Would you have used the atom bomb on Japan in WWII if you were Prez?

The really sad part is the way we rewrite the history to make us look heroic

 

That generation was heroic. The snowflake generation now are the only ones that whine about it.

We'll nuke someone else again in the future. You guys are gonna have a field day with that.

 

The generation was heroic. Truman was a coward war criminal

 

What war crime did he violate

 

Except that Eisenhower neither said nor implied any such thing.

 

Doesn't matter son. Can'tconvince those that refuse to see

 

Well at least you admit you don't know.

What country will we nuke next?

 

Okay, you can go back to living with mom and dad. Just be sure to clean up your room and take out the trash.

 

I think he is going to be grounded. Lol

 

Fair trade to nuke our enemies

 

That would have confirmed Japan's military analysis that we didn't have the stomach to kill millions of Japanese as would have occurred in an invasion, which was part of their defense calculations. The Emperor would not have made his radio broadcast before the military seized him. From that point no surrender would have been possible as the true operating principle of the military was death for everyone before the dishonor of surrender as was demonstrated in fighting island to island.

People like to make up alternative realities and ignore what actually happened, pretending that everyone must think like we do, a common arrogance of Americans. The Emperor gave ONE exact reason he broadcast his surrender. it was us being "cruel" with atom bomb that was going to cause the "extinction" of the Japanese as to why he surrendered before the Japanese military totally took over. Even after the bombs dropped on the cities, the Japanese military command opposed surrender, which is why the Emperor broadcast the surrender without informing them.

In addition, we had exactly TWO atomic bombs. The Japanese military did not believe we had many. BUT we had tricked the Japanese Emperor into believing we had hundreds of them. It would have quickly become apparent we were bluffing and the Japanese military was correct in their assessment. If you have TWO bullets against an enemy numbering 70,000,000+, you don't spend 1 of the 2 firing a warning shot to convince them you really don't want to hurt them.

(We only had enough material to built between 2 to 3 more, and it would have taken weeks to assemble them and transport them for usage. During those weeks the Japanese military would have further entrenched in the mountains plus moving their war factories there and would have seized control of the Japanese civilian government. Since the Japanese leadership believed we would have hung them all for war crimes and their ethics required they suicide before surrender, atom bombs would not cause them to surrender as surrender was death anyway.

Like Hitler believing all Germans should die for failing him, the Japanese military also had universal death before dishonor - and in island fighting civilians did mass suicide rather than being taken by the US military.

We convinced the Emperor on a bluff we had hundreds of such bombs, but did not. Those two bombs prevented genocide of the Japanese, not just many more American casualties. Contrary to the claims of anti-bomb claims, the Japanese were still fighting and killing Americans. For example, nearly 1000 Americans were killed with the ship that carried one of the bombs was sunk on the return trip by a Japanese destroyer.

The Japanese still had dozens of submarines hunting American ships. Still had 2000 Kamikazi planes. Still had nearly 1 million troops in China kill our ally Chinese, including mass slaughtering their civilians.

SO... the question to you is how many more thousands of Americans had to die because you thought it more ethical for them to die than Japanese to die? How many more tens of thousands of Chinese civilians had to die because you like Japanese civilians including in their war industrial city making weapons better? Not much of an ally when your allies deaths mean less than that of the enemy, and not much of a commander when American lives mean less than the enemy's lives.

 

Totally unecessary and the bombs had nothing to do with japan.

 

Mom....I said knock before entering

 

Sounds like a rough life you had.

I used to just put the sock on the door which is the universal sign.

But I've had friends with similar stories like yours

 

That's funny. Buy a house son. Lol

 

All fair points that you make which I largely agree with.

 

That is pretty much nonsense?

http://www.doug-long.com/quotes.htm

 

A very FALSE asserting being made by those against dropping the atom bombs was that Japan was going to surrender anyway (false by Japanese records) and that Japan had been isolated on their island and therefore poised no danger to anyone anyway. That also is false.

Clearly, those who opposed ending the war ASAP either have no clue about what was going on in China or absolutely did not care what happened to the Chinese - which happened to also be one of our allies. The Japanese had nearly a million troops in China and slaughtered - literally slaughtered - Chinese civilians.

Japan still has a submarine fleet hunting and sinking US ships - such as the ship that delivered one of the ships that delivered one of the bombs on the return trip - killing nearly 1000 Americans. Japan has 2,000 Kamikazi planes and was building more. Japan had troops spread around the Pacific still terrorizing and killing civilians.

Over and over "experts" claimed Germany would recognize they were defeated and surrendered, but did not and could not because Hitler. The same for Japan. Who controlled the Japanese military had no intentions of every surrendering no matter what it meant to civilians since they knew surrender meant death to them anyway. After the SECOND bomb, the Japanese Emperor broadcast a surrender without the knowledge of the Japanese military while he still had the ability to do so before the military seized him.

