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

[ThirdTerm]

America needed to pretend that it had dozens of nukes available, which was what Hirohito and his advisers believed before making the surrender proclamation. But there were only few atomic bombs available at the time. The target for the third A-bomb was the emperor's palace in Tokyo.

 

[elektra]

One major problem was that Truman believed the propaganda that Emperor Hirohito was a militarist and that there was no difference between him and the hardliners. Several people, including our best Japan expert Joseph Grew, told Truman this was totally false, but he chose not to believe it. Even at the time, given everything we knew about the emperor, Truman's acceptance of that propaganda was inexcusable. This was why he did not want to give the Japanese any clarification about the emperor's status in a surrender.

If you want a very good all-in-one refutation of the major arguments used by nuke defenders, I recommend reading Dr. Stephen Shalom's famous essay "The Obliteration of Hiroshima." I've posted a condensed version of it on my website The Pacific War and the Atomic Bomb:

https://miketgriffith.com/files/obliteration.pdf

A link to your website? As a source of this? You are kidding?

Where do you get your poor narrative of Joseph Grew from? Quote and link. (that will be three failures, bundy, eisenhower, and now grew).

Truman believed the Emperor was a militarists? Gee, what would give him that idea, after Pearl Harbor? After the invasion of China? After the invasion of Korea? After the invasion of Manchuria? After the invasion of the Philippines? After the invasion of French indo-china? That is just crazy talk, to think the leader of Japan was a militarist? And after the 10's of thousands of American men died in Pacific war. After the 10's of thousands who died as prisoners, I for one do not see how Truman could have any animosity towards the Emperor of Japan.

Truman's acceptance of propaganda, link to the propaganda. Show us, in it's entirety, the propaganda. Go ahead and link to the propaganda that Truman accepted as fact so that we can see for ourselves. Or is this simply another one of those FAKE news/opinion items of yours we are suppose to believe? As you dictate!

The surrender, or let us call it what it is, The Potsdam Declaration. If we call it what it is, it will be easier to link to and quote. The surrender demands never stated the Emperor had to step down. Never, not once.

Feel free to link to the demand, stating the Emperor must step down.
Link to Eisenhower's statement.
Link to Grew's statements.
Link to the propaganda you refer to in regards to the Emperor
Link to McGeorge Bundy

Or, go ahead obfuscate and distract us from what we are proving lies, by posting more stuff we are suppose to accept.

 

[Unkotare]

YOU changed the topic to your own weak bigotry and you want to blame someone else? Typical leftist who can't take personal responsibility.

Shit face says what?

So, you are ignorant of history and too weak to examine morality directly because you're an anti-religion bigot?

 

[Unkotare]

......I am not insulting you, you really are an idiot. Anybody is who does not do the research themselves.......

Ooh, take another photo of a book you bought, 'professor'!

 

[elektra]

So, you are ignorant of history and too weak to examine morality directly because you're an anti-religion bigot?

Morality? Scat, go, get, scat. I bet that confuses you, right, cause scat for you does not mean go?

 

[elektra]

......I am not insulting you, you really are an idiot. Anybody is who does not do the research themselves.......

Ooh, take another photo of a book you bought, 'professor'!

I got one thus far, I have at least 5 more on the way. It is nice being able to buy what I enjoy. History books. It certainly allows me to see all the quotes and posts here as pure lies.

Thus far, not one person has challenged any of my posts, why is that?

 

[Unkotare]

So, you are ignorant of history and too weak to examine morality directly because you're an anti-religion bigot?

Morality? ...

Morality.

 

[Unkotare]

......I am not insulting you, you really are an idiot. Anybody is who does not do the research themselves.......

Ooh, take another photo of a book you bought, 'professor'!

I got one thus far, I have at least 5 more on the way. ...

