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

[Leo123]

Sweetheart--I read a lot and I had a mother who was obsessed with old books especially history hun before rewriting history became in vogue---and then again I grew up around my elderly family---including my Grandfather and his 5 brothers who were all in WW2.

I research constantly hun---as a matter of habit.

AGain--the facts not he said/she said is that Japan would not have fully surrendered without the bombs BOTH bombs being dropped---------the two cities despite the lies that libs/communists/globalists/idiotic manipulative school teachers have spread since atleast my childhood were indeed military targets. The same groups lies about the Japanese being anything but absolutely evil assholes that needed to be killed to get them to stop their agressions which included mass rapes, cannabalism, tortured of capture soldiers, splitting open of pregnant women's bellies for sport along with stabbing infants for fun had to be stopped and asking pretty please would have never worked. They murdered their own children to avoid offending their druggy god/ruler who had them convinced to allow their selves or kids to live captured would be a sin.

It doesn't matter what anyone said about history for whatever reason---the facts are there---the japanese culture then would have never allowed for a full surrender without the bombs--their fucking god/ruler would have never stopped his aggressions until it became clear (even though he didn't know that we used up the last of our bombs) to him that he too could be bombed into the afterlife where they knew that he was not a god.

Without the bombs---Japan would not have completely surrender ---and they would not stopped their aggressions long term causing more wars later on killing more----sick of the globalist communists bullshit of trying to rewrite history making the US the bad guys when the facts we sacrificed to try to keep the worlds peace.

If you want to argue something that has some merits--why not try something along the lines of had the US not stopped Japan that the Japanese could have continue to rape and murder the chinese which might save some hardaches now.

As I just told another here, I noticed that most of the America naysayers in this thread have a history here of denigrating American history and even American traditional values.

 

[Vegasgiants]

I've already address the quotes in general----from idiots who should have been removed from command for being so inept that repeatedly were bought up for review for killing people, to others who are of no importance, to others playing political games. If you want me to argue a specific quote---Words mean nothing hun. HARD facts do--and I have already told you what the Japanese were alike, what they believe, what they did and were willing to continue to do which makes it clear that without the bombs intimidating their druggy god/ruler--the wars with Japan would have never completely ended.

I see. So the very military leaders that got us to that point are now idiots because YOU say so.


The japanese surrendered so surrender was ALWAYS an option

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No I found that virtually ALL the US military leadership believes the bombs were not needed. These people knew more about the situation on the ground than anyone. You simply dismiss them ......which I find odd

LOL Eisenhower knew NOTHING of the military aspects of the Pacific Campaigns and neither did Halsey or most of those you quoted.

 

[Vegasgiants]

LOL Eisenhower knew NOTHING of the military aspects of the Pacific Campaigns and neither did Halsey or most of those you quoted.

I await your evidence

 

[Turtlesoup]

I think the opinions of the military leaders are worth something

Well you know what they say about opinions---they are like assholes, everyone has one. In this case---inept leaders and idiots vying for political power mean nothing. FACTS are facts---and their opinions fly directly against the facts.

 

[Vegasgiants]

Well you know what they say about opinions---they are like assholes, everyone has one. In this case---inept leaders and idiots vying for political power mean nothing. FACTS are facts---and their opinions fly directly against the facts.

In your opinion

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I await your evidence

Eisenhower served in Europe end of discussion. Halsey was a carrier commander he did not do invasions for the ground game. the Chief of Staff was a Pogue that did not serve at all in the Pacific.

 

[Open Bolt]

Funny how I've provided loads of evidence and been met with "Nuh-uh! You lying!"
What impressive historical scholarship.

But you haven't provided loads of evidence. You are linking to a single inaccurate article over and over and over again.

If you want scholarship, I recommend starting with "Japan's Decision to Surrender" by Robert J.C. Butow, and then reading "Japan's Longest Day" by The Pacific War Research Society.

Note that The Pacific War Research Society are Japanese historians, so in addition to providing a good solid historical background of the end of the war, they also provide it with an interesting perspective.

 

[Vegasgiants]

Eisenhower served in Europe end of discussion. Halsey was a carrier commander he did not do invasions for the ground game. the Chief of Staff was a Pogue that did not serve at all in the Pacific.

So you claim they knew nothing about the situation in japan even after the war when they made those statements?


