Take That!

[dilloduck]

well, this guy in his interview meant :

Truman SENT the ultimatum july the 26th.
ok.

But july the 25th, so one day BEFORE, he gave the order "use the bomb as soon it would be operational". So he wanted all the same to use the bomb, even if he didn't know the japanese answer (he didn't know it because he didn't send it...it would be sent one day AFTER)

The order was given without care about the japanese answer, because it was given BEFORE the send of the ultimatum.

If you are saying that the bombs were dropped for more than one reason, I would agree with you.If Japan had tried to deal with it's concerns regarding US Asian policies by diplomacy instead of attacking Pearl Harbor et el, we may have never used it on an enemy.

 

[padisha emperor]

If you are saying that the bombs were dropped for more than one reason, I would agree with you.If Japan had tried to deal with it's concerns regarding US Asian policies by diplomacy instead of attacking Pearl Harbor et el, we may have never used it on an enemy.

more than one reason yes : redition of Japan and precede USSR because TRuman didn't want that Stlain took Hokkaido and an occupation area in Japan.

 

[GotZoom]

well, this guy in his interview meant :

Truman SENT the ultimatum july the 26th.
ok.

But july the 25th, so one day BEFORE, he gave the order "use the bomb as soon it would be operational". So he wanted all the same to use the bomb, even if he didn't know the japanese answer (he didn't know it because he didn't send it...it would be sent one day AFTER)

The order was given without care about the japanese answer, because it was given BEFORE the send of the ultimatum.

So you are suggesting that the "order" couldn't have been rescinded; that if Japan had surrendered on August 3, 5, or 6, that it would be too late? We would have dropped the bomb anyway?

Please.

 

[padisha emperor]

So you are suggesting that the "order" couldn't have been rescinded; that if Japan had surrendered on August 3, 5, or 6, that it would be too late? We would have dropped the bomb anyway?

Please.

no no, I think if japan would have accept the ultimatum,Truman wouldn't certainly launch the bomb.

i just said that before having the answer all was done to nuke Japan.

 

[Zhukov]

Zhukov : the Japanese armed forces offense USA at Pearl Harbor, and during the war. But the population, the civilian guys in the japanese metropolitan cities, didn't kill US soldiers, they maybe worked in some weapons factory, but it's a normal trhing in war time.

They didn't declare war on the U.S. Army or the U.S. Navy, Japan declared war on the United States of America. In response we declared war not on the Imperial Japanese Navy or the Imperial Japanese Army, we declared war on the Empire of Japan. That included every man, woman, and child who could be considered a citizen of their Empire.

If your nation is intent on perpetrating wars of agression with the sole intent to steal land and enslave or exterminate that land's original inhabitats and you do not leave or stay to put your life on the line to stop your government then you are complicit, what's more you are in the line of fire. I have no pity for those who died because of the Hiroshima bombing. Their government was evil and they did nothing. For them it was not a matter of right or wrong, it was about honor and dishonor. That is a poisonous mentality, and they paid for it with their lives. Some call it karma.

Japanese children were mobilized through the school system to to assist in the construction of war materiel and defensive obstacles for the imminent U.S. invasion they all thought was coming.

It wasn't our fault they were using child labor.

As for denying the Soviets a partition of Japan, let me pose a hypothetical question. Were you to ask all those citizens living in what was to become Eastern Germany shortly before the end of the war if they a.) would take the chance of being in either of two mystery cities wherein all the people would be killed, but if they lived they would be thereafter be free, or b.) they, and their children, would have to live under Communist domination for the rest of their lives, which do you think they'd pick?

Yet another way in which we did the Japanese a favor by nuking them.

As for ordering the attack before the ultimatum was issued, as Zoom pointed out it was obviously possible to cancel the bomb's use if they had surrendered, but the real telling thing about that tidbit of information is that Truman wasn't stupid. He knew full well the Japanese were not yet willing to accept an unconditional surrender.

As for Nagasaki, we can discuss that on the Tuesday the 9th.

I don't buy into historical revision. You don't want your cities nuked? Then you had best not be doing things like this:

human experimentation

germ warfare

live dissection of American POWs

nanking

Fact is, if in a fit of righteous anger we had exterminated them all, I wouldn't apologise for that either. Two atomic bombs? They got off easy.



Finally, I smell the waft of hyprocrisy from someone who venerates the memory of the greedy narcissitic war-mongering butcher Napoleon who, in his day, wreaked unprecented death and destruction upon an entire continent for little other purpose than to suck his own ego, and yet who waves his finger disapprovingly at the completely justified atomic bombing of Hiroshima.

 

[Merlin]

To get my two cents worth in here, there are still a lot of us left in the USA that wouldn't shed a tear or stop what we were doing to look up if we nuked every city in Japan at this late date just to make sure they were serious about surrendering. I lost too many kin to even think about forgiving or forgetting them. I surely wouldn't have stopped with just two cities.

 

[kurtsprincess]

sure, but when you can avoid it and kill instead of these civilians military forces, it's better.

Don't say to me that the US HQ hadn't other ways, other targets for their nuke bombs...Like a concentration of armies, a military harbor, a concentration of weapons factory (like in Pennemünde for the IIIrd Reich )


In fact, I disagreed here in this thread with Zhukov's post, who appears as be proud of this nuke, and with a disrespectful way.


But if everybody say : "it's normal that in a war the civilians are killed", first : why an army ? if everybody is killed......
second : then, the Al Quaeda's terror attacks are "normal", they kill civilians durong their war.

but here, everybody is ok to say these attacks were awful.

so ?...

PE......follow the chain of command of the Japanese leaders and you'll discover who is responsible for all those deaths. They were given multiple opportunities to surrender, and were told what the consequences would be if they didn't cease and desist. They chose to put their civilians at risk.

 

[kurtsprincess]

no no, I think if japan would have accept the ultimatum,Truman wouldn't certainly launch the bomb.

i just said that before having the answer all was done to nuke Japan.

It's called being "prepared" PE. One shouldn't give an ultimatum unless one is able to follow through on the threat.

I guess that would be the difference in leadership styles. Some make empty threats over and over again, which breeds dictators like Saddam. Then there are others who say "bring it on" and are willing to back it up with action.

Personally, I think most of the behaviorial problems in the world today are caused by those who make threats and then don't follow through on the consequences.

 

[padisha emperor]

Zhukov, I Never saidthat Japan hadn't ugly behaviors during these wars (China and WWII).
I just ask if the reasons of the bombs were the one said by Truman.

I totally agree with you with the massacre of Nankin, with the execution of POW....here we're ok.

 

[Unkotare]

.....
You also have to understand the Japanese mindset. They WOULD HAVE fought to the death rather than surrender. .....

Irrational