Originally posted by DRichards1968
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
"Thank God for the Atom Bomb"
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by ArmchairGeneral View PostSo burning a few hundred thousand people alive is preferable to making their hair fall out and giving some of them cancer?Everyone has opinions, only some count.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ArmchairGeneral View PostSo burning a few hundred thousand people alive is preferable to making their hair fall out and giving some of them cancer?
Radioactive illness causes cancer and a painful, slow death, so yes, it is worse than being killed in bombing.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostWhich supports my point that no one knew whether Japan wanted to surrender or not, not even Japan and hence, the very valid and very correct assumption that Japan was going to fight to the death.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
ie, saving his own skin.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
Translation, when he knew he cannot save his own skin, he decided to save his honour.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
All you are showing me is that the man is more worried about his reputation than the well being of his people.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostAnd my point is that Hirohito was willing to burn the last baby to save his reputation.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
You're sh!tting me! Nanking anyone? And do you actually think that Stalin cared about the Japanese population? How many Berlins was he willing to do on Japan?
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
There were eight armies numbering over 2 million men willing to do a Genghis Khan on Japan.
What was the largest number of troops the Soviets made in amphibious landings in one echelon, in the Kurile islands or Sakhalin?
Comment
-
''unconditional'' small word, but were there big consequences.
If the Japanese got the green light to keep the Mikado, the surrender would most likely have followed quickly, meaning no Soviet intervention, the U.S. taking over the whole of Korea, no Korean war and no nuclear armed unstable dictator holding the World to Ransom.
And in the end, the Americans did what the Japanese wanted all along, let Hirohito keep the throne.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostU.S. code breakers had been reading massive amounts of Japanese diplomatic and military codes for years through Magic and Purple, so they knew the Japanese were trying to negotiate an end to the war, which is how they ambushed Yamamoto by the way.
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostSurrendering without a guarantee of his own safety, therefore facing the very real possibility of execution seems a strange way of trying to "save his own skin.''
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostSeems a strange argument also, seeing as how the code of "never" surrendering was deemed the most honourable thing to do.
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostHe had nothing to do with writing the the speech, therefore it had nothing to do with him being worried about his reputation.
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostI'm a bit confused here, above you state that he [Hirohito] surrended to save his honour, now you're saying exactly the opposite, that he was willing to sacrifice the entire population to acheive the same thing, has to be one or the other.
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostYou keep mentioning the atrocity of Nanking as if it was a reason for world revenge against the Japanese, but what did the world do about the Nanking atrocity, virtually nothing, it was business as usual with Japan, as if it didn't happen at all.
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostBut like the Mongols failed to invade, it's debatable that the Soviets could either, with their limited amphibious capabilities, as for the Chinese, could you tell me how they were supposed to invade?
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostWhat was the largest number of troops the Soviets made in amphibious landings in one echelon, in the Kurile islands or Sakhalin?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostHence, the US knew the Japanese refusal of unconditional surrender.
I was answering your post, where you said........
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostWhich supports my point that no one knew whether Japan wanted to surrender or not, not even Japan and hence, the very valid and very correct assumption that Japan was going to fight to the death.
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostU.S. code breakers had been reading massive amounts of Japanese diplomatic and military codes for years through Magic and Purple, so they knew the Japanese were trying to negotiate an end to the war, which is how they ambushed Yamamoto by the way.
code breakers had been doing for years.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
Comes right back to what the Japanese did. They gave no honour to the Chinese and expected none when the favour was about to be returned.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostI have detailed his screaming at his ministers about the attack on Pearl Harbour.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
He sated the American desire for vengence. Once he surrendered, he knew American blood lust was gone. The same cannot be said of Chinese blood lust and Soviet blood lust/
But in the end the powers that be let him reign for another 40 years.
That's politics I guess.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
The world was not about to send 5 Chinese armies into Japan. Stalin had plans to do just that.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
Read up on my posts, the Japanese were not prepared for a Soviet invasion of Harikou.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostTwo armies and after that, it would only be time when Soviet transports can put 5 Chinese armies on Japanese soil. Considering what AUGUST STORM did, do you have any illusions what 5 Chinese armies under Soviet Generals, especially Zuhkov, was about to do on Japan?
Well, that sounds incredulous, that the Soviets actually had the capacity to match Overlord with their limited amphibious capability.
