions to mount a defense.

Most of Japanese fighting men were still in China in summer '45. They had no way of getting to Japan, since the US had long controlled the seas and air around Japan. Do you really believe the propaganda designed to justify the incineration of civilians?

Think for a minute. Japan had been bombed for months prior to their surrender. Their nation was entirely blockaded by the US military. If you think the women and children and old men in Japan, could have inflicted a million casualties on the world's greatest military had the US invaded, you are not thinking.

I know it is difficult to accept the fact that Truman was a war criminal, but it is time to put your big boy pants and accept the truth.

 

[Syriusly]

It was a part of justifying the use of the Bomb.

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen.

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR?

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan.

Yes, in the eye of those who are beholden to the foreign powers, all that the USA does in our defense is a mistake. Of course our biggest mistake is allowing folks like Howard Zinn to become professors in our Universities.

That Japanese were a very cruel, sadistic, murderous people who needed to be stopped, is ignored by the revisionist, It is a shame we did not have the Atomic Bomb in 1941 to stop them and Hitler.

The Atomic Bomb and the Marines saved the lives of countless Americans, 100,000? Maybe 500,000? The estimates vary, at the least destroying Nagasaki and Hiroshima saved a 1,000,000 Japanese lives.

Thank God, Truman treated the Atomic bomb as if it was simply the biggest, best, bomb ever made. All these emotions that syriusly attach to the bomb is just revisionist marxism as published by Howard Zinn.

Yes, syriously speaks of morality? In syriously's mind morality was to never to stop that japanese before or after they began their campaign of raping 10 year old chines virgins or the bayoneting of pregnant chinese women.

Yes, syriously would of had the USA cower and retreat, leaving Pearl Harbor and Hawaii to the Japanese, most likely surrendering California and the entire west coast of the USA to the Japanese.

syriously has no idea what is, moral.

You are seriously a brain damaged idiot.

I believe Truman did the correct thing in ordering the atomic bombs to be dropped, I am very aware of the barbarity of Imperial Japan, very aware of how much the United States accomplished from being attacked at Pearl Harbor to the point of Japan surrendering in Tokyo Bay- and am very happy the United States triumphed.

That you can't understand what I wrote, just displays your mental deficiencies.

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen.

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR?

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan.

 

[Syriusly]

So, kill every civilian? Is that your position?

Civilians, last I checked the nation of Japan was at war with us, civilians literally making bullets, guns, bombs, to kill us with, actively participating in the War machine. Acting as one united, not as individuals.

But hey, we did not kill every civilian. Not even close, we actually saved at least a million Japanese lives or more.

So your position is thus, that the USA should of surrendered the West Coast of California after Pearl Harbor was bombed.

The Japanese people lived under a dictatorial regime. If you refuse to do as you are told, by the regime, you die. So, if you were a Japanese civilian in 1945, you would support the war effort or be executed. For this they deserve death, in your blood lust mind.

The belief that the a-bombs saved lives, because they made invasion unnecessary, is bull shit. That theory was trotted out by the Truman administration AFTER the a-bombs and criticism mounted for wantonly murdering civilians. Many members of the US military leadership and administration disapproved of the a-bombing.

You must come to realize Japan had nothing left to fight with, in summer '45. Their people were starving and their nation defenseless. Yet, Truman went ahead an incinerated defenseless women, children, and old men when he dropped the a-bombs. Like most politicians, he was lying fool.

www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/macarthur%20reports/macarthur%20v1%20sup/ch5.htm

The idea that Japan was finished and had nothing left to fight with is a myth. They had well over a million man standing army ready to fight in Japan and a huge surplus of stored weapons and munitions to mount a defense.

Most of Japanese fighting men were still in China in summer '45. They had no way of getting to Japan, since the US had long controlled the seas and air around Japan. Do you really believe the propaganda designed to justify the incineration of civilians?

Think for a minute. Japan had been bombed for months prior to their surrender. Their nation was entirely blockaded by the US military. If you think the women and children and old men in Japan, could have inflicted a million casualties on the world's greatest military had the US invaded, you are not thinking.

I know it is difficult to accept the fact that Truman was a war criminal, but it is time to put your big boy pants and accept the truth.

I know it is difficult for you to accept the facts- Japan was willing to sacrifice their civilians to defend their homeland. Even after the Emperor demanded surrender, elements of the Army(the real political power in Japan) attempted a coupe to prevent the surrender.

