We Were Right to Drop the Bomb

[frigidweirdo]

The Truman defenders are all over the place about the use of the Bomb. Japan was defeated by the spring of 1945 and it's industry was almost completely destroyed. With the cooperation of the willing media, the Allies managed to deflect outrage about the bombing campaign over Dresden Germany and subsequent fire storm while Dresden was considered a non-military target. Allied daylight bomb runs over Japan changed from high impact to incendiary after almost all the industry was destroyed. The dirty little secret was that the FDR administration respected the German army but considered the Japanese to be sub-human and so did the eggheads who were pressuring Truman to use the ultimate weapon they spent so long developing.

The hardly needed to deflect outrage.
Six years of war for some, more for those in the Far East, millions of dead. The chance to stop the war, who cares how many more of the brutal enemy died?

 

[Unkotare]

who cares how many more of the brutal enemy died?

Innocent women and children were "the brutal enemy"?

 

[Muhammed]

I don't think we should have provoked Japan and Germany in the first place. That horrific war was easily avoidable.

We provoked Japan and Germany? Damn, there are indeed some ignorant people in this world.

Yes, those who don't know that the USA provoked them are extraordinarily ignorant.

 

[JoeB131]

It was a weapon, the war wasn't over, and no one really knew what the impact was going to be. We were already bombing the everloving shit out of Japanese cities for almost a year.

The bomb gave the Emperor the ability to force the army to quit, saving American lives and Japanese lives. It also had the impact of letting us see how truly awful these bombs were, without which someone may have tried to pop one off a few years later, and how do you think THAT would have gone?

If we had to invade Japan, it would have cost less lives than the 250,000 we killed with the bombs.

We bombed to try to intimidate the Soviets, not because of any military necessity.

 

[JoeB131]

And the Germans were just as guilty. The Japanese were guilty of the rape of Nanking and then there is that whole sneak attack on Pearl Harbor issue. The Japanese were also pretty vicious in how they conquered and ruled the Philippine Islands. So, basically, the Axis powers violated the rules of war, and you people, who have no clue of history other than what your buddy Zinn tells you, call every one else brainwashed.

The level of your ignorance is profound.

The difference between war heroes and war criminals is the difference between winners and losers.

Point is, we dropped two atomic weapons on a defeated country for no good reason.

 

[Skull Pilot]

To ease the conscience, believing the nice story may be preferable.

No. I have no problems with the decision to use nukes. None.

Since there have been no official declarations of war you can say we haven't fought any wars since WWII

you can say it.

it would not be true, of course.

words do not define reality.

if the words fail to accurately describe the reality that exists independently of them, then they are worthless bullshit.

The problem is that every "war" since WWII has been nothing but games of political brinksmanship on the part of our politicians

Our government has sent tens of thousands of our brave men and women to their deaths and has maimed and crippled tens of thousands more for no reason other than political maneuvering

Quite frankly we should be ashamed

MAD prevented Total War.

What does MAD have to do with all the undeclared unnecessary "wars" we have fought?

Was Vietnam going to nuke us?
Korea?
Iraq in the first Gulf war?
The second war in Iraq?

How about Afghanistan?

Yeah all those piddly ass backwards countries were a real threat to America

Like I said we should be ashamed that our soldiers are nothing but game pieces to be wasted on brinksmanship rather than fighting in just and necessary wars

Vietnam was part of the COntainment Strategy. We could not make it a total war, because doing so would invite MAD.

Ditto Korea.

IOW neither was a threat to us but we sent tens of thousands of our soldiers into the meat grinder for nothing

 

[Correll]

Today, the acts they committed would be reason for an international force to invade their nations.

Do you really think the so-called UN today would commit to real action anywhere under any circumstances? The biggest 'action' they are willing to take is in spreading cholera in Haiti.

Especially against nations with any real power.

 

[Correll]

I'm listening. I just wanted you to be clear before I responded.

The point I was trying to make was that your conclusion is self serving to your anti-american bias.


Much like the Gipper's serves his anti-government bias.

Your belief that you, as opposed to the rest of US, have "yours eyes open" is just your telling yourself that you are smarter and better than the rest of US.

Like I said, it is nice you have a good self image.

But it really doesn't do a thing to support your position.

Imo. my eyes are open and yours are blinded by your anti-american bias.

Thanks for enjoying.