Come on man

 

[RetiredGySgt]

So you claim they knew nothing about the situation in japan even after the war when they made those statements?


Come on man

They had NO experience with the Japanese on the Ground so YES that is my OPINION.

 

[Vegasgiants]

They had NO experience with the Japanese on the Ground so YES that is my OPINION.

I dismiss that opinion. They were EXPERTS on the situation in japan especially after the war when they were able to review all the documents available

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I dismiss that opinion. They were EXPERTS on the situation in japan especially after the war when they were able to review all the documents available

LOL yet they did no such thing. If they had they would have noted that Japanese Military fought virtually to the last man in every fight that the Japanese Civilians obeyed the military with out question on Saipan and Okinawa and committed suicide rather then surrender and that the Government of Japan refused to surrender before August 10 after 2 atomic bombs and a Russian invasion and then STILL voted to continue the war failing that attempt they tried a Coup to stop the surrender.

 

[Turtlesoup]

Yiu have top military leader being quoted that japan sued for peace. And

As late as 25 July, the day before the declaration was issued, Japan had asked for a diplomatic envoy led by Konoe to come to Moscow hoping to mediate peace in the Pacific.[107]


These are facts

Japan refused to surrender completely--------they were trying to retain power and the ability to attack others. The bombs forced them into surrendering completely ending their reign of terror saving millions....

 

[Vegasgiants]

LOL yet they did no such thing. If they had they would have noted that Japanese Military fought virtually to the last man in every fight that the Japanese Civilians obeyed the military with out question on Saipan and Okinawa and committed suicide rather then surrender and that the Government of Japan refused to surrender before August 10 after 2 atomic bombs and a Russian invasion and then STILL voted to continue the war failing that attempt they tried a Coup to stop the surrender.

And yet they surrendered and did not fight to the last man so they were open to that possibility

 

[Vegasgiants]

Japan refused to surrender completely--------they were trying to retain power and the ability to attack others. The bombs forced them into surrendering completely ending their reign of terror saving millions....

Actually they did surrender so the idea that they were never open to that possibility is ridiculous

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And yet they surrendered and did not fight to the last man so they were open to that possibility

Only because their God ordered it. And no the attempted coup was not just low level officers a General Committed suicide because his Coup failed.

 

[Oddball]

And yet they surrendered and did not fight to the last man so they were open to that possibility

There's no fighting back against getting vaporized, sock-o.

 

[Turtlesoup]

And yet they surrendered and did not fight to the last man so they were open to that possibility

Only after the two bombs were dropped fearing that we had more to drop on their emperors head.

 

[Leo123]

No I found that virtually ALL the US military leadership believes the bombs were not needed. These people knew more about the situation on the ground than anyone. You simply dismiss them ......which I find odd

One example: Leahy was told that the bomb was great enough to destroy the whole world. He was given false information. After that, even after the first test, Leahy was against the bomb. Dr. Bush told Leahy that the bomb would never go off. Leahy also said, after the test, that the bomb would be of 'no material assistance in our war against Japan.' Actual history proved him dead wrong. The war ended after the bombs were dropped and no American troops were needed to subdue Japan. Yet, here you are holding up a misinformed General as proof that dropping the bomb was a bad idea.

Eisenhower supposedly told Sec. of War Stimpson that the bomb should not be used. In reality, Stimson's own diary and assessments from contemporaries at the time shows that this conversation never took place.

Frankly, I find it odd that you did not look at all the facts of what happened at the time and made the typical anti-American knee-jerk conclusions. Leahy was dead wrong and Eisenhower never opposed the use of the bomb.

 

[Vegasgiants]

One example: Leahy was told that the bomb was great enough to destroy the whole world. He was given false information. After that, even after the first test, Leahy was against the bomb. Dr. Bush told Leahy that the bomb would never go off. Leahy also said, after the test, that the bomb would be of 'no material assistance in our war against Japan.' Yet, here you are holding up a misinformed General as proof that dropping the bomb was a bad idea.

Eisenhower supposedly told Sec. of War Stimpson that the bomb should not be used. In reality, Stimson's own diary and assessments from contemporaries at the time shows that this conversation never took place.

Frankly, I find it odd that you did not look at all the facts of what happened at the time and made the typical anti-American knee-jerk conclusions. Leahy was dead wrong and Eisenhower never opposed the use of the bomb.

I see no evidence of these claims