The largest amphibious landing I've been able to come across, was comprised of the 335th Infantry Division, 13th Marine Brigade and 355th Marine Battalion of the Pacific Fleet which was landed over two days.
From Glantz.....
http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/resour...z3/glantz3.asp
You have to admit, that's a fair way from two armies.
But as the info is pretty limited on that area of August Storm, I'd be very interested to see your sources on amphibious landings.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostThink just about everyone, knew that, OoE, but that's not the point.
I was answering your post, where you said........
With my post....
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostWhich was just bringing you up to speed with what the American [and British] code breakers had been doing for years.
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostBut that in no way saves Hirohito's honour. does it?
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostCould you give me post you have detailing his screaming at his ministers about the attack on Pearl Harbour.
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostThink the only thing would finally sate the American fighting man, was Hirohito dangling on the end of a rope.
But in the end the powers that be let him reign for another 40 years.
That's politics I guess.
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostSources?
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostIn what way were they not prepared for an invasion of Hokkaido?
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostAre you saying that the Soviets landed two armies in amphibious landings in one wave in the Kurile islands or Sakhalin?
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostWell, that sounds incredulous, that the Soviets actually had the capacity to match Overlord with their limited amphibious capability.
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostThe largest amphibious landing I've been able to come across, was comprised of the 335th Infantry Division, 13th Marine Brigade and 355th Marine Battalion of the Pacific Fleet which was landed over two days.
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostFrom Glantz.....
http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/resour...z3/glantz3.asp
You have to admit, that's a fair way from two armies.
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostBut as the info is pretty limited on that area of August Storm, I'd be very interested to see your sources on amphibious landings.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostDo you even understand how Japanese see suicide?
But Hirohito didn't do the honourable thing and commit harikiri, did he?
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostIn the sense that they were pyschologically and physically oriented the wrong way.
It was defended by the 5th area army.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
I'm saying that had plans to do so.
But you didn't say that originally, OoE, my question was...
Originally posted by ANZAC View PostWhat was the largest number of troops the Soviets made in amphibious landings in one echelon, in the Kurile islands or Sakhalin?
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostTwo armies and after that, it would only be time when Soviet transports can put 5 Chinese armies on Japanese soil. Considering what AUGUST STORM did, do you have any illusions what 5 Chinese armies under Soviet Generals, especially Zuhkov, was about to do on Japan?
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
When unopposed, that's more than enough
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostI'll get back to you tomorrow. I'm going to bed now.
Comment
-
Well, a war crime is a war crime, and from the planet where I come from, murdering a civilian is a war crime. How about some hundred thousands in a click? No idea. Perhaps it isn't.
Hummm let me explore a little further... the dudes who dropped this bombs weren't the same who accused (and condemned) a bunch of Germans at Nurenberg Court for reasons as using a torpedo in civilian ships not rescuing the crew (no, not forgeting the real evil Germans who were present at the same court)?
Furthermore I have the feeling (bot not the certainity) that the old reason "kill a few hundred thousands to save some others" is not so clear as some people keep passing the word. It often sounds like more a bad excuse but numbering alternatives and scenarios would be too long for my current availability.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Marcurix View Posti have to agree with alot of comments on here, The Atmoic bomb did not win the war, merly it just showed the USA tryingto scare the USSR.
Your crazy, several things where factored in at the time first and foremost before the bomb was dropped Japan gave no indications it was ready to surrender or even negotiate. Several of the US's top military planners set down and did a study it it would have taken over a million troops to invade japan succesfully with very astonishing losses in the hundreds of thousands, this is after the US and its allies have already lost hundreds of thousands of troops and finacially most countries were ready to go backrupted at the time due to the cost of maintaining such large forces to fight this war. The US had no idea at the time that stalin was even close to an atom bomb to compete with them and would challenge them in eastern europe like he did. So why would you even make such a claim. Dropping those bombs while I am not a proponent of using them was probably the best possible outcome that they had at the time. I have no problems with the way they were used.
Comment
-
DEVASTATING to the 'No' voters in this poll and to the uber-moron, Jon Stewart.
Pajamas TV - Afterburner - Jon Stewart, War Criminals & The True Story of the Atomic Bombs - Video
Comment
Comment