71 Years

[Unkotare]

"In an article that finally appeared August 19, 1945, on the front pages of the Chicago Tribune and the Washington Times-Herald, Trohan revealed that on January 20, 1945, two days prior to his departure for the Yalta meeting with Stalin and Churchill, President Roosevelt received a 40-page memorandum from General Douglas MacArthur outlining five separate surrender overtures from high-level Japanese officials. (The complete text of Trohan's article is in the Winter 1985-86Journal, pp. 508-512.)

This memo showed that the Japanese were offering surrender terms virtually identical to the ones ultimately accepted by the Americans at the formal surrender ceremony on September 2 -- that is, complete surrender of everything but the person of the Emperor. Specifically, the terms of these peace overtures included:

• Complete surrender of all Japanese forces and arms, at home, on island possessions, and in occupied countries.
• Occupation of Japan and its possessions by Allied troops under American direction.
• Japanese relinquishment of all territory seized during the war, as well as Manchuria, Korea and Taiwan.
• Regulation of Japanese industry to halt production of any weapons and other tools of war.
• Release of all prisoners of war and internees.
• Surrender of designated war criminals."

Was Hiroshima Necessary?

 

[regent]

Ignored Japanese Peace Bids Plague U. S., West, with What Might Have Been (August 14, 1965)

.

In any case after the second bomb Japan managed to surrender quickly. Perhaps Hirohito needed to assume command earlier?

Some people never real links before responding to them.

The Japanese were trying to negotiate terms ......

Which turned out to be the same terms we ultimately agreed to anyway. But to idol-worshipers like you, the lives of hundreds of thousands of civilians don't matter, do they?

What I idolize is that we didn't have to invade Japan and lose all those American lives. As for the terms, they were America's terms. If we allowed Japan to keep the emperor and not have any of the possessions they had captured it was our decision. It goes with winning a war.

 

[Unkotare]

"In an article that finally appeared August 19, 1945, on the front pages of the Chicago Tribune and the Washington Times-Herald, Trohan revealed that on January 20, 1945, two days prior to his departure for the Yalta meeting with Stalin and Churchill, President Roosevelt received a 40-page memorandum from General Douglas MacArthur outlining five separate surrender overtures from high-level Japanese officials. (The complete text of Trohan's article is in the Winter 1985-86Journal, pp. 508-512.)

This memo showed that the Japanese were offering surrender terms virtually identical to the ones ultimately accepted by the Americans at the formal surrender ceremony on September 2 -- that is, complete surrender of everything but the person of the Emperor. Specifically, the terms of these peace overtures included:

• Complete surrender of all Japanese forces and arms, at home, on island possessions, and in occupied countries.
• Occupation of Japan and its possessions by Allied troops under American direction.
• Japanese relinquishment of all territory seized during the war, as well as Manchuria, Korea and Taiwan.
• Regulation of Japanese industry to halt production of any weapons and other tools of war.
• Release of all prisoners of war and internees.
• Surrender of designated war criminals."

Was Hiroshima Necessary?

.

 

[Divine Wind]

I have "dodged" exactly nothing.

You did it again in the post of mine you quoted. You know, the part you truncated out.

 

[Divine Wind]

]Was Hiroshima Necessary?

From the link: "On the night of March 9-10, 1945, a wave of 300 American bombers struck Tokyo, killing 100,000 people. Dropping nearly 1,700 tons of bombs, the war planes ravaged much of the capital city, completely burning out 16 square miles and destroying a quarter of a million structures. A million residents were left homeless.

On May 23, eleven weeks later, came the greatest air raid of the Pacific War, when 520 giant B-29 "Superfortress" bombers unleashed 4,500 tons of incendiary bombs on the heart of the already battered Japanese capital. Generating gale-force winds, the exploding incendiaries obliterated Tokyo's commercial center and railway yards, and consumed the Ginza entertainment district. Two days later, on May 25, a second strike of 502 "Superfortress" planes roared low over Tokyo, raining down some 4,000 tons of explosives. Together these two B-29 raids destroyed 56 square miles of the Japanese capital."

