Japan Should Say, "Thank YOU" for The Bomb!

This childish notion that the US shouldn't accept any terms because they "hit us first" is just silly.

 

The Battle of Okinawa, the last battle of the Pacific War, resulted in up to 150,000 Japanese civilian casualties, which was 50% of the estimated pre-war 300,000 local population in Okinawa. If it had been repeated in other parts of Japan, over 20 million Japanese people could have lost their lives before Japan's surrender. In 1944, the Army came up with an auto-genocidal slogan, "ichioku gyokusai" (the shattering of the hundred million Japanese lives like a beautiful jewel), promoting the sacrifice of the social body as a whole. In a way, Hiroshima had to take one for the team in order to save other parts of Japan from a genocide.

 

Ironic that you quote MacArthur in a thread that you state that Japan should say thank you, when he publicly stated that the bombs were not necessary!

 

Yes "you" did. Most wars actually start from an economic point of view. The US stopped Japan trading. Japan was a threat to the US expansionism in the Pacific and far east and put down embargoes.

- - - Updated - - -

Why should "you" be allowed to impose your democracy on countries who do not want it.

 

Apparently OP knows more than the United States Strategic Bombing Survey. Y'know, the experts put in charge in 1946 to determine whether the atomic bombings were necessary.

Spoiler: They weren't.

 

The Q'ran is irrelevant. What led to the rise of ISIS was America's incredibly stupid insistence on invading Iraq, liquidating Iraq's leadership, leaving the country an anarchist's paradise and opening the floodgates for every disaffected rebel in the region-something you clearly forgot to mention. This will go down in history as the most insanely dangerous foreign policy decision made by any government, anytime. But please, blame ISIS for what the West started. It's much easier than admitting to a mistake.

 

Did Iraq ask to be invaded? Did the Iraqi people ask for your 'gift' of democracy-as if that's the answer to all ills because, as you are no doubt aware, America has shown scant regard for democracy as history has shown us, so this example of hypocrisy and double standards is typical. And while we're on the subject of behaving like Mohammed perhaps you might explain which of the following nations bombed by America ever even threatened an attack on the US, and what heinous crime they committed to deserve being bombed?

http://williamblum.org/chapters/rogue-state/united-states-bombings-of-other-countries

 

They believed in suicide bombers, so they were as crazy as Islam, valued human life very little, so of course the nukes were needed. We might need to do the same in THIS war, but hopefully not, of course.

 

Yes, democracy is the best way of course - but Mohammad didn't understand that at ALL (never advocated democracy), so of course he's not "divinely guided as the best role model of all time." He told people which hand to use on the toilet, and which hand to use (I'm not making this up, guys), but didn't even understand democracy. What's wrong with this picture?

- - - Updated - - -

Well by Muslims constantly supporting dictators, they kinda did ask to be invaded. Kinda.

 

No, it guides each and every action of a Jihadist. Islam says to make sex slaves out of Infidels, so they follow Mohammad's advice. This isn't rocket surgery. The terrorist's #1 role model is Mohammad. Period. End. Of. Story.

"ISIS Enshrines a Theology of Rape" - New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/middleeast/isis-enshrines-a-theology-of-rape.html?_r=0

 

Democracy is far superior to the form of gov't advocated/approved of by Jesus/Moses/Mohammad: dictatorships/kings, etc. Those 3 didn't understand democracy (representative republics) is the best form of gov't for the world, so of course they weren't divine. Jesus said "render unto Ceasar", so of course he would have been fine with "rendering unto King George", the fool, but Jesus would have been disasterous for America.

 

What's wrong with that picture is that in the 7th century AD democracy was barely in its infancy and the world was largely governed by kings, warlords and tribal leaders, including all of Europe. How about we also mention America (the bastion of freedom and democracy, remember?), supporting, funding and installing both dictators and terrorists when it is politically or ideologically convenient?

 

So obviously the all-knowing, all-powerful "Allah" wasn't smart enough to tell the angel Gabriel to mention "democracy" to Mohammad. Obviously. Not a very smart god, if you ask me.
If I had "Allah's" magic super-powers, and I cared about the world (I do, Allah probably does not), I'd of course have mentioned it enough to get it in the Islamic texts. How about you, Snake, would you have done that? If not, then maybe you can increase your compassion towards your fellow human being (like I've demonstrated - I'm a good role model for you) by answering "yes" to that question. What say you?

