Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Pelosi: Utterly Contemptible -Krauthammer

84 posts in this topic

Posted

Quote:

Originally Posted by g5jamz View Post

%7Boption%7D

You were saying? Are you saying these weren't dropped?

i was responding specifically about hiroshima.

The leaflet that g5jamz showed you was dropped on Hiroshima several days before the atomic bomb was detonated above the headquarters of the Japanese 2nd Army.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

americans learn a completely ridiculous, red blooded, jingoistic, heroic version of what happened that basically centers on France, Germany, and Japan, while completely ignoring everything the Russians were doing.

A jaundiced view, but your prejudices are a little irrelevant in this matter. If you've talked to any Russians, you notice they speak proudly about their own achievements during WWII as much as Americans. That is to be expected, and is proper. BTW, the Russians call WWII "the Great Patriotic War" to give you an idea of how much they talk about the British, American, French, etc. participation in the war.

I don’t get in their face about it.

Your "point" is specious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Del, I never said the Russians weren't a threat. I just said the primary purpose for both bombs was to get Japan to crack. You don't drop the worst weapon ever conceived on one country to send a signal to someone else, especially when you don't know how many bombs like that you can make. We had all of those soldiers with their lives on the line....I'm going to give Truman the benefit of the doubt and say his primary concern was saving their lives by getting Japan to surrender.

Meat, I suggest you don't bother with this red herring.

If it will put your heart at ease: yes, the bomb was dropped to win the war at minimal cost.

The vast majority of the evidence BEFORE the bomb was dropped overwhelming supports this over-arching premises; transcripts, briefs, military estimates, the entire bureaucratic logistical machine from the addendums and manifests to the personal recommendations of Commanding officers. The documentation is MASSIVE.

By contrast, the vast majority of evidence used to claim otherwise is largely speculation manufactured AFTER the bomb was dropped.

Meat, that’s an important distinction even if many people don’t understand it or don’t want to understand it.

Nobody from the year 2009 can forge a June 1945 presidential morning brief for Harry Truman about how to stop the Russians, let alone the incredible amount of logistical, bureaucratic, and policy paperwork that would have to accompany this supposed goal. In that sense, this red herring argument is like a scaffolding skeleton without a building inside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I don't doubt your assertion that MacArthur wanted to invade a weakened Russia. I am only trying to say that the primary focus in 1945, far and away, was to defeat the country that attacked us. Russia was more devastated by WW2 than Japan, and Russia didn't attack the United States.

Meat, a red herring argument is one made with the intent to change the subject without having challenged the opposing argument. Neither Patton nor MacArthur were involved in the decision to use the bomb.

Meat: “Did you steal the cookies?”

Mmmbeans: “Your shoes are untied”

When something like this happens, it’s a fair bet that he stole the cookies. Ignore him and move on.

For the record, I think it would have been the right decision to use the bomb for the purposes of stopping the Russians. Irregardless of my opinions, however, that’s not what happened. Indeed Truman (who DID factor into the decision for the atomic bomb) was actually sympathetic to the USSR much as Roosevelt was, something that doesn’t speak in his favor, but nobody’s perfect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

true or false Meat: Japan was trying to surrender before the atomic bombs were dropped, but the stated reason we didn't accept was something we allowed them to keep in the end anyway.

False.

Japan was trying to sue for a “peace” that would leave its military and political structure intact. And their bargaining strategy revolved around a mass banzai charge that would kill as many Americans as possible and as many Japanese as necessary. That was the stated purpose of Operation: Ketsu Go, a policy of mass suicide which was implemented all across Japan from school girls to old men. Again, next to the vast paraphernalia, publicly recorded statements and every bureaucratic-related document to affect such a wide-scale policy of holding out for “victory” – next to all that, your post-war claims of Japanese attempts to meekly submit to surrender are smoke and mirrors. It’s not even close. Sending out “signals” to third-parties to help them sign a “peace” which would keep the Americans from occupying Japan are similarly not offers of “surrender”.

To put it in terms you can understand, the emperor of Japan and his cohorts were willing to sacrifice millions of people to save their positions as God and demi-gods of the Land of the Rising Sun, domain of the Great Yamato Race. This was the original meaning of the Japanese refusal to allow the allies to “prejudice the prerogatives” of the emperor. If the United States acceded to those demands, there would have been no occupation and Hirohito and his divine progeny would continue to lord over his own people in the same manner as Kim Jong Il does in North Korea today, only worse.

After the Atom Bomb, of course, Hirohito settled for his life instead of his position as God. It does not speak well of him that he was still bargaining to save his own skin even after the bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but the Americans at the time weren’t interested in the life of a cowardly pretender.

At stake was whether or not Japan would be conquered and taught a new way of life or whether it would be allowed to endure to fight another day. What was NOT at issue was whether Hirohito would be allowed to live or not. Hell, even during the drawing up of the constitution, he STILL tried to retain his position as commander in chief of the Imperial Army and Navy before MacArthur told Hirohito’s Constitutional commission to shove it, then told Rowell to write Japan a new Law of the Land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Dems put her in line after Biden to take over the presidency...that doesn't concern you that she's a lying b***h?

did you see who John McCain wanted to put second in line?

lol

Both are morons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Welcome Rykehaven! Please continue to post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The leaflet that g5jamz showed you was dropped on Hiroshima several days before the atomic bomb was detonated above the headquarters of the Japanese 2nd Army.

you're either misinformed, lying, or are privy to something I can't find.

No evidence has ever been uncovered that leaflets warning of atomic attack were dropped on Hiroshima. Indeed, the decision of the Interim Committee was 'that we could not give the Japanese any warning.

this was in a letter criticizing a smithsonian exhibit from 1995 which you can read here if you care to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Anext to all that, your post-war claims of Japanese attempts to meekly submit to surrender are smoke and mirrors.

just in response to this specifically, you seem to know a lot more about this off the top of your head than I do, but you should really sit down and read this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

just in response to this specifically, you seem to know a lot more about this off the top of your head than I do, but you should really sit down and read this.

Doesn't #4 go against what you have been arguing fiz?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Doesn't #4 go against what you have been arguing fiz?

oh that's interesting. I somehow never even saw that.

in hindsight though the USSBS freely admit the bomb was unnecessary.

There is little point in attempting precisely to impute Japan's unconditional surrender to any one of the numerous causes which jointly and cumulatively were responsible for Japan's disaster. The time lapse between military impotence and political acceptance of the inevitable might have been shorter had the political structure of Japan permitted a more rapid and decisive determination of national policies. Nevertheless, it seems clear that, even without the atomic bombing attacks, air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion.

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.

in regards to what i'm arguing, i'm not even sure what i'm arguing anymore, because so many people like to jump on and im drunk half the time i post on this message board.

also, there's an interesting little graph on that second page that goes into the possible ways other civilians might have died had we not nuked them, but i have a hard time believing the united states government ever did or does now care about civilians.

i mean hell read Chalmers Johnson's Nemesis if you want to learn about just how ridiculous what we did in the immediate aftermath to Japan and what we continue to do today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

USA=Rome II

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites