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

[Skylar]

Or.....are merely aware of the facts.

Apparently not.

Notice you don't actually disagree with the factual veracity of anything I've said.

Which speaks volumes to who of us is aware of the facts.

Speculation is not fact.

Still not a single specific disagreement with the factual veracity of anything I've said.

Find me when you can actually find a single inaccuracy in anything I've said.

Read carefully: speculation is not fact. Don’t demand factual contradiction when you haven’t presented fact. You have presented 70+ year old propaganda.

Read carefully.....you have yet to dispute a single point I've made, nor have you found a single inaccuracy.

'uh-uh' isn't an argument. Its an excuse for one.

Find me when you manage to actually disagree with any specific point I've made. Until then, keep running

 

[Skylar]

Or.....are merely aware of the facts.

Apparently not.

Notice you don't actually disagree with the factual veracity of anything I've said.

Which speaks volumes to who of us is aware of the facts.

Numerous experts, researchers, and military officers dispute your “facts.” The fact that you know nothing of their works, should make you want to get informed.

You mean the experts and researchers you've failed to cite or even NAME?

Why don't you work on your own body of knowledge before you start rambling about mine.

The A-bombings were a war crime worse than Hitler’s death camps. Dirty Harry Truman is burning in Hell for eternity. Thank God!

Laughing...nope. Most estimates put the death told in Hiroshima at around 150,000 and Nagasaki at around 75,000. So 225,000.

Compare that with 6,000,000 with Hitler's camps. Alas, Gipper, 225,000 is not 'worse' than 6,000,000. In fact, you may want to look up the term 'order of magnitude'. It will help you understand exactly how wrong you are.

Worse still for your argument, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings ended a war. The Japanese surrendered about a week after Nagasaki. Where the death camps didn't.

Maybe you could dial up the research you do...and dial back the hysterical melodrama?

Okay I will agree that Hitler’s death camps were worse, but not by much without considering the numbers killed.

Not by much? Again, I direct you to the phrase 'order of magnitude'. That's when you multiply the number by 10.

And the numbers those killed in the death camps were more than an order of magnitude MORE than those that died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.

Worse for your argument, Hiroshima and Nagasaki ENDED a war. With the Hirohito announcing the surrender of Japan about a week after the final bombing. Within weeks, we were providing food and supplies to the Japanese people.

The death camps ended no war at all. Large scale, systematic murder at these camps began in 1941. And continued, unabaded for 4 more years.

Little more than a WEEK compared to 4 more YEARS. Yet you say the differences are 'not much'?

Or old friend 'order of magnitude' says otherwise.

 

[Unkotare]

Apparently not.

Notice you don't actually disagree with the factual veracity of anything I've said.

Which speaks volumes to who of us is aware of the facts.

Speculation is not fact.

Still not a single specific disagreement with the factual veracity of anything I've said.

Find me when you can actually find a single inaccuracy in anything I've said.

Read carefully: speculation is not fact. Don’t demand factual contradiction when you haven’t presented fact. You have presented 70+ year old propaganda.

Read carefully.....you have yet to dispute a single point I've made, nor have you found a single inaccuracy.

'uh-uh' isn't an argument. Its an excuse for one.

Find me when you manage to actually disagree with any specific point I've made. Until then, keep running

You are confused.

 

[gipper]

Apparently not.

Notice you don't actually disagree with the factual veracity of anything I've said.

Which speaks volumes to who of us is aware of the facts.

Numerous experts, researchers, and military officers dispute your “facts.” The fact that you know nothing of their works, should make you want to get informed.

You mean the experts and researchers you've failed to cite or even NAME?

Why don't you work on your own body of knowledge before you start rambling about mine.

The A-bombings were a war crime worse than Hitler’s death camps. Dirty Harry Truman is burning in Hell for eternity. Thank God!

Laughing...nope. Most estimates put the death told in Hiroshima at around 150,000 and Nagasaki at around 75,000. So 225,000.

