Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Again all you have are feelers from a Group NOT directly connected to the Government, further it has several bald faced lies in it, the NAVY did NOT control the Government the Army did. The peace group was a Minority in the Government and had no authority to negotiate anything at all. Further as noted in the last bit the AR MY which did CONTROL the Government was DEAD set against surrender and the ONLY thing that changed that was the Emperor ordering a surrender. And even AFTER the Emperor surrendered the Army staged a COUP to stop that.Confidential Documents released by the CIA Historical Review Program:
Memoranda for the President: Japanese Feelers — Central Intelligence Agency
Except that an invasion might not have been necessary.
Nothing you have posted shows any inclination by the Japanese Government to surrender NOTHING, you have a small peace group in the Japanese Government that had no authority no power talking about something they could not do even your own links prove that you retard.Rain Man will scream and bash his head against the door of his cell, but the reality is that there existed a possibility, maybe just a possibility, of a negotiated peace before all the terrible bloodletting of Iwo and Okinawa, to say nothing of the horror of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But the bloodthirsty racist FDR had absolutely no interest in peace, he was out for blood and he would have it no matter what.
.Confidential Documents released by the CIA Historical Review Program:
Memoranda for the President: Japanese Feelers — Central Intelligence Agency
That does not say what you claim it says. Retard..Confidential Documents released by the CIA Historical Review Program:
Memoranda for the President: Japanese Feelers — Central Intelligence Agency
FDR was dead and buried four months before Hiroshima and Nagasaki.Rain Man will scream and bash his head against the door of his cell, but the reality is that there existed a possibility, maybe just a possibility, of a negotiated peace before all the terrible bloodletting of Iwo and Okinawa, to say nothing of the horror of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But the bloodthirsty racist FDR had absolutely no interest in peace, he was out for blood and he would have it no matter what.
FDR was dead and buried four months before Hiroshima and Nagasaki.Rain Man will scream and bash his head against the door of his cell, but the reality is that there existed a possibility, maybe just a possibility, of a negotiated peace before all the terrible bloodletting of Iwo and Okinawa, to say nothing of the horror of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But the bloodthirsty racist FDR had absolutely no interest in peace, he was out for blood and he would have it no matter what.
Except that an invasion might not have been necessary.The best American value is that many Americans didn't die in the invasion of Japan.
Yeah that’s the American Way. You attack my military base and I will burn down all your cities and mass murder your women and children.
Compares with Nazi Germany? Really?Americans need to come to the realization that the bombings of civilians was really mass murder, not unlike what Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were guilty of.
Great column on the subject.
The Atomic Bombing of Japan, Reconsidered
By Alan Mosley
Mises.org
January 2, 2019
Russia’s move, in fact, compelled the Japanese to consider unconditional surrender; until then, they were only open to a conditional surrender that left their Emperor Hirohito some dignity and protections from war-crimes trials. Ward concludes that, as in the European theatre, Truman didn’t beat Japan; Stalin did.
Harry Truman never expressed regret publicly over his decision to use the atomic bombs. However, he did order an independent study on the state of the war effort leading up to August of 1945, and the strategic value of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. In 1946, the U.S. Bombing Survey published its findings, which concluded as follows: “Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey’s opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945 and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.” This is an intensive condemnation of Truman’s decision, seeing as Russia did enter the war, and that plans for an invasion had been developed.
As Timothy P. Carney writes for the Washington Examiner, the fog of war can be a tricky thing. But if we’re forced to side with Truman, or Eisenhower and the other dissenting military leaders, the Eisenhower position isn’t merely valid; it actually aligns better with some fundamental American values. Given all the uncertainty, both at the time and with modern historical revisionism, it’s better to look to principle rather than fortune-telling. One principle that should be near the top of everyone’s list is this: it’s wrong to target civilians with weapons of mass destruction. The deliberate killing of innocent men, women, and children by the hundreds of thousands cannot be justified under any circumstances, much less the ambiguous ones Truman encountered. Whether his decision was motivated by indignation toward Japanese “ pigheadedness” or concern for his troops, Truman’s use of such devastating weapons against non-combatants should not be excused. Americans must strive for complete and honest analysis of the past (and present) conflicts. And if she is to remain true to her own ideals, America must strive for more noble and moral ends—in all conflicts, domestic and foreign—guided by our most cherished first principles, such as the Golden Rule. At the very least, Americans should not try so hard to justify mass murder.
The Atomic Bombing of Japan - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com
Except that an invasion might not have been necessary.The best American value is that many Americans didn't die in the invasion of Japan.
Was an invasion of Germany necessary? In your opinion.
Yes. Mass murder is mass murder whether in a gas chamber or by fire bombing and a-bombing cities full of women and children.Compares with Nazi Germany? Really?Americans need to come to the realization that the bombings of civilians was really mass murder, not unlike what Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were guilty of.
Great column on the subject.
The Atomic Bombing of Japan, Reconsidered
By Alan Mosley
Mises.org
January 2, 2019
Russia’s move, in fact, compelled the Japanese to consider unconditional surrender; until then, they were only open to a conditional surrender that left their Emperor Hirohito some dignity and protections from war-crimes trials. Ward concludes that, as in the European theatre, Truman didn’t beat Japan; Stalin did.
Harry Truman never expressed regret publicly over his decision to use the atomic bombs. However, he did order an independent study on the state of the war effort leading up to August of 1945, and the strategic value of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. In 1946, the U.S. Bombing Survey published its findings, which concluded as follows: “Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey’s opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945 and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.” This is an intensive condemnation of Truman’s decision, seeing as Russia did enter the war, and that plans for an invasion had been developed.
