Happy Hiroshima Day!

[Flash]

Flash thank you==plain and simple--common sense

These stupid uneducated Moon Bats like this Unkotare character don't really have any common sense, do they?

 

[AZrailwhale]

Yeah nuking two cities full of defenseless innocent civilians is the same as bombing a military base that killed no civilians and a fraction on military personnel.

So thinks the Dumb American.

The Japanese bombed many cities full of innocent civilians. they raped, murdered and tortured their way through their failed war of conquest. Japanese civilians simply reaped what their uncivilized military sowed. No one that faced the Japanese in battle had the slightest bit of sympathy for their casualties. The Japanese chose to participate in a war of savagery and deserved far worse than they got in the end.

 

[harmonica]

AZrailwhale good call ..well put

 

[AZrailwhale]

Silly...it wasn’t necessary to take Iwo. Total waste of men and material, but Americans want to believe the fairytales.

Iwo was needed as a escort fighter base and emergency field for damaged B-29s. It would have been very useful as a base for Japanese fighters interdicting B-29 raids over Japan.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Only those who haven’t bothered to study the event.

Liar

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Iwo was needed as a escort fighter base and emergency field for damaged B-29s. It would have been very useful as a base for Japanese fighters interdicting B-29 raids over Japan.

Iwo Jima was saving air bombers lives long before the island was even secured.

 

[Unkotare]

But they didn't do it, did they?

....

The bloodthirsty fdr rejected the notion out of hand, thus strengthening the position of the hardliners in the Japanese government and undermining those who were considering offering the same terms of surrender that we eventually accepted anyway AFTER incinerating hundreds of thousands of civilians, and AFTER the terrible loss of US servicemen at Iwo Jima, Okinawa and other battles that might need not ever happened.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Wrong. Japan had been trying to surrender for months.

Wrong, Japan hadn't been trying to surrender. A few out of power Japanese politicians had been trying to get Stalin to intercede with the Americans to violate the agreed terms for Japanese surrender. The best the Japanese were willing to offer was a return to status quo ante of December 5th 1941 leaving the militarists in power, no reductions in the size of the IJA or remaining IJN, Japanese control of any disarmament of it's military, no war crimes trials and Japanese in control of post war Japan. Those are far better than the Kaiser's Germany got in 1918 and those terms were the seeds of WWII. None of hte Allies were prepared to consider ANY of those terms. The Japanese government wasn't prepared to surrender under ANY circumstances, it was stupid enough to believe that if it drowned the American invaders in oceans of Japanese blood, it could get favorable terms. Even after the nukes the Japanese government was insisting on continuing the war despite having been shown that we could eradicate the population of Japan without suffering more than a few casualties in the Silverplate B-29 crews dropping the nukes. The official Japanese position on ending the war was literally "death before dishonor".

 

[Unkotare]

These stupid uneducated Moon Bats like this Unkotare character don't really have any common sense, do they?

"Uneducated"? Do you consider yourself educated?

 

[Unkotare]

The Japanese bombed many cities full of innocent civilians. they raped, murdered and tortured their way through their failed war of conquest. Japanese civilians simply reaped what their uncivilized military sowed. No one that faced the Japanese in battle had the slightest bit of sympathy for their casualties. The Japanese chose to participate in a war of savagery and deserved far worse than they got in the end.

Quite a few of America's top military leaders of that time disagreed with you. Are you a general or an admiral?

 

[Unkotare]

Wrong, Japan hadn't been trying to surrender. ....

Gen. MacArthur disagrees with you. The terms that he informed fdr about turned out to be the very same as the ones we eventually accepted anyway.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Military leaders of that day came out in opposition to such barbarity. Our enemies at the time certainly acted in barbaric ways during the war, but America is better than that.

NOT leaders that fought the Japanese or who we read in on the expected casualties of the invasion. The only alternatives to invasion were to blockade and starve the country, resulting millions of civilian and military deaths while the Japanese occupation forces continued to slaughter more ,millions on the Asian mainland, or invading Korea or mainland China and spending hundreds of thousands of American lives and still allowing the IJA to slaughter civilians. Or a combination of blockade and allowing the Soviets to occupy the entire Asian continent creating even more massive problems than we faced during the cold war.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Gen. MacArthur disagrees with you. The terms that he informed fdr about turned out to be the very same as the ones we eventually accepted anyway.

