Did the Atomic Bomb End WW2??

[lonewolf]

Mar 26, 2012 22:51:55 GMT ♫anna♫ said:

Even then some feared it would be a dude and the Japanese would then have this technology to study and perfect!

My dear Anna Banana, I am truly shocked that you didn’t know that they were, in fact, both dudes. One was a “Little Boy” and the other was a “Fat Man”.

Mar 26, 2012 22:51:55 GMT ♫anna♫ said:

Tokyo was already destroyed in April 1945 by over 300 B27s, that dropped incendiary bombs to burn people alive.

Thanks for the history lesson, Anna! I had always been under the impression that B-29s were used in that attack.

[DAS (formerly BushAdmirer)]

Mar 26, 2012 22:32:25 GMT ♫anna♫ said:

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

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 - I believe the Japanese Emperor was fully complicit in the war. It is false to believe that he was tucked away in an ivory tower and innocent of any evil doing.

All you have to do is read a bit about Saipan and the mass Japanese suicides there that were ordered by the Emperor. The Americans had captured the island and were treating the locals nicely. The Japanese leadership didn't want word to filter back to the Japanese mainland that Japanese captives in Saipan were well treated. Quite the opposite. They wanted the citizens to believe that the American invaders were cruel and heartless. So to solve the worries about word leaking back, Hirohito ordered the citizens of Saipan to commit mass suicide. They complied.

Truman of course knew Hirohito was no angel. He was reluctant to give him a pass, just as I would have been if in Truman's shoes.

It is good that the war ended when it did but sad that the Emperor was spared the same fate as his generals.

[lakshmi]

Mar 27, 2012 19:30:54 GMT DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) said:

Tiki - What is the difference between the Shah and the mullahs? There's no freedom with any of them. At least Iranians could enjoy a good economy, life and culture when Shah was around. Now, the mullahs are wiping out out 4000 years of culture and existence for a religion. Iran could have had nuclear power and economic independence by now under the Shah. The Shah was a heck a lot better than the mullahs. Unfortunately many people are too ignorant to admit that. Some Iranians can be their own worst enemy. The same people who are protesting now started the revolution only on false pretenses and leadership. And they are doing it again. Get rid of the mullahs and then you got something to live for in Iran.

So much repression simply because the people questioned Ahmadinejad's fraudulent election. Now they have a "crime" unit to control internet access as they beat women and old men in the streets. This regime is taking the country back to the 7th century.

He was better only for american oil except u can not accept it bcz only u can see what fox news told u to see. U thot butcher of tehran had HONEST ELECTIONS?? ROFL!! Ya u better go read history and then go back to here and im gonna discuss it to u.

Wow i donno why do some ppl think americans are ignorant and arrogant.

[lonewolf]

Mar 27, 2012 21:31:20 GMT Ben Gay said:

LONEBONE...it's easy to see why you have no flesh-and-blood friends and live on the computer.

OH GEE WHIZ! Please don’t say such terrible things about me Mr. Gay; I’m very sensitive and you’re hurting my feelings.

[Big Lin]

If the tone of this thread doesn't improve rapidly it's going to be headed for Vendetta.

Try and keep on topic - attack the post, not the poster.

[DAS (formerly BushAdmirer)]

Agree completely with Lin. This is a very interesting debate topic. No reason to turn it into an insult contest.

[lakshmi]

^ Its not insult if u say religious ppl are stupid?

[Big Lin]

Look, please take a look at my rules.

I try to let borderline things go but lately a tiny handful of members are crossing the line.

Now let me make this clear.

I might be tolerant, patient and anxious NOT to stifle debate.

But - read my lips - attack the POST and NOT the POSTER.

I rarely use my disciplinary tools but I can give members warnings - three strikes and your'e on an automatic suspension of posting rights for three days; I can also ban a member from posting for a longer period if necessary; and in the worst case scenarios I can suspend or ban a member.

I don't want to have to take ANY of these steps.

It's not hard to keep on topic and just debate the issues.

Believe me, you DON'T want to see me when I lose my temper!

Let's have some common sense and common courtesy, please.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.

[DAS (formerly BushAdmirer)]

Tiki - I believe the Muslim religion is entirely bogus. It has zero legitimacy. Mohammed was never a prophet, he was a con man. Allah doesn't exist nor did he ever. The entire Islamic religion is a scam.

