Well now you've certainly alerted the dog, and he'll be over here telling us that when Truman asked Eisenhower his thoughts on bombing Hiroshima, the answer was to not do it.
Thanks a lot. Jesus.

The counter point is that yes, Japan was done and it was only a matter of time before they surrendered. We had fire bombed Tokyo and other major cities and killed more with the fire bombings than the two nuclear bombs we dropped. estimates are that 200,000 Japanese died at Nagasaki and Hiroshima. 350,000 Japanese died in the firebombing campaign.

But the point everyone misses is that at that stage of the war, America was still suffering several hundred casualties EVERY DAY that the war continued. There were no American casualties as a result of the bombings at Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

You also need to remember that Russia declared war on Japan when they were convinced Japan would surrender and immediately started a land grab of as much of China and Indochina as they could. We'll never know what would have happened if we had waited for Japan to decide for itself to surrender. Certainly several hundred more Americans would have died while we waited for Japan to surrender, certainly more of Indochina would be in dispute, and if we had been compelled to invade Japan hundreds of thousands would have died.

Nope. using atomic weapons on Japan might have been unnecessary in some "experts" opinion, but Shooter thinks a better case can be made that it saved allied lives. And no, Shooter doesn't much care how many Japanese we killed with either the fire bombings or the atomic bombings. We didn't ask for that fight. We ended it.

 

You present a very good arguement. I still say the nuclear bombs dropped on Japan were nothing more than racism and the thought "We built it, let's see how well it works; they're only Japs. - is true." Proveable? No. Believed by some to be kind of true. I would argue, any group who support the fire-bombing a Dresden would not have many qualms when it came to testing the A Bomb on Japan. As an aside, visiting the nuclear bomb sites in Japan can be very moving. They are "areas of peace". School children - some - visit the sites and treat them with wonderful devotion. They welcomed me into their groups, never making me feel guilty for what we did - though the guilt exists in my heart. There is so much about WW II I have great difficulty with. I don't believe the U.S. should have entered the war. At the time a majority of the population of the U.S. were driven out of their homes in Europe for political and quality of life issues. Supply the products needed for war but not the people. If the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor was all that it is said to have been then I support a war against Japan but not Germany. One of the serious arguements in favor of the war was the Jewish issue. An excellent reason to go to war but we would not accept Jews escaping Europe. SO ... ! And, after the war, we gave many of those responsible for the murder/slaughte of Jews pardons so they could help us with the develoopment of "the bomb", as well as other tasks. Too many questons with answers against fighting in WW II. As an aside. There are still a number of people in Britain who are angry at the U.S. for not entering the war much earlier. We get very few good-guy-points.

 

The racism against Japan was very real but almost certainly had nothing to do with the decision to use the bomb.

You need to do more research. On December 7, 1941, Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor. Their ambassadors were to have delivered a "declaration of war" just before the attack, but were late.

On December 8 we declared war against Japan.

Almost immediately after Germany declared war on the US, followed by Italy.

We didn't ask for war. We did fight it. And end it.

And if you think there is much honorable or good about war I think you really need to study up.

Japan at the time was a brutal, arrogant regime. You might want to read up on their atrocities, starting with the rape of Nanking.

After the war Japan got it's poop in a group and joined the world community, as did Germany. That everyone could move beyond the war is testament to humanity. That we are now questioning the motivations and morality is good. That we are doing so using faulty information and ignoring the mores of that era is short sighted and ignorant.

 

Interesting understanding. You do realize that there are well educated historians who would strongly disagree with you? The U.S. was a very racist country in the 40s (as well as a lot of other periods but for now 'll stick with the 40s). We stole all the land in California that was owned by Japanese - even American citizens who were of Japanese ancestry. Then we put all the Japanese in prisoner-of-war camps. When the war was over, we released the Japanese but did not give them back their land. Given how we, as a country, felt about the Japanese and all other non-white people it is easy to understand why we would not think twice dropping two nuclear bombs on them. It has been and continues to be argued among historians if we would have dropped nuclear bombs on white people. Yes, we fought in WW II but we did not "end it". The major contribution made to the war was not men but equipment. Our factories were capable of making more "things" like tanks, guns, bombs, hospital gear, etc. The allies had the heart for the fight but not the gear. We gave them - SOLD them the gear. And we helped them defeat Hitler's army. Japan, we fought almost on our own. Our decision to use the nuclear weapons - made by some German's who played active parts in killing Jews in the death camps - was made easy by the fact Japanese were not white. As for how the Japanese treated all non-Japanese; I am well aware of Japan's ugliness. I am also aware of how ugly the U.S. people have been. By our values the Japanese were worse than us. By their values they were not. As for the flowers of war, I don't believe there is anything about armed conflict that is not negative. That we - the white population - have been warring against each other for hundreds and hundreds of years saddens me. Saddens me because it stands as proof that we are not at all civilized. I feel that way about most of us in the U.S. who believe in capital punishment. Ugly, ugly, ugly. There are some people who are "just folks" who like wars. Wars give them the opportunity to prove their ugliness by killing other humans legally. The points you make about the bombing of Pear Harbor are questioned to this day. Some respected historians argue we played a role in it. I don't believe we should have sent one soldier to help fight against Hitler's Germany or Japan. Did our going to war and killing hundreds of thousands change anything? It is possible Germany would have been ruler of all of western Europe and Japan would have taken over more of Asia. Would they be able to retain this power? History suggests they would, in time, fail. Because our country said they needed me I enlisted. I may not believe in the concept of war but I believe in paying the asked price for living here. Some believe the price is too high. I agree the price is too high but I don't see a short-term solution. I am told this is the price for living here. I understand and I pay. It is not my business what any person in our world does that doesn't directly impinge on me. Your interpretation of history differs from mine. It does not in any way indicate you are wrong and I am right. It says nothing more than we have different opinions.