Yes- thousands of American lives were saved, and likely hundreds of thousands of Japanese lives.

The actual effect of the atomic bombs was less than conventional bombing- except for one thing- it convinced Japan to surrender.

 

[Camp]

So, kill every civilian? Is that your position?

Civilians, last I checked the nation of Japan was at war with us, civilians literally making bullets, guns, bombs, to kill us with, actively participating in the War machine. Acting as one united, not as individuals.

But hey, we did not kill every civilian. Not even close, we actually saved at least a million Japanese lives or more.

So your position is thus, that the USA should of surrendered the West Coast of California after Pearl Harbor was bombed.

The Japanese people lived under a dictatorial regime. If you refuse to do as you are told, by the regime, you die. So, if you were a Japanese civilian in 1945, you would support the war effort or be executed. For this they deserve death, in your blood lust mind.

The belief that the a-bombs saved lives, because they made invasion unnecessary, is bull shit. That theory was trotted out by the Truman administration AFTER the a-bombs and criticism mounted for wantonly murdering civilians. Many members of the US military leadership and administration disapproved of the a-bombing.

You must come to realize Japan had nothing left to fight with, in summer '45. Their people were starving and their nation defenseless. Yet, Truman went ahead an incinerated defenseless women, children, and old men when he dropped the a-bombs. Like most politicians, he was lying fool.

www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/macarthur%20reports/macarthur%20v1%20sup/ch5.htm

The idea that Japan was finished and had nothing left to fight with is a myth. They had well over a million man standing army ready to fight in Japan and a huge surplus of stored weapons and munitions to mount a defense.

Most of Japanese fighting men were still in China in summer '45. They had no way of getting to Japan, since the US had long controlled the seas and air around Japan. Do you really believe the propaganda designed to justify the incineration of civilians?

Think for a minute. Japan had been bombed for months prior to their surrender. Their nation was entirely blockaded by the US military. If you think the women and children and old men in Japan, could have inflicted a million casualties on the world's greatest military had the US invaded, you are not thinking.

I know it is difficult to accept the fact that Truman was a war criminal, but it is time to put your big boy pants and accept the truth.

Japan had been bombed, but so had Iwo Jima, turning the landscape into rubble and dust. The Japanese simply hid in their caves and waited for the Marines to show up. Okinawa showed the limits of a bombing campaign over a larger landscape and area. Bombs of that era did not penetrate deep into mines, caves and bunkers. They destroyed surface targets and only penetrated a few meters below ground level.

The favored defense of the 'Japan was too weak to mount a defense' point is that the civilian population was starving. The military command that ruled Japan was perfectly willing to sacrifice the civilian population to obtain a positive negotiating position.

Not sure about those big boy pants you speak of, but I provided a pretty good source of what the Japanese strength was and you seem to be refuting it with some unsourced opinions. If the Japanese military was as weak as you project, you should be able to provide a link to refute the one I submitted for review.

BTW, the Japanese forces in China only amounted to a fraction of the over seven million troops available at the time. 900.000 were lost to the Russians (detailed in the link), but that has no bearing on the millions dispersed on the home islands that would have to be confronted the same way they were confronted on Iwo Jima and Okinawa.

 

[elektra]

It was a part of justifying the use of the Bomb.

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen.

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR?

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan.

Yes, in the eye of those who are beholden to the foreign powers, all that the USA does in our defense is a mistake. Of course our biggest mistake is allowing folks like Howard Zinn to become professors in our Universities.

That Japanese were a very cruel, sadistic, murderous people who needed to be stopped, is ignored by the revisionist, It is a shame we did not have the Atomic Bomb in 1941 to stop them and Hitler.

The Atomic Bomb and the Marines saved the lives of countless Americans, 100,000? Maybe 500,000? The estimates vary, at the least destroying Nagasaki and Hiroshima saved a 1,000,000 Japanese lives.

Thank God, Truman treated the Atomic bomb as if it was simply the biggest, best, bomb ever made. All these emotions that syriusly attach to the bomb is just revisionist marxism as published by Howard Zinn.

Yes, syriously speaks of morality? In syriously's mind morality was to never to stop that japanese before or after they began their campaign of raping 10 year old chines virgins or the bayoneting of pregnant chinese women.

Yes, syriously would of had the USA cower and retreat, leaving Pearl Harbor and Hawaii to the Japanese, most likely surrendering California and the entire west coast of the USA to the Japanese.

syriously has no idea what is, moral.