Having pointed out the obvious about Islam, let me go on to say......

Ditto for Judaism, Buddhism, Christianity, etc. All are bogus. All are scams.

Note that this post is not a personal attack on you. It is simply a statement of my views on religion.

Islam simply happens to be the worst of the worst, but they're all ridiculous nonsense.

[Big Lin]

I've known BA for a long time and he has always been an excellent poster with strong opinions, a lot of knowledge on a range of subjects and one of the few members I've never had to ask to restrain themselves.

He is an open atheist and he believes that religion is superstitious, unscientific nonsense.

I admit I'm a Christian but I'm not one of the type that thinks that the Bible is literally true or that my faith should outweigh certain knowledge.

I actually disagree that Islam is any more irrational or morally dubious than Christianity or Judaism; I'd say they all had pretty poor track records when they've been in power.

On the other hand, so have plenty of atheist regimes, such as Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao and similar nasties.

Once again I find I'm having to remind a MINORITY of members NOT to make personal remarks.

If this doesn't stop I'll have to start imposing the first stage of the disciplinary procedure.

And you WON'T want me to get my cane out, would you?

[lonewolf]

Mar 28, 2012 0:18:54 GMT Big Lin said:

And you WON'T want me to get my cane out, would you?

;D That might not be a bad idea now that I think about it.

Big Lin >>>>> (_!_) <<<<<< Ben Gay

[♫anna♫]

Mar 27, 2012 17:17:53 GMT DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) said:

Mar 26, 2012 22:32:25 GMT ♫anna♫ said:

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 - I believe the Japanese Emperor was fully complicit in the war. It is false to believe that he was tucked away in an ivory tower and innocent of any evil doing.

All you have to do is read a bit about Saipan and the mass Japanese suicides there that were ordered by the Emperor. The Americans had captured the island and were treating the locals nicely. The Japanese leadership didn't want word to filter back to the Japanese mainland that Japanese captives in Saipan were well treated. Quite the opposite. They wanted the citizens to believe that the American invaders were cruel and heartless. So to solve the worries about word leaking back, Hirohito ordered the citizens of Saipan to commit mass suicide. They complied.

Truman of course knew Hirohito was no angel. He was reluctant to give him a pass, just as I would have been if in Truman's shoes.

It is good that the war ended when it did but sad that the Emperor was spared the same fate as his generals.

Dearest BushAdmirer,
The war should have ended months earlier. Of course Hirohito was a war criminal, but granting him immunity was the lesser of the evils. Had this been done months earlier it would have saved many lives on both sides! General MacArthur was correct in fearing a partisan war against occupying US troops if the emperor was tried and executed. Truman got away with his war crimes too!

For what it's worth Emperor Hirohito stopped Japan's research on the atomic bomb!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirohito QUOTE:
Japan was doing basic research on the atomic bomb,[28] however Hirohito was opposed to the atomic bomb plan from the beginning. The Emperor thought that use of an atomic bomb would bring about the extermination of mankind. Research of the Japanese atomic bomb was finally abolished by command of the Emperor.

[DAS (formerly BushAdmirer)]

There is a large amount of speculation in that point of view Anna. I don't believe there was any formal offer (months earlier) of surrender contingent upon Hirohito being retained as emperor.

Depending upon which historian you read, the Japanese Emperor made the decision to surrender even though there was military desire for continuing (and even an attempted power grab afterward) after the destruction by the atomic bombs.

There are many conflicting theories about what might have been. Some say it was the declaration of war from the USSR, which had been neutral up to that point, that was the tipping point. Some say the Allied blockade was sufficient to starve Japan into submission. Most say an invasion would have been needed if not for the Atomic Bombs. We would have bombed the Japanese islands with all possible armaments anyway, had they not surrendered. It would have decimated the Japanese population, and not just soldiers, but the entire population. The civilian deaths would have been scattered rather than concentrated in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but the death toll would likely have been at least as high.

It was the defense of Iwo Jima that convinced the Unites States to use the bombs. Japan was training children and old women to fight to the death, much less the remainder of their army on the home islands. The bloodbath would have been staggering if we had had to invade and fight conventionally.

