The truth about Truman’s bombing Japan

[RetiredGySgt]

LOL

They initially thought FDR was not serious about his murderous unconditional surrender requirement. When they put out feelers threw third parties asking for surrender terms IN 1943, FDR responded with **** you. They continued asking for surrender terms in 44 and 45. Only to get the same response. Naturally, they concluded that FDR and Truman wanted to exterminate all of Japan. Thus resulting in the despite and suicidal efforts of the army and Air Force.

THERE WAS NO NEED TO DROP THE A-BOMBS OR INVADE.

Is there a reason why you do not provide a link to back up your wild claims about Japan being a peace-seeking nation led by reasonable good and civilized people seeking while America was led by demonic evil warmongers? Just asking.

...and you have some nerve asking me for links, when I have been trying to educate you for a decade now. Do you come to this forum NEW every day?

You have NEVER .linked to anything except a book that is not proof of anything. At least Unk linked to a verifiable source document even if it does not say what he claims it says.

Linked dozens and dozens and dozens of times. The proof is easy to find, but when you are dumb, statist, and a *****, the truth is too much for you to accept.

If reliable realistic scholarly and historically accepted links are so easy to find why don't you post them?

He can NOT, he linked to a book a while back one written to make money that had no references to anything other then the comments of certain Generals after the war.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

By the way he also claimed that Japan offered to surrender with the ONLY demand being we not hang the Emperor.

 

[regent]

If we can't figure out today how Japan surrendered, how could they have figured it out in 1945? With numerous Japanese organizations requesting surrender terms it must have been a difficult period. The real answer was when the emperor decided it was enough then surrender began.

 

[gipper]

By the way he also claimed that Japan offered to surrender with the ONLY demand being we not hang the Emperor.

That’s right and you not knowing it, just proves what a dumbass you are.

 

[gipper]

LOL

They initially thought FDR was not serious about his murderous unconditional surrender requirement. When they put out feelers threw third parties asking for surrender terms IN 1943, FDR responded with **** you. They continued asking for surrender terms in 44 and 45. Only to get the same response. Naturally, they concluded that FDR and Truman wanted to exterminate all of Japan. Thus resulting in the despite and suicidal efforts of the army and Air Force.

THERE WAS NO NEED TO DROP THE A-BOMBS OR INVADE.

Is there a reason why you do not provide a link to back up your wild claims about Japan being a peace-seeking nation led by reasonable good and civilized people seeking while America was led by demonic evil warmongers? Just asking.

...and you have some nerve asking me for links, when I have been trying to educate you for a decade now. Do you come to this forum NEW every day?

You have NEVER .linked to anything except a book that is not proof of anything. At least Unk linked to a verifiable source document even if it does not say what he claims it says.

Linked dozens and dozens and dozens of times. The proof is easy to find, but when you are dumb, statist, and a *****, the truth is too much for you to accept.

If reliable realistic scholarly and historically accepted links are so easy to find why don't you post them?

Read the OP dumbass.

 

[gipper]

If we can't figure out today how Japan surrendered, how could they have figured it out in 1945? With numerous Japanese organizations requesting surrender terms it must have been a difficult period. The real answer was when the emperor decided it was enough then surrender began.

We know how they surrendered. Truman mass murdered them unnecessarily, then agreed to their only condition. That the emperor be spared.

 

[HenryBHough]

The war is over.

As usual, Democrats, your side lost.

Get over it.

 

[Andylusion]

Americans need to come to the realization that the bombings of civilians was really mass murder, not unlike what Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were guilty of.

Great column on the subject.

The Atomic Bombing of Japan, Reconsidered
By Alan Mosley
Mises.org

January 2, 2019

Russia’s move, in fact, compelled the Japanese to consider unconditional surrender; until then, they were only open to a conditional surrender that left their Emperor Hirohito some dignity and protections from war-crimes trials. Ward concludes that, as in the European theatre, Truman didn’t beat Japan; Stalin did.