Except those terms weren't coming from the Japanese government, but from a powerless and discredited Peace Faction.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Wrong, Japan hadn't been trying to surrender. A few out of power Japanese politicians had been trying to get Stalin to intercede with the Americans to violate the agreed terms for Japanese surrender. The best the Japanese were willing to offer was a return to status quo ante of December 5th 1941 leaving the militarists in power, no reductions in the size of the IJA or remaining IJN, Japanese control of any disarmament of it's military, no war crimes trials and Japanese in control of post war Japan. Those are far better than the Kaiser's Germany got in 1918 and those terms were the seeds of WWII. None of hte Allies were prepared to consider ANY of those terms. The Japanese government wasn't prepared to surrender under ANY circumstances, it was stupid enough to believe that if it drowned the American invaders in oceans of Japanese blood, it could get favorable terms. Even after the nukes the Japanese government was insisting on continuing the war despite having been shown that we could eradicate the population of Japan without suffering more than a few casualties in the Silverplate B-29 crews dropping the nukes. The official Japanese position on ending the war was literally "death before dishonor".

I have been telling him and the other Japanese apologists that for years. They don't listen I even have source material that proves the point.

 

[Flash]

"Uneducated"? Do you consider yourself educated?

Not only more educated but I have much more moral clarity.

You have a distorted view of morality and you sure as hell don't know what you are talking about most of the time.

 

[gipper]

Liar

Baby killer.

 

[Unkotare]

NOT leaders that fought the Japanese .....

Do you need the list again that has been posted on so many of these threads over and over?

 

[gipper]

As a student of military history and tactics I have to tell you: There are NO innocents in a war zone; only allies and enemies. If an individual is not a proven ally, they are an enemy; pure and simple.,

BS. You believe in total war, yet think our leaders are moral and ethical. The empire has become a warmongering imperialist disaster. Mass murdering defenseless civilians is a war crime. Our corrupt government hung Germans and Japanese for this. Truman should have been hung too.

 

[Unkotare]

Not only more educated ......

Upon what do you base that belief, other than the simple fact of disagreeing with me?

 

[AZrailwhale]

Cherry-picking and exaggeration don't refute facts. FDR definitely pushed the Japanese into war because he was desperate to save Stalin's Russia. He turned down very reasonable, if not extraordinary, Japanese peace offers, and refused to even meet with Prince Konoye (Konoe) to discuss the situation.

As for Japanese occupation, go read Hildi Kang's book Under the Black Umbrella: Voices from Colonial Korea, 1910–1945. Kang interviewed hundreds of Koreans who lived under Japanese rule in Korea and was rather stunned to discover that most of them had never experienced cruelty and that quite a few of them said they had no problems with the Japanese. Yes, there were some cases of abuse and cruelty, but these were the exception, not the rule.

Or, read General Elliott Thorpe's book East Wind, Rain. Thorpe was certainly no cheerleader for the Japanese, far from it, but even he was willing to admit that the Japanese treated Dutch prisoners from Java better than Sukarno's thugs treated them.

You mentioned American POW accounts. Yes, go read those accounts, because some of them mention Japanese guards who were not cruel or vicious and who did what they could to help the POWs. I again repeat the fact that the death rate among Japanese POWs in Soviets hands was nearly double the death rate of American POWs in Japanese hands.

To be clear, I am not denying that in many cases, many Japanese soldiers behaved in a cruel, vicious, inhumane manner, but such conduct was by no means universal.

And, while we're at it, we might wanna consider the voluminous evidence that many American soldiers behaved in a cruel and inhumane manner as well, including extracting gold fillings from live Japanese prisoners, executing Japanese prisoners, and shooting at Japanese sailors in the water after their boats had sunk. Our soldiers did not commit as many war crimes as did the Japanese, but they committed quite a few. Read John Dower's famous book War Without Mercy and Richard Aldrich's award-winning book The Far Away War: Personal Diaries of the Second World War in Asia and the Pacific.

If the Japanese occupation troops were so benevolent, how come the Japanese are universally hated by the Koreans even today?