Was Hiroshima Wrong?

[GWV5903]

actually the ones in Saudi Arabia. it was the reason bin laden gave for the attacks.

Brain Fart, long day....

If I remember we where requested to be there by the Saudis, where we not? I have a difficult time with OBL being recognized as a soldier or commander of an armed force. Terrorist attacks are performed by cowards imo....

Also, I believe there was a previous ultimatum given to the Japanese....

Define:terrorist

Also, there was a previous ultimatum given to the Americans...

OBL fits that definition, his anger is based on the existence of the State of Isreal....

Are you referring to OBL? I presume you are, so he totally ignored King Fahd's request our troops be present in SA? What did OBL do to SA?

He apparently believes that Sharia Law needs to be re-established throughout the muslim world, yeah he is a real 21st century figure....

 

[SW2SILVER]

Oh, for the love of....What is the bleeding point to this thread, anyway? If those bombs weren‘t used, hundreds of thousands more civilians would have died, would that have been a better alternative? Please...The Japanese weren't just going to give up, and surrender. So, it wasn't right to "nuke" Japan, it was the lesser of two evils, unavoidable. The US isn't some villan comparable to those nutjobs in Al Qaeda, as some are trying to imply.

 

[JamesInFlorida]

I think the bombs were very sad, and terrible-but ultimately I think we made the right decision.

 

[steeliniraq]

I started reading through this but quickly realized this is a bs thread used to stir the pot and piss people off. There is no answer that can satisfy the posters reason because they have never experienced anything like what was happening in that era and they, god willing, never will. The leaders of this country made a decision in the interests of their people. Its called leadership. For the rest of time people can and will second guess it but they made a tough decision and I am grateful for it. I just wish the people that are in charge of the country today had half the leadership qualities as those from back in the day. Leadership isnt a popularity contest.

 

[maatsmom843]

Saving the life of a single American GI would have been worth killing every living thing in Japan so far as I'm concerned. Those two attacks saved the lives of probably 1,000,000 American servicemen. So they were definitely the RIGHT thing to do.

spoken like one who only understands the story from their own vantage point.

Thank you for your neg rep, maatsmom843. It means so much to me knowing that my opinion differs from yours. I shall return the favor when I am able to give out rep again. After all, if I get neg rep cause you disagree with me, I should give you some neg rep cause I disagree with your point of view. Your -6 point rep pains me. When I neg rep you, you'll get a -491. If you happen to see my ex-wife running around there in Charleston, SC, tell her to **** herself too along with yourself.

whoa! take this thing seriously much???

it's ok here's what you do:

1. Unhook your modem

2. Close your eyes, count to ten and take a few deep breaths. you may find that chanting a mantra aids in relaxation

3. Leave your computer, engage in some non-internet related activity for at least 1-2 hours. really "reconnect" with the real world.

4. Acknowledge that you reacted irrationally, and be nice to all of your e-peers from now on.

peace!

 

[Toronado3800]

Oh, for the love of....What is the bleeding point to this thread, anyway? If those bombs weren‘t used, hundreds of thousands more civilians would have died, would that have been a better alternative? Please...The Japanese weren't just going to give up, and surrender. So, it wasn't right to "nuke" Japan, it was the lesser of two evils, unavoidable. The US isn't some villan comparable to those nutjobs in Al Qaeda, as some are trying to imply.

Look up how close the Japanese offer of surrender was to our demands. THINK it was Meeting at Potsdam where I read it first. Bound to be someplace on the webs. Not a conspiracy theory, reality. Truman was cold and pragmatic. I would have done worse in his shoes so this is not me bashing him.

 

[Kalam]

Can anyone explain this?

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.

United States Strategic Bombing Survey: Summary Report (Pacific War) (p. 26)

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Can anyone explain this?

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.

United States Strategic Bombing Survey: Summary Report (Pacific War) (p. 26)

I can. They are simply wrong. How exactly would bombing cause the Japanese military government to surrender by November when we have ABSOLUTE PROOF that two ATOMIC bombs did not convince those same leaders to surrender in August? They were so adamant about not surrendering they staged a Coup against the Emperor, someone they believed was a LIVING GOD.

By August nothing was left, Japan had no shipping no industry , no food, no heating materials and no way to fight back, YET they REFUSED to surrender. They even refused after 2 ATOMIC Bombs. The survey's opinion is simply WRONG. ANd note it is nothing more than an OPINION.

The bombing survey was wrong in Europe also. Bombing never caused anyone to surrender. In Europe the Germans INCREASED production as bombing ramped up. Air power was unable to win WW2. Simple straight forward FACT.

 

[Kalam]

I can. They are simply wrong.