Harry Truman never expressed regret publicly over his decision to use the atomic bombs. However, he did order an independent study on the state of the war effort leading up to August of 1945, and the strategic value of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. In 1946, the U.S. Bombing Survey published its findings, which concluded as follows: “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 had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.” This is an intensive condemnation of Truman’s decision, seeing as Russia did enter the war, and that plans for an invasion had been developed.

As Timothy P. Carney writes for the Washington Examiner, the fog of war can be a tricky thing. But if we’re forced to side with Truman, or Eisenhower and the other dissenting military leaders, the Eisenhower position isn’t merely valid; it actually aligns better with some fundamental American values. Given all the uncertainty, both at the time and with modern historical revisionism, it’s better to look to principle rather than fortune-telling. One principle that should be near the top of everyone’s list is this: it’s wrong to target civilians with weapons of mass destruction. The deliberate killing of innocent men, women, and children by the hundreds of thousands cannot be justified under any circumstances, much less the ambiguous ones Truman encountered. Whether his decision was motivated by indignation toward Japanese “ pigheadedness” or concern for his troops, Truman’s use of such devastating weapons against non-combatants should not be excused. Americans must strive for complete and honest analysis of the past (and present) conflicts. And if she is to remain true to her own ideals, America must strive for more noble and moral ends—in all conflicts, domestic and foreign—guided by our most cherished first principles, such as the Golden Rule. At the very least, Americans should not try so hard to justify mass murder.

The Atomic Bombing of Japan - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

No, I disagree with all of this.

In a world war, there is no such thing as a non-combatant.

If you exist in a society, you are supporting the war effort. Throughout all human history, the way that an enemy is defeated is by killing 'the man behind the man, with the gun'.

This is one of the reasons that we have had so many long drawn out combat zones in the last couple of decades.

Until you wipe out the people that are supporting the war effort, the war will continue.

This is why the war in Vietnam never ended, while we were there. We killed the vietcong, and the North Vietnamese troops, but never attacked the people that were feeding, funding, supplying, and replacing all the troops we killed.

So the war just never ended. If the US military had been unshackled, we would have easily... EASILY wiped out north Vietnam. Walk in the park.

Same with Syria today, and the Ukraine.

Until one side starts wiping out the people of those countries, neither of those wars will end. As long as the man, behind man with gun, continues to feed the man with the gun, fund the man with the gun, supply the man with the gun.... then there will always be a man with a gun shooting at you.

What do you think Sherman's march to the sea was all about? You had to wipe out the people that were supplying the war effort. Until the public says they have had enough, and agree to end the conflict, the the conflict doesn't end.

And by the way........

I get a little irritated with people that focus on the atom bomb. Does everyone not know what we were doing before dropping that bomb?

We were fire-bombing. Do all of you know what fire-bombing is?

So I assume everyone is aware of Paradise California, the town that was wiped out by a raging wild fire inferno, that killed 86 people, and had these chilling pictures of devastation

The difference is, that was an almost rural hill-side community. What if the same thing happened in the dead center of a major metropolitan city?

Tokyo ^

In world war 2, bombs dropped on London, caused a fire storm. When the temperatures get hot enough, just like a wild fire in California, the fire creates its own wind, that fans the flames, increasing heat and fire, which is how wild fire can burn 5,000 acres in 3 hours, like what happened in California.

Well, the powers that be realized this was a great way to do major damage, and specifically set out to create bombs that had the hottest flames, and the highest chance of catching the surrounding building and anything else, on fire.

What was created was the fire-bombs of WW2, and one of the biggest targets hit was Tokyo.

The piles of ash you are looking at, isn't some remote hill side community... it is Tokyo. The numbers of dead, are still unknown to this day. Estimates are over hundred thousand at least.

The atomic bomb drop on Hiroshima, only killed 80 thousand. And many were instantly vaporized, not set ablaze in a massive inferno.

By far, the fire bombings across Japan were far more terrifying than the atom bombs. They caused far more devastation, and cause vastly more suffering and pain to the people who lived threw it, and those who didn't.

And oddly enough, it also harmed our troops far more. The smell of burnt human flesh, was so bad, that pilots got sick from the smell of burnt people, from just being around their planes at the air base, days after the attack had happened. I've heard that some vet pilots, never had a cook out, or open fire again for the rest of their lives, because the smell of smoke, brought back the smell of burnt flesh of those people in Tokyo.