 

[elektra]

One major problem was that Truman believed the propaganda that Emperor Hirohito was a militarist and that there was no difference between him and the hardliners. Several people, including our best Japan expert Joseph Grew, told Truman this was totally false, but he chose not to believe it. Even at the time, given everything we knew about the emperor, Truman's acceptance of that propaganda was inexcusable. This was why he did not want to give the Japanese any clarification about the emperor's status in a surrender.

If you want a very good all-in-one refutation of the major arguments used by nuke defenders, I recommend reading Dr. Stephen Shalom's famous essay "The Obliteration of Hiroshima." I've posted a condensed version of it on my website The Pacific War and the Atomic Bomb:

https://miketgriffith.com/files/obliteration.pdf

A link to your website? As a source of this? You are kidding?

Where do you get your poor narrative of Joseph Grew from? Quote and link. (that will be three failures, bundy, eisenhower, and now grew).

Truman believed the Emperor was a militarists? Gee, what would give him that idea, after Pearl Harbor? After the invasion of China? After the invasion of Korea? After the invasion of Manchuria? After the invasion of the Philippines? After the invasion of French indo-china? That is just crazy talk, to think the leader of Japan was a militarist? And after the 10's of thousands of American men died in Pacific war. After the 10's of thousands who died as prisoners, I for one do not see how Truman could have any animosity towards the Emperor of Japan.

Truman's acceptance of propaganda, link to the propaganda. Show us, in it's entirety, the propaganda. Go ahead and link to the propaganda that Truman accepted as fact so that we can see for ourselves. Or is this simply another one of those FAKE news/opinion items of yours we are suppose to believe? As you dictate!

The surrender, or let us call it what it is, The Potsdam Declaration. If we call it what it is, it will be easier to link to and quote. The surrender demands never stated the Emperor had to step down. Never, not once.

Feel free to link to the demand, stating the Emperor must step down.
Link to Eisenhower's statement.
Link to Grew's statements.
Link to the propaganda you refer to in regards to the Emperor
Link to McGeorge Bundy

Or, go ahead obfuscate and distract us from what we are proving lies, by posting more stuff we are suppose to accept.

 

[mikegriffith1]

One major problem was that Truman believed the propaganda that Emperor Hirohito was a militarist and that there was no difference between him and the hardliners. Several people, including our best Japan expert Joseph Grew, told Truman this was totally false, but he chose not to believe it. Even at the time, given everything we knew about the emperor, Truman's acceptance of that propaganda was inexcusable. This was why he did not want to give the Japanese any clarification about the emperor's status in a surrender.

If you want a very good all-in-one refutation of the major arguments used by nuke defenders, I recommend reading Dr. Stephen Shalom's famous essay "The Obliteration of Hiroshima." I've posted a condensed version of it on my website The Pacific War and the Atomic Bomb:

https://miketgriffith.com/files/obliteration.pdf

A link to your website? As a source of this? You are kidding?

Where do you get your poor narrative of Joseph Grew from? Quote and link. (that will be three failures, bundy, eisenhower, and now grew).

Truman believed the Emperor was a militarists? Gee, what would give him that idea, after Pearl Harbor? After the invasion of China? After the invasion of Korea? After the invasion of Manchuria? After the invasion of the Philippines? After the invasion of French indo-china? That is just crazy talk, to think the leader of Japan was a militarist? And after the 10's of thousands of American men died in Pacific war. After the 10's of thousands who died as prisoners, I for one do not see how Truman could have any animosity towards the Emperor of Japan.

Truman's acceptance of propaganda, link to the propaganda. Show us, in it's entirety, the propaganda. Go ahead and link to the propaganda that Truman accepted as fact so that we can see for ourselves. Or is this simply another one of those FAKE news/opinion items of yours we are suppose to believe? As you dictate!

The surrender, or let us call it what it is, The Potsdam Declaration. If we call it what it is, it will be easier to link to and quote. The surrender demands never stated the Emperor had to step down. Never, not once.

