Instead of coming out swinging at me you could have actually made a contribution to the thread.

Now you just look desperate.

2nukes on a crippled enemy country is very easy to understand...you nuked like 200.000 people, whilst being in no immediate danger, super easy to understand stuff...happy klingon day!

:thumbsup :thumbsup

When the Chinese start to say sorry to all the Chinese, Philippinos, Burmese, POW's and their own people they were happy to see killed in a war they would lose. Then fine, we should say sorry for ending WW2 with the least number of Japanese casulties.

This was like Hitler in his bunker already knowing he was going to shoot himself, telling Germans to fight to the death.

such great logic! nuke a crippled enemy because one man in a palace lives in his imaginary world and will not admit defeat to other men in another palace!...now the other men in the palace have hurt hurt pride and need to nuke 200.000 random civilians who do not get asked about palatial matters at all :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

LOL at the west trying to justify nuking civilians OMG you guys are desperate to justify what is the #1 and #2 terrorist act of all times :1orglaugh :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

the jap emperor surrendering his crippled to fuck country was SOOOOO important OMFG! its the equivalent of "Say my name bitch" :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

it was SO SO SO SO important for the emperor to submit and then carry on living in his palace LOL 200.000 dead over a meaningless "we surrender" :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

There was a terrible tragedy in Japan

The U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey group, assigned by President Truman to study the air attacks on Japan, produced a report in July of 1946 that concluded (52-56):

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.

General (and later president) Dwight Eisenhower ? then Supreme Commander of all Allied Forces, and the officer who created most of America?s WWII military plans for Europe and Japan ? said:

The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn?t necessary to hit them with that awful thing.

Newsweek, 11/11/63, Ike on Ike

Eisenhower also noted (pg. 380):

In [July] 1945? Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. ?the Secretary, upon giving me the news of the successful bomb test in New Mexico, and of the plan for using it, asked for my reaction, apparently expecting a vigorous assent.

During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of ?face?. The Secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude?.

Admiral William Leahy ? the highest ranking member of the U.S. military from 1942 until retiring in 1949, who was the first de facto Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and who was at the center of all major American military decisions in World War II ? wrote (pg. 441):

It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons.

The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children.

General Douglas MacArthur agreed (pg. 65, 70-71):

MacArthur?s views about the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were starkly different from what the general public supposed ?. When I asked General MacArthur about the decision to drop the bomb, I was surprised to learn he had not even been consulted. What, I asked, would his advice have been? He replied that he saw no military justification for the dropping of the bomb. The war might have ended weeks earlier, he said, if the United States had agreed, as it later did anyway, to the retention of the institution of the emperor.

Moreover (pg. 512):

The Potsdam declaration in July, demand[ed] that Japan surrender unconditionally or face ?prompt and utter destruction.? MacArthur was appalled. He knew that the Japanese would never renounce their emperor, and that without him an orderly transition to peace would be impossible anyhow, because his people would never submit to Allied occupation unless he ordered it. Ironically, when the surrender did come, it was conditional, and the condition was a continuation of the imperial reign. Had the General?s advice been followed, the resort to atomic weapons at Hiroshima and Nagasaki might have been unnecessary.

Similarly, Assistant Secretary of War John McLoy noted (pg. 500):

I have always felt that if, in our ultimatum to the Japanese government issued from Potsdam [in July 1945], we had referred to the retention of the emperor as a constitutional monarch and had made some reference to the reasonable accessibility of raw materials to the future Japanese government, it would have been accepted. Indeed, I believe that even in the form it was delivered, there was some disposition on the part of the Japanese to give it favorable consideration. When the war was over I arrived at this conclusion after talking with a number of Japanese officials who had been closely associated with the decision of the then Japanese government, to reject the ultimatum, as it was presented. I believe we missed the opportunity of effecting a Japanese surrender, completely satisfactory to us, without the necessity of dropping the bombs.

Under Secretary of the Navy Ralph Bird said:

I think that the Japanese were ready for peace, and they already had approached the Russians and, I think, the Swiss. And that suggestion of [giving] a warning [of the atomic bomb] was a face-saving proposition for them, and one that they could have readily accepted.

***

In my opinion, the Japanese war was really won before we ever used the atom bomb. Thus, it wouldn?t have been necessary for us to disclose our nuclear position and stimulate the Russians to develop the same thing much more rapidly than they would have if we had not dropped the bomb.




nice job USA :thumbsup

Look at the shellshocked serb squirm.

Ahahahahahahahaahahahahaha

Sure, there is opinion after the fact.

None of which has jack fucking shit to do with what bo should have said nor is it even factual. It's simply opinion on war.

hey at least you got one delusional man in a palace to "say your name" :thumbsup:thumbsup

well worth the 200.000 dead :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

you guys really like to murder others dont you? :winkwink:

Serbi is too fucking stupid and shellshocked to even embrace historical facts. We didn't start the shit with Japan, we finished it.


Just like with your Serbi punk asses
Ahahahahahahahaahahahahaha

Don't try to argue logic on this one. Americans see this as their truly noble war. No one ever considers the fact that a country of 73 million was never really going to take over a country of 132 million that was many days away from their homeland by sea. And that they were fighting on other fronts already. "We saved lives" is always going to be the fall back.

None of this actually relates to factual history or this thread .

Obvious, you don't concern yourself with facts.

Cool story though not really. You fully leave out the basic fact that Japs attacked USA.

I've seen the movie only about 5 times. :D

Will have a look at that documentary though, thanks.

Yes, in 2011.

--- 3 nuclear reactors melted down after quake, Japan confirms - CNN.com

quick history lesson for you:

the entire world war 2, not the war in the Pacific and certainly not just the USA kicking jap ass, is universally considered the Noble war, well, universally except by you and the shellshocked serbi.

i guess it's easy to forget that the USA didn't start shit in Europe or the Pacific when your goal is to simply make shit up about Americans so you can point your finger at US.

they bombed them out of necessity, not because they deserved it. There is a difference here. You can still show regret over the amount of deaths that happened because of it without saying it was necessary at the time. That is probably the tone he was aiming for there.

you may very well be right. i see it as disingenuous. he should know more about ww2 than that. BO also should know that the morality debate of dropping those bombs has overshadowed the atrocities and conquests of imperial Japan. it was also a time long before precision bombing. civilian targets were part and partial of the entire ww2 for all sides, it was how the war was fought. hindsight is 20-20.

Oh so according to your logic the USA started many wars so other countries have the right to nuke your civilians when you are no longer a threat?

What does the USA have against asians this is a serious question...most of the bombs ever dropped were by the USA on asians...why such hate? I mean you fly the fuck over and bomb and nuke and napalm and agent orange them...what did asians do to piss you off so much?

Shellshockedserbio, we've been buddies and more with Japan since MacArthur rebuilt their country 75 years ago.



You also fail at realizing 99.999999999% of gfyers weren't even born during Vietnam war.

You also completely fail at grasping what the topic is.

I heard that 70 years after the nuke the radiation is still increasing....

Oh wait...

Anyway... it's a pretty radiated place....:helpme

Nukes are an anomaly of history.

War is stupid.

like shellshockserbi and bronco67esq.