You are seriously a brain damaged idiot.

I believe Truman did the correct thing in ordering the atomic bombs to be dropped, I am very aware of the barbarity of Imperial Japan, very aware of how much the United States accomplished from being attacked at Pearl Harbor to the point of Japan surrendering in Tokyo Bay- and am very happy the United States triumphed.

That you can't understand what I wrote, just displays your mental deficiencies.

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen.

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR?

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan.

This is not my thread.

Your choice if words seemed deragatory, belittling, ignorant.

I can not help how you express yourself.

I understand you have not studied the war in the pacific as well.

I do not like revisionist or the revusionist them touched upon, even if the person os ignorant in regards to what they state.

 

[elektra]

Most of Japanese fighting men were still in China in summer '45. They had no way of getting to Japan, since the US had long controlled the seas and air around Japan. Do you really believe the propaganda designed to justify the incineration of civilians?



I know it is difficult to accept the fact that Truman was a war criminal, but it is time to put your big boy pants and accept the truth.

How did the Japanese sink the USS Indianapolis, killing 900 sailors, on July 30th, 1945?

Your opinion that the Japanese were beat, while they were killing Americans is simply an ignorant opinion of revionist.

 

[Syriusly]

It was a part of justifying the use of the Bomb.

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen.

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR?

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan.

Yes, in the eye of those who are beholden to the foreign powers, all that the USA does in our defense is a mistake. Of course our biggest mistake is allowing folks like Howard Zinn to become professors in our Universities.

That Japanese were a very cruel, sadistic, murderous people who needed to be stopped, is ignored by the revisionist, It is a shame we did not have the Atomic Bomb in 1941 to stop them and Hitler.

The Atomic Bomb and the Marines saved the lives of countless Americans, 100,000? Maybe 500,000? The estimates vary, at the least destroying Nagasaki and Hiroshima saved a 1,000,000 Japanese lives.

Thank God, Truman treated the Atomic bomb as if it was simply the biggest, best, bomb ever made. All these emotions that syriusly attach to the bomb is just revisionist marxism as published by Howard Zinn.

Yes, syriously speaks of morality? In syriously's mind morality was to never to stop that japanese before or after they began their campaign of raping 10 year old chines virgins or the bayoneting of pregnant chinese women.

Yes, syriously would of had the USA cower and retreat, leaving Pearl Harbor and Hawaii to the Japanese, most likely surrendering California and the entire west coast of the USA to the Japanese.

syriously has no idea what is, moral.

You are seriously a brain damaged idiot.

I believe Truman did the correct thing in ordering the atomic bombs to be dropped, I am very aware of the barbarity of Imperial Japan, very aware of how much the United States accomplished from being attacked at Pearl Harbor to the point of Japan surrendering in Tokyo Bay- and am very happy the United States triumphed.

That you can't understand what I wrote, just displays your mental deficiencies.

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen.

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR?

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan.

This is not my thread.

Your choice if words seemed deragatory, belittling, ignorant.

I can not help how you express yourself.

I understand you have not studied the war in the pacific as well..

I am not responsible for your lack of reading comprehension- what part of The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan

seemed 'derogatory, belittling, ignorant'?

Feel free to try to match your 'studies' of the War in the Pacific against mine.

 

[Syriusly]

Civilians, last I checked the nation of Japan was at war with us, civilians literally making bullets, guns, bombs, to kill us with, actively participating in the War machine. Acting as one united, not as individuals.

But hey, we did not kill every civilian. Not even close, we actually saved at least a million Japanese lives or more.

So your position is thus, that the USA should of surrendered the West Coast of California after Pearl Harbor was bombed.

The Japanese people lived under a dictatorial regime. If you refuse to do as you are told, by the regime, you die. So, if you were a Japanese civilian in 1945, you would support the war effort or be executed. For this they deserve death, in your blood lust mind.

The belief that the a-bombs saved lives, because they made invasion unnecessary, is bull shit. That theory was trotted out by the Truman administration AFTER the a-bombs and criticism mounted for wantonly murdering civilians. Many members of the US military leadership and administration disapproved of the a-bombing.

You must come to realize Japan had nothing left to fight with, in summer '45. Their people were starving and their nation defenseless. Yet, Truman went ahead an incinerated defenseless women, children, and old men when he dropped the a-bombs. Like most politicians, he was lying fool.