Compare that with 6,000,000 with Hitler's camps. Alas, Gipper, 225,000 is not 'worse' than 6,000,000. In fact, you may want to look up the term 'order of magnitude'. It will help you understand exactly how wrong you are.

Worse still for your argument, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings ended a war. The Japanese surrendered about a week after Nagasaki. Where the death camps didn't.

Maybe you could dial up the research you do...and dial back the hysterical melodrama?

Okay I will agree that Hitler’s death camps were worse, but not by much without considering the numbers killed.

Not by much? Again, I direct you to the phrase 'order of magnitude'. That's when you multiply the number by 10.

And the numbers those killed in the death camps were more than an order of magnitude MORE than those that died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.

Worse for your argument, Hiroshima and Nagasaki ENDED a war. With the Hirohito announcing the surrender of Japan about a week after the final bombing. Within weeks, we were providing food and supplies to the Japanese people.

The death camps ended no war at all. Large scale, systematic murder at these camps began in 1941. And continued, unabaded for 4 more years.

Little more than a WEEK compared to 4 more YEARS. Yet you say the differences are 'not much'?

Or old friend 'order of magnitude' says otherwise.

Go away. Why post in a thread that you refuse to read?

 

[mikegriffith1]

There is just no getting you to engage in a reasoned, fact-based discussion on this issue, is there? And who starts a fight: the one who keeps trying to provoke the fight and wants to fight, or the one who tries to avoid the fight but finally responds to the provocations and throws the first punch because he realizes that the other person is determined to hurt him?

The guy who throws the first punch.

That's third-grade logic. Just about every legal system on the planet recognizes the principle that provocation can constitute starting the fight, even if the provocator does not throw the first punch.

I notice you guys keep avoiding the question about what you think any other self-respecting nation would do if three major nations ganged up on it and did to it what we, the Dutch, and British were doing to Japan.

There you go again acting like all Japanese were guilty of the actions of the bad actors in the army. Pray tell: What barbaric actions did the women and children in Hiroshima and Nagasaki commit? What barbaric actions did the seniors, women, and children in the 65 cities that we fire-bombed and/or naval-bombarded commit?

What percentage of Japanese soldiers do you believe committed war crimes, and what percentage of Japan's population do you believe those soldiers constituted?

don’t know, don’t care.

That's certainly true.

Our actions were justified.

So you're just gonna keep repeating this militaristic myth and ignore the fact that Japan was prostrate and starving, that Japan was trying to surrender, that Japan was virtually defenseless against air and naval attack, that Truman knew all of these things, and that the nukes did not even cause Japan to surrender anyway?

You know, if it was such a righteous deed, why did Truman lie about the first nuke? Huh? Why did he pretend that Hiroshima was "a military base" and that it was nuked to minimize civilian casualties? Why did the Truman administration and MacArthur's occupation government lie about radiation effects and dismiss all the reports of severe injury and death from radiation? Why did the War Department suppress most photos and films of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki victims? Hey? Is that the conduct of people who believe they've done something good?

 

[gipper]

There is just no getting you to engage in a reasoned, fact-based discussion on this issue, is there? And who starts a fight: the one who keeps trying to provoke the fight and wants to fight, or the one who tries to avoid the fight but finally responds to the provocations and throws the first punch because he realizes that the other person is determined to hurt him?

The guy who throws the first punch.

That's third-grade logic. Just about every legal system on the planet recognizes the principle that provocation can constitute starting the fight, even if the provocator does not throw the first punch.

I notice you guys keep avoiding the question about what you think any other self-respecting nation would do if three major nations ganged up on it and did to it what we, the Dutch, and British were doing to Japan.

There you go again acting like all Japanese were guilty of the actions of the bad actors in the army. Pray tell: What barbaric actions did the women and children in Hiroshima and Nagasaki commit? What barbaric actions did the seniors, women, and children in the 65 cities that we fire-bombed and/or naval-bombarded commit?