Don't let latter-day revisionism blind you to the simple fact that in war a nation must clearly define who the enemy is and then proceed to inflict casualties until they quit fighting and surrender without condition. Any other solution is a compromise, and leads to interminable conflicts such as we have seen in all the wars fought since. To use the most effective weapon available, coupled with the political will to actually force capitulation instead of settling for a "negotiated settlement" actually saves lives in the long run by settling the question once and for all. Present day Korea is a good example of what happens when you don't finish the job.

[♫anna♫]

Dearest BushAdmirer!
Bombing noncombattant civilians is no way to win a war! You just end up with a lot of angry soldiers fighting a "private war" to avenge their wrongfully killed family, relatives and friends! Did Al Qaida's 911 attack make Americans want to submit to bin Laden's will?

The key to surrender was through Hirohito and his entourage! They knew they were beat. No fuel, lack of food, losing ground on all fronts! America senselessly destroyed 60 Japanese cities with incendary bombings killing primarily civilians. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were cities 61 and 62. Truman could finally use the atomic bomb! A senseless war crime.

I believe the US and the Western powers should have stayed out of the war! The end result is that Mao was able to become the biggest mass murderer in history with Stalin in 2nd place. WW2 should have been between Stalin and Hitler and Hirohito and Mao.

I have sympathy for Chinese nationalists and those persecuted under the nazis, but the US could have helped them more with political and economic pressure.

[DAS (formerly BushAdmirer)]

Hitler would surely have preferred that America and Britain stay out of the war. He had every chance of winning a land only war where his lack of a substantial navy wouldn't hamper him. His territorial ambition might have raised the Nazi flag over most of Europe. You might be living in Nazi Germany today.

America was unlikely to attack Japan aside from the small issue of Pearl Harbor.

[♫anna♫]

Mar 29, 2012 13:51:54 GMT DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) said:

Hitler would surely have preferred that America and Britain stay out of the war. He had every chance of winning a land only war where his lack of a substantial navy wouldn't hamper him. His territorial ambition might have raised the Nazi flag over most of Europe. You might be living in Nazi Germany today.

America was unlikely to attack Japan aside from the small issue of Pearl Harbor.

The US naval blockade of Japan was an act of war and piracy. FDR wanted to provoke the Japanese into attacking the US, which they did.

Hitler like Franco and other dictators was going nowhere. In victory or defeat only one generation supports these dictatorships and then they fade away.

[DAS (formerly BushAdmirer)]

The key to America's early involvement occurred on September 28, 1940, when Japan, Germany and Italy signed the Tripartite Treaty. This treaty required that any of the three nations had to respond by declaring war should any one of the other three be attacked by any of the Allied nations. This meant that should Japan attack the United States, and the United States responded by declaring war against Japan, it would automatically be at war with the other two nations, Germany and Italy.

Roosevelt did make election promises that he would not send our boys to fight in foreign wars. He didn't want to enter the war without full support of the American people.

Clearly, he didn't like what was happening in Europe where Nazi Germany was expanding rapidly. Nor did he like what Japan was doing in China. He did try to aid the war effort in every way possible short of launching an attack. The convoys to Russia and Britain invited attacks on American shipping. He did want to deny petroleum fuel to Japan to limit their Chinese war effort.

[♫anna♫]

And now back to the Hiroshima debate!
Why was it so "desirable" to incinerate 100,000 Japanese civilians?

With the unconstitutional Federal Reserve Act in 1913 the bankers behind this takeover of America's money system were able to determine America's political course and future! J.P. Morgan of course was the biggest US banker of the time and he appointed people, who wanted Japan nuked, to powerful positions!
Why is it taboo to investigate the following in this debate?
www.whale.to/b/mullins8.html QUOTE:

A UNITED NATIONS PROJECT

In May of 1945, the architects of postwar strategy, or, as they liked to call themselves, the "Masters of the Universe", gathered in San Francisco at the plush Palace Hotel to write the Charter for the United Nations. Several of the principals retired for a private meeting in the exclusive Garden Room. The head of the United States delegation had called this secret meeting with his top aide, Alger Hiss, representing the president of the United States and the Soviet KGB; John Foster Dulles, of the Wall Street law firm of Sullivan and Cromwell, whose mentor, William Nelson Cromwell, had been called a "professional revolutionary" on the floor of Congress; and W. Averill Harriman, plenipotentiary extraordinary, who had spent the last two years in Moscow directing Stalin's war for survival. These four men represented the awesome power of the American Republic in world affairs, yet of the four, only Secretary of State Edward Stettinius Jr., had a position authorized by the Constitution. Stettinius called the meeting to order to discuss an urgent matter; the Japanese were already privately suing for peace, which presented a grave crisis. The atomic bomb would not be ready for several more months. "We have already lost Germany," Stettinius said. "If Japan bows out, we will not have a live population on which to test the bomb."

