The Nuking of Nagasaki: Even More Immoral and Unnecessary than Hiroshima

[gipper]

So you think the USA should kill exactly like our enemies. I don't. How is mass murdering defenseless women and children from the air, different from the mass murder at Nanking?

Defenseless? They had air defences. The had guns to shoot down planes. They also had Japanese aces and zeros to use in the defense of all the cities in Japan. Further the Japanese were warned. Total destruction if the do not surrender. So yes, air defences from ground batteries. Pilots still able to attack. Did you know much of the population of Hiroshima was evacuated prior to Hiroshima? All facts that I am teaching you. And that is women and children, left in the city because they worked in the industry that built guns bombs war supplies. Yes, that is right, the city was largely evacuated and left behind, those needed to keep the japanese war machine running.

Their air defenses were so formidable, the US started daylight bombing.

 

[mikegriffith1]

So you think the USA should kill exactly like our enemies. I don't. How is mass murdering defenseless women and children from the air, different from the mass murder at Nanking?

Defenseless? They had air defences. The had guns to shoot down planes. They also had Japanese aces and zeros to use in the defense of all the cities in Japan. Further the Japanese were warned. Total destruction if the do not surrender. So yes, air defences from ground batteries. Pilots still able to attack. Did you know much of the population of Hiroshima was evacuated prior to Hiroshima? All facts that I am teaching you. And that is women and children, left in the city because they worked in the industry that built guns bombs war supplies. Yes, that is right, the city was largely evacuated and left behind, those needed to keep the japanese war machine running.

Their air defenses were so formidable, the US started daylight bombing.

I've already pointed out to Elektra, three times now, that by spring 1945, Japan's air defenses were so pitiful that our bombing raids were losing only 0.003 of their bombers—in other words, only 3 out of every 1,000 bombers were being shot down. To put it another way, if you were flying a bomber in one of those raids, you had a 99.997 chance of surviving the raid.

In order to obscure/mask the inhumanity and cruelty of what Truman was doing to Japan, his apologists must outright lie about Japan's defensive capabilities and portray Japan as some formidable, powerful opponent, when in reality Japan was virtually defenseless against air and naval attack. As for the 2.5 million soldiers in Japan, they were neutralized and posed no threat to us, since they were stranded because the Imperial Navy could not transport them off the home islands, not to mention the fact that they were running low on food. By June 1945, the only ground fighting between U.S. and Japanese soldiers was occurring hundreds of miles from Japan, i.e., in the Philippines, where the Japanese were losing at least 4-5 soldiers to every 1 of our soldiers they were managing to kill, in addition to the fact that they were cut off and surrounded.

 

[gipper]

So you think the USA should kill exactly like our enemies. I don't. How is mass murdering defenseless women and children from the air, different from the mass murder at Nanking?

Defenseless? They had air defences. The had guns to shoot down planes. They also had Japanese aces and zeros to use in the defense of all the cities in Japan. Further the Japanese were warned. Total destruction if the do not surrender. So yes, air defences from ground batteries. Pilots still able to attack. Did you know much of the population of Hiroshima was evacuated prior to Hiroshima? All facts that I am teaching you. And that is women and children, left in the city because they worked in the industry that built guns bombs war supplies. Yes, that is right, the city was largely evacuated and left behind, those needed to keep the japanese war machine running.

Their air defenses were so formidable, the US started daylight bombing.

I've already pointed out to Elektra, three times now, that by spring 1945, Japan's air defenses were so pitiful that our bombing raids were losing only 0.003 of their bombers—in other words, only 3 out of every 1,000 bombers were being shot down. To put it another way, if you were flying a bomber in one of those raids, you had a 99.997% chance of surviving the raid.

In order to obscure or mask the inhumanity and cruelty of what Truman was doing to Japan, his apologists must outright lie about Japan's defensive capabilities and portray Japan as some formidable, powerful opponent, when in reality Japan was virtually defenseless against air and naval attack, and the soldiers on the home islands were harmless to us, since they were stranded because the Imperial Navy could not transport them off the home islands, not to mention the fact that they were running low on food. Moreover, Japan was losing at least 4-5 soldiers to every 1 of our soldiers they were managing to kill in ground engagements far from Japan, i.e., in the Philippines.

Exactly, but the American statist only believes what they learned in government school's third grade history class. They have not progressed from there. Sadly.

The truth is Japan was essentially defenseless, by summer 1945. This of course means Truman's act was one of barbaric proportions, unparalleled in all of human history. The typical duped American can't bring themselves to accept this fact, even though it is evident. So they resort to lies and idiotic equivalences, to justify it.