What percentage of Japanese soldiers do you believe committed war crimes, and what percentage of Japan's population do you believe those soldiers constituted?

don’t know, don’t care.

That's certainly true.

Our actions were justified.

So you're just gonna keep repeating this militaristic myth and ignore the fact that Japan was prostrate and starving, that Japan was trying to surrender, that Japan was virtually defenseless against air and naval attack, that Truman knew all of these things, and that the nukes did not even cause Japan to surrender anyway?

You know, if it was such a righteous deed, why did Truman lie about the first nuke? Huh? Why did he pretend that Hiroshima was "a military base" and that it was nuked to minimize civilian casualties? Why did the Truman administration and MacArthur's occupation government lie about radiation effects and dismiss all the reports of severe injury and death from radiation? Why did the War Department suppress most photos and films of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki victims? Hey? Is that the conduct of people who believe they've done something good?

It is amazing how they purposely ignore the facts. It is equally amazing how uncaring and warlike they are.

Just goes to prove government controlled education and media can fool some of the people all the time.

 

[P@triot]

Whatever are we going to do with statists?

I don't know. But when you figure it out, let me know. Work on immature idealists too while you're at it. Would love to rid the world of BOTH groups.

 

[P@triot]

Just about every legal system on the planet recognizes the principle that provocation can constitute starting the fight, even if the provocator does not throw the first punch.

You seriously need to consult an attorney. I've never seen someone so ignorant of the law. Throwing the first punch will get you charged with assault in 100% of cases save for one thing: you do have a "personal space" you can defend so that you don't have to wait to be assaulted (and possibly incapacitated) before defending yourself.

But short of invading that personal space aggressively - there is nothing I can do to "provoke" a punch for you legally. You will get charged with assault every time, you imbecile.

 

[gipper]

Whatever are we going to do with statists?

I don't know. But when you figure it out, let me know. Work on immature idealists too while you're at it. Would love to rid the world of BOTH groups.

Yes it’s immature and idealistic to condemn the wanton slaughter of defenseless civilians. LOL!

You and your brethren condemn the slaughter of innocent civilians by Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany. Yet you commend the wanton slaughter of innocent civilians by the USA.

Think. Please think.

 

[P@triot]

Yes! Our criminal government needs to kill as many innocent women and children as possible. It’s the American Way!

You, W, and Ellen must be great friends. LOL

You, Saddam Hussein, and Barack Obama must be great friends. All of you paint the United States as "evil" and the evil nations as the "innocent, defenseless angels".

The difference though is that they actually believe it, while your bored ass is just trolling.

 

[P@triot]

Yes it’s immature and idealistic to condemn the wanton slaughter of defenseless civilians. LOL!

The people of Germany weren't "innocent". They were the one's who supported Adolf Hitler. They were the one's who rallied for Adolf Hitler. They were the one's who voted for Adolf Hitler.

Same with Japan. Same with China. Same with Iran.

I'd tell you to think, but you're clearly not capable.

 

[P@triot]

Amazing that people can be so eager to parrot 70 year old propaganda.

But not nearly as amazing as people so eager to ignore history for a whitewashed, utopian rewritten version of it.

 

[gipper]

Amazing that people can be so eager to parrot 70 year old propaganda.

But not nearly as amazing as people so eager to ignore history for a whitewashed, utopian rewritten version of it.

You are the one ignoring history. You believe lies spoon feed you by a corrupt state. Again, you aren’t very smart.

 

[Unkotare]

Amazing that people can be so eager to parrot 70 year old propaganda.

But not nearly as amazing as people so eager to ignore history for a whitewashed, utopian rewritten version of it.

You're afraid to study history? What are you doing here?

 

[HenryBHough]

Tehran should be the new Nagasaki.

That’s not funny.

Happy to hear you agree. It should not be "funny" - just dead-as-a-fart serious. Until that's accomplished there can be no peace in The Middle East. So......what's with the smirk?

 

[Persistence Of Memory]

I know I'm a freckled faced freshman poster here and should just mop the floors and keep my F mouth shut. I know that!!

