Hiroshima, 64 years ago (boston.com pics)

[GONNAFISTYA]

lol

Pathetic.

[shaft]

i think you're (intentionally?) confusing issues. i dont think gfy or most who argue that the bombs were not necessary are arguing that japan didn't commit those atrocities.

no im arguing the stupidity of crying warcrime at the atrocity committed when it was a drop in the bucket compared to WWII as a whole. war fucking sucks, it should have never happened. there were probably thousands of other solutions that are easy to suggest decades later. I also like pointing out GFY's obsession with America. The America who help stopped the AXIS by fighting on multiple fronts.

[Chupacabra]

i think you're (intentionally?) confusing issues. i dont think gfy or most who argue that the bombs were not necessary are arguing that japan didn't commit those atrocities.

no im arguing the stupidity of crying warcrime at the atrocity committed when it was a drop in the bucket compared to WWII as a whole. war fucking sucks, it should have never happened. there were probably thousands of other solutions that are easy to suggest decades later. I also like pointing out GFY's obsession with America. The America who help stopped the AXIS by fighting on multiple fronts.

two wrongs make a right?

anyway, i guess i just see these things are two different issues.

edit: i should also say that i dont know enough about this nuclear weapon thing to really comment on it. but again, that's separate from the japanese war crimes.

[Captain]

no im arguing the stupidity of crying warcrime at the atrocity committed when it was a drop in the bucket compared to WWII as a whole. war fucking sucks, it should have never happened. there were probably thousands of other solutions that are easy to suggest decades later. I also like pointing out GFY's obsession with America. The America who help stopped the AXIS by fighting on multiple fronts.

You're forgetting the 25 million Soviets who died holding back the Nazis.

[GONNAFISTYA]

Here shaft, perhaps this will comfort you...



Or perhaps the first one isn't comfy enough. Maybe you want a softer flag to wrap yourself in?



Hey shaft...remember that time when you said all I do is bash America and I said all you do is bash people who bash America...and you denied it? Remember that?

"GFY's obsession with America". Heaven forbid we have an honest discussion. Fucking idiot.

[shaft]

two wrongs make a right?

anyway, i guess i just see these things are two different issues.

edit: i should also say that i dont know enough about this nuclear weapon thing to really comment on it. but again, that's separate from the japanese war crimes.

how is dropping a bomb to defeat Japan separate than all the other atrocities committed that led to that decision? Japan started war, japan kills millions, America (and allies) join war killing millions and stop japan.

im not saying two wrongs make a right, in fact i never even said we should have used nuclear weapons. the only good thing that happened was the war ending. civilian casualties on both sides are sickening. are you saying it wasnt right to end the war? no, i dont think so. youre confused. Like i said, my main point was to bust GFY's chops and his one track mind. end of discussion.

[shaft]

Hey shaft...remember that time when you said all I do is bash America and I said all you do is bash people who bash America...and you denied it? Remember that?

"GFY's obsession with America". Heaven forbid we have an honest discussion. Fucking idiot.

I am far from a patriot and there are many things i don't like about America, however i rarely discuss them on a quake forum and the only anti-America retard i troll here is you, and its way2fuckingez because you're so goddamn obsessed. Feel free to show me where Ive pointed out anyones else's obsession with America though. Pretty sure i asked you last time and you had nothing. I win again.

[GONNAFISTYA]

my main point was to bust GFY's chops and his one track mind. end of discussion.

My main point was to bust the chops of the many who STILL think dropping nukes was a good idea (hindsight is obviously not 20/20 if people don't learn from it). End of discussion.

[GONNAFISTYA]

I am far from a patriot and there are many things i don't like about America...

Quit bashing America you traitor!

...i rarely discuss them on a quake forum and the only anti-America retard i troll here is you, and its way2fuckingez because you're so goddamn obsessed. Feel free to show me where Ive pointed out anyones else's obsession with America though. Pretty sure i asked you last time and you had nothing. I win again.

No. You lose. You're the one who looks obsessed.

[edit] fuck it...waste of time

[sliver]

I am not American and I'd say I'm more critical of America than the average person (which is not to say that I am ever critical for no reason whatsoever, i.e. out of blind hatred or somesuch thing), but I can't say I have any complaints about the A-bomb.

I'm not a history buff either, so someone will have to illuminate me about the Japanese "trying to make a deal" as GKY put it. But based on the broader facts, that the U.S. was expending its soldiers' lives half way around the world to finish a war they didn't want to get involved in from the beginning . . . option was perfectly reasonable if disproportionate.

