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

[Unkotare]

... it would be understandable why you're ignoring the 6 million dead .....

I'm not. You are being illogical and dishonest in claiming so.

 

[Unkotare]

... I am beginning to wonder if it's hatred for America that drives your view because common sense it can't be.

....

Inevitably, you turn to emo-bullshit because you cannot defend your immoral hypocrisy and are ignorant of the history in question.

I'm not ignorant of the history; ...

It is very clear that you are. You seem to be eager to maintain that condition.

 

[Unkotare]

...

Revisionist historians would like to convince you (and apparently have) that it wasn't the bombs at all, that ended the war; ....

I have quoted (many times) prominent US military leaders of that time who said that the bomb was unnecessary and immaterial to ending the war. Are they "revisionist historians"?

 

[Unkotare]

...what president would you prefer - the one, who will protect our lives, or who will defend our enemies and allow them continue to kill Americans?

Your transparent appeal to emotion fails. If fdr were interested in protecting American lives he would have pursued the possibility of ending the war much sooner rather than ignoring MacArthur's 40-page communique informing him of Japanese overtures toward ending the war (again, under the exact same terms that Truman eventually accepted anyway).

 

[Unkotare]

And yet you can not LINK to a single piece of ACTUAL evidence that proves any of what you say, you keep linking to OPINIONS. Guess what moron, everyone has one. I on the other hand have and continue to link to FACTS, hard evidence that proves MY point.

And none of those whose after-the-fact opinions he keeps quoting had all of the knowledge and all of the responsibility that Truman and the Allied leaders had when they had to make the decisions. They weren't easy decisions and I imagine many second-guessed themselves for the rest of their lives. The doubt and guilt must have been terrible but that doesn't change the necessity and the right of the decision they had to make and did correctly make.

"
prior to 31 December 1945 and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.
That was a conclusion of the 1946 U.S. Bombing Survey ordered by President Harry Truman in the wake of World War II.

Gen. Dwight Eisenhower said in 1963, “ the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing.”"

‘It wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing’ — Why dropping the A-Bombs was wrong - Washington Examiner

Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey’s opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945 and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

"That wasn’t merely hindsight. Eisenhower made the same argument in 1945. "

 

[Unkotare]

"In his memoirs, Ike recalled a visit from War Secretary Henry Stimson:



I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of “face.”

Admiral William Leahy, Truman’s chief military advisor, wrote:



It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons."

 

[RetiredGySgt]

"In his memoirs, Ike recalled a visit from War Secretary Henry Stimson:



I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of “face.”

Admiral William Leahy, Truman’s chief military advisor, wrote:



It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons."

Ike has no credibility AT ALL. He ran the systematic bombing and destruction of European cities for 3 years in Europe, He killed a hell of a lot more people then any atomic bomb.And at no time during that bombing campaign did he suggest a way to lessen the death rate or destruction. He was NOT in the Pacific he did not have any first hand experience with the Japanese.

 

[gipper]

"In his memoirs, Ike recalled a visit from War Secretary Henry Stimson:



I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of “face.”

Admiral William Leahy, Truman’s chief military advisor, wrote:



It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons."

Ike has no credibility AT ALL. He ran the systematic bombing and destruction of European cities for 3 years in Europe, He killed a hell of a lot more people then any atomic bomb.And at no time during that bombing campaign did he suggest a way to lessen the death rate or destruction. He was NOT in the Pacific he did not have any first hand experience with the Japanese.

Why do you post obvious lies? First, the Brits controlled about half the bombing missions in Europe. So dummy, Ike had no control over them. Secondly, Ike wasn’t involved in air forces until Spring 1944 and he delegated command.

On 27 March 1944, the Combined Chiefs of Staff issued orders granting control of all the Allied air forces in Europe, including strategic bombers, to General Dwight D. Eisenhower, the Supreme Allied Commander, who delegated command to his deputy in SHAEF Air Chief Marshal Arthur Tedder.
Strategic bombing during World War II - Wikipedia

To think Ike needed to be in the Pacific to understand things, is typical stupidity of a dumb grunt.

STOP POSTING.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

"In his memoirs, Ike recalled a visit from War Secretary Henry Stimson:



I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of “face.”

Admiral William Leahy, Truman’s chief military advisor, wrote:



It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons."