"But, Mr. Secretary," said Alger Hiss, "no one can ignore the terrible power of this weapon." "Nevertheless," said Stettinius, "our entire postwar program depends on terrifying the world with the atomic bomb." "To accomplish that goal," said John Foster Dulles, "you will need a very good tally. I should say a million." "Yes," replied Stettinius, "we are hoping for a million tally in Japan. But if they surrender, we won't have anything." "Then you have to keep them in the war until the bomb is ready," said John Foster Dulles. "That is no problem. Unconditional surrender." "They won't agree to that," said Stettinius. "They are sworn to protect the Emperor." "Exactly," said John Foster Dulles. "Keep Japan in the war another three months, and we can use the bomb on their cities; we will end this war with the naked fear of all the peoples of the world, who will then bow to our will."

Edward Stettinius Jr. was the son of a J.P. Morgan partner who had been the world's largest munitions dealer in the First World War. He had been named by J.P. Morgan to oversee all purchases of munitions by both France and England in the United States throughout the war. John Foster Dulles was also an accomplished warmonger. In 1933, he and his brother Allen had rushed to Cologne to meet with Adolf Hitler and guaranteed him the funds to maintain the Nazi regime. The Dulles brothers were representing their clients, Kuhn Loeb Co., and the Rothschilds. Alger Hiss was the golden prince of the communist elite in the united States. When he was chosen as head of the prestigious Carnegie Endowment for International Peace after World War II, his nomination was seconded by John Foster Dulles. Hiss was later sent to prison for perjury for lying about his exploits as a Soviet espionage agent.

This secret meeting in the Garden Room was actually the first military strategy session of the United Nations, because it was dedicated to its mission of exploding the world's first atomic weapon on a living population. It also forecast the entire strategy of the Cold War, which lasted forty-three years, cost American taxpayers five trillion dollars, and accomplished exactly nothing, as it was intended to do. Thus we see that the New World Order has based its entire strategy on the agony of the hundreds of thousands of civilians burned alive at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, including many thousands of children sitting in their schoolrooms. These leaders had learned from their master, Josef Stalin, that no one can rule without mass terrorism, which in turn required mass murder. As Senator Vandenberg, leader of the Republican loyal opposition, was to say (as quoted in American Heritage magazine, August 1977), "We have got to scare the hell out of "em."

[Big Lin]

I don't think anyone has said the atomic bomb was desirable.

It was IMO the lesser of two evils.

It's hardly as if the Japanese hadn't bombed civilian populations.

To say nothing of their other atrocities.

In war you sometimes have to make tough calls.

That's what Hiroshima and Nagasaki were; tough calls that IMO were the lesser of two evils

[♫anna♫]

Apr 18, 2012 20:10:42 GMT Big Lin said:

I don't think anyone has said the atomic bomb was desirable.

It was IMO the lesser of two evils.

It's hardly as if the Japanese hadn't bombed civilian populations.

To say nothing of their other atrocities.

In war you sometimes have to make tough calls.

That's what Hiroshima and Nagasaki were; tough calls that IMO were the lesser of two evils

The lesser of the evils ( assuming FDR should have provoked Japan into starting a war with the US ) was offering Hirohito immunity from the start for a surrender. Emperor Hirohito made Tojo ( sometimes spelled Togo ) and the war cabinet. Hirohito could have replaced the warmongers, if his safety was garanteed.

[Big Lin]

Apr 29, 2012 19:29:07 GMT ♫anna♫ said:

Apr 18, 2012 20:10:42 GMT Big Lin said:

I don't think anyone has said the atomic bomb was desirable.

It was IMO the lesser of two evils.

