Did the Atomic Bomb End WW2??

[lonewolf]

Mar 15, 2012 1:54:30 GMT DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) said:

Anna - You are reaching. The Russians may have captured a couple undefended islands but they were not about to invade the Japanese mainland.

[♫anna♫]

Mar 15, 2012 7:29:18 GMT @lonewolf said:

Mar 15, 2012 1:54:30 GMT DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) said:

Anna - You are reaching. The Russians may have captured a couple undefended islands but they were not about to invade the Japanese mainland.

Thanks for the video Lonewolf!
I think it's more logical that the threat of invasion was feared more by Japanese military leaders than the terrorist bombing attacks on their cities. The fire bombing of Tokyo killed many more people than the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but didn't bring surrender either!! The results of these terrorist attacks is that more soldiers are fighting a private war to avenge their lost non combattant loved ones!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo
Terrorist attacks don't bring peace whether it's the attack on Pearl Harbor, 911 or the nuking of Hiroshima!

Hirohito gave a monologue shortly after the war. When asked why he surrendered he said: "Something had to be done before mainland Japan was invaded!" No mention of fearing the atomic bomb. His monologue was published in 1990.
A reference to this hearing can be heard on this YouTube video:

[♫anna♫]

ADMIRAL WILLIAM D. LEAHY [/size]
Admiral William Leahy was also a witness to the war with Japan! I see nothing "anti-American" about agreeing with his assessment of the atomic bomb and it's misuse on Japan!
(Chief of Staff to Presidents Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_D._Leahy QUOTE:
After the bomb was tested, Leahy was strongly opposed to its use in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In his memoir, he wrote:

"Once it had been tested, President Truman faced the decision as to whether to use it. He did not like the idea, but he was persuaded that it would shorten the war against Japan and save American lives. It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons... My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make wars in that fashion, and that wars cannot be won by destroying women and children."[5]
William Leahy, I Was There, pg. 441.

[Ben Gay]

Mar 14, 2012 21:32:25 GMT @lonewolf said:

Dearest Anna Banana,

Why did you call her "Banana"?

[Ben Gay]

Mar 15, 2012 3:53:20 GMT ♫anna♫ said:

Truman artifically prolonged the war, letting Americans die in the process, so that the atomic bomb could be used on human beings!

[/color][/size][/quote]

That's what happens when you have a brainwashed military zombie in charge of a country.

[lonewolf]

Mar 24, 2012 10:49:28 GMT Ben Gay said:

Mar 14, 2012 21:32:25 GMT @lonewolf said:

Dearest Anna Banana,

Why did you call her "Banana"?

Because I like bananas and I like Anna. Any other questions?

[lonewolf]

Mar 15, 2012 3:53:20 GMT ♫anna♫ said:

Truman artifically prolonged the war, letting Americans die in the process, so that the atomic bomb could be used on human beings!

[/color][/size][/quote]

Nonsense! The Japanese were free to surrender anytime they wanted. Therefore, they, and they alone, were responsible for prolonging the war, not Truman.

[Ben Gay]

Mar 24, 2012 19:46:13 GMT @lonewolf said:

Because I like bananas and I like Anna. Any other questions?

Do you like okra?

[DAS (formerly BushAdmirer)]

Mar 25, 2012 8:44:34 GMT @lonewolf said:

Mar 15, 2012 3:53:20 GMT ♫anna♫ said:

Truman artifically prolonged the war, letting Americans die in the process, so that the atomic bomb could be used on human beings!

[/color][/size][/quote]

Nonsense! The Japanese were free to surrender anytime they wanted. Therefore, they, and they alone, were responsible for prolonging the war, not Truman. [/quote]

You are correct Lonewolf. You have pointed out the obvious.

[♫anna♫]

Mar 26, 2012 1:04:36 GMT DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) said:

Mar 25, 2012 8:44:34 GMT @lonewolf said:

Nonsense! The Japanese were free to surrender anytime they wanted. Therefore, they, and they alone, were responsible for prolonging the war, not Truman.

You are correct Lonewolf. You have pointed out the obvious.

Nonsense! The Japanese refused to surrender, if their Emperor was going to be tried an hung as a war criminal! Go back and read some of the articles that were already posted on this thread!

Hirohito and his family were granted immunity only after the atomic bomb was used on Japan!