Ike has no credibility AT ALL. He ran the systematic bombing and destruction of European cities for 3 years in Europe, He killed a hell of a lot more people then any atomic bomb.And at no time during that bombing campaign did he suggest a way to lessen the death rate or destruction. He was NOT in the Pacific he did not have any first hand experience with the Japanese.

Why do you post obvious lies? First, the Brits controlled about half the bombing missions in Europe. So dummy, Ike had no control over them. Secondly, Ike wasn’t involved in air forces until Spring 1944 and he delegated command.

On 27 March 1944, the Combined Chiefs of Staff issued orders granting control of all the Allied air forces in Europe, including strategic bombers, to General Dwight D. Eisenhower, the Supreme Allied Commander, who delegated command to his deputy in SHAEF Air Chief Marshal Arthur Tedder.
Strategic bombing during World War II - Wikipedia

To think Ike needed to be in the Pacific to understand things, is typical stupidity of a dumb grunt.

STOP POSTING.

LOL you are TRULY CHALLENGED on Military and History. In the Military whether you delegate command or not the supreme Commander is TOTALLY responsible for what is subordinate commanders DO. As for History the fighting in Europe was NOTHING like the fighting in the Pacific, NOTHING LIKE. The Germans did not suicide to avoid surrender or mount human wave assaults, they did not order their civilians to commit suicide rather then surrender and they did NOT fight to the death on every battle. Saipan and Okinawa taught the US commanders on the ground EXACTLY what they were up against if they invaded Japan. The Japanese ordered their civilians to form in a human wave attack on landing beaches with bamboo spears.On the Main Islands. The Germans surrendered when beaten the Japanese did NOT.

 

[gipper]

"In his memoirs, Ike recalled a visit from War Secretary Henry Stimson:



I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of “face.”

Admiral William Leahy, Truman’s chief military advisor, wrote:



It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons."

Ike has no credibility AT ALL. He ran the systematic bombing and destruction of European cities for 3 years in Europe, He killed a hell of a lot more people then any atomic bomb.And at no time during that bombing campaign did he suggest a way to lessen the death rate or destruction. He was NOT in the Pacific he did not have any first hand experience with the Japanese.

Why do you post obvious lies? First, the Brits controlled about half the bombing missions in Europe. So dummy, Ike had no control over them. Secondly, Ike wasn’t involved in air forces until Spring 1944 and he delegated command.

On 27 March 1944, the Combined Chiefs of Staff issued orders granting control of all the Allied air forces in Europe, including strategic bombers, to General Dwight D. Eisenhower, the Supreme Allied Commander, who delegated command to his deputy in SHAEF Air Chief Marshal Arthur Tedder.
Strategic bombing during World War II - Wikipedia

To think Ike needed to be in the Pacific to understand things, is typical stupidity of a dumb grunt.

STOP POSTING.

LOL you are TRULY CHALLENGED on Military and History. In the Military whether you delegate command or not the supreme Commander is TOTALLY responsible for what is subordinate commanders DO. As for History the fighting in Europe was NOTHING like the fighting in the Pacific, NOTHING LIKE. The Germans did not suicide to avoid surrender or mount human wave assaults, they did not order their civilians to commit suicide rather then surrender and they did NOT fight to the death on every battle. Saipan and Okinawa taught the US commanders on the ground EXACTLY what they were up against if they invaded Japan. The Japanese ordered their civilians to form in a human wave attack on landing beaches with bamboo spears.On the Main Islands. The Germans surrendered when beaten the Japanese did NOT.

So now you try to change the argument.

You claimed Ike directed the bombing of Germany. You did this to denigrate him for disagreeing with Truman’s war crime. You claim Ike systemically bombed Germany so he has no credibility on disagreeing with the bombing of Japan. I have proven you wrong once again. YOU LIED ONCE AGAIN.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

"In his memoirs, Ike recalled a visit from War Secretary Henry Stimson:



I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of “face.”

Admiral William Leahy, Truman’s chief military advisor, wrote:



It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons."

Ike has no credibility AT ALL. He ran the systematic bombing and destruction of European cities for 3 years in Europe, He killed a hell of a lot more people then any atomic bomb.And at no time during that bombing campaign did he suggest a way to lessen the death rate or destruction. He was NOT in the Pacific he did not have any first hand experience with the Japanese.

