Hiroshima at 75: bitter row persists over US decision to drop the bomb

No - bin Laden wants his talking point back.

 

Ridiculous.

Nonsense.

Ditto.

 

False. False. Complex.

 

Yes - Truman was a psychopathic fascist.

 

Correct.
Incorrect.

 

^^^ Sanity.

(Though the genocide issue is one which will be picked apart by those unwilling to see these two bombings as the horrendous acts of terror they were.)

 

^^^ Gets it.

 

And that is precisely what many in the US continue to say.

 

NO my uncle on the Battleship Nevada was NOT a combatant.
There was no Declaration of War between the Empire of Japan and
the United States of America





Thus, "infamy" on Japan.
A word hardly heard before FDR's speech
and I believe a dagger in the heart of honor of Japan
But, hey
that's just Moi

 

~ I think Hiroshima was a military target. There were factories and other facilities there. However I believe it was also densely populated with many civilians who worked in the factories. The goal was to end the war - totally. The U.S. accomplished that goal and in doing so preserved many lives.
I am certain had Germany or Japan had an atomic weapon first the results would have been much worse .

~ Yes - correct. I believe the U.S. was actually in the beginning of peace talks with Japan. Pearl Harbor was a sneak attack. Japan was directly responsible for pulling the U.S. into war as an act of self-defense. Something the likes of Obama fail to point out.
The Obama administration was an unwanted and inappropriate apologist to the world for America. No wonder other nations miss him .

 

The really f*****-up part is at Hiroshima received absolutely no warning. They warned Nagasaki about the attack, but was Hiroshima they wanted to kill as many civilians as possible to fully test the bombs destructive capabilities. That is why Hiroshima was selected because it was a highly populated city.

 

Bin Laden felt New York City was a legitimate target, among other places.

It's either okay, or it isn't.

I'm sticking with my pals Jesus, Ike & Einstein, and saying it isn't.

 

I will not justify Japan's attack with dramatic fonts, but they knew they were outgunned by the US and their only hope of winning was crippling the Navy. The military was fair game by their strategy.

 

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were spared from firebombing because "virgin targets" were desired.

The sickness of it is almost unimaginable.

 

No- they would not. If you were to follow commentary on FOX for example, you would be aware of some harsh criticism of Trump by both Hannity and Carlson, the top two news shows.

It is however true that with limited exception- you elect a leader to reach a goal- and unless you are an idiot you don't attempt to micromanage and criticize each step along the way. We care about reaching the goals first- details of how it's done are a step lower down the list. Let the man do his job; take us where we asked to go- and fire him if he doesn't. Trump's never had that opportunity.

IF a conservative (Trump supporter) in any way identified something they disagreed with about Trump, the left would do their damnedest to make it the entire case proving Trump had no support.
That's why you get little feedback on the issues- the left always abuses them. Hell, it's not safe for a person to wear a MAGA hat in public because some wacko is likely to lose it and physically attack the person or attempt to do them harm in some way- that is what the left things is "rational" these days.

To be honest, we don't feel the left is playing with a full deck, so to speak. Honest discussion includes pros and cons- but if you blow things out of proportion, you aren't discussing anyway; you are provoking arguments for arguments sake. Useless noise. That seems to be the essence of left-leaning media and followers.

I've posted several articles criticizing aspects of Trump's conduct- but also usually noted that bad as it may be at times, it's greatly preferable to anything the left could come up with. Trump is not the president I would like him to be- but as Winston Churchill once said about democracy "It's the worst system of government there is- except for all the others". That's comparable to the view of Trump supporters. He's not Jesus- but Jesus wasn't running.

Right now, the democrats are about to confirm a person who is clearly physically and mentally unprepared for the job as their candidate. That in itself is a departure from sanity. They had a lot better people, but for assorted reasons, (such as being too rational or moderate) couldn't get themselves to go with qualifications first. They listen to people as ludicrous as AOC; and cozy up to any idea they think might get votes, no matter how wacky it is. These are not people interested in the quality of life in America- or even it's survival. They wouldn't have a prayer of running the nation anyway but downhill fast. So why would anyone of any party with any common sense not support Trump, when all opposition is so grossly incompetent?

Why do all arguments about Trump go to personality issues- never economics, jobs, conditions- the things that typically rule elections parameters? Because they have nothing, so they grab at whatever else.
I'm interested in hiring the guy that can get the job done. That comes FIRST, because if it doesn't- nothing else will matter.

Trump will be gone, just as Obama, Clinton, Bush, etc are. I think what the dems fear most is that if Trump proves his objectives are realistic, the man who follow him will walk the same path, the nation will get stronger, and the democrats will be left behind. They should try the "Performance" approach, actually doing something for the people and nation rather than spending 4 years trying to torpedo the president. Be a lot more reason to consider them, and perhaps- believe in them.

 

I wonder why you haven’t mentioned the fire bombing of Tokyo

 

And yet you still can’t show that Japan was ready to surrender

 

~ Lou Dobbs is the most critical of the "lazy do-nothing Republicans" that I have seen.
Sunday Morning Futures on FOX has a host that always questions the republicans with obvious disappointment.

 

It's not the topic. Why haven't you mentioned Trump's combover? (Same reason.)

 

Then it wasn't "allright" to eliminate the jews, or to bomb the world trade center, to launch missiles at London, or for that matter to bomb Pearl harbor.

We have no way on knowing how many Americans and how many Japanese would have been killed if we had done differently- but most estimates are far higher than those resulting from use of the nukes.
The Navy estimated between 1.7 and 4 million American casualties with 400,000 to 800,000 deaths. The same department estimated that there would be up to 10 million Japanese casualties. The total of both bombs killed about 225,000 Japanese- no Americans. It would seem that even from the standpoint of some Japanese- who said they would have fought to the last man or woman- that the choice saved millions of Japanese lives.

War is not a prize fight with rules. The only rule is to WIN. You do that best by being their first with the most. Indeed, Hitlers Blitzkreig proved how effective that technique is. You can bet that if the Nazis had developed a nuke before we did, you wouldn't be living in America today, because we would not exist.

It may be hard to understand- but the worst thing you can do is a war is fail to give it all you have got.

 

Deus vult​

 

And yet you still can't just educate yourself...

 

Surrender accepted

 

Of course those things weren't alright.

Bottom line: NEVER okay

Also: Japan crushed & prepared to surrender

Repeating bottom line: NEVER okay

 

Are you wrestling with yourself?

Knock yourself out bro!