[lakshmi]

^ Yes and why they couldn't give it BEFORE they kill 150k citizens? Its gonna make more sense before. They gave AFTER bcz they liked to use nuclear weapons and teach russia they got some. It was biggest terrorist act in all HISTORY.

[lonewolf]

Mar 26, 2012 3:25:28 GMT ♫anna♫ said:

The Japanese refused to surrender, if their Emperor was going to be tried an hung as a war criminal!

Exactly! And therefore the fault lies with the Japanese, and NOT with President Truman.

[lonewolf]

Mar 26, 2012 3:47:24 GMT @lakshmi said:

It was biggest terrorist act in all HISTORY.

Apparently you’re knowledge of history is extremely limited.

[lakshmi]

Mar 26, 2012 7:00:37 GMT @lonewolf said:

Mar 26, 2012 3:47:24 GMT @lakshmi said:

It was biggest terrorist act in all HISTORY.

Apparently you’re knowledge of history is extremely limited.

In six weeks not in one day. Sorry i for got i better explain it 4u.

U like to cut hairs but u for got to tell cambodian genocide also holocaust. I think that SINCERE ppl no what i said.

[♫anna♫]

Mar 26, 2012 7:00:37 GMT @lonewolf said:

Mar 26, 2012 3:47:24 GMT @lakshmi said:

It was biggest terrorist act in all HISTORY.

Apparently you’re knowledge of history is extremely limited.

Really Wolfie!
No court of law in this world would hold the innocent non combattant civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki responsible for whatever Japanese war criminals may have done in Nanking!
Two war crimes don't equal justice!

[♫anna♫]

Mar 26, 2012 3:47:24 GMT @lakshmi said:

^ Yes and why they couldn't give it BEFORE they kill 150k citizens? Its gonna make more sense before. They gave AFTER bcz they liked to use nuclear weapons and teach russia they got some. It was biggest terrorist act in all HISTORY.

We have to give allied and axis leaders credit for not using the weapons of mass destruction! Some of Hitler's generals begged him to allow the use of poisoned gas, but Hitler refused because it would have been a war crime.

The atomic bomb clearly falls into the catagory of weapons of mass destruction and it is a great shame that Truman used it! It's also a shame that so many misguided Americans applaud and approve of this unneccesary war crime!

[lakshmi]

I agree with it anna. How sad ppl excuse it.

[DAS (formerly BushAdmirer)]

Mar 26, 2012 14:02:10 GMT ♫anna♫ said:

Mar 26, 2012 3:47:24 GMT @lakshmi said:

^ Yes and why they couldn't give it BEFORE they kill 150k citizens? Its gonna make more sense before. They gave AFTER bcz they liked to use nuclear weapons and teach russia they got some. It was biggest terrorist act in all HISTORY.

We have to give allied and axis leaders credit for not using the weapons of mass destruction! Some of Hitler's generals begged him to allow the use of poisoned gas, but Hitler refused because it would have been a war crime.

Well now Anna, Hitler did use poisoned gas on millions of helpless women and children in the death camps. I guess he didn't consider it a war crime if the victims were Jewish, Gypsies, Poles, or Homosexuals.

Truman knew that the fanatical Japanese generals controlled the Japanese government and would not surrender without giving them indisputable evidence that they were going to lose the war. He made the decision to drop the bomb on Hiroshima first, and simultaneously demanded a Japanese surrender. The second bomb was only dropped when the Japanese didn't surrender after Hiroshima.

Truman could have dropped the bomb on Tokyo which would have ended the war even sooner. He didn't do that for humanitarian reasons.

[Big Lin]

I think you've put it right in context, BA.

A great post and one that for me sums up how war ain't pretty and you sometimes have to do bad things to stop worse things from happening.

[lonewolf]

Mar 26, 2012 10:22:02 GMT @lakshmi said:

In six weeks not in one day. Sorry i for got i better explain it 4u.

As if I should have known what you were thinking.

[lonewolf]

Mar 26, 2012 13:55:05 GMT ♫anna♫ said:

Really Wolfie!
No court of law in this world would hold the innocent non combattant civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki responsible for whatever Japanese war criminals may have done in Nanking!

Anna, where, exactly, did I ever write that non combatant Japanese civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were responsible for the actions of Japanese war criminals in Nanking?

[DAS (formerly BushAdmirer)]

Mar 26, 2012 16:59:59 GMT Big Lin said:

I think you've put it right in context, BA.

