Did we really have to nuke Japan?

[elektra]

The only argument that the pro-nukers have left is that lots of Americans would have been killed in the invasion of Japan. Can any reasonable sane human really defend that argument? Evidence, that's right, freaking evidence indicates that the Japanese were so desperate to negotiate surrender terms that they turned to Stalin when the idiot that democrats had appointed to succeed FDR seemed clueless. The hangup for surrender negotiations was the promise not to execute the Japanese emperor but Truman was bound by his dead boss's mandate of unconditional surrender and refused to negotiate terms while Stalin was lying to the Japanese about liberal terms of surrender. It's ironic but the one thing the Japanese surrender terms hinged on was authorized after Truman signed off on the incineration of two Japanese cities full of civilians.

Agree with nearly all this, but the J had begun efforts to discuss peace before FDR's demise, IIRC, via another country other than the Soviets. Switzerland perhaps.

More importantly...those of you who think nuking Japan was a good idea need to explain to the rest of us why the US has never again used nuclear weapons.

After all, we have lost other wars since then. Vietnam most prominently.

Why was it A-O-K in August 1945, but not in the late 60's?

Or for that matter in N Korea, Iraq, Syria etc.



The wholesale slaughter of civilian populations was and is morally indefensible.

That's true whether we're talking about the Rape of Nanking, the Killing Fields of Cambodia, or Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Your idea that the innocent must die, Americans, is ludicrous.

How about the Rape of Nanking, do you really know what that was, the rape of 10 year old girls, than the ten year old girl was bayoneted, alive, a picture is then taken and sent home, to the proud parents (who go to work building bombs, bullets, or repairing the Japanese War Ships in Nagasaki), the parents then send the pic to the local paper for publication, as a hero.

Children in the United States of America should see their fathers die in a battle on the Japanese homeland? When we can stop the people who are the literal enemies of the United States of America?

13 children died when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, without declaring War first.

The Japanese "Men", raped murdered and children. In Burma the Japanese sexually tortured the children first, unless they were virgin girls, who were simply raped before they bayoneted them to death.

Yes Japanese children died, after we warned the Japanese government we would completely destroy everything in Japan if they did not surrender, at that it took two atomic bombs, two cities, to stop the Japanese.

The Japanese Army were literally raping and murdering children, all over China, to include Vietnam and Burma, when the bomb dropped on Nagasake, and kflaux believes these children must die a gruesome death, while we have the means to stop the rape and murder of children.

The children of Burma, should they have been tortured sexually another 3 months, another 4 months? Should the children of those attacked by Japan die another 5 months, or should we prevent the Japanese from killing, murdering, raping, and torturing children as fast as humanly possible, or should allow the millions who were not Japanese, to simply die.

The Japanese killed millions, how many on the day Nagasaki was bombed, who knows how many the Japanese killed that day, in China were they were pretty much unhindered.

The wholesale slaughter of civilian populations engaged in acts of war, is a simple, legitimate, target.

Those who state otherwise, are, I am at a lost of words, you are scum, nothing more.

Millions of Asian's died at the hands of the Japanese Army, literally. How many rapes were committed by the Japanese, rapes of minor children? Why must these hundreds of thousands, these millions, be murdered, raped, because kflaux has no understanding of the events which were happening.

Nagasaki and Hiroshima, the men of these two cities raped more children during war, than history has ever known. A literal World Record.

 

[elektra]

There were three alternatives: a bloodbath of an invasion, using chemical weapons, or using the atomic bombs. That's it.

That was not "it."

Or allow thousands upon thousands of children to continue to be raped and murdered by japanese soldeirs, daily.

 

[Unkotare]

There were three alternatives: a bloodbath of an invasion, using chemical weapons, or using the atomic bombs. That's it.

That was not "it."

Or allow thousands upon thousands of children to continue to be raped and murdered by japanese soldeirs, daily.

Your limitations are your own. The insistence on categorical statements does not erase the moral question you seem to want to avoid.

 

[elektra]

There were three alternatives: a bloodbath of an invasion, using chemical weapons, or using the atomic bombs. That's it.

That was not "it."

Or allow thousands upon thousands of children to continue to be raped and murdered by japanese soldeirs, daily.

Your limitations are your own. The insistence on categorical statements does not erase the moral question you seem to want to avoid.

"Categorical statements", is that how you describe the rape and murder of children by the Japanese? By stating such, are you not erasing the morality involved in your ideology?

 

[Unkotare]

There were three alternatives: a bloodbath of an invasion, using chemical weapons, or using the atomic bombs. That's it.

That was not "it."

Or allow thousands upon thousands of children to continue to be raped and murdered by japanese soldeirs, daily.

Your limitations are your own. The insistence on categorical statements does not erase the moral question you seem to want to avoid.

"Categorical statements", is that how you describe the rape and murder of children by the Japanese?

???

Uh...no.

Is English your first language?

 

[Unkotare]

Was Hiroshima Necessary

 

[JoeB131]

Thank your dad, medics were great. But we didn't know Japan was defeated, and I was in an infantry division in the Pacific. We did the New Guinea thing, then the Luzon thing including the recapture of Bataan. Over three hundred days of combat. We were slated for Coronet, and expecting a blood bath but then no one told us the war was over. Might check the real numbers of Japanese troops and equipment waiting on Kyushu and Honshu for the Americans to invade.

Except that they were out of fuel, they were out of ships, their infrastructure was smashed.

And once the Russians were in the War, it was done.

The bombs were unnecessary. Now, if you need to tell yourself that it was okay to burn hundreds of thousands to death, have at it.

 

[JoeB131]

Now you have resorted to, flat out lies.

No ships or planes left in the summer of 1945, then how did the single biggest lost of the U.S. Navy occur on July 30th, 1945.

I hope you are simply a liar, I hate to think people are so stupid, while at the same time they claim they know so much because GOOGLE TELLS THEM EVERYTHING, FAST!

At that point in the war, the Japanese had no operational battleships, no operational carriers, and they were expendign the last of their planes as Kamikazes.

Japan was defeated, and everyone knew it. It was just a matter of what the peace treaty was going to say.

We refused to give them assurances on the Emperor, until the Russians got into the war, and it looked like they m ight get to Japan before we did. Suddenly, we were totally cool with Hirohito! Why, that poor man had nothing to do with the war.

 

[JoeB131]

Because you say its really fast, with google?

Most Military men of the time, had no idea that we were going to Nuke Japan, hence your premise is false.

At the least, you can prove the assertions you claim are true. Eisenhower was too easy for me, lets move onto MacArthur, who you state opposed using a Nuke on Japan. Was it June 12th or July 12th, that MacArthur stated Japan's Mainland must be attacked? Its a question I know the answer to, and will post the exact page from MacArthur's book, as in a book MacArthur wrote.

But as you say, "google is fast", so while I go take pics of pages from MacArthur's book, go ahead and "google", what you believe.

I'm not going to waste time talking to you because you are like, a crazy person.

But Nuclear Weapons were not some fantastic secret that no one knew about. They had been speculated about since the 1920's. Scientists had published papers about them before the war.

Now, go back to your crazy talk, no one is really interested in you anymore.

 

[JoeB131]

No one discusses this, but the real game changer was the entry of the USSR into the War.

Russia and Japan signed a non-Aggression pact in 1941. This freed up the Japanese to attack the US, and Russia to fight Germany.

Once Germany had been defeated, Stalin could shift dozens of battle hardened divisions to the Pacific Theater.

Because the Japanese were expecting the Americans to attack from the South, they had left their northern flanks completely exposed. There were only two divisions stationed in Hokkaido, and they were dug in on the EASTERN coast.

The Kwantung Army was overrun in a few weeks in Manchuria.

But we Americans really, really need to beleive it was the A-bomb that made the difference.

 

[Unkotare]

Nagasaki and Hiroshima, the men of these two cities raped more children during war, than history has ever known. A literal World Record.

Proof? That aside, are you saying the civilians in those two cities were killed in revenge?