What the article doesn't do is list the casualties of all the fire bombing raids on Japan that year? Why? Could it be because more died in some of those raids than at Hiroshima or Nagasaki? Why the outcry over 90,000 dead and 4 square miles of city center destroyed when twice that number died and a lot more area was destroyed in a single the fire raid on Tokyo? Not to mention the 66 other fire bombing raids on Imperial Japan. War is bad. Next time Japan shouldn't start one.

Japanese Cities

The Tokyo Fire Raids, 1945

Firebombing of Tokyo - Mar 09, 1945 - HISTORY.com

 

[Unkotare]

I have "dodged" exactly nothing.

You did it again in the post of mine you quoted. You know, the part you truncated out.

Not at all. Be specific if you need to be corrected.

 

[Divine Wind]

Not at all. Be specific if you need to be corrected.

I'm betting you were the dodge ball champ of your high school.

 

[Steven_R]

We're still giving out Purple Heart medals made for the expected casualties that we would have suffered in an invasion of Japan. Think about that for a moment, the sheer number of killed and wounded we've suffered in Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm, Mogadishu, Iraq, Afghanistan, and all the other battles along we way and with all those casualties, we've still not exceeded the number of casualties from one expected WW2 campaign.

So even assuming the first bomb was necesary... the second bomb was pure sadism.

Not at all. After Hiroshima and the Japanese failed to respond to the surrender response, we had to assume they either A) hadn't gotten the message or B) were still going to make a last stand.

So Nagasaki A) reinforced the message, effectively saying we were going to keep it up (they had no way of knowing we were out of bombs) or B) took out a shipyard and a Headquarters for the defense.

Sucks for the locals, but that's war.

 

[Vastator]

A nations soldiers, are strongly motivated to fight for their people. When engaging in unrestricted warfare; it makes sense to destroy your opponents motivation. War is hell. Civilians are "fair game" if you wish to see your adversary completely destroyed, or subjugated. Imperial Japan knew this well, and used it to great advantage. However as Hiroshima, and Nagasaki proved they were ill equipped to withstand the same.

 

[Unkotare]

Not at all. Be specific if you need to be corrected.

I'm betting you were the dodge ball champ of your high school.

No. Now, do you have something specific you need correction on?

 

[Unkotare]

"In an article that finally appeared August 19, 1945, on the front pages of the Chicago Tribune and the Washington Times-Herald, Trohan revealed that on January 20, 1945, two days prior to his departure for the Yalta meeting with Stalin and Churchill, President Roosevelt received a 40-page memorandum from General Douglas MacArthur outlining five separate surrender overtures from high-level Japanese officials. (The complete text of Trohan's article is in the Winter 1985-86Journal, pp. 508-512.)

This memo showed that the Japanese were offering surrender terms virtually identical to the ones ultimately accepted by the Americans at the formal surrender ceremony on September 2 -- that is, complete surrender of everything but the person of the Emperor. Specifically, the terms of these peace overtures included:

• Complete surrender of all Japanese forces and arms, at home, on island possessions, and in occupied countries.
• Occupation of Japan and its possessions by Allied troops under American direction.
• Japanese relinquishment of all territory seized during the war, as well as Manchuria, Korea and Taiwan.
• Regulation of Japanese industry to halt production of any weapons and other tools of war.
• Release of all prisoners of war and internees.
• Surrender of designated war criminals."

Was Hiroshima Necessary?

.

 

[Unkotare]

Ignored Japanese Peace Bids Plague U. S., West, with What Might Have Been (August 14, 1965)

.

In any case after the second bomb Japan managed to surrender quickly. Perhaps Hirohito needed to assume command earlier?

Some people never real links before responding to them.

The Japanese were trying to negotiate terms ......

Which turned out to be the same terms we ultimately agreed to anyway. But to idol-worshipers like you, the lives of hundreds of thousands of civilians don't matter, do they?

.

 

[Unkotare]

.... (or whatever stink smelly terror group that consists mainly of brown colored people) .... those stink apes .....

And now we see the real motivation behind your commenting here at all.

Took you long enough .......

Stop trolling the history forum and go back to the race forum. Better yet, go back to stromfront and stay there.

The JAPS [sic] got exactly what they had coming to them. They reaped the whirlwind from the disgusting seeds they planted.

Not one tear.

I only wished they dropped them sooner, and a few more than two. Especially right in the middle of Tokyo.