The sad consequence of this historical ignorance, is our leaders continue to commit horrendous acts of violence.

 

[elektra]

Their air defenses were so formidable, the US started daylight bombing.

Their air defenses shot down one of our airplanes killing an airman on august 18th of 1945. That is after the Japanese surrendered. But that is an American dead, which obviously, you could care less about.

 

[gipper]

Their air defenses were so formidable, the US started daylight bombing.

Their air defenses shot down one of our airplanes killing an airman on august 18th of 1945. That is after the Japanese surrendered. But that is an American dead, which obviously, you could care less about.

Good God that's dumb.

 

[gipper]

Their air defenses were so formidable, the US started daylight bombing.

Their air defenses shot down one of our airplanes killing an airman on august 18th of 1945. That is after the Japanese surrendered. But that is an American dead, which obviously, you could care less about.

Good God that's dumb.

 

[gipper]

Their air defenses were so formidable, the US started daylight bombing.

Their air defenses shot down one of our airplanes killing an airman on august 18th of 1945. That is after the Japanese surrendered. But that is an American dead, which obviously, you could care less about.

Good God that's dumb.

 

[elektra]

in other words, only 3 out of every 1,000 bombers were being shot down. To put it another way, if you were flying a bomber in one of those raids, you had a 99.997 chance of surviving the raid.

You are such an idiot you do not even know enough to google your percentages. You have no idea what you are talking about, and now that is apparent while you do simple math!

 

[elektra]

Their air defenses shot down one of our airplanes killing an airman on august 18th of 1945. That is after the Japanese surrendered. But that is an American dead, which obviously, you could care less about.

Good God that's dumb.[/QUOTE]
Yes, that is very dumb, the japanese were defenseless yet they still were killing Americans, even after the surrender. But you really do not care about our deaths, do you. If you did, you would not exaggerate and lie when you post your unsubstantiated opinion.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Hiroshima
"Going to stop killing us yet?"
"Nope"

Nagasaki
"Going to stop killing us yet?"
"YEP."

There ya go...

 

[gipper]

Their air defenses shot down one of our airplanes killing an airman on august 18th of 1945. That is after the Japanese surrendered. But that is an American dead, which obviously, you could care less about.

Good God that's dumb.

Yes, that is very dumb, the japanese were defenseless yet they still were killing Americans, even after the surrender. But you really do not care about our deaths, do you. If you did, you would not exaggerate and lie when you post your unsubstantiated opinion.[/QUOTE]
There’s the old dumb equivalence game dumb statists like to play.

1 dead American warrior justifies 200,000 murdered Japanese civilians.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Their air defenses were so formidable, the US started daylight bombing.

Their air defenses shot down one of our airplanes killing an airman on august 18th of 1945. That is after the Japanese surrendered. But that is an American dead, which obviously, you could care less about.

What?! You're using this absurd argument again, after I pointed out to you that this shootdown occurred because we flew bombers and other planes over Tokyo on the 18th without first informing the Japanese that we were going to do so?! What in the devil were we thinking to do this when we knew tensions were still incredibly high and when we knew that the last time a bomber formation had appeared over Tokyo, a huge chunk of the city had been obliterated and some 80,000 people killed?

As for this obscene line of yours that anyone who disagrees with your barbarism "could care less" about American deaths, you and your fellow Truman worshipers are the ones who seemingly "could care less" about all the needless American deaths that occurred because of Truman's refusal to pursue a reasonable negotiated peace, i.e., after Truman ignored several Japanese peace feelers (we know he was briefed on them), after he ignored the repeated warnings from his own Japan experts that the Japanese would fight to the death if they thought we were going to depose the emperor (Grew personally explained this to him in May), and after he refused to privately negotiate once he learned from Japanese intercepts that the emperor himself wanted to end the war and that the only obstacle was Truman's insistence on unconditional surrender (we know he was informed of this fact). You and your fellow denialists/Truman defenders are the ones who are showing disdain for the deaths of our soldiers when their deaths would have been avoided if Truman had not refused to budge from FDR's "unconditional surrender" policy.

For that matter, we would have had no war with Japan if FDR had not treasonously sided with the Soviet Union, had not imposed draconian sanctions on Japan for doing the same thing that Western powers had done a few decades earlier, had not rejected Japan's entirely reasonable peace offers to get him to lift the sanctions, and had not moved the Pacific Fleet to Hawaii and stationed B-17 bombers in the Philippines.