A great post and one that for me sums up how war ain't pretty and you sometimes have to do bad things to stop worse things from happening.

Thanks Lin -- Nice of you to say that.

Even though I disagree with Anna, I do see her side of the argument. A leader like Harry Truman would have been receiving conflicting advice from all sides. He had to make a historic decision affecting many people's lives either way. Sometimes a leader can find himself caught between a rock and a hard place. No matter which course Truman had taken, historians would still be debating the wisdom of his choice today.

Suppose he had decided not to drop the A-Bomb but to invade instead. Further suppose that the American military lost 100,000 lives completing the invasion while the war dragged on for the better part of another year. That's certainly not an unreasonable outcome when you consider the horrific losses during the invasion of Okinawa just to the south.

Further suppose that the news media gets ahold of the information that we had the bomb and didn't use it. Do you think the parents of those 100,000 lost military personnel might vote for Harry's opponent? Don't you think there would have been a huge national outrage? I think Harry would have gone down in history at 'The Spineless President' who blinked.

[♫anna♫]

Mar 26, 2012 21:17:02 GMT DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) said:

Mar 26, 2012 16:59:59 GMT Big Lin said:

I think you've put it right in context, BA.

A great post and one that for me sums up how war ain't pretty and you sometimes have to do bad things to stop worse things from happening.

Thanks Lin -- Nice of you to say that.

Even though I disagree with Anna, I do see her side of the argument. A leader like Harry Truman would have been receiving conflicting advice from all sides. He had to make a historic decision affecting many people's lives either way. Sometimes a leader can find himself caught between a rock and a hard place. No matter which course Truman had taken, historians would still be debating the wisdom of his choice today.

Suppose he had decided not to drop the A-Bomb but to invade instead. Further suppose that the American military lost 100,000 lives completing the invasion while the war dragged on for the better part of another year. That's certainly not an unreasonable outcome when you consider the horrific losses during the invasion of Okinawa just to the south.

Further suppose that the news media gets ahold of the information that we had the bomb and didn't use it. Do you think the parents of those 100,000 lost military personnel might vote for Harry's opponent? Don't you think there would have been a huge national outrage? I think Harry would have gone down in history at 'The Spineless President' who blinked.

Dearest BushAdmirer!
All Truman had to do was grant Hirohito immunity to get the Japanese to discuss surrender. Hirohito gave the warmongers Togo and co. power and he could have removed them from this power and replaced them with the pro peace Japanese politicans. Since Truman refused to grant Hirohito immunity the pro war faction was left in power and almost stopped the surrender with a putsch!

[♫anna♫]

Mar 26, 2012 15:04:38 GMT DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) said:

Mar 26, 2012 14:02:10 GMT ♫anna♫ said:

We have to give allied and axis leaders credit for not using the weapons of mass destruction! Some of Hitler's generals begged him to allow the use of poisoned gas, but Hitler refused because it would have been a war crime.

Well now Anna, Hitler did use poisoned gas on millions of helpless women and children in the death camps. I guess he didn't consider it a war crime if the victims were Jewish, Gypsies, Poles, or Homosexuals.

Truman knew that the fanatical Japanese generals controlled the Japanese government and would not surrender without giving them indisputable evidence that they were going to lose the war. He made the decision to drop the bomb on Hiroshima first, and simultaneously demanded a Japanese surrender. The second bomb was only dropped when the Japanese didn't surrender after Hiroshima.

Truman could have dropped the bomb on Tokyo which would have ended the war even sooner. He didn't do that for humanitarian reasons.

Dearest BushAdmirer!
No one is saying that the crimes of Auschwitz or Nanking were justified and right! I also find the people who doubt or deny war crimes much more likable than those who support and applaud war crimes!

Truman used the atomic bomb as soon as it was available! It had to be tested and it was used as soon as possible on Hiroshima! The atomic bomb was not available before August 1945, when it was used! Even then some feared it would be a dude and the Japanese would then have this technology to study and perfect!

Tokyo was already destroyed in March 1945 by over 300 B29s, that dropped incendiary bombs to burn people alive.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo
More non combattant civilians died in Tokyo from this than in Hiroshima!

[Big Lin]

Hirohito was as much to blame as Tojo and the rest of them.

IMO he ought to have been hung as a war criminal.