You reveal your ignorance with every post. And once again, where is the documentation that the dropping of the bombs was an act of revenge?

.

 

[Unkotare]

After reading the entirety of this thread; I am shocked to see how many people fail to grasp the concept of "Unrestricted Warfare". In warfare, there is no moral high ground. Only victory, or defeat. War means shaking off the shackles of civility; and using any means one can conceive of to implement domination over your enemies.

So, when we began military action in Afghanistan in 2001, you think we should have targeted schools and hospital specifically "to implement domination"? Is that what you think America should be?

Well?

 

[CultureCitizen]

We're still giving out Purple Heart medals made for the expected casualties that we would have suffered in an invasion of Japan. Think about that for a moment, the sheer number of killed and wounded we've suffered in Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm, Mogadishu, Iraq, Afghanistan, and all the other battles along we way and with all those casualties, we've still not exceeded the number of casualties from one expected WW2 campaign.

So even assuming the first bomb was necesary... the second bomb was pure sadism.

Not at all. After Hiroshima and the Japanese failed to respond to the surrender response, we had to assume they either A) hadn't gotten the message or B) were still going to make a last stand.

So Nagasaki A) reinforced the message, effectively saying we were going to keep it up (they had no way of knowing we were out of bombs) or B) took out a shipyard and a Headquarters for the defense.

Sucks for the locals, but that's war.

Let's see:
Hiroshima bomb - August 6
Call for surrender - August 6 ( 16 hours after bomb explosion ) .
Nagasiaki bomb - August 9
Hirohito capitulation announcement - August 14.

If that was the case why didn't they drop another bomb in August 12? ... logistics , probably.
Even after the second bombing it took them 5 days to surrender. It is clear that 2.5 days were not nearly enough for the bad news to sink in... I stand by my position: pure sadism.

 

[Vastator]

After reading the entirety of this thread; I am shocked to see how many people fail to grasp the concept of "Unrestricted Warfare". In warfare, there is no moral high ground. Only victory, or defeat. War means shaking off the shackles of civility; and using any means one can conceive of to implement domination over your enemies.

So, when we began military action in Afghanistan in 2001, you think we should have targeted schools and hospital specifically "to implement domination"? Is that what you think America should be?

Well?

Afghanistan is a whole nuther thread. But without leaving you hanging; and as to not derail this thread; I'll simply say this. I believe our country should not invade another country unless we have decided in advance to keep the real estate for ourselves. For revenge purposes carpet bombing and such will do just fine.

 

[Steven_R]

We're still giving out Purple Heart medals made for the expected casualties that we would have suffered in an invasion of Japan. Think about that for a moment, the sheer number of killed and wounded we've suffered in Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm, Mogadishu, Iraq, Afghanistan, and all the other battles along we way and with all those casualties, we've still not exceeded the number of casualties from one expected WW2 campaign.

So even assuming the first bomb was necesary... the second bomb was pure sadism.

Not at all. After Hiroshima and the Japanese failed to respond to the surrender response, we had to assume they either A) hadn't gotten the message or B) were still going to make a last stand.

So Nagasaki A) reinforced the message, effectively saying we were going to keep it up (they had no way of knowing we were out of bombs) or B) took out a shipyard and a Headquarters for the defense.

Sucks for the locals, but that's war.

Let's see:
Hiroshima bomb - August 6
Call for surrender - August 6 ( 16 hours after bomb explosion ) .
Nagasiaki bomb - August 9
Hirohito capitulation announcement - August 14.

If that was the case why didn't they drop another bomb in August 12? ... logistics , probably.
Even after the second bombing it took them 5 days to surrender. It is clear that 2.5 days were not nearly enough for the bad news to sink in... I stand by my position: pure sadism.

The 8th was when the Soviets declared war on the Nips. We didn't drop a bomb on the 12th because we didn't have another bomb to drop.The 14th is when the hard liners tried to throw a coup. The 15th is when Hirohito announced the surrender.

 

[Unkotare]

After reading the entirety of this thread; I am shocked to see how many people fail to grasp the concept of "Unrestricted Warfare". In warfare, there is no moral high ground. Only victory, or defeat. War means shaking off the shackles of civility; and using any means one can conceive of to implement domination over your enemies.