As Timothy P. Carney writes for the Washington Examiner, the fog of war can be a tricky thing. But if we’re forced to side with Truman, or Eisenhower and the other dissenting military leaders, the Eisenhower position isn’t merely valid; it actually aligns better with some fundamental American values. Given all the uncertainty, both at the time and with modern historical revisionism, it’s better to look to principle rather than fortune-telling. One principle that should be near the top of everyone’s list is this: it’s wrong to target civilians with weapons of mass destruction. The deliberate killing of innocent men, women, and children by the hundreds of thousands cannot be justified under any circumstances, much less the ambiguous ones Truman encountered. Whether his decision was motivated by indignation toward Japanese “ pigheadedness” or concern for his troops, Truman’s use of such devastating weapons against non-combatants should not be excused. Americans must strive for complete and honest analysis of the past (and present) conflicts. And if she is to remain true to her own ideals, America must strive for more noble and moral ends—in all conflicts, domestic and foreign—guided by our most cherished first principles, such as the Golden Rule. At the very least, Americans should not try so hard to justify mass murder.
The Atomic Bombing of Japan - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com
War is hell. We should pass laws abolishing all conflicts, the sad thing is that most nations make wars according to their own well being.Yes. Mass murder is mass murder whether in a gas chamber or by fire bombing and a-bombing cities full of women and children.Compares with Nazi Germany? Really?Americans need to come to the realization that the bombings of civilians was really mass murder, not unlike what Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were guilty of.
Great column on the subject.
The Atomic Bombing of Japan, Reconsidered
By Alan Mosley
Mises.org
January 2, 2019
Russia’s move, in fact, compelled the Japanese to consider unconditional surrender; until then, they were only open to a conditional surrender that left their Emperor Hirohito some dignity and protections from war-crimes trials. Ward concludes that, as in the European theatre, Truman didn’t beat Japan; Stalin did.
Harry Truman never expressed regret publicly over his decision to use the atomic bombs. However, he did order an independent study on the state of the war effort leading up to August of 1945, and the strategic value of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. In 1946, the U.S. Bombing Survey published its findings, which concluded as follows: “Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey’s opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945 and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.” This is an intensive condemnation of Truman’s decision, seeing as Russia did enter the war, and that plans for an invasion had been developed.
As Timothy P. Carney writes for the Washington Examiner, the fog of war can be a tricky thing. But if we’re forced to side with Truman, or Eisenhower and the other dissenting military leaders, the Eisenhower position isn’t merely valid; it actually aligns better with some fundamental American values. Given all the uncertainty, both at the time and with modern historical revisionism, it’s better to look to principle rather than fortune-telling. One principle that should be near the top of everyone’s list is this: it’s wrong to target civilians with weapons of mass destruction. The deliberate killing of innocent men, women, and children by the hundreds of thousands cannot be justified under any circumstances, much less the ambiguous ones Truman encountered. Whether his decision was motivated by indignation toward Japanese “ pigheadedness” or concern for his troops, Truman’s use of such devastating weapons against non-combatants should not be excused. Americans must strive for complete and honest analysis of the past (and present) conflicts. And if she is to remain true to her own ideals, America must strive for more noble and moral ends—in all conflicts, domestic and foreign—guided by our most cherished first principles, such as the Golden Rule. At the very least, Americans should not try so hard to justify mass murder.
The Atomic Bombing of Japan - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com
I can't defend a horrible act of war, no one should especially with hindsight.Yes. Mass murder is mass murder whether in a gas chamber or by fire bombing and a-bombing cities full of women and children.Compares with Nazi Germany? Really?Americans need to come to the realization that the bombings of civilians was really mass murder, not unlike what Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were guilty of.
Great column on the subject.
The Atomic Bombing of Japan, Reconsidered
By Alan Mosley
Mises.org
January 2, 2019
Russia’s move, in fact, compelled the Japanese to consider unconditional surrender; until then, they were only open to a conditional surrender that left their Emperor Hirohito some dignity and protections from war-crimes trials. Ward concludes that, as in the European theatre, Truman didn’t beat Japan; Stalin did.
Harry Truman never expressed regret publicly over his decision to use the atomic bombs. However, he did order an independent study on the state of the war effort leading up to August of 1945, and the strategic value of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. In 1946, the U.S. Bombing Survey published its findings, which concluded as follows: “Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey’s opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945 and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.” This is an intensive condemnation of Truman’s decision, seeing as Russia did enter the war, and that plans for an invasion had been developed.
As Timothy P. Carney writes for the Washington Examiner, the fog of war can be a tricky thing. But if we’re forced to side with Truman, or Eisenhower and the other dissenting military leaders, the Eisenhower position isn’t merely valid; it actually aligns better with some fundamental American values. Given all the uncertainty, both at the time and with modern historical revisionism, it’s better to look to principle rather than fortune-telling. One principle that should be near the top of everyone’s list is this: it’s wrong to target civilians with weapons of mass destruction. The deliberate killing of innocent men, women, and children by the hundreds of thousands cannot be justified under any circumstances, much less the ambiguous ones Truman encountered. Whether his decision was motivated by indignation toward Japanese “ pigheadedness” or concern for his troops, Truman’s use of such devastating weapons against non-combatants should not be excused. Americans must strive for complete and honest analysis of the past (and present) conflicts. And if she is to remain true to her own ideals, America must strive for more noble and moral ends—in all conflicts, domestic and foreign—guided by our most cherished first principles, such as the Golden Rule. At the very least, Americans should not try so hard to justify mass murder.
The Atomic Bombing of Japan - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com
You need to visit the CIA and give them a good talking to. Maybe repeat the same thing over and over and over again until you get water boarded?