 

[Unkotare]

The Japanese Army were literally raping and murdering children, all over China, to include Vietnam and Burma, when the bomb dropped on Nagasake [sic]....

Japanese forces in China were in retreat well before the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima.

 

[gipper]

Was Hiroshima Necessary

The truth means nothing to the statist. To them, Truman was right to refuse Japan's surrender and use the a bombs on a defenseless nation.

By early 1945, American bombers flew uncontested over all of Japan. Japan had been hallowed out and their people who we are told would all fight to the death, were starving and had no arms in which to fight an American invasion.

The pentagon predicted 40k American deaths had we invaded....then Truman made up the fictitious number of 500k deaths, after he murdered women and children with the two a bombs...merely to justify his heinous actions. Amazingly millions of Americans still believe this lie.

 

[gipper]

The only argument that the pro-nukers have left is that lots of Americans would have been killed in the invasion of Japan. Can any reasonable sane human really defend that argument? Evidence, that's right, freaking evidence indicates that the Japanese were so desperate to negotiate surrender terms that they turned to Stalin when the idiot that democrats had appointed to succeed FDR seemed clueless. The hangup for surrender negotiations was the promise not to execute the Japanese emperor but Truman was bound by his dead boss's mandate of unconditional surrender and refused to negotiate terms while Stalin was lying to the Japanese about liberal terms of surrender. It's ironic but the one thing the Japanese surrender terms hinged on was authorized after Truman signed off on the incineration of two Japanese cities full of civilians.

Agree with nearly all this, but the J had begun efforts to discuss peace before FDR's demise, IIRC, via another country other than the Soviets. Switzerland perhaps.

More importantly...those of you who think nuking Japan was a good idea need to explain to the rest of us why the US has never again used nuclear weapons.

After all, we have lost other wars since then. Vietnam most prominently.

Why was it A-O-K in August 1945, but not in the late 60's?

Or for that matter in N Korea, Iraq, Syria etc.



The wholesale slaughter of civilian populations was and is morally indefensible.

That's true whether we're talking about the Rape of Nanking, the Killing Fields of Cambodia, or Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Your idea that the innocent must die, Americans, is ludicrous.

How about the Rape of Nanking, do you really know what that was, the rape of 10 year old girls, than the ten year old girl was bayoneted, alive, a picture is then taken and sent home, to the proud parents (who go to work building bombs, bullets, or repairing the Japanese War Ships in Nagasaki), the parents then send the pic to the local paper for publication, as a hero.

Children in the United States of America should see their fathers die in a battle on the Japanese homeland? When we can stop the people who are the literal enemies of the United States of America?

13 children died when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, without declaring War first.

The Japanese "Men", raped murdered and children. In Burma the Japanese sexually tortured the children first, unless they were virgin girls, who were simply raped before they bayoneted them to death.

Yes Japanese children died, after we warned the Japanese government we would completely destroy everything in Japan if they did not surrender, at that it took two atomic bombs, two cities, to stop the Japanese.

The Japanese Army were literally raping and murdering children, all over China, to include Vietnam and Burma, when the bomb dropped on Nagasake, and kflaux believes these children must die a gruesome death, while we have the means to stop the rape and murder of children.

The children of Burma, should they have been tortured sexually another 3 months, another 4 months? Should the children of those attacked by Japan die another 5 months, or should we prevent the Japanese from killing, murdering, raping, and torturing children as fast as humanly possible, or should allow the millions who were not Japanese, to simply die.

The Japanese killed millions, how many on the day Nagasaki was bombed, who knows how many the Japanese killed that day, in China were they were pretty much unhindered.

The wholesale slaughter of civilian populations engaged in acts of war, is a simple, legitimate, target.

Those who state otherwise, are, I am at a lost of words, you are scum, nothing more.

Millions of Asian's died at the hands of the Japanese Army, literally. How many rapes were committed by the Japanese, rapes of minor children? Why must these hundreds of thousands, these millions, be murdered, raped, because kflaux has no understanding of the events which were happening.

Nagasaki and Hiroshima, the men of these two cities raped more children during war, than history has ever known. A literal World Record.