Now, you might want to accuse me of having a pro-american bias.

The difference between us is that I am aware of my biases.

Unlike you, my eyes are ACTUALLY open.

At least compared to you.

Anti-American bias? Really? So I disagree with you, therefore I have "anti-American bias", oh give me a break.

Am I smarter than the rest of the US? Not necessarily, however many people have the heads stuck up the proverbial ass of the US govt's media machine. However you're claiming I'm biased for no reason other than you are trying to chip away at me. I'm sorry, but many people are biased because they simply accept that the US is right. Cowboys 'n' Injuns syndrome. Cowboys are the good guys, committing genocide, and the Injuns are the bad guys who are receiving genocide and the destruction of their way of life and the taking of their land.

The same. Whatever the US does it must be good because we're the US and we only do good things. The Iranians and Iraqis and Libyans and Syrians and ISIS and everyone must be bad because they're our enemies and we fight for good. It's black and white, nothing else.

However I'm not looking at good v. evil. I see evil v. evil.

But then if you think i'm blinded by some "anti-American bias" when you have no freaking clue about me, then maybe this says more about you.

I'm here to discuss what I THINK. You're here to tell me that I'm this and that and the other. That's the difference.

No, you disagree with me and insist on judging people in the middle of a world war in the middle of the last century by modern standards.

THe second is indefensible.

Well hasn't your judging of me based on nothing much been fun? No, not really. I'm not really interested in a discussion like this which is baseless and just intent on blocking actual points being made.

Nothing in that last post was a personal judgement on you, it was a judgement on your actions.

You have been judging these WWII figures by modern standards, not those of the time.

 

[Correll]

And the Germans were just as guilty. The Japanese were guilty of the rape of Nanking and then there is that whole sneak attack on Pearl Harbor issue. The Japanese were also pretty vicious in how they conquered and ruled the Philippine Islands. So, basically, the Axis powers violated the rules of war, and you people, who have no clue of history other than what your buddy Zinn tells you, call every one else brainwashed.

The level of your ignorance is profound.

The difference between war heroes and war criminals is the difference between winners and losers.

Point is, we dropped two atomic weapons on a defeated country for no good reason.

NOnsense.

 

[Correll]

To ease the conscience, believing the nice story may be preferable.

No. I have no problems with the decision to use nukes. None.

you can say it.

it would not be true, of course.

words do not define reality.

if the words fail to accurately describe the reality that exists independently of them, then they are worthless bullshit.

The problem is that every "war" since WWII has been nothing but games of political brinksmanship on the part of our politicians

Our government has sent tens of thousands of our brave men and women to their deaths and has maimed and crippled tens of thousands more for no reason other than political maneuvering

Quite frankly we should be ashamed

MAD prevented Total War.

What does MAD have to do with all the undeclared unnecessary "wars" we have fought?

Was Vietnam going to nuke us?
Korea?
Iraq in the first Gulf war?
The second war in Iraq?

How about Afghanistan?

Yeah all those piddly ass backwards countries were a real threat to America

Like I said we should be ashamed that our soldiers are nothing but game pieces to be wasted on brinksmanship rather than fighting in just and necessary wars

Vietnam was part of the COntainment Strategy. We could not make it a total war, because doing so would invite MAD.

Ditto Korea.

IOW neither was a threat to us but we sent tens of thousands of our soldiers into the meat grinder for nothing

No, both were real threats to US as allies and proxies of the Soviet Union.

 

[Wyatt earp]

I don't think we should have provoked Japan and Germany in the first place. That horrific war was easily avoidable.

We provoked Japan and Germany? Damn, there are indeed some ignorant people in this world.

Yes, those who don't know that the USA provoked them are extraordinarily ignorant.

I agree history is not where he is very bright at.

 

[Correll]

It was a weapon, the war wasn't over, and no one really knew what the impact was going to be. We were already bombing the everloving shit out of Japanese cities for almost a year.

The bomb gave the Emperor the ability to force the army to quit, saving American lives and Japanese lives. It also had the impact of letting us see how truly awful these bombs were, without which someone may have tried to pop one off a few years later, and how do you think THAT would have gone?

If we had to invade Japan, it would have cost less lives than the 250,000 we killed with the bombs.

We bombed to try to intimidate the Soviets, not because of any military necessity.

Your assumption that the Japanese would fall easily reminds me of Hitler's confidence with the RUssians.