Everyone focuses on the atom bomb. People seem to forget that one of the reasons we dropped that big bomb, because we were so horrified at the firebombings, and we wanted a way to push this war until it ended.

My opinion to this day is.... it was the right move. Not a good move.... there are no 'good moves' in war. But it was the right move. Those bombs convinced the Japanese people, and the Japanese government, to move towards surrender, and finally ending at least some of the horrors of WW2.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

By the way he also claimed that Japan offered to surrender with the ONLY demand being we not hang the Emperor.

That’s right and you not knowing it, just proves what a dumbass you are.

RETARD it NEVER happened. Go ahead link to your source for this ridiculous claim. Even after 2 atomic Bombs the Army would not surrender you dumb ass. and when the Emperor surrendered anyway the Army staged a Coup to stop him.

 

[Faun]

Americans need to come to the realization that the bombings of civilians was really mass murder, not unlike what Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were guilty of.

Great column on the subject.

The Atomic Bombing of Japan, Reconsidered
By Alan Mosley
Mises.org

January 2, 2019

Russia’s move, in fact, compelled the Japanese to consider unconditional surrender; until then, they were only open to a conditional surrender that left their Emperor Hirohito some dignity and protections from war-crimes trials. Ward concludes that, as in the European theatre, Truman didn’t beat Japan; Stalin did.

Harry Truman never expressed regret publicly over his decision to use the atomic bombs. However, he did order an independent study on the state of the war effort leading up to August of 1945, and the strategic value of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. In 1946, the U.S. Bombing Survey published its findings, which concluded as follows: “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 had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.” This is an intensive condemnation of Truman’s decision, seeing as Russia did enter the war, and that plans for an invasion had been developed.

As Timothy P. Carney writes for the Washington Examiner, the fog of war can be a tricky thing. But if we’re forced to side with Truman, or Eisenhower and the other dissenting military leaders, the Eisenhower position isn’t merely valid; it actually aligns better with some fundamental American values. Given all the uncertainty, both at the time and with modern historical revisionism, it’s better to look to principle rather than fortune-telling. One principle that should be near the top of everyone’s list is this: it’s wrong to target civilians with weapons of mass destruction. The deliberate killing of innocent men, women, and children by the hundreds of thousands cannot be justified under any circumstances, much less the ambiguous ones Truman encountered. Whether his decision was motivated by indignation toward Japanese “ pigheadedness” or concern for his troops, Truman’s use of such devastating weapons against non-combatants should not be excused. Americans must strive for complete and honest analysis of the past (and present) conflicts. And if she is to remain true to her own ideals, America must strive for more noble and moral ends—in all conflicts, domestic and foreign—guided by our most cherished first principles, such as the Golden Rule. At the very least, Americans should not try so hard to justify mass murder.

The Atomic Bombing of Japan - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Democrats are just plain evil.

Democrats defeated the Imperialists and the Nazi’s and turned America into a global super power.

 

[Camp]

Is there a reason why you do not provide a link to back up your wild claims about Japan being a peace-seeking nation led by reasonable good and civilized people seeking while America was led by demonic evil warmongers? Just asking.

...and you have some nerve asking me for links, when I have been trying to educate you for a decade now. Do you come to this forum NEW every day?

You have NEVER .linked to anything except a book that is not proof of anything. At least Unk linked to a verifiable source document even if it does not say what he claims it says.

Linked dozens and dozens and dozens of times. The proof is easy to find, but when you are dumb, statist, and a *****, the truth is too much for you to accept.

If reliable realistic scholarly and historically accepted links are so easy to find why don't you post them?

Read the OP dumbass.

Your OP link is a speculative opinion published by an extremely right-wing partisan entity and would never be accepted as a historically relevant work by any recognized scholarly group such as a college thesis board. Your entire thread is based on unprovable speculation and opinions. Your response to critics who disagree with your opinion is to call them dumb asses.

Thread fail. Accurate history is not based on speculative opinions and partisan revisionist theories.