Again...you justify the a bombs because the Japanese military committed atrocities...and you claim I am illogical.

Using the a bombs can never be justified. Murdering defenseless civilians because of the acts of their military, of which they had no control, is not only illogical it is psychopathic.

 

[regent]

Thank your dad, medics were great. But we didn't know Japan was defeated, and I was in an infantry division in the Pacific. We did the New Guinea thing, then the Luzon thing including the recapture of Bataan. Over three hundred days of combat. We were slated for Coronet, and expecting a blood bath but then no one told us the war was over. Might check the real numbers of Japanese troops and equipment waiting on Kyushu and Honshu for the Americans to invade.

Except that they were out of fuel, they were out of ships, their infrastructure was smashed.

And once the Russians were in the War, it was done.

The bombs were unnecessary. Now, if you need to tell yourself that it was okay to burn hundreds of thousands to death, have at it.

At the time it came down to Japanese lives or American lives and I had to choose, I vote for Americans to live. Call me old fashioned or whatever, That which seems so hard for many to understand is that the Pacific war was different.
Cam anyone answer these questions:
Did Japan believe she could defeat America?
If Japan could not defeat America, why did she attack America?
If Japan could not defeat America what was their strategy?
Was it still their strategy at the end of the war?
As for Japan's shortage of ships she no longer needed ships we were bringing the Americans to them to be killed.

 

[Unkotare]

As for Japan's shortage of ships she no longer needed ships we were bringing the Americans to them to be killed.

= the desperate irrationality of someone who can't support his argument but lacks the character to admit it and move on.

 

[gipper]

Thank your dad, medics were great. But we didn't know Japan was defeated, and I was in an infantry division in the Pacific. We did the New Guinea thing, then the Luzon thing including the recapture of Bataan. Over three hundred days of combat. We were slated for Coronet, and expecting a blood bath but then no one told us the war was over. Might check the real numbers of Japanese troops and equipment waiting on Kyushu and Honshu for the Americans to invade.

Except that they were out of fuel, they were out of ships, their infrastructure was smashed.

And once the Russians were in the War, it was done.

The bombs were unnecessary. Now, if you need to tell yourself that it was okay to burn hundreds of thousands to death, have at it.

At the time it came down to Japanese lives or American lives and I had to choose, I vote for Americans to live. Call me old fashioned or whatever, That which seems so hard for many to understand is that the Pacific war was different.
Cam anyone answer these questions:
Did Japan believe she could defeat America?
If Japan could not defeat America, why did she attack America?
If Japan could not defeat America what was their strategy?
Was it still their strategy at the end of the war?
As for Japan's shortage of ships she no longer needed ships we were bringing the Americans to them to be killed.

No...it did not come down to Japanese lives or American lives. That is a false argument offered by statists to justify the mass murder of women and children. The war was over by July '45. Japan lost and their government and military knew it and asked that only the Emperor stay on the throne. There was no need for America to invade the mainland. There was no need to occupy Japan.

Why is this so difficult to understand?

 

[regent]

Nagasaki and Hiroshima, the men of these two cities raped more children during war, than history has ever known. A literal World Record.

Proof? That aside, are you saying the civilians in those two cities were killed in revenge?

So what was Japans strategy for the war?

Thank your dad, medics were great. But we didn't know Japan was defeated, and I was in an infantry division in the Pacific. We did the New Guinea thing, then the Luzon thing including the recapture of Bataan. Over three hundred days of combat. We were slated for Coronet, and expecting a blood bath but then no one told us the war was over. Might check the real numbers of Japanese troops and equipment waiting on Kyushu and Honshu for the Americans to invade.

Except that they were out of fuel, they were out of ships, their infrastructure was smashed.

And once the Russians were in the War, it was done.

The bombs were unnecessary. Now, if you need to tell yourself that it was okay to burn hundreds of thousands to death, have at it.