Moving the Pacific Fleet to Hawaii made no sense--no logistical sense, no tactical sense, and no training sense, as Admiral Richardson emphatically pointed out to FDR at the time. When Richardson would not keep quiet about this unsound and misguided move, FDR fired him. Read Richardson's book Pearl Harbor Countdown.

 

[The Purge]

Next time. Just for giggles and laughs let's make it Mecca and Medina......

 

[gipper]

Their air defenses were so formidable, the US started daylight bombing.

Their air defenses shot down one of our airplanes killing an airman on august 18th of 1945. That is after the Japanese surrendered. But that is an American dead, which obviously, you could care less about.

What?! You're using this absurd argument again, after I pointed out to you that this shootdown occurred because we flew bombers and other planes over Tokyo on the 18th without first informing the Japanese that we were going to do so?! What in the devil were we thinking to do this when we knew tensions were still incredibly high and when we knew that the last time a bomber formation had appeared over Tokyo, a huge chunk of the city had been obliterated and some 80,000 people killed?

As for this obscene line of yours that anyone who disagrees with your barbarism "could care less" about American deaths, you and your fellow Truman worshipers are the ones who seemingly "could care less" about all the needless American deaths that occurred because of Truman's refusal to pursue a reasonable negotiated peace, i.e., after Truman ignored several Japanese peace feelers (we know he was briefed on them), after he ignored the repeated warnings from his own Japan experts that the Japanese would fight to the death if they thought we were going to depose the emperor (Grew personally explained this to him in May), and after he refused to privately negotiate once he learned from Japanese intercepts that the emperor himself wanted to end the war and that the only obstacle was Truman's insistence on unconditional surrender (we know he was informed of this fact). You and your fellow denialists/Truman defenders are the ones who are showing disdain for the deaths of our soldiers when their deaths would have been avoided if Truman had not refused to budge from FDR's "unconditional surrender" policy.

For that matter, we would have had no war with Japan if FDR had not treasonously sided with the Soviet Union, had not imposed draconian sanctions on Japan for doing the same thing that Western powers had done a few decades earlier, had not rejected Japan's entirely reasonable peace offers to get him to lift the sanctions, and had not moved the Pacific Fleet to Hawaii and stationed B-17 bombers in the Philippines.

Moving the Pacific Fleet to Hawaii made no sense--no logistical sense, no tactical sense, and no training sense, as Admiral Richardson emphatically pointed out to FDR at the time. When Richardson would not keep quiet about this unsound and misguided move, FDR fired him. Read Richardson's book Pearl Harbor Countdown.

As has been done in nearly all our wars, the potus lied us into it. WWII was no exception. When will the people wake up?

FDR set up Japan with his draconian demands, sanctions, and refusal to even talk to the a Japanese. He then knew the Japanese fleet was steaming to Pearl, because their code was broken. He refused to warn Pearl commanders, got the carriers out of harms way, and sacrificed those sailors at Pearl. Then he scapegoated the commanders for failing to do their duty.

This after he had tried desperately to get Hitler to attack US shipping in the N Atlantic, which would have killed more innocent Americans.

Nice guy that FDR. Too bad Truman was even worse.

 

[candycorn]

/——/ And you think simply asking the Japs pretty please with sprinkles on top would have stopped them?

LOL. They were stopped entirely by 1945. They had nothing left by summer, but you find mass murdering defenseless Japanese civilians entirely justified.

/——/ Read The Rape of Nanking and get back to us with your snowflake solution to stop brutal regimes. The library will have a copy if you don’t have the coin to buy it. https://www.amazon.com/Rape-Nanking...f+nanking&qid=1569764042&sr=8-1&tag=ff0d01-20

So you think the USA should kill exactly like our enemies. I don't. How is mass murdering defenseless women and children from the air, different from the mass murder at Nanking?

/—-/ Maybe you think we should humanly capture the enemy and release them in a preserve like when you trap a squirrel in your attic.

I don’t believe murdering thousands of innocent women and children is ever justified, but you do.

The japs did it. We stopped it.

 

[P@triot]

Pearl Harbor wasn’t necessary either.

True but Irrelevant -

How is that "irrelevant"?!?

 

[Cellblock2429]

Their air defenses were so formidable, the US started daylight bombing.

Their air defenses shot down one of our airplanes killing an airman on august 18th of 1945. That is after the Japanese surrendered. But that is an American dead, which obviously, you could care less about.