 

[gipper]

...and you have some nerve asking me for links, when I have been trying to educate you for a decade now. Do you come to this forum NEW every day?

You have NEVER .linked to anything except a book that is not proof of anything. At least Unk linked to a verifiable source document even if it does not say what he claims it says.

Linked dozens and dozens and dozens of times. The proof is easy to find, but when you are dumb, statist, and a *****, the truth is too much for you to accept.

If reliable realistic scholarly and historically accepted links are so easy to find why don't you post them?

Read the OP dumbass.

Your OP link is a speculative opinion published by an extremely right-wing partisan entity and would never be accepted as a historically relevant work by any recognized scholarly group such as a college thesis board. Your entire thread is based on unprovable speculation and opinions. Your response to critics who disagree with your opinion is to call them dumb asses.

Thread fail. Accurate history is not based on speculative opinions and partisan revisionist theories.

That’s what you always say. Anything that conflicts with the State’s position, is conspiracy theory or speculation. Then you demand proof when it has been already given to you.

Who’s dumber than a statist?


Answer: no one.

 

[gipper]

Americans need to come to the realization that the bombings of civilians was really mass murder, not unlike what Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were guilty of.

Great column on the subject.

The Atomic Bombing of Japan, Reconsidered
By Alan Mosley
Mises.org

January 2, 2019

Russia’s move, in fact, compelled the Japanese to consider unconditional surrender; until then, they were only open to a conditional surrender that left their Emperor Hirohito some dignity and protections from war-crimes trials. Ward concludes that, as in the European theatre, Truman didn’t beat Japan; Stalin did.

Harry Truman never expressed regret publicly over his decision to use the atomic bombs. However, he did order an independent study on the state of the war effort leading up to August of 1945, and the strategic value of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. In 1946, the U.S. Bombing Survey published its findings, which concluded as follows: “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 had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.” This is an intensive condemnation of Truman’s decision, seeing as Russia did enter the war, and that plans for an invasion had been developed.

As Timothy P. Carney writes for the Washington Examiner, the fog of war can be a tricky thing. But if we’re forced to side with Truman, or Eisenhower and the other dissenting military leaders, the Eisenhower position isn’t merely valid; it actually aligns better with some fundamental American values. Given all the uncertainty, both at the time and with modern historical revisionism, it’s better to look to principle rather than fortune-telling. One principle that should be near the top of everyone’s list is this: it’s wrong to target civilians with weapons of mass destruction. The deliberate killing of innocent men, women, and children by the hundreds of thousands cannot be justified under any circumstances, much less the ambiguous ones Truman encountered. Whether his decision was motivated by indignation toward Japanese “ pigheadedness” or concern for his troops, Truman’s use of such devastating weapons against non-combatants should not be excused. Americans must strive for complete and honest analysis of the past (and present) conflicts. And if she is to remain true to her own ideals, America must strive for more noble and moral ends—in all conflicts, domestic and foreign—guided by our most cherished first principles, such as the Golden Rule. At the very least, Americans should not try so hard to justify mass murder.

The Atomic Bombing of Japan - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Democrats are just plain evil.

Democrats defeated the Imperialists and the Nazi’s and turned America into a global super power.

Yet they occupied half of Europe and all of Japan. Amazingly, the US still has troops stationed in both places(and a hundred other countries). Yet equally amazing, statists don’t think the USA is an Imperial power.

Nothing is dumber than a statist.

 

[gipper]

By the way he also claimed that Japan offered to surrender with the ONLY demand being we not hang the Emperor.

That’s right and you not knowing it, just proves what a dumbass you are.

RETARD it NEVER happened. Go ahead link to your source for this ridiculous claim. Even after 2 atomic Bombs the Army would not surrender you dumb ass. and when the Emperor surrendered anyway the Army staged a Coup to stop him.

Linked many times but you being a *****, can’t accept the truth.

 

[Faun]

Americans need to come to the realization that the bombings of civilians was really mass murder, not unlike what Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were guilty of.

Great column on the subject.