You must think your tired old argument has not been debated a thousand times before.

How the Japanese lived and thought at the time is irrelevant, they certainly did not think like individuals, they thought as unit, as one. They would not consider thinking otherwise, for that was the culture. How about a statistic to support your claim they lived in fear of reprisals of the Emperor?

Many members of the Military Leadership disapproved? Is this where you para-phrase Eisenhower at Potsdam and where I follow up by showing Eisenhower wrote 2 different versions of that story, many years later. I will also show that Stimson had a different account in his book as well.

The Japanese had nothing left to fight with? They did in the spring that is evident. Okinawa. But you did say the summer, so I guess to make your argument we will ignore the men who were prisoners getting tortured, starving, and dying, fine. So my response to that, if you can come up with a link or something to reference, my response will be quotes from all the high ranking Japanese Military commanders that disagree with you.

I will finish the "defenseless Japanese" argument with the sinking of the USS Indianapolis by the Japanese on July 30th of 1945, 900 sailors died.

Nagasaki was responsible for the repair of ships and submarines, did the one that got the USS Indianapolis port in Nagasaki?

Then just to show your uneducated, I will point out only 1 A-Bomb was dropped. Not "a-bombs" as you believe. I guess for the uneducated stating a-bombs sounds more devastating then simply saying 2 Nuclear Bombs. 1 A-Bomb. 1 Hydrogen bomb.

So, which do you wish to tackle first, defenseless Japanese is the most difficult so you should ignore that.
Top officials disagreeing is hard as well, for every top official who knew, agreed to end the war with the 2 bombs, not to mention I can site current statements from the time and you can only site statements from years later.

My Japanese Military leader stuff is about impossible to refute.

Nagasaki and Mitsubusi Heavy industries always throw the revisionists for a spin. Hiroshima as the Headquarters of the Japanese 8th Army is also a very good comeback.

So, just take a little area or if you want, rant the tired old Revisionist creed, I guarantee I have a book to throw at you.

If the shoe were on the other foot, and the Japanese bombed the USA into submission, murdering millions of American civilians, you would think differently.

Stop believing the statist lies. War is ALWAYS the health of the STATE...and WWII is a perfect example of this fundamental truth.

The a-bombings were the greatest war crime EVER committed. Truman should have been tried and executed for his crime, just as many German and Japanese war criminals were.

The Japanese did bomb the USA and murder Americans, except the Japanese did this when we were not at War with Japan. So there is not need to argue if the shoe was on the other foot, for we have a shoe that kicked us in the Ass while we were not looking.

Hardly an argument, the dropping of the 2 nuclear bombs came with a warning, just a couple of days before, we literally told them to surrender or we will blow you up, destroy your cities.

When a country attacks another country and declares war, the subsequent deaths the aggressor suffers is not murder, it is simply our self-defense.

The Japanese Emperor was told to surrender, than we dropped leaflets on the target, explaining that the city was to be destroyed and that they should evacuate. Many did leave, over 100,000. Lucky for them.

Surrender or die, the warning was given.View attachment 65712

The Japanese military bombed a US MILITARY BASE...they did not murder 100s of thousands of civilians, as the US military did. .

The Japanese military did indeed murder hundreds of thousands of civilians- not by mere bombing- Japan didn't have the kind of air force that could accomplish that- but the old fashioned way- bullets, bayonets, starvation, forced labor

From the invasion of China in 1937 to the end of World War II, the Japanese military regime murdered near 3,000,000 to over 10,000,000 people, most probably almost 6,000,000 Chinese, Indonesians, Koreans, Filipinos, and Indochinese, among others, including Western prisoners of war. This democide was due to a morally bankrupt political and military strategy, military expediency and custom, and national culture (such as the view that those enemy soldiers who surrender while still able to resist were criminals).

Nanking Massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
50,000–300,000 dead (primary sources)[1][2]
40,000–300,000 dead (scholarly consensus)[3]
300,000 dead (Chinese government, scholarly consensus in China)[4][5][6]

 

[IsaacNewton]

Japan started the war and they got what they got. Pushing a stick into the eye of a bengal tiger is alot of fun until it's eye clears and it sees you.

Iwo Jima, like Pelilieu and the Phillipines were targets that should have been bypassed. McArthur is the one that argued for taking the Phillipines to save his own face.