Well damn, I'm glad that whatever the Strategic Bombing Survey missed in their interviews with Japanese leaders didn't make it past you.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I can. They are simply wrong.

Well damn, I'm glad that whatever the Strategic Bombing Survey missed in their interviews with Japanese leaders didn't make it past you.

FACTS. Again, 2 Atomic bombs in August not only did not convince the Army lead Government to surrender they staged a Coup against the Emperor when he intervened. You know that guy they believed was a LIVING God? The ONLY part of the Government willing to surrender was not in the majority. The Army ran the Government. There is no credible reason to believe that if those Army Generals would NOT surrender in August after 2 ATOMIC bombs, that somehow by November they would be convinced.

 

[Toronado3800]

The Japanese government was fractured, true. I believe a good portion of it was attempting to surrender on terms which may have been acceptable to the American ppl.

Too bad they went through the absolute wrong diplomatic channels instead of just getting on a shortwave radio and begging for their terms to be accepted. THAT would have made us look like jerks for not accepting.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The Japanese government was fractured, true. I believe a good portion of it was attempting to surrender on terms which may have been acceptable to the American ppl.

Too bad they went through the absolute wrong diplomatic channels instead of just getting on a shortwave radio and begging for their terms to be accepted. THAT would have made us look like jerks for not accepting.

Source Documents from the Japanese Government provide ample evidence that the Army which was the majority was not fractured and had no intention of surrender. Already provided the link.

The only "offer" that was ever made was a ceasefire with return to pre war borders. Even after 2 Atomic bombs the Army refused to surrender and made demands.

 

[JBeukema]

I started reading through this but quickly realized this is a bs thread used to stir the pot and piss people off.

You get mad when you have to actually think about what you believe and why?

 

[JBeukema]

They even refused after 2 ATOMIC Bombs.

Earlier, you claimed the second bomb made them surrender.

Can you please pick a single narrative and stick with it?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I started reading through this but quickly realized this is a bs thread used to stir the pot and piss people off.

You get mad when you have to actually think about what you believe and why?

You are an idiot. You are misguided and stupid on this and many issues. The Japanese Government ONLY surrendered after 2 atomic bombs and the Emperor intervened. Further the Army attempted a COUP to prevent that. No credible evidence exists to suggest that by November the same Generals that would not surrender after 2 atomic bombs would suddenly change their mind.

 

[JBeukema]

Retarded would surrender if America was going to be invaded? Since he demonizes those Japanese leaders who planned to resisted by any means, I can assume nothing else.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

They even refused after 2 ATOMIC Bombs.

Earlier, you claimed the second bomb made them surrender.

Can you please pick a single narrative and stick with it?

Prove of your IGNORANCE, also proof you did not read my link. The Japanese Government REFUSED to surrender. The Emperor over ruled the Army Generals and ordered a surrender. The Army attempted a Coup to prevent that order being carried out.

 

[manifold]

JB,

Repeat after me:

Anything the US does is righteous and wholly justified. Any action against the US is despicable, morally unconscionable and pure evil.

It's a lot simpler that way.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Retarded would surrender if America was going to be invaded? Since he demonizes those Japanese leaders who planned to resisted by any means, I can assume nothing else.

If I had no navy, no air force, no food or heating materials for my civilians, my cities were all in flames, my army was filled with teenagers and old men and the enemy could bomb me at will anytime, anywhere, ya I would surrender. As a soldier I would not but if I was the leader I would have a moral obligation to my people.

 

[bodecea]

I think that nationalism is abhorrent but respect that your views are at least consistent. American isolationism would be a most welcome change from the current state of affairs.

Personally, I think that Nationalism is the only reasonable basis for citizenship in a country. If one is not truly committed, devoted, and loyal to that country, why are they there to begin with? Likewise, why would one retain any loyalty or devotion to a country that they have left? For example.... my paternal great-grandparents Adam and Karoline left Germany in 1910. The next time they had any contact with the portion of their family they left in Germany is when two of my great-grandfathers cousins showed up on their doorstep in Connecticut in 1928. Adam's belief, and that which has been handed down on that side of the family for the last century (including several of the intermarried families now) is that we are AMERICANS and AMERICANS ONLY. Where we came from means NOTHING.

I think that American Isolationism would bring about some very interesting things in the world. Including some things that foreigners may not like. The form of Total Isolationism I espouse would mean no medicines, food, money, or any other form of aid would be leaving the United States for the "developing nations". There would be no aircraft carriers treating tsunami victims. No American search teams digging through the rubble after earthquakes. It would also require some MASSIVE and MAJOR changes in American culture as well. Travel would largely be a thing of the past. Individual communities would have to start providing for themselves again. We would have to go back to a more agrarian, less technological, and hopefully more morality and values driven society.

Bunker Mentality.