The Nuking of Nagasaki: Even More Immoral and Unnecessary than Hiroshima

[Mushroom]

You deny the emperor was the one who surrendered on the radio?????

Only because the Big Six were deadlocked, and for the first time ever in the entire history of the Showa Era (which started in 1901) actually had an actual vote in how his government was run.

If they were not deadlocked and the vote was 4-2, the war would have continued. No matter what he wanted.

Because the Emperor had no power.

And I do not deny that, that is your idiocy talking.

Hell, his Japanese was so archaic that he needed a translator!

Tell me, how much do you know of Japanese culture and history? Because in case you did not notice, I speak of actual people, eras, and events. You just scream nonsense. Which is obvious to anybody that has an even superficial knowledge of Japan. Even an Otaku knows more of Japan than you do.

Oh, and technically, The Emperor never surrendered. He simply said they would accept Potsdam. Which in itself never demanded a surrender.

We have ordered our government to communicate to the governments of the United States, Great Britain, China and the Soviet Union that our empire accepts the provisions of their joint declaration.

And notice, that is the closest he ever came to saying "surrender". He never said "surrender", simply that he accepted the declaration. Which also never demanded a surrender.

You are so far from the truth, you have no idea.

 

[Vegasgiants]

Only because the Big Six were deadlocked, and for the first time ever in the entire history of the Showa Era (which started in 1901) actually had an actual vote in how his government was run.

If they were not deadlocked and the vote was 4-2, the war would have continued. No matter what he wanted.

Because the Emperor had no power.

And I do not deny that, that is your idiocy talking.

Hell, his Japanese was so archaic that he needed a translator!

Tell me, how much do you know of Japanese culture and history? Because in case you did not notice, I speak of actual people, eras, and events. You just scream nonsense. Which is obvious to anybody that has an even superficial knowledge of Japan. Even an Otaku knows more of Japan than you do.

Yet the big six did not surrender


Only the emperor could do that


Only he had that power

 

[ding]

 

[Mushroom]

Yet the big six did not surrender


Only the emperor could do that

Then tell me, exactly when did he "surrender".



There is the actual speech. Kindly point to me the minute and second when he "surrendered".

 

[ding]

Bam!

 

[Rigby5]

If the Japanese were "defenseless" they would not be shooting at Americans any longer.

They were not shooting at us.
Why do you think we could send in a lone B-29 and not have it get shot down?
That is because they had already run out of planes, fuel, and pilots.

 

[Vegasgiants]

Then tell me, exactly when did he "surrender".



There is the actual speech. Kindly point to me the minute and second when he "surrendered".

Please tell me you are kidding

 

[Mushroom]

This is the problem when people only took High School history, and think that told them everything they need to know.

I have studied this war for over 40 years, and my late uncle was actually was a teacher and had a Masters in "Oriental History", specifically in the Showa era. And before he died just over a year ago, we had a great many talks about this very subject. And even though I do not have a degree like he did, I impressed him with my knowledge and understanding of the Era. I even took him aback when he first heard me call him the "Showa Emperor". As I was actually living in Japan at the end of the Showa Era, and at the start of the Heisei Era (Emperor Akihito for those not aware of Japanese naming).

We are now under Emperor Naruhito, who will be known as Emperor Reiwa once he passes

 

[Mushroom]

Please tell me you are kidding

No, I am not kidding. Where exactly did he "surrender"?

 

[Rigby5]

Not before the Soviets declared war.

Up until that point Japan was trying to secure Soviet aid to help them end the war in a draw instead of surrendering.

That is ridiculously stupid.
The Japanese hated the Russians.
They had just fought the Russo Sino war not long before, and were total enemies.
The Japanese never considered the Russians as being able to help them negotiate any sort of better peace than just surrendering.

 

[Vegasgiants]

No, I am not kidding. Where exactly did he "surrender"?

We have ordered Our Government to communicate to the Governments of the United States, Great Britain, China and the Soviet Union that Our Empire accepts the provisions of their Joint Declaration [Potsdam Declaration].

I cant believe you never even read the speech

 

[Mushroom]

We have ordered Our Government to communicate to the Governments of the United States, Great Britain, China and the Soviet Union that Our Empire accepts the provisions of their Joint Declaration [Potsdam Declaration].

And now kindly tell me where that ever demanded that they surrender?