Likely though, some forward base near Japan had to be taken to house the B-29s to pound the Japanese mainland. The flights from Guam and Tinian, and China were too far.

And the men fighting on the ground are beyond reproach. Marines, Army, Navy, whoever. They did what had to be done at great loss of life. We won a war that had to be won, while fighting a greater foe half a world away and supplying all of our allies.

Whatever Germany and Japan got, they deserved it. And the result of defeating those two ideologies is immeasurable for humanity.

 

[elektra]

It was a part of justifying the use of the Bomb.

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen.

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR?

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan.

Yes, in the eye of those who are beholden to the foreign powers, all that the USA does in our defense is a mistake. Of course our biggest mistake is allowing folks like Howard Zinn to become professors in our Universities.

That Japanese were a very cruel, sadistic, murderous people who needed to be stopped, is ignored by the revisionist, It is a shame we did not have the Atomic Bomb in 1941 to stop them and Hitler.

The Atomic Bomb and the Marines saved the lives of countless Americans, 100,000? Maybe 500,000? The estimates vary, at the least destroying Nagasaki and Hiroshima saved a 1,000,000 Japanese lives.

Thank God, Truman treated the Atomic bomb as if it was simply the biggest, best, bomb ever made. All these emotions that syriusly attach to the bomb is just revisionist marxism as published by Howard Zinn.

Yes, syriously speaks of morality? In syriously's mind morality was to never to stop that japanese before or after they began their campaign of raping 10 year old chines virgins or the bayoneting of pregnant chinese women.

Yes, syriously would of had the USA cower and retreat, leaving Pearl Harbor and Hawaii to the Japanese, most likely surrendering California and the entire west coast of the USA to the Japanese.

syriously has no idea what is, moral.

You are seriously a brain damaged idiot.

I believe Truman did the correct thing in ordering the atomic bombs to be dropped, I am very aware of the barbarity of Imperial Japan, very aware of how much the United States accomplished from being attacked at Pearl Harbor to the point of Japan surrendering in Tokyo Bay- and am very happy the United States triumphed.

That you can't understand what I wrote, just displays your mental deficiencies.

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen.

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR?

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan.

This is not my thread.

Your choice if words seemed deragatory, belittling, ignorant.

I can not help how you express yourself.

I understand you have not studied the war in the pacific as well..

I am not responsible for your lack of reading comprehension- what part of The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan

seemed 'derogatory, belittling, ignorant'?

Feel free to try to match your 'studies' of the War in the Pacific against mine.

I have seen your statement, care to re-word? Or does that represent your opinion explicitly.

 

[Unkotare]

So, kill every civilian? Is that your position?

Civilians, last I checked the nation of Japan was at war with us, civilians literally making bullets, guns, bombs, to kill us with, actively participating in the War machine. Acting as one united, not as individuals.......

Does that gossamer delusion make it easier for you to accept yourself as someone who would slaughter every last civilian?

I do not need to justify my self-defense.

You can't support your own argument.

 

[Camp]

It was a part of justifying the use of the Bomb.

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen.

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR?

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan.

Yes, in the eye of those who are beholden to the foreign powers, all that the USA does in our defense is a mistake. Of course our biggest mistake is allowing folks like Howard Zinn to become professors in our Universities.

That Japanese were a very cruel, sadistic, murderous people who needed to be stopped, is ignored by the revisionist, It is a shame we did not have the Atomic Bomb in 1941 to stop them and Hitler.

The Atomic Bomb and the Marines saved the lives of countless Americans, 100,000? Maybe 500,000? The estimates vary, at the least destroying Nagasaki and Hiroshima saved a 1,000,000 Japanese lives.

Thank God, Truman treated the Atomic bomb as if it was simply the biggest, best, bomb ever made. All these emotions that syriusly attach to the bomb is just revisionist marxism as published by Howard Zinn.

Yes, syriously speaks of morality? In syriously's mind morality was to never to stop that japanese before or after they began their campaign of raping 10 year old chines virgins or the bayoneting of pregnant chinese women.

Yes, syriously would of had the USA cower and retreat, leaving Pearl Harbor and Hawaii to the Japanese, most likely surrendering California and the entire west coast of the USA to the Japanese.

syriously has no idea what is, moral.

You are seriously a brain damaged idiot.

