In the words of Gene Hackman "Yes sir drop those suckers...Twice!"

__________________
"True Freedom is the Freedom to oppress others"

Ideology: Self Preservation.

Nope, it wasn't necessary.

Yea, screw it if the country is trying to go for peace.

If they were trying to go for peace they would have surrendered.

__________________
My Political Blog (Updated Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

They were willing to.

We didn't care.

Please post your evidence that Japan attempted to surrender unconditionally before we dropped our atomic weapons on them.

__________________
My Political Blog (Updated Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

Yes, we asked them to surrender unconditionally.

That would mean they would lose their Emperor.

They said, "No, we don't want that. Otherwise, we will surrender."

We said, "No, unconditional only."

We drop two bombs.

Japan surrenders.

They keep their Emperor until almost 1990.

It. Does. Not. Make. Sense.

Probably. Explain why they were entitled to retain their emperor.



That response was insufficient. That is what "unconditional" means...without conditions.



The bombs seemed to motivate them to surrender unconditionally. Therefore, we were correct to use them.


I agree actually....they could have saved themselves a lot of unnecessary suffering and trouble by simply surrendering unconditionally to begin with. But the fault was their's. We provided them with the opportunity.


So to sum up: Your statement of "They were willing to [surrender]" was flat wrong. They were not willing to surrender without conditions.

__________________
My Political Blog (Updated Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

I don't feel like playing the separation game.

Anyways, if unconditional surrender was such a "high priority" to the United States government, then why were they allowed to retain their Emperor after the war ended? It didn't meet the requirements of an uncoditional surrender. Why didn't they enforce it? They didn't give a crap. Unconditional surrender was the only thing stopping peace. Not Japan's relentlessness or any other propaganda myth manifested by the government of the time period.

No one is forcing you to.


If we had done that, we would not have been able to restructure their government in such a way as to remove their threat to us. And unconditional surrender gives us complete control. An unconditional surrender removes the need for negotiation.

But the specific reasons were irrelevant. They attacked us. We were not obligated to subject ourselves to conditions. At the time they were a threat, and we could not remove that threat without an unconditional surrender.



I agree. The Japanese could have chosen to surrender unconditionally at any time. That would have removed the need for atomic weapons to be used.

__________________
My Political Blog (Updated Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?