The Atomic Bombing of Japan, Reconsidered
By Alan Mosley
Mises.org

January 2, 2019

Russia’s move, in fact, compelled the Japanese to consider unconditional surrender; until then, they were only open to a conditional surrender that left their Emperor Hirohito some dignity and protections from war-crimes trials. Ward concludes that, as in the European theatre, Truman didn’t beat Japan; Stalin did.

Harry Truman never expressed regret publicly over his decision to use the atomic bombs. However, he did order an independent study on the state of the war effort leading up to August of 1945, and the strategic value of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. In 1946, the U.S. Bombing Survey published its findings, which concluded as follows: “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 had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.” This is an intensive condemnation of Truman’s decision, seeing as Russia did enter the war, and that plans for an invasion had been developed.

As Timothy P. Carney writes for the Washington Examiner, the fog of war can be a tricky thing. But if we’re forced to side with Truman, or Eisenhower and the other dissenting military leaders, the Eisenhower position isn’t merely valid; it actually aligns better with some fundamental American values. Given all the uncertainty, both at the time and with modern historical revisionism, it’s better to look to principle rather than fortune-telling. One principle that should be near the top of everyone’s list is this: it’s wrong to target civilians with weapons of mass destruction. The deliberate killing of innocent men, women, and children by the hundreds of thousands cannot be justified under any circumstances, much less the ambiguous ones Truman encountered. Whether his decision was motivated by indignation toward Japanese “ pigheadedness” or concern for his troops, Truman’s use of such devastating weapons against non-combatants should not be excused. Americans must strive for complete and honest analysis of the past (and present) conflicts. And if she is to remain true to her own ideals, America must strive for more noble and moral ends—in all conflicts, domestic and foreign—guided by our most cherished first principles, such as the Golden Rule. At the very least, Americans should not try so hard to justify mass murder.

The Atomic Bombing of Japan - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Democrats are just plain evil.

Democrats defeated the Imperialists and the Nazi’s and turned America into a global super power.

Yet they occupied half of Europe and all of Japan. Amazingly, the US still has troops stationed in both places(and a hundred other countries). Yet equally amazing, statists don’t think the USA is an Imperial power.

Nothing is dumber than a statist.

LOLOL

You say that as though it refuted the reality that Democrats defeated the Imperialists and the Nazi’s and made America a global super power. If that’s a problem for ya, too ******* bad.

 

[gipper]

Americans need to come to the realization that the bombings of civilians was really mass murder, not unlike what Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were guilty of.

Great column on the subject.

The Atomic Bombing of Japan, Reconsidered
By Alan Mosley
Mises.org

January 2, 2019

Russia’s move, in fact, compelled the Japanese to consider unconditional surrender; until then, they were only open to a conditional surrender that left their Emperor Hirohito some dignity and protections from war-crimes trials. Ward concludes that, as in the European theatre, Truman didn’t beat Japan; Stalin did.

Harry Truman never expressed regret publicly over his decision to use the atomic bombs. However, he did order an independent study on the state of the war effort leading up to August of 1945, and the strategic value of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. In 1946, the U.S. Bombing Survey published its findings, which concluded as follows: “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 had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.” This is an intensive condemnation of Truman’s decision, seeing as Russia did enter the war, and that plans for an invasion had been developed.

As Timothy P. Carney writes for the Washington Examiner, the fog of war can be a tricky thing. But if we’re forced to side with Truman, or Eisenhower and the other dissenting military leaders, the Eisenhower position isn’t merely valid; it actually aligns better with some fundamental American values. Given all the uncertainty, both at the time and with modern historical revisionism, it’s better to look to principle rather than fortune-telling. One principle that should be near the top of everyone’s list is this: it’s wrong to target civilians with weapons of mass destruction. The deliberate killing of innocent men, women, and children by the hundreds of thousands cannot be justified under any circumstances, much less the ambiguous ones Truman encountered. Whether his decision was motivated by indignation toward Japanese “ pigheadedness” or concern for his troops, Truman’s use of such devastating weapons against non-combatants should not be excused. Americans must strive for complete and honest analysis of the past (and present) conflicts. And if she is to remain true to her own ideals, America must strive for more noble and moral ends—in all conflicts, domestic and foreign—guided by our most cherished first principles, such as the Golden Rule. At the very least, Americans should not try so hard to justify mass murder.