It's hardly as if the Japanese hadn't bombed civilian populations.

To say nothing of their other atrocities.

In war you sometimes have to make tough calls.

That's what Hiroshima and Nagasaki were; tough calls that IMO were the lesser of two evils

The lesser of the evils ( assuming FDR should have provoke Japan into starting a war with the US ) was offering Hirohito immunity from the start for a surrender. Emperor Hirohito made Tojo ( sometimes spelled Togo ) and the war cabinet. Hirohito could have replaced the warmongers, if his safety was garanteed.

Why SHOULD Hirohito's safety have been guaranteed? JHimmler made the same request to the Allies and was turned down decisively.

Both were war criminals and both should have been hung.

[♫anna♫]

Apr 29, 2012 23:35:46 GMT Big Lin said:

Apr 29, 2012 19:29:07 GMT ♫anna♫ said:

The lesser of the evils ( assuming FDR should have provoked Japan into starting a war with the US ) was offering Hirohito immunity from the start for a surrender. Emperor Hirohito made Tojo ( sometimes spelled Togo ) and the war cabinet. Hirohito could have replaced the warmongers, if his safety was garanteed.

Why SHOULD Hirohito's safety have been guaranteed? JHimmler made the same request to the Allies and was turned down decisively.

Both were war criminals and both should have been hung.

Dearest Lin,
Hirohito and his family were granted immunity after the senseless and criminal nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki! Truman had to wait until the atomic bombs were ready and could be used before he granted Hirohito immunity and accepted a surrender!

Gen Douglas MacArthur was outraged by Truman's insistance that the war be prolonged so that nuclear bombs could be used on human beings! MacArthur also stated that US troops would be subjected to Japanese partisan attacks, if Hirohito were tried and executed as a war criminal.

Hirohito was the Shintoist equivalent of a direct descendent of Jesus Christ!

[DAS (formerly BushAdmirer)]

Anna - You're making some extremely debatable assumptions here. Where does it say that Hirohito offered to ditch the military leaders to save his own skin? Where does it say that the war was prolonged waiting for nuclear bombs? The reverse is true. The war was shortened by those bombs.

I think you've been reading too many conspiracy theories. Try reading actual history instead.

[DAS (formerly BushAdmirer)]

Anna - Please refer to this site www.americanthinker.com/2008/08/hiroshima_hoax_japans_wllingne.html

A staple of Hiroshima Revisionism has been the contention that the government of Japan was prepared to surrender during the summer of 1945, with the sole proviso that its sacred emperor be retained. President Harry S. Truman and those around him knew this through intercepted Japanese diplomatic messages, the story goes, but refused to extend such an assurance because they wanted the war to continue until atomic bombs became available. The real purpose of using the bombs was not to defeat an already-defeated Japan, but to give the United States a club to use against the Soviet Union. Thus Truman purposely slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Japanese, not to mention untold thousands of other Asians and Allied servicemen who would perish as the war needlessly ground on, primarily to gain diplomatic advantage.

One might think that compelling substantiation would be necessary to support such a monstrous charge, but the revisionists have been unable to provide a single example from Japanese sources. What they have done instead amounts to a variation on the old shell game. They state in their own prose that the Japanese were trying to surrender without citing any evidence and, to show that Truman was aware of their efforts, cite his diary entry of July 18 [1945] referring to a "telegram from Jap Emperor asking for peace."

There it is! The smoking gun! But it is nothing of the sort. The message Truman cited did not refer to anything even remotely resembling surrender. It referred instead to the Japanese foreign office's attempt (under the suspicious eyes of the military) to persuade the Soviet Union to broker a negotiated peace that would have permitted the Japanese to retain their prewar empire and their imperial system (not just the emperor) intact. No American president could have accepted such a settlement, as it would have meant abandoning the United States' most basic war aims.

And here is another site which debunks the other conspiracy theory that Roosevelt knew of the Pearl Harbor attack and wanted it to get Germany into the war. atheistethicist.blogspot.com/2011/12/world-war-ii-and-irrationality-of.html

[♫anna♫]

The claim that there was anything good about killing at least 150,000 Japanese civilians with the atomic bomb and making the lives of those who survived into a living hell of radiation poisoning is wrong and obscene.