At the time it came down to Japanese lives or American lives and I had to choose, I vote for Americans to live. Call me old fashioned or whatever, That which seems so hard for many to understand is that the Pacific war was different.
Cam anyone answer these questions:
Did Japan believe she could defeat America?
If Japan could not defeat America, why did she attack America?
If Japan could not defeat America what was their strategy?
Was it still their strategy at the end of the war?
As for Japan's shortage of ships she no longer needed ships we were bringing the Americans to them to be killed.

No...it did not come down to Japanese lives or American lives. That is a false argument offered by statists to justify the mass murder of women and children. The war was over by July '45. Japan lost and their government and military knew it and asked that only the Emperor stay on the throne. There was no need for America to invade the mainland. There was no need to occupy Japan.

Why is this so difficult to understand?

Let us start with basics: Did Japan believe she could defeat America in a war?

 

[regent]

Thank your dad, medics were great. But we didn't know Japan was defeated, and I was in an infantry division in the Pacific. We did the New Guinea thing, then the Luzon thing including the recapture of Bataan. Over three hundred days of combat. We were slated for Coronet, and expecting a blood bath but then no one told us the war was over. Might check the real numbers of Japanese troops and equipment waiting on Kyushu and Honshu for the Americans to invade.

Except that they were out of fuel, they were out of ships, their infrastructure was smashed.

And once the Russians were in the War, it was done.

The bombs were unnecessary. Now, if you need to tell yourself that it was okay to burn hundreds of thousands to death, have at it.

At the time it came down to Japanese lives or American lives and I had to choose, I vote for Americans to live. Call me old fashioned or whatever, That which seems so hard for many to understand is that the Pacific war was different.
Cam anyone answer these questions:
Did Japan believe she could defeat America?
If Japan could not defeat America, why did she attack America?
If Japan could not defeat America what was their strategy?
Was it still their strategy at the end of the war?
As for Japan's shortage of ships she no longer needed ships we were bringing the Americans to them to be killed.

No...it did not come down to Japanese lives or American lives. That is a false argument offered by statists to justify the mass murder of women and children. The war was over by July '45. Japan lost and their government and military knew it and asked that only the Emperor stay on the throne. There was no need for America to invade the mainland. There was no need to occupy Japan.

Why is this so difficult to understand?

Because I don't believe posters seventy years later had the power and certainly not the information to decide whether America did not have to invade Japan. The Japanese were waiting for the invasion and had prepared defenses. Did the Japanese believe they would accomplish anything by defending Kyushu and Honshu? If they did, the war would continue, if not, the war was over. So did the Japanese believe at that time that they would gain by their defense against invasion?

 

[Camp]

Thank your dad, medics were great. But we didn't know Japan was defeated, and I was in an infantry division in the Pacific. We did the New Guinea thing, then the Luzon thing including the recapture of Bataan. Over three hundred days of combat. We were slated for Coronet, and expecting a blood bath but then no one told us the war was over. Might check the real numbers of Japanese troops and equipment waiting on Kyushu and Honshu for the Americans to invade.

Except that they were out of fuel, they were out of ships, their infrastructure was smashed.

And once the Russians were in the War, it was done.

The bombs were unnecessary. Now, if you need to tell yourself that it was okay to burn hundreds of thousands to death, have at it.

At the time it came down to Japanese lives or American lives and I had to choose, I vote for Americans to live. Call me old fashioned or whatever, That which seems so hard for many to understand is that the Pacific war was different.
Cam anyone answer these questions:
Did Japan believe she could defeat America?
If Japan could not defeat America, why did she attack America?
If Japan could not defeat America what was their strategy?
Was it still their strategy at the end of the war?
As for Japan's shortage of ships she no longer needed ships we were bringing the Americans to them to be killed.

No...it did not come down to Japanese lives or American lives. That is a false argument offered by statists to justify the mass murder of women and children. The war was over by July '45. Japan lost and their government and military knew it and asked that only the Emperor stay on the throne. There was no need for America to invade the mainland. There was no need to occupy Japan.

Why is this so difficult to understand?

Where the heck do you get your estimates of Japanese military strength? They had moved over 500,000 combat hardened troops to Kyushu by July '45 in preparation for an invasion.