 

[Wyatt earp]

It was a weapon, the war wasn't over, and no one really knew what the impact was going to be. We were already bombing the everloving shit out of Japanese cities for almost a year.

The bomb gave the Emperor the ability to force the army to quit, saving American lives and Japanese lives. It also had the impact of letting us see how truly awful these bombs were, without which someone may have tried to pop one off a few years later, and how do you think THAT would have gone?

If we had to invade Japan, it would have cost less lives than the 250,000 we killed with the bombs.

We bombed to try to intimidate the Soviets, not because of any military necessity.

Joe it would, millions would of died if we invaded the main land it would of been a blood bath, remember the last Japanese soldier didn't surrender till 1974 and only when his commander flown out to force him to surrender.

 

[Camp]

And the Germans were just as guilty. The Japanese were guilty of the rape of Nanking and then there is that whole sneak attack on Pearl Harbor issue. The Japanese were also pretty vicious in how they conquered and ruled the Philippine Islands. So, basically, the Axis powers violated the rules of war, and you people, who have no clue of history other than what your buddy Zinn tells you, call every one else brainwashed.

The level of your ignorance is profound.

The difference between war heroes and war criminals is the difference between winners and losers.

Point is, we dropped two atomic weapons on a defeated country for no good reason.

NOnsense.

The Japanese still had plenty of soldiers that could have been brought home from China and Southeast Asia. More importantly, an occupation would have been struggling and fighting a guerrilla war. Suicide bombers, both civilian and military would have been endless. So, at first it would have been a conventional battle fighting conventional experienced combat forces while contending with guerrilla forces at the same time. Once conventional forces were defeated it would have reverted to insurgency or guerrilla warfare conducted by trained and experienced veterans supplemented by civilians. That could have and probably would have continued for many years.

 

[Wyatt earp]

On a side note, Truman what I read almost used the bomb during the battle of the budge

 

[there4eyeM]

It would have required ships to transport troops back to Japan; US subs had seen to the elimination of those.

Who cares what a bunch of impotent crazies might have done running around a destroyed island with no capacity to project their craziness?

Japan essentially posed no further threat to the US or its vital interests.

A demonstration of the bomb might have done wonders for US relations, showing true strength and restraint.

 

[Correll]

It would have required ships to transport troops beck to Japan; US subs had seen to the elimination of those.

Who cares what a bunch of impotent crazies might have done running around a destroyed island with no capacity to project their craziness?

Japan essentially posed no further threat to the US or its vital interests.

Well, all the people in Japanese occupied territories, and all the POWS, for starters.

And to be clear, I consider US AND allied POWS to be a vital interest of the USA.

 

[prison/con.net]

the nukes should have been dropped on moscow, stalingrad and lenin grad, actually. there was no need to invade Japan. just navel blockade, no shipping, no fishing, and fire bomb them. We killed more people by fire bombing toyko than with the nukes.

 

[Iceweasel]

I think also the fear was the Nazis had made progress and were in bed with the Japanese. They were determined to fight to the last man too so as bad as it was it did shorten the war.

Fellow, the Nazis were already history.

No shit fellow. If they had technology and gave or sold it to the Japanese it would have been a serious threat.

 

[Skull Pilot]

To ease the conscience, believing the nice story may be preferable.

No. I have no problems with the decision to use nukes. None.

The problem is that every "war" since WWII has been nothing but games of political brinksmanship on the part of our politicians

Our government has sent tens of thousands of our brave men and women to their deaths and has maimed and crippled tens of thousands more for no reason other than political maneuvering

Quite frankly we should be ashamed

MAD prevented Total War.

What does MAD have to do with all the undeclared unnecessary "wars" we have fought?

Was Vietnam going to nuke us?
Korea?
Iraq in the first Gulf war?
The second war in Iraq?

How about Afghanistan?

Yeah all those piddly ass backwards countries were a real threat to America

Like I said we should be ashamed that our soldiers are nothing but game pieces to be wasted on brinksmanship rather than fighting in just and necessary wars

Vietnam was part of the COntainment Strategy. We could not make it a total war, because doing so would invite MAD.

Ditto Korea.

IOW neither was a threat to us but we sent tens of thousands of our soldiers into the meat grinder for nothing

No, both were real threats to US as allies and proxies of the Soviet Union.

I don't think so