What would you have done with Afghanistan?

[Rigby5]

Yeah, because when we bombed Hiroshima we made a difference between the good and bad Japanese.

Please.
You go to war
You destroy your enemy
You destroy his economy, his ability to fight, his will to fight
The you go home.
OTHERWISE
Don't go to war.

That is the whole point, we should NOT have bombed Hiroshima.
By mining the China Sea, we had already sunken hundreds of food freighters, the Japanese were starving, and were trying desperately to surrender.
We just deliberately put them off so we could finish both the uranium and plutonium bombs so that we could compare them.
Neither Nagasaki nor Hiroshima were military targets.
Both were civilian cities.
Neither had any effect on economy, ability, or will.
We just finally let them surrender.

Going to war with the Afghans was even more evil than what we did to the Japanese.
They had been our allies, and never attacked us at all.
We not only failed to help rebuilt Afghanistan after urging them to fight the Soviets for us, but then turned on them like traitors.
You do NOT attack your allies like we did by attacking the Taliban.

 

[Rigby5]

The decision to invade was correct. Afghanistan had multiple enemies inside and posed a real threat.
The method and manner were as messed up as a HS senior at Mardi Gras.
If you are not willing to destroy your enemy,
DON'T GO TO WAR.
This "limited War" crap is, well, CRAP.

Wrong!
The only faction of the Mujahedeen that was dangerous and attacked us was the Saudis, like bin Laden.
And the rest of the Mujahedeen, like the Taliban, hated the Saudis and only accepted them because we insisted,
We attacked the wrong people, and we violated all sorts of war crimes.
We deliberately lied in order to go to war against our allies.
For example, Saddam got in the war with Iran just to please us.
He even asked permission from ambassador Glasspie before attacking Kuwait for stealing oil.
The US got it all wrong, or more likely deliberately lied in both cases, Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

If we didn’t have the Surrender in Chief in office the optics would be better

 

[Dadoalex]

That is the whole point, we should NOT have bombed Hiroshima.
By mining the China Sea, we had already sunken hundreds of food freighters, the Japanese were starving, and were trying desperately to surrender.
We just deliberately put them off so we could finish both the uranium and plutonium bombs so that we could compare them.
Neither Nagasaki nor Hiroshima were military targets.
Both were civilian cities.
Neither had any effect on economy, ability, or will.
We just finally let them surrender.

Going to war with the Afghans was even more evil than what we did to the Japanese.
They had been our allies, and never attacked us at all.
We not only failed to help rebuilt Afghanistan after urging them to fight the Soviets for us, but then turned on them like traitors.
You do NOT attack your allies like we did by attacking the Taliban.

The bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki arguably saved millions of lives and many American lives. To that date the Japanese had refused surrender in every engagement. Your view of history is tainted.
I'm not defending the use but lay the blame where it belongs. With the Japanese. As much as a year earlier, any reasoned view showed the Empire falling.

Same with the Taliban.

When the Taliban chose to participate then defend the attack on 9/11 the responsibility for what happened next lay exclusively with them Just as...

When Bush made the decision to not take out the Taliban and Bin Laden because " there are no good targets in Afghanistan" he became solely responsible for all that happened next.

When he too destruction off the table we were left with endless stalemate or ignominious withdrawal.

Now for the big question...

Have you ever ever ever seen a "successful" military withdrawal/surrender/evacuation?
EVER?

 

[Dadoalex]

Wrong!
The only faction of the Mujahedeen that was dangerous and attacked us was the Saudis, like bin Laden.
And the rest of the Mujahedeen, like the Taliban, hated the Saudis and only accepted them because we insisted,
We attacked the wrong people, and we violated all sorts of war crimes.
We deliberately lied in order to go to war against our allies.
For example, Saddam got in the war with Iran just to please us.
He even asked permission from ambassador Glasspie before attacking Kuwait for stealing oil.
The US got it all wrong, or more likely deliberately lied in both cases, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Your view of history is, shall we say, outside the mainstream.
I would state with confidence that your view of history is well inside Crazy Lake.

 

[Rigby5]

The bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki arguably saved millions of lives and many American lives. To that date the Japanese had refused surrender in every engagement. Your view of history is tainted.
I'm not defending the use but lay the blame where it belongs. With the Japanese. As much as a year earlier, any reasoned view showed the Empire falling.

Totally wrong.
With the use of tanks, the Soviets had previously beaten the Japanese in the Soviet Japanese border war of 1939, and they surrendered peacefully.
In fact, the Japanese clearly WERE trying desperately to surrender to the US for over a years, since we mined the China sea and were starving the civilians to death.