So, when we began military action in Afghanistan in 2001, you think we should have targeted schools and hospital specifically "to implement domination"? Is that what you think America should be?

Well?

Afghanistan is a whole nuther thread. But without leaving you hanging; and as to not derail this thread; I'll simply say this. I believe our country should not invade another country unless we have decided in advance to keep the real estate for ourselves. For revenge purposes carpet bombing and such will do just fine.

So you would support targeting and destroying a school or a hospital for no military purpose? Just to 'punish' the civilians?

 

[Theowl32]

We're still giving out Purple Heart medals made for the expected casualties that we would have suffered in an invasion of Japan. Think about that for a moment, the sheer number of killed and wounded we've suffered in Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm, Mogadishu, Iraq, Afghanistan, and all the other battles along we way and with all those casualties, we've still not exceeded the number of casualties from one expected WW2 campaign.

So even assuming the first bomb was necesary... the second bomb was pure sadism.

Not at all. After Hiroshima and the Japanese failed to respond to the surrender response, we had to assume they either A) hadn't gotten the message or B) were still going to make a last stand.

So Nagasaki A) reinforced the message, effectively saying we were going to keep it up (they had no way of knowing we were out of bombs) or B) took out a shipyard and a Headquarters for the defense.

Sucks for the locals, but that's war.

Let's see:
Hiroshima bomb - August 6
Call for surrender - August 6 ( 16 hours after bomb explosion ) .
Nagasiaki bomb - August 9
Hirohito capitulation announcement - August 14.

If that was the case why didn't they drop another bomb in August 12? ... logistics , probably.
Even after the second bombing it took them 5 days to surrender. It is clear that 2.5 days were not nearly enough for the bad news to sink in... I stand by my position: pure sadism.

Typical American hating left wing ass.

Here research all of these.

Following Japan's brutal invasion of China in 1937, Japanese soldiers frequently rounded up Chinese to provide them with bayonet practice. After the fall of Nanking (Nanjing), these unfortunate Chinese were herded into one of many slaughter pits and are shown providing Japanese soldiers with bayonet practice using live victims. This photograph was taken by a Japanese and processed in a Japanese-owned photographic shop. A Chinese photographic technician made copies that were smuggled out of China.

INDEX TO SELECTED IMPERIAL JAPANESE ARMY WAR CRIMES

The Rape of Nanking (1937), also known as the Nanjing Massacre

The Bangka Island Massacre (1942): Slaughter of Australian Army Nurses

The Bataan Death March (1942)

The Sandakan Death March (1945)

Murder and cannibalism on the Kokoda Track (1942)

Conscripting women for sexual slavery in Japanese Army brothels (1937-1945)

Mutilation and murder of Dutch civilians in Borneo

Murder and cannibalism - captured American pilots

Go ahead and start with the cannibalism of our pilots. You can also start with the mass rape of Nanking.

Here, the Bangka Island Massacre of 1942.

Bodies of massacred Chinese.

Thousands of babies thrown into the air and caught on a bayonet in front of the mothers. They then raped the mothers before killing them. Read the archived incidents.

----------------------

I have a feeling I could list and post photo after photo of things they did medically to prisoners where they systematically executed them before doing all sorts of experiments. The japs were ruthless, merciless animals who worshiped their false gods. They reaped EXACTLY what they sowed.

Period.

Take your academic temptation to blame everything and flame America and shove it. I know you wont read it, and even if you did, it will have no effect.

 

[Vastator]

After reading the entirety of this thread; I am shocked to see how many people fail to grasp the concept of "Unrestricted Warfare". In warfare, there is no moral high ground. Only victory, or defeat. War means shaking off the shackles of civility; and using any means one can conceive of to implement domination over your enemies.

So, when we began military action in Afghanistan in 2001, you think we should have targeted schools and hospital specifically "to implement domination"? Is that what you think America should be?

Well?

Afghanistan is a whole nuther thread. But without leaving you hanging; and as to not derail this thread; I'll simply say this. I believe our country should not invade another country unless we have decided in advance to keep the real estate for ourselves. For revenge purposes carpet bombing and such will do just fine.

So you would support targeting and destroying a school or a hospital for no military purpose? Just to 'punish' the civilians?

Never without military purpose... That would become too expensive.