 

Here are a few quotes from a few snowflakes. Somehow I don't think you could measure up to any of them.

http://www.doug-long.com/quotes.htm

 

If Eisenhower was God you'd have a point. But he wasn't. Nor were we willing to agreed to the terms Japan insisted upon to surrender.

Eisenhower was willing to sacrifice any lives for global political agendas. The lives of troops and civilians irrelevant. If you read further WHY Eisenhower opposed using the bomb it is because he wanted to maintain a very close relationship with Stalin and the USSR - with now people ranting that Trump wanting a close relationship with Putin is TREASON and grounds for impeachment.

Nor was Eisenhower much involved in the Asian theater. The generals directly involved in invasion plans and even dropping the bomb claimed it necessary. One even the general who flew the plane with the first bomb.

Why do people think they can pick one opinion out of thousands and then declare they win? Unfortunately, Eisenhower did not have the ability to declare Japan is surrendering, did he? Generals lie a lot anyway in predicting surrender, such as how N. Vietnam was going to surrender. Germany was going to surrender. The Taliban will surrender...

 

I can't. You said my job is being taken away in exchange for us nuking the enemy

 

Unrelated note: Your link triggered my Symantec and could contain Phishing software.

Can you copy and paste the quotes or whatever you are talking about? I will not be going to that link

 

America wasted resources and lives entering world war 2 because of japan, if we had let england, russia, and the germans destroy themselves into a stalemate, we would be the only nuclear power today.

einstein developed the atomic bomb because he was an American, not a jew.

all of our failures as a country today are because we dropped the atomic bomb, now we depend on unfair trade and immigration due to the world war 2 global market created by the rich who control American investments.

 

Einstein did not develop the bomb, he warned FDR that such as the bomb could be made and that Germany knew how to make it. He was a German pacifist and did so because he was Jewish and, while he had fled to the USA, his sister did not and she was killed in a holocaust camp.

Based upon that, the USA not only began the Manhattan Project, but also did a raid to destroy Germany's heavy water facility. Germany even tested a bomb, but did not have enough material. Germany knew how to make atom bombs even before we did. Did you know that?

Had we not assisted the UK and the USSR - for which Germany declared war on us - Germany would have won the war and controlled all of Europe and the USSR. It would not have been a stalemate whatsoever.

It is just naive to claim we would be the only nuclear power. Germany understood atomic bombs before we did, but their first test did not have enough material and we had done a raid destroying their ability to make another before the war ended.

Your last paragraph is so absurd and overstated there is no point to respond to it. It's just more "I hate the USA" coming from the left.

 

The great error of WWII was FDR and Eisenhower believed the USA and the mass murderer Stalin would be great friends and allies after the war by which the USSR and USA would control the world- provided we betrayed everyone in Eastern Europe giving their countries to the USSR. This also protracted the war costing many lives.

Churchill vehemently opposed this, arguing the rational decision of the USA and UK just continue its success out of Greece up the "soft underbelly of Eastern Europe" - thus shortening the war, saving lives, and liberation all Eastern European countries like we had promised if they fought with us and fought as insurgents. This was a lie. FDR agreed privately with Stalin to betray them all.

Instead, to try to be pals with the mass murderer Stalin, FDR secretly agreed to let Stalin enslave all Eastern European countries. Eisenhower was made the top commander because he was willing to go along with this horrific betrayal that also then created the USSR Warsaw Pact of enslaved countries by Stalin. Eisenhower was not a combat commander, he was the political link between FDR, Stalin and Churchill.

In the end, FDR sided with Stalin against the UK - with Eisenhower to put such a mass betrayal into effect. It became known that FDR was very ill and pro-socialists had gotten onto his staff as advisers. The Potdam Accord between FDR and Stalin is considered by many to be the greatest betrayal of allies in USA history, including by me.

Eisenhower was NOT universally liked, though now some Democrats on the forum claim he was their guy - most of all because he was so pro-USSR. Republicans furiously tried to stop him obtaining the nomination. He was severely criticized for giving all of Eastern Europe to the USSR, communism and Stalin. He also was severely criticized for how readily he sacrificed American lives such as the early air campaigns against Germany - which were essentially suicide missions and the highest rates of American casualties in the war.

But for FDR and Eisenhower wanting to be pals with Stalin, D-Day and all the death and destruction fighting across Western Europe would never had been necessary and 100,000,000 would not have been enslaved by a sociopathic mass murdering Stalin. There would have been no Warsaw Pact, no Cold War and no divided Berlin or divided Germany as we would have captured it - rather than FDR agreeing that Stalin could - all due to the liberal side of FDR siding with the USSR's communism/socialism over the UK's capitalism and his willingness to outright lie to and betray our Eastern European allies.

The reason Eisenhower opposed using the atomic bombs was because he though it would harm being pals with Stalin.

BTW, Russia began its atomic bomb program in 1943 in the middle of the war. The UK was developing it too - two years before using the atomic bomb on Japan. Read up on it sometime.