{...
Japanese records report 8,440 killed, 8,766 wounded, 162 aircraft lost in combat, and 42 tanks lost (of which 29 were later repaired and redeployed). Roughly 3,000 Manchu and Japanese troops were taken prisoner during the battles. Due to a military doctrine that prohibited surrender, the Japanese listed most of these men as killed in action, for the benefit of their families.[58] Some sources put the Japanese casualties at 45,000 or more killed, with Soviet casualties of at least 17,000.[31] However, these estimates for Japanese casualties are considered inaccurate as they exceed the total strength of the Japanese forces involved in the battle (estimated at 28,000–40,000 troops, despite Soviet claims that they were facing 75,000).[59][10] According to the records of the Bureau 6A hospital, the Japanese casualties amounted to 7,696 killed, 8,647 wounded, 1,021 missing, and 2,350 sick, for a total of 19,714 personnel losses, including 2,895 Manchu casualties. The Kwantung Army headquarters and their records give a slightly different figure of 8,629 killed and 9,087 injured. The former Japanese Minister of agriculture and forestry estimated a total of 35,000 to 36,000 casualties[10] The Soviets initially claimed to have inflicted 29,085 casualties on the Japanese, but later increased this to 61,000 for the official histories.[2]
...}

Battles of Khalkhin Gol - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Rigby5]

The bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki arguably saved millions of lives and many American lives. To that date the Japanese had refused surrender in every engagement. Your view of history is tainted.
I'm not defending the use but lay the blame where it belongs. With the Japanese. As much as a year earlier, any reasoned view showed the Empire falling.

Same with the Taliban.

When the Taliban chose to participate then defend the attack on 9/11 the responsibility for what happened next lay exclusively with them Just as...

When Bush made the decision to not take out the Taliban and Bin Laden because " there are no good targets in Afghanistan" he became solely responsible for all that happened next.

When he too destruction off the table we were left with endless stalemate or ignominious withdrawal.

Now for the big question...

Have you ever ever ever seen a "successful" military withdrawal/surrender/evacuation?
EVER?

Just all lies.
The Taliban most certainly did NOT at all participate in the attack on 9/11, or defend it.
The Taliban had absolutely no responsibility for the 9/11 attack at all, and the US did, since it was the US that forced the Taliban to accept al Qaeda Arabs.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Totally wrong.
With the use of tanks, the Soviets had previously beaten the Japanese in the Sino Russo war, and they surrendered peacefully.
In fact, the Japanese clearly WERE trying desperately to surrender to the US for over a years, since we mined the China sea and were starving the civilians to death.

Nah. Their Samurai code was such that they would have fought to the last man.

 

[Rigby5]

Your view of history is, shall we say, outside the mainstream.
I would state with confidence that your view of history is well inside Crazy Lake.

You are ignorant.
Al Qaeda was created by the CIA in 1979, to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan.

 

[Rigby5]

Nah. Their Samurai code was such that they would have fought to the last man.

Samurai code is for the nobility.
The majority of the Japanese forces were reluctant draftees.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki had nothing to do with the Japanese surrender.
They lost more people on every single fire bomb raid we made.

Look up the battle of Khalkin Gol in 1939.

Battles of Khalkhin Gol - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[cnm]

We are part of the UN we would be part of the task force. Just would not be solo.

As though anyone would trust you.

What a hoot.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Samurai code is for the nobility.
The majority of the Japanese forces were reluctant draftees.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki had nothing to do with the Japanese surrender.
They lost more people on every single fire bomb raid we made.

Look up the battle of Khalkin Gol in 1939.

Battles of Khalkhin Gol - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It’s in their blood. They would have fought to the last man.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

As though anyone would trust you.

What a hoot.

America is still the most powerful nation

 

[Rigby5]

It’s in their blood. They would have fought to the last man.

They not only had just surrendered in the 1939 war, but already were trying to surrender to the US, and obviously did surrender to the US.
We just deliberately delayed it so that we could test and compare the uranium and plutonium bombs.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

They not only had just surrendered in the 1939 war, but already were trying to surrender to the US, and obviously did surrender to the US.
We just deliberately delayed it so that we could test and compare the uranium and plutonium bombs.

My grandparents fought in WW2. They tell a different story. Why are you calling them liars?

 

[Rigby5]

My grandparents fought in WW2. They tell a different story. Why are you calling them liars?

Back in WW2, people in the US knew nothing about Japan pretty much.
And in fact, that was back when the government would do horrendous things like the Tuskegee Experiment.
So there is no reason to discount what I read in the "Potsdam Diaries" by Truman.
He said the Japanese were trying to surrender through the Soviets since those were the only open diplomatic channels, and Truman and Stalin agree to put them off and delay allowing them to surrender.

 

[cnm]

America is still the most powerful nation

No one trusts it to do the right thing by its allies. It has demonstrated many times it will pay attention only to its own interests and will not care about any agreements or understandings.

 

[cnm]

My grandparents fought in WW2. They tell a different story. Why are you calling them liars?

Because they believed the propaganda they were fed, then regurgitated it.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Back in WW2, people in the US knew nothing about Japan pretty much.
And in fact, that was back when the government would do horrendous things like the Tuskegee Experiment.
So there is no reason to discount what I read in the "Potsdam Diaries" by Truman.
He said the Japanese were trying to surrender through the Soviets since those were the only open diplomatic channels, and Truman and Stalin agree to put them off and delay allowing them to surrender.

My grandparents fought for the Soviet Union.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Because they believed the propaganda they were fed, then regurgitated it.

They saw it firsthand. What are you talking about?