Why do you post obvious lies? First, the Brits controlled about half the bombing missions in Europe. So dummy, Ike had no control over them. Secondly, Ike wasn’t involved in air forces until Spring 1944 and he delegated command.

On 27 March 1944, the Combined Chiefs of Staff issued orders granting control of all the Allied air forces in Europe, including strategic bombers, to General Dwight D. Eisenhower, the Supreme Allied Commander, who delegated command to his deputy in SHAEF Air Chief Marshal Arthur Tedder.
Strategic bombing during World War II - Wikipedia

To think Ike needed to be in the Pacific to understand things, is typical stupidity of a dumb grunt.

STOP POSTING.

LOL you are TRULY CHALLENGED on Military and History. In the Military whether you delegate command or not the supreme Commander is TOTALLY responsible for what is subordinate commanders DO. As for History the fighting in Europe was NOTHING like the fighting in the Pacific, NOTHING LIKE. The Germans did not suicide to avoid surrender or mount human wave assaults, they did not order their civilians to commit suicide rather then surrender and they did NOT fight to the death on every battle. Saipan and Okinawa taught the US commanders on the ground EXACTLY what they were up against if they invaded Japan. The Japanese ordered their civilians to form in a human wave attack on landing beaches with bamboo spears.On the Main Islands. The Germans surrendered when beaten the Japanese did NOT.

So now you try to change the argument.

You claimed Ike directed the bombing of Germany. You did this to denigrate him for disagreeing with Truman’s war crime. You claim Ike systemically bombed Germany so he has no credibility on disagreeing with the bombing of Japan. I have proven you wrong once again. YOU LIED ONCE AGAIN.

He IS directly responsible for the decisions and actions of anyone UNDER HIM. Which if you knew the military you would know. HE CHOSE not to do anything about HIS role in the decision to fire Bomb Germany to systematically bomb cities. Which from 1944 to 1945 killed a hell of a lot more CIVILIANS then the two Atom Bombs.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Actually Truman's own cabinet publicly stated the bomb would put us on par with the German genocide at the time, and the dept of defense stifled all Truman's top generals , insisting all comments be vetted first

Further, the 'it would have saved millions' canard started out far less in #'s, grew due to historic revisionists who supported Truman , as opposed to all his generals

~S~

As always,mudwhistle gets his. Ass handed to him on a platter just like everyday of the entire year.lol

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Pearl Harbor wasn’t necessary either.

True, because FDR should not have provoked Japan to attack us. In the months leading up to Pearl Harbor, the Japanese tried repeatedly to get FDR to lift the crippling sanctions he had imposed on Japan. They offered enormous concessions, including ignoring the Tripartite Treaty. But, FDR, who was ever willing to excuse Soviet atrocities and tyranny, refused to show even half as much flexibility toward anti-communist Japan. Instead of making Japan our ally and letting the Japanese carry out their plan to invade the Soviet Union, FDR, desperate to save the Soviet experiment, provoked Japan to war.

indeed
Fdr and Ike were both motherfuckers who betrayed America,both buddies with mass murderer of innocent civilians Stalin.all three of them are burning and suffering in hell right now

 

[Levant]

The truth is hardly anti American. Besides why are you proud of your government for.commiting history’s greatest war crime? Why would you support the mass murdering of defenseless civilians?

You are the epitome of anti-American.

Really? The bombings that stopped the killers of 6 MILLION people, over half of that - over 3 MILLION of them, innocent women, children, and non-militant old men, is worse than the 6 million they killed? Stopping the Japanese was worse than Hitler's Final Solution that killed 6 million Jews?

So, you're an anti-semite, pro-Nazi, holocaust denier along with just generally hating the United States.

*edit* But you're right; the truth is not Anti-American. The problem is that you keep lying. There's no truth in anything you've written.

 

[gipper]

The truth is hardly anti American. Besides why are you proud of your government for.commiting history’s greatest war crime? Why would you support the mass murdering of defenseless civilians?

You are the epitome of anti-American.

Really? The bombings that stopped the killers of 6 MILLION people, over half of that - over 3 MILLION of them, innocent women, children, and non-militant old men, is worse than the 6 million they killed? Stopping the Japanese was worse than Hitler's Final Solution that killed 6 million Jews?