How in the hell could this thread last for near 150 pages of total nonsense. How many posts???.................................NEAR 1500?????

People are looking at crap 80 F years later. Analyzing if FDR would have sheet his pants one less time, Churchill would have kicked Stalin in the nuts and everything would have been different and better.

This thread has stage 5 cancer. Cancer threads can only be dealt in one way. All opposition to the OP scatters from here for 2 weeks. Like a scab, it will fall.

This is the only treatment known to man to battle Thread Cancer. If used correctly, it has a near 100% cure rate

 

[Unkotare]

I know I'm a freckled faced freshman poster here and should just mop the floors and keep my F mouth shut. I know that!!

How in the hell could this thread last for near 150 pages of total nonsense. How many posts???.................................NEAR 1500?????

People are looking at crap 80 F years later. Analyzing if FDR would have sheet his pants one less time, Churchill would have kicked Stalin in the nuts and everything would have been different and better.

This thread has stage 5 cancer. Cancer threads can only be dealt in one way. All opposition to the OP scatters from here for 2 weeks. Like a scab, it will fall.

This is the only treatment known to man to battle Thread Cancer. If used correctly, it has a near 100% cure rate

It's the History forum, dumbass. It is a forum for discussing history.

 

[gipper]

I know I'm a freckled faced freshman poster here and should just mop the floors and keep my F mouth shut. I know that!!

How in the hell could this thread last for near 150 pages of total nonsense. How many posts???.................................NEAR 1500?????

People are looking at crap 80 F years later. Analyzing if FDR would have sheet his pants one less time, Churchill would have kicked Stalin in the nuts and everything would have been different and better.

This thread has stage 5 cancer. Cancer threads can only be dealt in one way. All opposition to the OP scatters from here for 2 weeks. Like a scab, it will fall.

This is the only treatment known to man to battle Thread Cancer. If used correctly, it has a near 100% cure rate

Go away. You clearly are unwilling to learn the truth. You prefer wallowing in your ignorance.

 

[mikegriffith1]

War is never necessary...

God, small children are so adorable. I love their innocence.

Adolf Hitler invaded over 20 nations (including, but not limited to, Poland, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, France, Greece, Yugoslavia, Austria) and you official position is that all of them should have surrendered and become serfs. Because nobody should fight back. War is “never” necessary.

I won't pretend to give Gipper's official position, but your "official position" seems to be that it was just fine that FDR saved the Soviet Union twice, that FDR sided with the Soviets in China by funneling aid to the Chinese Nationalists (who were also receiving Soviet aid), that FDR condemned Japan's move into China but said nothing about the fact that that move was done in large part to counter the Soviets' efforts to strengthen their influence in China (as mentioned, they were aiding the Nationalists), that FDR ensured that Japan did not invade the Soviet when such an invasion would have led to the USSR's downfall, that FDR and Truman handed over tens of millions of Eastern Europeans to Soviet tyranny, that Truman handed over China, North Korea, and much of Vietnam to the Communists, and in the process sentenced over 30 million Chinese to death at the hands of Mao's henchmen.

And if anyone expresses the view that these actions were terrible and disastrous, not to mention treasonous, you accuse them of being unpatriotic!

 

[gipper]

Yes it’s immature and idealistic to condemn the wanton slaughter of defenseless civilians. LOL!

The people of Germany weren't "innocent". They were the one's who supported Adolf Hitler. They were the one's who rallied for Adolf Hitler. They were the one's who voted for Adolf Hitler.

Same with Japan. Same with China. Same with Iran.

I'd tell you to think, but you're clearly not capable.

Let’s do a little thought experiment. W invades Iraq and caused possibly as many as one million deaths of mostly civilians (no doubt this makes you so proud). Let’s say Iraq manages to beat back the invasion and ultimately invades the US homeland. Since Americans elected W, you think the Iraqi armed forces are justified in mass murdering American civilians.

Do you see your foolish thinking?