Feel free to link to the demand, stating the Emperor must step down.
Link to Eisenhower's statement.
Link to Grew's statements.
Link to the propaganda you refer to in regards to the Emperor
Link to McGeorge Bundy

Or, go ahead obfuscate and distract us from what we are proving lies, by posting more stuff we are suppose to accept.

Is this some kind of joke? The fact that Eisenhower and Grew, among many others, opposed nuking Japan has been documented in literally hundreds of scholarly studies. Eisenhower expressed his views in his memoir, which is readily available, and I've provided you with several links that quote from his memoir. Or, you can go read his memoir if by chance you think all the links I've provided have fabricated Ike's statements.

It is beyond silly to argue that the attack on Pearl Harbor justified Truman's professed belief that the emperor was just another one of the militarists. This argument shows an amazing, surreal ignorance of the emperor and of Japanese history from the early 1900s until 1945. If you can ever dare yourself to read something that challenges your PC brainwashing, you should read Emperor Hirohita and the Pacific War (University of Washington Press, 2016), by Dr. Noriko Kawamura, a professor of history at the University of Washington.

If you would read her book, or several others I could suggest (but hers is the best because she uncovered previously unknown sources), you would learn that the emperor did all he could--within Japan's existing system of government--to oppose the hardliners over and over again, that the emperor did not want war with the U.S., that the emperor admired America and England, that the emperor pushed for lenient governance of Japan's colonial holdings, that the emperor had to put down a revolt by radical hardliners in 1926, that in the 1926 revolt the radical hardliners targeted some of Hirohito's cabinet members for assassination, and that Hirohito began to look for ways to end the war after the fall of Saipan (Taiwan), among many other important facts.

By the way, the "link to your [my] website" is a condensed version of Dr. Stephen Shalom's famous article "The Obliteration of Hiroshima," which answers every major excuse given for nuking Japan. Clearly, you have not yet bothered to read it.

 

[elektra]

Is this some kind of joke? The fact that Eisenhower and Grew, among many others, opposed nuking Japan has been documented in literally hundreds of scholarly studies. Eisenhower expressed his views in his memoir, which is readily available, and I've provided you with several links that quote from his memoir. Or, you can go read his memoir if by chance you think all the links I've provided have fabricated Ike's statements.

As I have stated, you will not provide a link. You simply dictate that you must be, believed.

Hundreds of studies? Should be easy to link one?
Eisenhower's memoir? Quote! Include the title and page number.

Eisenhower, he was the commander in europe? Maybe you can tell us how that has anything to do with japan?
But, go ahead and quote something and include the source.

You claim you know and have read and have said links. So go ahead and post.

The fact that you have not quoted and sourced after a dozen times I have requested shows that you are charlatan parroting somebody else's work, who is also a charlatan.

 

[elektra]

By the way, the "link to your [my] website" is a condensed version of Dr. Stephen Shalom's famous article "The Obliteration of Hiroshima," which answers every major excuse given for nuking Japan. Clearly, you have not yet bothered to read it.

Feel free to quote and link to the good Doctor's sources. I have obliterated every post you have made and will gladly show all you have is someone else's lies. So go ahead quote and link to the doctor's source.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Here is good article written in 2015 by Dr. Geoffrey Shepherd titled "It's Clear the US Should Not Have Bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki." Dr. Shepherd outlines one of the several alternative courses of action that we could have taken instead of nuking two cities:

This month marks the 70th anniversary of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And with each passing year the historical record is ever clearer that dropping the A-bombs was unnecessary, repugnant and very likely a war crime.

The bombings probably killed more than 200,000 Japanese civilians and maimed untold more. Such destruction of life stirs me to sorrow and outrage. That’s even more true given that there was an alternative available: the US could have dropped an A-bomb in or near Tokyo Bay. Such a warning shot could have persuaded the Japanese to end the war, and its humane nature would have enhanced the US’s moral standing.

