I Get So Pissed Off Here Sometimes

You have been misinformed by propaganda: http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-stone-kuznick-hiroshima-obama-20160524-snap-story.html

 

While the circumstantial evidence suggests he may have, I haven't seen anything definitive. The main difference seems to be that democrats want it investigated and republicans don't want it investigated. So it's hard to really argue about facts that aren't known yet. But I suspect that no matter how bad the facts are, you'll still stick with your team.

 

Sorry its not debateable.

 

Can't have a debate with somebody closed to facts, it's true.

 

no I dont debate historical fact. This is remedial stuff we all learned in 4th grade. Facebook posters may entertain your debate though. Then again they like the taste of tidepods as well.

 

You were misinformed. If you understand what was going on in the war at that time you would have understood that the explanation doesn't make any sense. Why would the Japanese surrender just because we destroyed a few cities with a different kind of bomb after we had destroyed hundreds of their cities with regular bombs? The death toll wasn't even the highest from the nuclear bombs. The Japanese leadership wanted to bleed America into better peace terms. The Soviet invasion removed their potential broker, and also introduced an adversary that they knew would treat their leadership and country badly and didn't care whether they had major losses in getting victory.

 

Facepalm....I have to ask where you attended elementary school. You dont have to answer unless you want to. The Japanese didnt surrender. It took a second bomb.....uggh sorry I cant get embroiled in facebook level stuff.

 

My elementary school taught me the same thing as you. Old history textbooks were written primarily to inspire patriotism, not to communicate facts. And I discovered this during a debate about the morality of using it where my initial position was that it was immoral and we should have accepted conditional surrender. But when I researched it, I found that it wasn't what actually ended the war. I think this is the article that convinced me: https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/05/30/the-bomb-didnt-beat-japan-stalin-did/

I also don't really use facebook. I mean I have an account, but I don't even check it monthly. I am not sure what makes you so certain you are correct. I guess you're just too closed-minded to consider alternatives. It is well known that history is written by the victors, and the traditional narrative sounded better than the fact that Truman wanted to test his bomb on civilians to intimate the Russians... because that's what he really did. And it sounded better to the Japanese to claim a loss from insurmountable technology than too many enemies.

 

Let's narrow that a bit.
A Democrat nuked the enemy civilians. His name is Truman.

 

The Japanese including the Emperor had no idea of how many more of the A Bombs Democrat Truman had nor how many he would drop. They were bad bad bombs for sure. There was nothing for Japan to not surrender for. Why fight when they were beaten so badly?

 

Add me to the list making that suggestion. Good post above. Sorry the OP ran into opposition.

 

The Japanese plan before the soviets attacked them was to use the soviets to negotiate as good of peace terms as possible with the Americans (I've seen primary sources on this one). They knew the Americans and Soviets were rivals, and so thought the Soviets wouldn't let the Americans get too good of a deal. Failing that, they also thought they could bleed the Americans until favorable terms could be negotiated. Their main concern being the emperor.

I think nearly all of the major cities had been devastated by bombings. Had this concerned the leadership before, they would have surrendered after the other bombings. This wasn't going to prevent the Japanese from hiding in the ruins and killing a lot of Americans.

Also timing. When the Japanese leadership met to decide to surrender, they had not yet heard of the 2nd nuclear bombing (I think it occurring during the meeting, actually). And it was days after the 1st nuclear bombing. The soviet invasion, however:

https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/05/30/the-bomb-didnt-beat-japan-stalin-did/

 

Yes, Truman was a piece of garbage.

 

Angry?

It's because of the paid right wing trolls who cause so much trouble by spewing hate:


Asa Kavich‎ to The Daily Show
March 28, 2014 ·
Google: republican paid trolls

The next time you come across an infuriated, typo-laden rant defending Fox News online, you can rest assured that your countrymen haven’t devolved into a mob of barely literate, blind devotees of Rupert Murdoch’s TV hate machine. After all, it’s probably just a Fox staffer doing his or her job.



https://www.facebook.com/thedailyshow/posts/10152315231346800

 

Harry S Truman was a patriot unlike Dump Trump who is a draft dodger:


https://www.trumanlibrary.org/lifetimes/military.htm

 

I was referring to his actions at the end of WWII primarily. Both in terms of the the nuclear bombs and in exacerbating strain with the Soviets. Despite his immensely destructive impact, I probably shouldn't try to say that's all there was to him as a person.

 

I'm happy, happy, happy that the USA nuked Japan, and given the same circumstances, it should be done again.

My Dad, and many others, came home. And we won quicker. Winning is the only thing.

Thanks President Truman. You did good at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

 

Please read this: https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/05/30/the-bomb-didnt-beat-japan-stalin-did/

 

It all works together for good. All the pain and death dished out works toward winning. If Stalin helped dish out death to the Japanese, good.

 

While I'm torn over what happened to civilians in those two cities (especially the innocent children) I have no choice but to concede that it did accelerate the ending of the war. Being the warrior that he was, it was said at that time that President Truman did not lose one minute of sleep over this decision.

My greatest regret as a student of history is how so many Japanese war criminals got off so easy after the war. IMO, not enough of them were held accountable for their horrendous crimes in China and in other parts of Asia. Further, too many Japanese capitalists retained their war wealth (as did many Germans) and were not forced to pay compensatory sums to their victims. Truman and the allies should have done more to make them pay.

 

Stalin did save American lives by attacking the Japanese for sure. The whole point was that the nuclear bombing was not significant in inducing unconditional surrender. A point I forgot about from the article was:

https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/05/30/the-bomb-didnt-beat-japan-stalin-did/

 

It was a mistake not to hit Tokyo.

 

Ok. Thanks for the clarification. But note that historians agree that it was the Truman doctrine that stopped the spread of communism. I recall from past readings that it was this stoppage which prevented half the world from turning commie and that this (it was said years ago) which prevented WW III.


https://www.google.com/search?q=tru...hrome.0.0l6.3515j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

You mean Kyoto? Probably wouldn't have made a difference. The nuclear bombs didn't need Tokyo's sloppy seconds:

 

While Tokyo was fire bombed repeatedly, I understand from past readings that HST was planning on dropping still another series of A-Bombs when Japan suddenly surrendered. That supposedly is why he did not drop one there.