Have a great week.

- - - Updated - - -

You just admitted that "Allah" is not all-knowing.

 

Ok, tell us when democracy reached the Christian world. I don't recall it being mentioned in the Bible even once. So, where was the 'all-knowing' Christian 'god' in all this? Oh yes, busy setting up kingdoms...
Oh, and I "admitted" nothing, so quit trying that one; it won't work.

 

No it's not, refusing to trade with a country is not an act of war. You are confusing embargo with blockade.

Americans attacked first? Right, in a convoluted manner we attacked China, French Endo China and Taiwan by aiding the Japanese with needed war materiel and fuel. Eye roll.

Cheers

Sent from my SM-T900 using Tapatalk

 

Does that give the US unrestricted authority to act in a way that killed civilians, and caused massive issues with cancer and other defects for people that weren't even Japanese?

Does it make it any less of a war crime that civilians were either vaporized, or blasted with radiation so severe they grew black fingernails that had veins in them?

Get a grip. The US is absolutely not some untouchable perfect entity.

 

No, actually the embargo (not an "attack") was put in place because Japan's rapacious expansionism through open warfare in China, an ally of the U.S. (check out what happened to the USS Panay if you want to know about first strikes).
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1937-1945/pearl-harbor

 

There was never a surrender offer and the only talks the had was with the Soviets and that was for a "peace settlement" a cessation of hostilities. From the first day we went to war it was unconditional surrender. They ruthlessly attacked us in the middle of negotiations in an attempt to destroy our ability to defend ourselves. They continued those attacks with the intention of seizing the Pacific and continued there mass murdering resulting in tens of millions of deaths. Even after the Miracle at Midway when they could not longer defeat us they continued for 4 more years with each battle causing even more deaths on both sides.

How many of our soldiers would you have been willing to sacrifice in order to have to kill more Japanese in order to force the Japanese to surrender. How many more lives in China and Southeast Asia where the Japanese were slaughtering by some estimates 250,000 a month.

 

The cities were building weapons of war. This is old news. We didn't bomb civilians. You're deluded.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

You failed completely in your answer, because you couldn't answer this: "How about you, Snake, would you have done that?"
All you could do was point out how bad Christianity was - google "tu quoque"! A classic example of intellectual failure, I'm afraid.
I AGREE WITH YOU, however, that Christianity is not better than Islam (so Jesus is not better than Mohammad.) You do make a great point there.

You, like other religious apologists, can't answer the question because then it might appear that you are better than the invisible man who lives in the sky - and that risks your "afterlife", and you are so fearful that you can't risk that - even though answering "yes" to that question is of course the most moral/helpful route for humanity. Time to get a new belief system, my friend - a more moral one.
Have a great day.

 

And yet, 67 Japanese cities were firebombed, but those two were not. The bombs were purely used to show the world what they could do.

 

Hind sight is all powerful ain't it. The truth is that no one truly knew the power of or the lingering effects of atomic weapons, not the politicians and not the Generals. Perhaps a few scientific minds vaguely understood but even they at the time thought in terms of tnt and tonnage and any high ranking general "read into" the Manhattan Project thought in the same terms.

Cheers

Sent from my SM-T900 using Tapatalk

 

Me, a religious apologist? I detest all and any organised 'faith' doctrines and their associated scams, and have frequently said so in my posts. As far as you asking what I would have done nearly 2000 years ago well, that is about as absurd as those who claim that Mohammed was a paedophile when paedophilia wasn't even recognised as a condition until the 19th century, and when child betrothal and marriage was the societal norm throughout the world at the time of Mohammed, including Christian Europe.
You cannot realistically ask what someone with a 21st century mindset would do in the Dark Ages where completely different mores, norms and thought processes existed. You might as well have asked what I would do in the year 3016

 

Yes and there were no "massive" issues with cancer or cancer deaths especially compared to the numbers that were dying at Japanese hands on a daily basis.

Not a war crime

Strawman.

 

They wanted a "peace agreement" a cessation of hostilities.