The atomic bombings are often framed as the only alternative to a land invasion of a Japan that wouldn’t surrender under any but the most-dire circumstances. The possible need for an invasion loomed throughout 1945, and Americans naturally feared many US casualties. Much of a fanatic Japanese soldiery—and possibly many citizens—might fight to the last inch. One early study estimated 40,000 American soldiers’ deaths, yet President Harry Truman and others soon spoke of “half a million.”

But the A-bombs’ advent automatically changed that, allowing the US to wield the threat of nuclear attack. With the first device tested and proven in July 1945, and numerous others being readied early in August, America could have used their power as a new dimension of threat—rather than crudely dropping the bombs as mass killers.

Properly used as threats to ensure quick surrender, the A-bombs could have prevented virtually all further deaths in Japan—of Americans, Japanese and any others, from invasion, firebombing, A-bombing and ground warfare. That is, of course, precisely what the A-bombs did achieve. But the US hastily destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki first.

Tokyo Bay would have been the ideal place to display the bombs’ power. A large open area, the bay is next to Tokyo and all of Japan’s leaders, including the emperor. It offered a wide array of places—on vacant land or on water—to drop an A-bomb, for fully awesome effect. The mushroom-cloud explosion could be near or not-so-near to Tokyo, and more or less dangerous to Japan’s emperor, leaders, citizens and urban capital.

In this way, the US could have carefully maximized the scope of the threat, while minimizing the harm to Tokyo itself. And if the Japanese were crazily intransigent, we could have simply dropped another A-bomb, closer to Tokyo or in a low-population area. Even another, if needed.

But American leaders had acquired the habit of bombing cities, having attacked Berlin, Hamburg and even the cultural jewel of Dresden. US Air Force leaders such as Jimmy Doolittle gained instant fame from bombing raids over Japan. The hellish firebombing of Tokyo in March 1945 alone killed some 250,000 civilians and maimed huge numbers more.

With the Japanese A-bombings, a key player was Leslie Groves, who had built up and managed the Manhattan Project over the years. He now chaired the committee guiding Truman’s actions, and he closely managed—daily and hourly—the planning, loading, and crew work to fly the bomb for dropping. Grove was determined to deploy them fast. Separately, a supposed threat of the Soviet Union’s invading Japan was cited as a reason for haste. Such an excuse to rush to bomb can likely be chalked up, at least partly, to self-interest by the US.

And the planning of Truman’s advisors—including Groves, Doolittle, and Curtis LeMay—was full of mistakes. Hiroshima emerged as a candidate after having escaped attack thus far in the conflict. It was almost entirely civilian, and any attention to its few military targets soon disappeared. Hiroshima was distant from Tokyo, and the blast itself wiped out all communication, so the Japanese leadership in Tokyo didn’t fully see the destruction. When the leveling of Hiroshima predictably gave Tokyo little awareness, Nagasaki was added. But that choice was even less logical, and it doubled the death toll and the stifling stain on America’s moral character.

The US had already exceeded rational and civilized bounds with our massive bombings in Europe and Japan. Our job was to conclude the war with a minimum of mega-deaths. By using the Tokyo Bay method to display the A-bombs’ power, America would have shown its compassion and humanity. But Truman and his people failed, and the harm was widespread and lasting.

On top of the Japanese deaths and casualties, the actual dropping of the A-bombs likely heightened the stakes at the advent of the Cold War. Had the US not dropped the A-bombs, the nuclear arms race might have proceeded more slowly and less wastefully, possibly without hydrogen bombs. The US and USSR might even have cultivated cooperation and prosperity, in place of mutual fears and military-industrial excesses.

This 70th anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is a sorrowful reminder: a final spasm of killing engulfed those two poor cities. Had the US instead fired a warning shot by dropping an A-bomb in Tokyo Bay, scarcely a soul would have died. And yet the leaders of that era chose to kill hundreds of thousands, instead.​

 

[Unkotare]

.... I for one do not see how Truman could have any animosity towards the Emperor of Japan.....