I believe Truman did the correct thing in ordering the atomic bombs to be dropped, I am very aware of the barbarity of Imperial Japan, very aware of how much the United States accomplished from being attacked at Pearl Harbor to the point of Japan surrendering in Tokyo Bay- and am very happy the United States triumphed.

That you can't understand what I wrote, just displays your mental deficiencies.

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen.

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR?

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan.

This is not my thread.

Your choice if words seemed deragatory, belittling, ignorant.

I can not help how you express yourself.

I understand you have not studied the war in the pacific as well.

I do not like revisionist or the revusionist them touched upon, even if the person os ignorant in regards to what they state.

Let's not confuse the Battle of Iwo Jima with the need to invade or use of nukes to end the war. Iwo was chosen as a needed airbase for providing fighter support, specifically, P-51's to protect B-29's in the bombing campaign over Japan, an emergency landing field for returning bombers and a base for air rescue assets for aircraft that went down at sea during that campaign. The choice of Iwo Jima has always been highly debated. Part of that debate includes the failure of the 72 days of heavy bombing of Iwo and the three days of Naval bombardment that failed to soften the target as planners had hoped for and predicted.
The debate seriously questions the battle to have been executed wisely or even picked as the right target. At the crux, however, the real failure was the overestimation of the damage that would or could be inflicted in a heavy bombing such as what was used at Iwo Jima.

 

[Syriusly]

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen.

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR?

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan.

Yes, in the eye of those who are beholden to the foreign powers, all that the USA does in our defense is a mistake. Of course our biggest mistake is allowing folks like Howard Zinn to become professors in our Universities.

That Japanese were a very cruel, sadistic, murderous people who needed to be stopped, is ignored by the revisionist, It is a shame we did not have the Atomic Bomb in 1941 to stop them and Hitler.

The Atomic Bomb and the Marines saved the lives of countless Americans, 100,000? Maybe 500,000? The estimates vary, at the least destroying Nagasaki and Hiroshima saved a 1,000,000 Japanese lives.

Thank God, Truman treated the Atomic bomb as if it was simply the biggest, best, bomb ever made. All these emotions that syriusly attach to the bomb is just revisionist marxism as published by Howard Zinn.

Yes, syriously speaks of morality? In syriously's mind morality was to never to stop that japanese before or after they began their campaign of raping 10 year old chines virgins or the bayoneting of pregnant chinese women.

Yes, syriously would of had the USA cower and retreat, leaving Pearl Harbor and Hawaii to the Japanese, most likely surrendering California and the entire west coast of the USA to the Japanese.

syriously has no idea what is, moral.

You are seriously a brain damaged idiot.

I believe Truman did the correct thing in ordering the atomic bombs to be dropped, I am very aware of the barbarity of Imperial Japan, very aware of how much the United States accomplished from being attacked at Pearl Harbor to the point of Japan surrendering in Tokyo Bay- and am very happy the United States triumphed.

That you can't understand what I wrote, just displays your mental deficiencies.

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen.

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR?

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan.

This is not my thread.

Your choice if words seemed deragatory, belittling, ignorant.

I can not help how you express yourself.

I understand you have not studied the war in the pacific as well..

I am not responsible for your lack of reading comprehension- what part of The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan

seemed 'derogatory, belittling, ignorant'?

Feel free to try to match your 'studies' of the War in the Pacific against mine.

I have seen your statement, care to re-word? Or does that represent your opinion explicitly.

Here is my statement- feel free to express your outrage at what I said- with my additional commentary in Red

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb. Exactly what I said.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of. Absolutely correct.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen. Was Iwo Jima a mistake as the OP claimed- that it had no strategic value- I haven't looked into that- so perhaps it was a strategic mistake. But yes- we did have many costly battles that in hindsight could have been avoided- some were really stupid, arrogant errors, some were just mistakes

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR? Still waiting for the OP to answer my question

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan. Yes- I stand by this remark. Feel free to explain what part of this disturbed you.

 

[elektra]

Yes, in the eye of those who are beholden to the foreign powers, all that the USA does in our defense is a mistake. Of course our biggest mistake is allowing folks like Howard Zinn to become professors in our Universities.

That Japanese were a very cruel, sadistic, murderous people who needed to be stopped, is ignored by the revisionist, It is a shame we did not have the Atomic Bomb in 1941 to stop them and Hitler.

The Atomic Bomb and the Marines saved the lives of countless Americans, 100,000? Maybe 500,000? The estimates vary, at the least destroying Nagasaki and Hiroshima saved a 1,000,000 Japanese lives.