So, you're an anti-semite, pro-Nazi, holocaust denier along with just generally hating the United States.

*edit* But you're right; the truth is not Anti-American. The problem is that you keep lying. There's no truth in anything you've written.

You entire premise is wrong. The a bombs didn’t end the war. The war was over well before Truman’s war crime.

 

[Levant]

...

Your account picture is Asian. Are you? ....

Why would that matter?

Because if you're Japanese, it would be understandable why you're ignoring the 6 million dead and focusing on the 200 thousand dead. It wouldn't make you right but it would help me to understand why you're insisting on ignoring their democide while focusing on the steps the United States took to end the war..

I’m not Japanese. I’m an American, just much smarter than you.

No; apparently you're not smarter than me. Did I ask if you were Japanese? Did I imply it? Suggest it? Insinuate it? Apparently you can't read. Have your nurse read a bit more slowly so you can understand what she's saying to you.

 

[gipper]

...

Your account picture is Asian. Are you? ....

Why would that matter?

Because if you're Japanese, it would be understandable why you're ignoring the 6 million dead and focusing on the 200 thousand dead. It wouldn't make you right but it would help me to understand why you're insisting on ignoring their democide while focusing on the steps the United States took to end the war..

I’m not Japanese. I’m an American, just much smarter than you.

No; apparently you're not smarter than me. Did I ask if you were Japanese? Did I imply it? Suggest it? Insinuate it? Apparently you can't read. Have your nurse read a bit more slowly so you can understand what she's saying to you.

I accept the truth. You are man enough to accept it.

 

[Levant]

Really? The bombings that stopped the killers of 6 MILLION people, over half of that - over 3 MILLION of them, innocent women, children, and non-militant old men, is worse than the 6 million they killed? Stopping the Japanese was worse than Hitler's Final Solution that killed 6 million Jews?

So, you're an anti-semite, pro-Nazi, holocaust denier along with just generally hating the United States.

*edit* But you're right; the truth is not Anti-American. The problem is that you keep lying. There's no truth in anything you've written.

You entire premise is wrong. The a bombs didn’t end the war. The war was over well before Truman’s war crime.

Well, in the post you replied to (there's that reading thing again) the premise was that you're an anti-semite, Nazi-loving, holocaust denier that hates the United States. I understand you not denying that because you were trying to be truthful but if you want to make the claim that the war was over well before the bombs were dropped, please provide any story from any paper, in Japan, China, or the US, that the war was ended.

 

[Levant]

No; apparently you're not smarter than me. Did I ask if you were Japanese? Did I imply it? Suggest it? Insinuate it? Apparently you can't read. Have your nurse read a bit more slowly so you can understand what she's saying to you.

I accept the truth. You are man enough to accept it.

There you go again, reading comprehension. Your reply has nothing to do with my post. Let me say it a little slower for you. D..i..d......I......a..s..k......i..f......y..o..u......w..e..r..e......J..a..p..a..n..e..s..e..?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

It is such a joy reading the inane, sophomoric essays of those who are ignorant of history, criticizing the critical decisions that were made in real time.

The justification for both the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs was written throughout the entire Pacific Rim by the conduct of the Japanese themselves.

Starting with the unprovoked attack on Pearl Harbor, the horrific treatment of POW's, the grotesque behavior of Japanese soldiers and guards in Occupied territories, the maniacal behavior of Japanese soldiers throughout the war and beyond, the horrific policy decisions of Japanese commanders, to the rhetoric of Japanese political leaders in Japan, preparing for the inevitable land invasion, where women and children were being prepared to fight with - literally - sticks and stones, to the death.

The idea that the Japanese were anywhere close to surrender is preposterous to anyone familiar with the facts on the ground. The bombs saved hundreds of thousands of Japanese lives as well as tens of thousands of American lives. It was the most fully justified military decision in human history. A pox on anyone claiming otherwise. You make me want to puke.

If you had written these pathetic self-righteous bullshit essays in the '50's when WWII vets were still around, you would have been thrashed to within an inch of your miserable, ignorant lives.

Comedy gold from you as always you have been brainwashed by hollywood and our corporate controlled media as well as having your only research confined to our textbooks from our corrupt school system,but that’s normal foryou. Our real history and the real truth is that fdr provoked the Japanese to attack us.you need to look in the mirror when telling someone they have an ignorant life