The Atomic Bombing of Japan - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Democrats are just plain evil.

Democrats defeated the Imperialists and the Nazi’s and turned America into a global super power.

Yet they occupied half of Europe and all of Japan. Amazingly, the US still has troops stationed in both places(and a hundred other countries). Yet equally amazing, statists don’t think the USA is an Imperial power.

Nothing is dumber than a statist.

LOLOL

You say that as though it refuted the reality that Democrats defeated the Imperialists and the Nazi’s and made America a global super power. If that’s a problem for ya, too ******* bad.

Yeah the US is a global superpower, but the people have gained nothing from this. The elites have benefited greatly. The people lose their rights gradually as the politicians impose ever greater restrictions, ultimately leading to a police state. Unending war aboard always results in serfdom at home, but somehow statists don’t know this fundamental historical FACT.

 

[Faun]

Americans need to come to the realization that the bombings of civilians was really mass murder, not unlike what Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were guilty of.

Great column on the subject.

The Atomic Bombing of Japan, Reconsidered
By Alan Mosley
Mises.org

January 2, 2019

Russia’s move, in fact, compelled the Japanese to consider unconditional surrender; until then, they were only open to a conditional surrender that left their Emperor Hirohito some dignity and protections from war-crimes trials. Ward concludes that, as in the European theatre, Truman didn’t beat Japan; Stalin did.

Harry Truman never expressed regret publicly over his decision to use the atomic bombs. However, he did order an independent study on the state of the war effort leading up to August of 1945, and the strategic value of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. In 1946, the U.S. Bombing Survey published its findings, which concluded as follows: “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 had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.” This is an intensive condemnation of Truman’s decision, seeing as Russia did enter the war, and that plans for an invasion had been developed.

As Timothy P. Carney writes for the Washington Examiner, the fog of war can be a tricky thing. But if we’re forced to side with Truman, or Eisenhower and the other dissenting military leaders, the Eisenhower position isn’t merely valid; it actually aligns better with some fundamental American values. Given all the uncertainty, both at the time and with modern historical revisionism, it’s better to look to principle rather than fortune-telling. One principle that should be near the top of everyone’s list is this: it’s wrong to target civilians with weapons of mass destruction. The deliberate killing of innocent men, women, and children by the hundreds of thousands cannot be justified under any circumstances, much less the ambiguous ones Truman encountered. Whether his decision was motivated by indignation toward Japanese “ pigheadedness” or concern for his troops, Truman’s use of such devastating weapons against non-combatants should not be excused. Americans must strive for complete and honest analysis of the past (and present) conflicts. And if she is to remain true to her own ideals, America must strive for more noble and moral ends—in all conflicts, domestic and foreign—guided by our most cherished first principles, such as the Golden Rule. At the very least, Americans should not try so hard to justify mass murder.

The Atomic Bombing of Japan - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Democrats are just plain evil.

Democrats defeated the Imperialists and the Nazi’s and turned America into a global super power.

Yet they occupied half of Europe and all of Japan. Amazingly, the US still has troops stationed in both places(and a hundred other countries). Yet equally amazing, statists don’t think the USA is an Imperial power.

Nothing is dumber than a statist.

LOLOL

You say that as though it refuted the reality that Democrats defeated the Imperialists and the Nazi’s and made America a global super power. If that’s a problem for ya, too ******* bad.

Yeah the US is a global superpower, but the people have gained nothing from this. The elites have benefited greatly. The people lose their rights gradually as the politicians impose ever greater restrictions, ultimately leading to a police state. Unending war aboard always results in serfdom at home, but somehow statists don’t know this fundamental historical FACT.

I know you would have preferred the Nazis had taken over Europe, and then expanded beyond that, but that’s only because you’re fucked in the head. If you don’t like being part of a super power, you’re always welcome to move to Guatemala.

 

[gipper]

Democrats are just plain evil.

Democrats defeated the Imperialists and the Nazi’s and turned America into a global super power.