Thank God, Truman treated the Atomic bomb as if it was simply the biggest, best, bomb ever made. All these emotions that syriusly attach to the bomb is just revisionist marxism as published by Howard Zinn.

Yes, syriously speaks of morality? In syriously's mind morality was to never to stop that japanese before or after they began their campaign of raping 10 year old chines virgins or the bayoneting of pregnant chinese women.

Yes, syriously would of had the USA cower and retreat, leaving Pearl Harbor and Hawaii to the Japanese, most likely surrendering California and the entire west coast of the USA to the Japanese.

syriously has no idea what is, moral.

You are seriously a brain damaged idiot.

I believe Truman did the correct thing in ordering the atomic bombs to be dropped, I am very aware of the barbarity of Imperial Japan, very aware of how much the United States accomplished from being attacked at Pearl Harbor to the point of Japan surrendering in Tokyo Bay- and am very happy the United States triumphed.

That you can't understand what I wrote, just displays your mental deficiencies.

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen.

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR?

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan.

This is not my thread.

Your choice if words seemed deragatory, belittling, ignorant.

I can not help how you express yourself.

I understand you have not studied the war in the pacific as well..

I am not responsible for your lack of reading comprehension- what part of The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan

seemed 'derogatory, belittling, ignorant'?

Feel free to try to match your 'studies' of the War in the Pacific against mine.

I have seen your statement, care to re-word? Or does that represent your opinion explicitly.

Here is my statement- feel free to express your outrage at what I said- with my additional commentary in Red

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb. Exactly what I said.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of. Absolutely correct.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen. Was Iwo Jima a mistake as the OP claimed- that it had no strategic value- I haven't looked into that- so perhaps it was a strategic mistake. But yes- we did have many costly battles that in hindsight could have been avoided- some were really stupid, arrogant errors, some were just mistakes

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR? Still waiting for the OP to answer my question

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan. Yes- I stand by this remark. Feel free to explain what part of this disturbed you.

I understand your position, its wrong, big deal.

 

[Syriusly]

You are seriously a brain damaged idiot.

I believe Truman did the correct thing in ordering the atomic bombs to be dropped, I am very aware of the barbarity of Imperial Japan, very aware of how much the United States accomplished from being attacked at Pearl Harbor to the point of Japan surrendering in Tokyo Bay- and am very happy the United States triumphed.

That you can't understand what I wrote, just displays your mental deficiencies.

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen.

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR?

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan.

This is not my thread.

Your choice if words seemed deragatory, belittling, ignorant.

I can not help how you express yourself.

I understand you have not studied the war in the pacific as well..

I am not responsible for your lack of reading comprehension- what part of The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan

seemed 'derogatory, belittling, ignorant'?

Feel free to try to match your 'studies' of the War in the Pacific against mine.

I have seen your statement, care to re-word? Or does that represent your opinion explicitly.

Here is my statement- feel free to express your outrage at what I said- with my additional commentary in Red

In 1945- no one was very concerned about justifying the use of the Atomic bomb. Exactly what I said.

While there were a few concerned about the morality of using the atomic bomb, that I believe was mostly ignorance- ignorance of the massive bombing campaigns over Tokyo and other Japanese cities. Most Americans had no qualms with inflicting any harm to Japan- and FDR was a master of the pulse of the American people. He didn't have to justify using a weapon that he didn't live to authorize the use of. Absolutely correct.

Was Iwo Jima a mistake? Very possibly- certainly we committed to very many other costly battles that in hindsight accomplished little- and to our point of view- should have been foreseen. Was Iwo Jima a mistake as the OP claimed- that it had no strategic value- I haven't looked into that- so perhaps it was a strategic mistake. But yes- we did have many costly battles that in hindsight could have been avoided- some were really stupid, arrogant errors, some were just mistakes

Is your thread intended to be a warning of how governments can commit to make strategic errors- or is it just another attack on FDR? Still waiting for the OP to answer my question

The one thing that we should absolutely remember about the Battle of Iwo Jima is the bravery and sacrifice of the Marines who believed that they were making a difference in the battle to defeat Imperial Japan. Yes- I stand by this remark. Feel free to explain what part of this disturbed you.

I understand your position, its wrong, big deal.

So you don't think that the Marines on Iwo Jima were brave- and we should remember their part in defeating Imperial Japan?

Why?