Honestly, send a message: "you fucked us at Pearl Harbour, we're fucking you a million times harder." Turnabout is fair play. If I'm in a war for the sole reason that somebody else attacked me without warning, of course I'm going to favour an option that results in zero casualties on my side and instantly ends the war.

The Japanese were definitely involved in more significant (if smaller-scale) war crimes as far as prisoner treatment etc. than any Allied forces I've ever heard mentioned.

[Hannibal]

I am a history buff and I'd sooner eat broken glass than touch on WWII topics in this forum. YMMV

[Nightshade]

I don't think an invasion of the main island would have been necessary, however Honshu would have been a terrible battle. There are of course two side to this coin, as how many Japanese civilians would have died if the US had decided to blockade the mainland and starve them into submission?

Hard to say, I don't want to go speaking out of turn, not knowing offhand what remaining strength the Japanese had on the mainland at the end of the war. Yes, the blockade would have been the more cruel way, if one can gauge levels of cruelty in war, and I don't even know if that would have been necessary, strategically speaking. What was the point of seizing and dividing all of Germany? Hitler was dead and the German army had surrendered, so was there a point to all that? I think that the Japanese were certainly contained as a regional and global threat by the end of the war, but who's to say what would have happened if we hadn't taken some final step? I know that Pelelieu and Okinawa were horrific battles, the Japanese fought to the last man. Would they have just gone quietly into that good night if we'd stopped at Okinawa?

I don't hold to the "they fucked with us, so we're going to fuck them harder" approach. Not saying that that wasn't a factor in driving the bombs being dropped, I just think it's retarded. One is supposed to destroy exactly as much as required to accomplish the mission, and to destroy the enemy's ability to fight. Anything more and you're just running up the score. Besides, I think we all can agree that it wasn't the Japanese civilian population that bombed Pearl Harbor, and they were the ones that suffered.

GFY - Can you perhaps enlighten us as to the details of the deal that the Japanese were trying to make? Don't recall anyone trying to bargain on Okinawa...

[Peenyuh]

Every country who fought in WWII slaughtered civilians. A bullet, or an A-bomb. No difference. Every human on this planet is responsible for every disgusting thing one human has done to another. Change the fuckin world GFY, or go fuck yerself!

[Captain]

Did someone ask for your worthless opinion, gomez?

[LawL]

lol @ "dropping nukes on civillians wasn't that bad because other bad things were going on".

[Peenyuh]

Did someone ask for your worthless opinion, gomez?

You did. Check yer blackberry... it's in yer PURSE.

EDIT:
In total there are 12 users online :: 5 registered, 3 hidden and 4 guests
Most users ever online was 300 on December 10th, 2005, 5:46 am

Registered users: Baidu [Spider], Google [Bot], MSN [Bot], Peenyuh, Yahoo [Bot]

Mazduh, you chickenshit.

[xer0s]

America America America America America America America America America America America America America America America America

[Oralloy]

Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were legitimate military targets, however, there was absolutely no need to drop nuclear weapons over them to end the war. The Japanese were defacto defeated in the Pacific. The bombs were dropped to demonstrate this new weapon, and to scare the Russians.

Unfortunately there was no referee to call the fight because one side was clearly beaten. We had to push on until Japan actually surrendered.

[HM-PuFFNSTuFF]

Every human on this planet is responsible for every disgusting thing one human has done to another. (

new sig material

[HM-PuFFNSTuFF]

test

[Oralloy]

sigh

Japan didn't need to be invaded or bombed. If anyone has read a real history book the Japanese were fucked and trying to make a deal...and were ignored.

The first time the government of Japan contacted the United States about any deal was on August 10.

The A-bombs were dropped on August 6 and 9.

As to the cities being "legitimate military targets" that's a load of shit.

Hiroshima was Japan's primary military port, from which they shipped out most of their troops when they invaded other countries. It held tens of thousands of Japanese soldiers who were awaiting deployment.

Nagasaki held a number of large weapon factories, including the factory that designed the special torpedoes that were crafted specifically to defeat Pearl Harbor's natural defenses.

The bombing planners admitted they wanted "virgin" targets with high population density. The first bomb drop was a calibration test as well as an experiment for the second bomb drop.

The only reason they were dropped was to prove a point. A point which ultimately killed 160,000 people.

FFS.

Actually, the reason was to try to make Japan surrender.

[Oralloy]

I don't think an invasion of the main island would have been necessary, however Honshu would have been a terrible battle. There are of course two side to this coin, as how many Japanese civilians would have died if the US had decided to blockade the mainland and starve them into submission?

Hard to say, I don't want to go speaking out of turn, not knowing offhand what remaining strength the Japanese had on the mainland at the end of the war.