Yet they occupied half of Europe and all of Japan. Amazingly, the US still has troops stationed in both places(and a hundred other countries). Yet equally amazing, statists don’t think the USA is an Imperial power.

Nothing is dumber than a statist.

LOLOL

You say that as though it refuted the reality that Democrats defeated the Imperialists and the Nazi’s and made America a global super power. If that’s a problem for ya, too ******* bad.

Yeah the US is a global superpower, but the people have gained nothing from this. The elites have benefited greatly. The people lose their rights gradually as the politicians impose ever greater restrictions, ultimately leading to a police state. Unending war aboard always results in serfdom at home, but somehow statists don’t know this fundamental historical FACT.

I know you would have preferred the Nazis had taken over Europe, and then expanded beyond that, but that’s only because you’re fucked in the head. If you don’t like being part of a super power, you’re always welcome to move to Guatemala.

Another fallacy pushed by statists. They think Hitler intended to conquer the whole world, yet couldn’t even get past the USSR.

Statists require a boogie man to continue growing the state.

 

[Faun]

Democrats defeated the Imperialists and the Nazi’s and turned America into a global super power.

Yet they occupied half of Europe and all of Japan. Amazingly, the US still has troops stationed in both places(and a hundred other countries). Yet equally amazing, statists don’t think the USA is an Imperial power.

Nothing is dumber than a statist.

LOLOL

You say that as though it refuted the reality that Democrats defeated the Imperialists and the Nazi’s and made America a global super power. If that’s a problem for ya, too ******* bad.

Yeah the US is a global superpower, but the people have gained nothing from this. The elites have benefited greatly. The people lose their rights gradually as the politicians impose ever greater restrictions, ultimately leading to a police state. Unending war aboard always results in serfdom at home, but somehow statists don’t know this fundamental historical FACT.

I know you would have preferred the Nazis had taken over Europe, and then expanded beyond that, but that’s only because you’re fucked in the head. If you don’t like being part of a super power, you’re always welcome to move to Guatemala.

Another fallacy pushed by statists. They think Hitler intended to conquer the whole world, yet couldn’t even get past the USSR.

Statists require a boogie man to continue growing the state.

Dumbfuck, Hitler came within miles of Moscow. What led to Hitler’s defeat was having to utilize resources to fight on his west, because the U.S. joined the war, that he needed to defeat the Communists on his east. Without the U.S., Britain was facing certain defeat and Hitler was able to focus on fighting the Soviets. The entry of the U.S. forced him to reduce his efforts in fighting towards Moscow.

Your entire premise on everything you’ve stated in this thread is based on revising what we know historically.

 

[gipper]

Yet they occupied half of Europe and all of Japan. Amazingly, the US still has troops stationed in both places(and a hundred other countries). Yet equally amazing, statists don’t think the USA is an Imperial power.

Nothing is dumber than a statist.

LOLOL

You say that as though it refuted the reality that Democrats defeated the Imperialists and the Nazi’s and made America a global super power. If that’s a problem for ya, too ******* bad.

Yeah the US is a global superpower, but the people have gained nothing from this. The elites have benefited greatly. The people lose their rights gradually as the politicians impose ever greater restrictions, ultimately leading to a police state. Unending war aboard always results in serfdom at home, but somehow statists don’t know this fundamental historical FACT.

I know you would have preferred the Nazis had taken over Europe, and then expanded beyond that, but that’s only because you’re fucked in the head. If you don’t like being part of a super power, you’re always welcome to move to Guatemala.

Another fallacy pushed by statists. They think Hitler intended to conquer the whole world, yet couldn’t even get past the USSR.

Statists require a boogie man to continue growing the state.

Dumbfuck, Hitler came within miles of Moscow. What led to Hitler’s defeat was having to utilize resources to fight on his west, because the U.S. joined the war, that he needed to defeat the Communists on his east. Without the U.S., Britain was facing certain defeat and Hitler was able to focus on fighting the Soviets. The entry of the U.S. forced him to reduce his efforts in fighting towards Moscow.

Your entire premise on everything you’ve stated in this thread is based on revising what we know historically.

For slow thinking Statists...getting close to Moscow, is not conquering the world.