And how he could have even given that speech, if the Big Six did not let him give it.

As I have been saying over and over, your knowledge of this is superficial at best.

 

[Open Bolt]

They were not shooting at us.
Why do you think we could send in a lone B-29 and not have it get shot down?

How did Japan manage to chase the second atomic bomb away from Kokura Arsenal?

That is because they had already run out of planes, fuel, and pilots.

Japan had two million soldiers and ten thousand kamikazes waiting to pounce on our invading forces.

That is ridiculously stupid.

I know. But it is what Japan was doing.

The Japanese hated the Russians.
They had just fought the Russo Sino war not long before, and were total enemies.

Nonetheless, Japan was trying to enlist Soviet aid in ending the war in a draw so Japan could escape it without surrendering.

The Japanese never considered the Russians as being able to help them negotiate any sort of better peace than just surrendering.

That is incorrect. Japan thought the Soviets could help them to end the war in a draw so Japan could escape it without surrendering.

 

[Mushroom]

That is incorrect. Japan thought the Soviets could help them to end the war in a draw so Japan could escape it without surrendering.

The problem here is that so many idiots can not comprehend the difference between an "Armistice" and a "Surrender".

An Armistice is a truce, a cease-fire. That is what Japan wanted. Ultimately, with the lines drawn back to those of mid-1941, but still in their favor.

What the Allies wanted was for Japan to surrender all occupied territories, and to remove their capability to start another major conflict.

The biggest problem, is as so many who do not understand, they are not the same. WWI did not end in a surrender of Germany, it ended in an armistice. That is why it is called "Armistice Day", and not "Surrender Day".

However, by that time the "German Empire" and the "Austrian Empire" had literally ceased to exist. So what started as an armistice ended up being a surrender. For a more realistic example of an armistice, look no farther than the Korean War. The "Active War" ended with an armistice in 1953, but technically the two nations are still at war. There has never been a peace treaty between the two, and as recently as 2010 North Korea was still attacking South Korea.



If Japan had gotten what they wanted, we might still be technically at war with them.

 

[Vegasgiants]

And now kindly tell me where that ever demanded that they surrender?

And how he could have even given that speech, if the Big Six did not let him give it.

As I have been saying over and over, your knowledge of this is superficial at best.

You make me laugh

 

[ding]

The winner by knockout.... Mushroom

 

[Vegasgiants]

Those who oppose the bombings argue it was militarily unnecessary,[3] inherently immoral, a war crime, or a form of state terrorism.[4] Critics believe a naval blockade and conventional bombings would have forced Japan to surrender unconditionally.[5] Some critics believe Japan was more motivated to surrender by the Soviet Union's invasion of Manchuria and other Japanese-held areas.[6][7]

 

[ding]

Surely it was obscene for us to nuke Nagasaki just three days, 72 hours, after we had nuked Hiroshima.

No one ever claimed it was moral. Just that it was the lesser of two evils.

 

[Vegasgiants]

In 1963, the bombings were the subject of a judicial review in Ryuichi Shimoda et al. v. The State in Japan.[117] On the 22nd anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor, the District Court of Tokyo declined to rule on the legality of nuclear weapons in general, but found, "the attacks upon Hiroshima and Nagasaki caused such severe and indiscriminate suffering that they did violate the most basic legal principles governing the conduct of war."[118]

In the opinion of the court, the act of dropping an atomic bomb on cities was at the time governed by international law found in the Hague Regulations on Land Warfare of 1907 and the Hague Draft Rules of Air Warfare of 1922–1923[119] and was therefore illegal.[12

 

[Mac-7]

In 1963, the bombings were the subject of a judicial review in Ryuichi Shimoda et al. v. The State in Japan.[117] On the 22nd anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor, the District Court of Tokyo declined to rule on the legality of nuclear weapons in general, but found, "the attacks upon Hiroshima and Nagasaki caused such severe and indiscriminate suffering that they did violate the most basic legal principles governing the conduct of war."[118]

In the opinion of the court, the act of dropping an atomic bomb on cities was at the time governed by international law found in the Hague Regulations on Land Warfare of 1907 and the Hague Draft Rules of Air Warfare of 1922–1923[119] and was therefore illegal.[12

What did the japanese court say about the Rape of Nanking?
Or the forced prostitution of Comfort Women?