Southern Kyushu had 900,000 Japanese soldiers waiting to repel our invasion, and thousands of kamikazes that were training to aim for troop transports.

It is possible though that we would have skipped southern Kyushu and struck the Tokyo Plain directly. However, that would have made us unable to use most of the short range ground fighters that we were counting on for air support. But we could have countered that by using A-bombs to clear the beaches ahead of invasion.

Whatever we did, it certainly would have been at least as unpleasant as coming ashore at Normandy was.

GFY - Can you perhaps enlighten us as to the details of the deal that the Japanese were trying to make? Don't recall anyone trying to bargain on Okinawa...

Japan tried to reach a number of unrealistic deals in 1945.

In early 1945, before the collapse of Germany, Japan was trying to get Germany and Russia to make peace with each other. Japan hoped that if Germany was able to focus 100% of their attention on the UK, the US would have to shift a lot of Pacific resources to the war in Europe, thereby giving Japan some much-needed breathing room.

After Germany collapsed, up through the end of June, Japan focused on trying to get the Soviets to switch sides and help Japan in the Pacific theater.

In July of 1945, Japan finally stopped trying to win the war, and started trying to end the war in a draw. Japan hoped that the Soviets would mediate peace talks with the US that would result in a ceasefire something like the way the Korean War later ended. Japan also hoped that in exchange for good relations with Japan after the war, the Soviets would mediate in bad faith and press us to offer Japan such a deal. And Japan thought that we first needed to be sufficiently demoralized before we'd consider such a thing, so they were going to wait until we invaded Japan and had our invasion repelled (they hoped) before beginning negotiations.

On August 10 of 1945 (after both A-bombs) Japan decided to offer a conditional surrender, the condition being that Hirohito would remain sovereign ruler of Japan.

After being told on August 11 that MacArthur would have the power to depose Hirohito if he felt like it, Japan offered an unconditional surrender on August 14.

When they surrendered, they missed having the next A-bomb dropped on Tokyo by about a week.

[Captain]

EDIT:
In total there are 12 users online :: 5 registered, 3 hidden and 4 guests
Most users ever online was 300 on December 10th, 2005, 5:46 am

Registered users: Baidu [Spider], Google [Bot], MSN [Bot], Peenyuh, Yahoo [Bot]

Mazduh, you chickenshit.

lol, the filthy mexicunt thinks everyone should be logged on at Q3W 24/7 like his own fat self.

[GONNAFISTYA]

GFY - Can you perhaps enlighten us as to the details of the deal that the Japanese were trying to make? Don't recall anyone trying to bargain on Okinawa...

Japan had been given the Potsdam ultimatum from Washington on July 26, 1945. However - like Iraq - America had approached the deal from an "agree to these terms or else" starting position....which anyone with a sense of pride (ie Japan) would reject outright. Regardless of the ultimatum, Truman had already decided to nuke Japan in early July, so - as the Japanese authorities described in their reasons for refusing to surrender - it was a ridiculous offer.

Japan was indeed in the mood to surrender, but not under such moronic terms. The six-month long campaign of firebombing 60 -70 Japanese cities and food producing sites were indeed taking their toll and the Japanese government was afraid of their people starving. Given nowhere to bargain, Japan tried making a deal with Russia, which made matters worse.

There seems to be a prevalent consensus that Japan would never have surrendered if they weren't nuked. Most people cite Japan's bloodletting history in support of this. They'll claim that Japan would have fought to the last man, that the conventional bombings that leveled large portions of Japan for six months had no effect and that the war would have probably lasted until December 1945.

If that's true, why did they surrender? Why didn't they ignore the bombings and continue to fight anyways? Simple: because the people who thought they'd never surrender were wrong.

Oralloy is correct in that Japan decided to officially surrender at the Imperial Conference on August 9/10, but that's not the only time Japan considered giving up. Like I said, the American "bargaining tactics" were laughed off so they were ignored; they didn't believe they'd be nuked. Obviously this was Japan's fatal mistake.

Nobody is saying it was an easy decision, but if nuking civilians is the "smart, efficient" way to end wars, we're fucked as a species, which is the root of my argument.

Nightshade, if you need more info into the buildup to the bombing look up the works of Mark Selden from Cornell University.

[GONNAFISTYA]

It is also worth noting that during the six month bombing campaign of Japan, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were purposefully avoided so that the coming nukes could be tested on - as I mentioned - virgin targets. If the military establishments of those two cities was indeed so formidable, why ignore them for six months unless you're planning to nuke them anyways?

That's a question nobody seems to have an answer for...at least an answer that doesn't make them uncomfortable. It's also the main reason I dismiss the "they were military targets" argument.