Are you claiming that the atomic bomb was used against civilians as an act of revenge?

 

[elektra]

This 70th anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is a sorrowful reminder: a final spasm of killing engulfed those two poor cities. Had the US instead fired a warning shot by dropping an A-bomb in Tokyo Bay, scarcely a soul would have died. And yet the leaders of that era chose to kill hundreds of thousands, instead.​

Bomb water? And invite the japanese to watch? From how far, 20 miles so they would not burn thier eyes. Bomb water, dont destroy anything? And that would teach them.good.

Well, we already know that the japanese would not surrender after bombing hiroshima now you want to blow up nothing? You expect the japanese to surrender, after giving a good whoopin to water.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

 

[Unkotare]

This 70th anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is a sorrowful reminder: a final spasm of killing engulfed those two poor cities. Had the US instead fired a warning shot by dropping an A-bomb in Tokyo Bay, scarcely a soul would have died. And yet the leaders of that era chose to kill hundreds of thousands, instead.​

Bomb water? And invite the japanese to watch? From how far, 20 miles so they would not burn thier eyes. Bomb water, dont destroy anything? And that would teach them.good.

Well, we already know that the japanese would not surrender after bombing hiroshima now you want to blow up nothing? You expect the japanese to surrender, after giving a good whoopin to water.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

You sound like a good little democrat ghoul. The scumbag fdr went to hell before he got to see his hunger for the blood of hundreds of thousands of civilians satisfied. His errand-boy truman carried out the bloodsucker's last wishes, and now you play the mindless apologist. That bed you're lying in is getting pretty crowded.

 

[elektra]

Are you claiming that the atomic bomb was used against civilians as an act of revenge?

Wipe that shit off your face.

 

[elektra]

This 70th anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is a sorrowful reminder: a final spasm of killing engulfed those two poor cities. Had the US instead fired a warning shot by dropping an A-bomb in Tokyo Bay, scarcely a soul would have died. And yet the leaders of that era chose to kill hundreds of thousands, instead.​

Bomb water? And invite the japanese to watch? From how far, 20 miles so they would not burn thier eyes. Bomb water, dont destroy anything? And that would teach them.good.

Well, we already know that the japanese would not surrender after bombing hiroshima now you want to blow up nothing? You expect the japanese to surrender, after giving a good whoopin to water.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

You sound like a good little democrat ghoul. The scumbag fdr went to hell before he got to see his hunger for the blood of hundreds of thousands of civilians satisfied. His errand-boy truman carried out the bloodsucker's last wishes, and now you play the mindless apologist. That bed you're lying in is getting pretty crowded.

Shitboy claims what?

 

[Unkotare]

This 70th anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is a sorrowful reminder: a final spasm of killing engulfed those two poor cities. Had the US instead fired a warning shot by dropping an A-bomb in Tokyo Bay, scarcely a soul would have died. And yet the leaders of that era chose to kill hundreds of thousands, instead.​

Bomb water? And invite the japanese to watch? From how far, 20 miles so they would not burn thier eyes. Bomb water, dont destroy anything? And that would teach them.good.

Well, we already know that the japanese would not surrender after bombing hiroshima now you want to blow up nothing? You expect the japanese to surrender, after giving a good whoopin to water.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

You sound like a good little democrat ghoul. The scumbag fdr went to hell before he got to see his hunger for the blood of hundreds of thousands of civilians satisfied. His errand-boy truman carried out the bloodsucker's last wishes, and now you play the mindless apologist. That bed you're lying in is getting pretty crowded.

Shitboy claims what?

You'd be even more excited if all the many Christians in Nagasaki had been Mormons, huh bigot? Does the idea give you a tingle?

 

[Unkotare]

So, by his own admission, deflekta's talk about "ending the war sooner" was a load of bullshit. For his ilk, it was an act of revenge. Sooner of later, his type of apologist/hypocrite/ghoul always reveals his true colors.