What?! You're using this absurd argument again, after I pointed out to you that this shootdown occurred because we flew bombers and other planes over Tokyo on the 18th without first informing the Japanese that we were going to do so?! What in the devil were we thinking to do this when we knew tensions were still incredibly high and when we knew that the last time a bomber formation had appeared over Tokyo, a huge chunk of the city had been obliterated and some 80,000 people killed?

As for this obscene line of yours that anyone who disagrees with your barbarism "could care less" about American deaths, you and your fellow Truman worshipers are the ones who seemingly "could care less" about all the needless American deaths that occurred because of Truman's refusal to pursue a reasonable negotiated peace, i.e., after Truman ignored several Japanese peace feelers (we know he was briefed on them), after he ignored the repeated warnings from his own Japan experts that the Japanese would fight to the death if they thought we were going to depose the emperor (Grew personally explained this to him in May), and after he refused to privately negotiate once he learned from Japanese intercepts that the emperor himself wanted to end the war and that the only obstacle was Truman's insistence on unconditional surrender (we know he was informed of this fact). You and your fellow denialists/Truman defenders are the ones who are showing disdain for the deaths of our soldiers when their deaths would have been avoided if Truman had not refused to budge from FDR's "unconditional surrender" policy.

For that matter, we would have had no war with Japan if FDR had not treasonously sided with the Soviet Union, had not imposed draconian sanctions on Japan for doing the same thing that Western powers had done a few decades earlier, had not rejected Japan's entirely reasonable peace offers to get him to lift the sanctions, and had not moved the Pacific Fleet to Hawaii and stationed B-17 bombers in the Philippines.

Moving the Pacific Fleet to Hawaii made no sense--no logistical sense, no tactical sense, and no training sense, as Admiral Richardson emphatically pointed out to FDR at the time. When Richardson would not keep quiet about this unsound and misguided move, FDR fired him. Read Richardson's book Pearl Harbor Countdown.

As has been done in nearly all our wars, the potus lied us into it. WWII was no exception. When will the people wake up?

FDR set up Japan with his draconian demands, sanctions, and refusal to even talk to the a Japanese. He then knew the Japanese fleet was steaming to Pearl, because their code was broken. He refused to warn Pearl commanders, got the carriers out of harms way, and sacrificed those sailors at Pearl. Then he scapegoated the commanders for failing to do their duty.

This after he had tried desperately to get Hitler to attack US shipping in the N Atlantic, which would have killed more innocent Americans.

Nice guy that FDR. Too bad Truman was even worse.

/——/ I knew PH Vets and all agree with you.

 

[elektra]

There’s the old dumb equivalence game dumb statists like to play.
1 dead American warrior justifies 200,000 murdered Japanese civilians.

Was it just 1? Or was it over 900 on the Indianapolis, another 18 on a submarine, 1,000's in prisoner of war camps?

And yes, if the Atomic bombs saved just one american, it would of been worth it. In this case it saved untold thousands.

Murder? Not is a war, not in a war the Japanese started, not of those who actively participated in the war. Murder? Murder was what was happening to our Americans being tortured to death by the Japanese.

 

[elektra]

When was that meeting, for as you just stated, nothing is decided unless the Big Six and the Supreme War Council meet and agree. So when was that meeting and could you post the transcript.

I am seriously wondering if you are a high school student.
First off, the Big Six and the Supreme War Council were the same group. "Big Six" is just a common nickname for the Supreme War Council, which in turn is a shortened version of the council's full name: Supreme Council for the Direction of the War. Do you understand what "aka" means?

Let us digress a bit, and address your blatant errors. You call me a "high school" student for not realizing the Big Six and the Supreme War Council are the same thing. Yet, you made that error before me? By your "rules", you are not even a grade school student.
The Nuking of Nagasaki: Even More Immoral and Unnecessary than Hiroshima

Let me just repeat a few facts that you keep ignoring or failing to explain:

* The hardliners on the Supreme Council for the Direction of the War (aka the Big Six and the Supreme War Council)

 

[elektra]

I've already pointed out to Elektra, three times now, that by spring 1945, Japan's air defenses were so pitiful that our bombing raids were losing only 0.003 of their bombers—in other words, only 3 out of every 1,000 bombers were being shot down. To put it another way, if you were flying a bomber in one of those raids, you had a 99.997 chance of surviving the raid.

99.997 ha, ha, ha, even if your opinion is right, your math is still wrong, don't you think you were suppose to move the decimal point at one step in your calculations! Did you finish grade school. You make errors without realizing your mistake. From page numbers to confusing the Supreme War council, aka the Big Six! You can't even do a simple percentage correctly. Then you call into question my education?