63 years ago today
- Thread starter Little-Acorn
- Start date
True, but only on the same level that 9/11 probably made future terrorist attacks less likely, because we'll be more on guard because of it.
It still doesn't make the action itself right, imo.
Epicurus
Reasonable
Certainly not, I agree.
IMO, it would be a different situation if the war's outcome was still undecided and they used it to tip the balance in our favor. If there was a very real threat of America losing the war to NAZI Germany, I don't think any true American would have a problem using the atomic bomb.
As it was, however, we essentially obliterated two cities and rendered them unusuable for generations because we wanted an unconditional surrender instead of the conditional surrender they were offering. The Japanese were going to lose either way, at that point. Using atomic weapons against them at that point was unnecessary IMO.
But it wasn't our choice to make and I don't envy Truman's responsibility to decide it.
Good Luck
New member
The problem was the conditions set by the offer of conditional surrender. They were not acceptable. They demanded a cease fire in place, with Japan keeping all territories in China, Russia and pacific islands that they still held at the time of the offer. The short of the offer for conditional surrender was Japan wanted us to stop making war on them in return for them not fighting back. Russia - our ally at the time - would most certainly have not agreed to the offer with Russian soil still in the hands of Japan. That one hold out would have continued the war, and we did not really have the option of unilateral acceptance.
As such, the alternative of conducting a full scale invasion of Japan's home islands was a very real scenario. We could have taken back those areas still held by Japan, but the thought of the time was that would remove their motivation for offering a surrender. The culture of Japan was one that could not accept defeat - but offering a cease fire in place - with Japan keeping some of it's empire - was not complete defeat. Fighting to the last was in their code of honor if some victory was not attainable. So the concern over the level of casualties involved in a full scale invasion of Japan's home islands was a very real one.
Addendum: Many believed at the time that had Japan known we had no more bombs available after Nagasaki, they would not have surrendered.
Last edited:
They really didn't know if it would work, they had not yet tested the devices or the modified planes to see if the drop would work. There was an argument on whether or not to warn the Japanese government that the drop was coming, just in case the devices didn't go off.
They had to arm the devices in the air, the first bomb used Uranium, the second more powerful one used Plutonium, however it caused less damage as Nagasaki's terrain limited direct impact in much of the city. Nagasaki was the second target of the second plane, the first one had haze that they could not see the target area through.
The first bomb went off at 1900 ft above the city, the second about 1700 feet.
The pause in between was not to allow the Japanese time to surrender, it just took that long to prepare the attack as they had not collected a sufficient amount of Plutonium to attack immediately following the first attack. Three days then the second strike....
Descriptions from survivors are truly Hellish.
They had to arm the devices in the air, the first bomb used Uranium, the second more powerful one used Plutonium, however it caused less damage as Nagasaki's terrain limited direct impact in much of the city. Nagasaki was the second target of the second plane, the first one had haze that they could not see the target area through.
The first bomb went off at 1900 ft above the city, the second about 1700 feet.
The pause in between was not to allow the Japanese time to surrender, it just took that long to prepare the attack as they had not collected a sufficient amount of Plutonium to attack immediately following the first attack. Three days then the second strike....
Descriptions from survivors are truly Hellish.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Instead of proposing unconditional surrender or nothing, we should've said that we'd accept a conditional surrender that gave amnesty to the Japanese emperor. In essence, an unconditional surrender in all but name, except that it would be remotely "honorable". Since we gave him amnesty anyway after the war it would've been a loss of nothing but tough talk. The three stalwart Japanese ministers had too much pride for an unconditional surrender, and I would see no problem with taking their idiotic psychology into account in exchange for hundreds of thousands of innocent lives.
Oh, but this is merely speculation with the benefit of hindsight.
Oh, but this is merely speculation with the benefit of hindsight.
Last edited:
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
http://www.associatedcontent.com/ar...pan_delay_surrender_to_the.html?page=3&cat=37
Alperovitz argued that the Japanese were ready to capitulate as early as June 1945, when the emperor opened his mind to surrender and that faint peace feelers appeared as early as September 1944.14 In correspondence with Herbert Feis, it was later agreed "that a Russian declaration was considered useful psychologically-as the shock which itself was likely to produce surrender".15 Due to the severe decay in Japanese morale, even Eisenhower, the future architect of the military-industrial complex, argued against dropping the bomb. Eisenhower later told Feis that "it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing".16 Even the War Department advised Truman that a Soviet declaration of war combined with an imminent threat to invade Kyushu would surely force surrender.
Truman dropped the bomb not using the information obtained from Henry Stimson's War Department, but at the behest of Secretary of State Byrnes.
Alperovitz argued that the Japanese were ready to capitulate as early as June 1945, when the emperor opened his mind to surrender and that faint peace feelers appeared as early as September 1944.14 In correspondence with Herbert Feis, it was later agreed "that a Russian declaration was considered useful psychologically-as the shock which itself was likely to produce surrender".15 Due to the severe decay in Japanese morale, even Eisenhower, the future architect of the military-industrial complex, argued against dropping the bomb. Eisenhower later told Feis that "it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing".16 Even the War Department advised Truman that a Soviet declaration of war combined with an imminent threat to invade Kyushu would surely force surrender.
Truman dropped the bomb not using the information obtained from Henry Stimson's War Department, but at the behest of Secretary of State Byrnes.
Minister of Truth
Practically Perfect
Yes, I too wish that 10 million Japanese and 1 million more Americans had died. Would have served us all right.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Yes, I too wish that 10 million Japanese and 1 million more Americans had died. Would have served us all right.
Yes, I wish (place ridiculous rebuttal with a huge assumption in the middle of it here) too!
Last edited:
Minister of Truth
Practically Perfect
So say the numbers of what a US/USSR invasion would have looked like. Pretty, huh?
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Threedee is an excellent example of how college teaches you nothing.
Yes, I too wish that 10 million Japanese and 1 million more Americans had died. Would have served us all right.
Who knows what would have happened?
Regardless, the ends do not justify the means. We might be able to thwart a terrorist attack by ripping off someone's fingernails, but it doesn't mean America should be a country that tortures. We also shouldn't be a country that intentionally targets civilians in a war; no country should.
That's what Bin Laden does, btw.
Threedee is an excellent example of someone who is going to be caught with various female body parts rotting in his basement someday, and become a case study for the Behavioral Science Dept at the FBI.
Oh Gosh, I ‘m sorry, I did it again! This is what I think about Thor, not threedee, why do I keep doing this? Sorry!
But seriously, this is thor/brent, whatever you call that freak.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
I could've stopped him, if only I could go back and have another chance...
I never saw a bigger bunch of whining crybabies in my life. You call yourself men?
Ohhh, Darla’s venomous….ohhhhhh.
I get more than my share of venom and shit slung at me, and I can deal with it without crying about it.
Men, or mice? I report, you decide.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Well it is easy to see how that can happen. We all know how easy it is to confuse some of these liberals. We also know that some of them never actually read what it is they are responding to. They just react.
She probably got to the "Th" in his name, jumped to her assumption and attacked and an innocent kid took the hit.
For shame. For shame.