 

Why are you people still arguing over this - especially the person who seems like laftist America hater?

Let's just remember that it was FDR, the great hero of the Democrats who interned Japanes citizens and non-citizens, and his successor Truman, another Democrat, who did not see to it that the wronged Japanes Americans were not given back their property.

It's kind of like screaming about Trump putting illegal immigrant 'KIDS IN CAGES!!!' when it was Democrat Obama who oversaw the institution of those cages.

Yeah... no - you don't get to have it both ways.

 

Are you saying that wantingnot is incorrect or showing hatred?
He has spoken accurately, are you sure that your ignorance and the sympathy bias demonstrated is not what You are talking about?

 

Oh, Shooter disagrees with a lot of people.
Is that a problem for you?
America was indeed a racist country in WWII. And remained so up to the 1970's.

Sometime look up the Tuskagee Airmen. A fascinating story of the war.

The liberals in charge until about 1948 kept it that way. Until the 60's the Dixie democrats and their Jim crow laws kept racism going.

None of that proves dropping the bomb was racist. Even if race entered into it (not one whisper of it in any of the documents from that era) using the bomb made strategic and military sense.

 

Oh, and your suggestion we had a hand in Pear Harbor is not well taken.
Put up your sources and back it up.

Pearl Harbor might be the best documented surprise attack in history. The Japanese thinking of the day, the planning, the execution. And on our side the fear and expectation, the attack and the aftermath.

And we indeed played a major role in winning, both in Europe and in Japan.

If we had not entered the war and won America would be a Japanese territory today. But regardless, a nation that thinks peace and freedom do not have to be fought for is not a nation at all.

 

Shootersa, I'm tired of this back and forth with no advancement by either side. I have not said you or your opinions are wrong. I say there are scholars who disagree and people who offer a different opinion. It is the war against Hitler's Germany I believe we should not have entered. The Japanese by attacking Pearl Harbor brought us into a war against Japan. If my words suggest we should not have entered into a war against Japan I have mis-spoken. A small problem I have is your constantly asking for proof without sharing any of your proof. Also, you keep making comments which are somewhat insulting. I don't attack you. I offer different opinions, commenting that most of them are mine and just opinions. Unlike you I don't say, We (the USA) won the war. I say we contributed. Apparently the history books written by and for "the war's winners" are sufficient for you. As men have been saying since the time of the Romans (or whenever), The winner writes the history. Don't trust the history books. "The first casualty of war is truth" is also an expression that is very old, I believe. I know Winston Churchill, who was a reporter I believe, when he witnessed the valiant death of the 600 was disheartened he couldn't report precisely what he saw (Churchill's autobiography). The analysis of such reporting of battles shows how little the civilians have known about war and its costs.
You - or anyone - can disagree with me, as is your prerogative. I will feel free to question your offered opinions as well. My questioning is in no way an effort by me to disprove you. During one of the times I was trying university, I had an English professor who had us (the class) reading a series of modern one act plays by a living playwright. The professor demanded his interpretation of a specific play was THE INTERPRETATION and accepted no other. At the behest of one of the students the playwright visited the class and set the professor straight. The playwright agreed the professor's interpretation was interesting and not off the mark but it was not what the playwright intended. From this I could correctly argue that the professor was not wrong, if right and wrong are what you're looking for. I could also correctly argue that the professor was not correct. I believe we are stuck in a similar set of circumstances. We are arguing right and wrong when the foundations of both our experiences are opinions or personal theories. If we are to continue, I believe it is time to break out the books, articles and respected opinions of those we believe are responsible for our positions. Evan as a retired person, I doubt I have the time for such research but if it is how you wish we continue, then so be it. I would just as soon say you believe what you believe and I believe what I believe. We have some points in common but not many conclusions.

 

Don't let the OP or treasonous conservative/America Hating/Republican fake patriot fool you with these kinds of threads. They love to use our veterans and troops for cheap political props like this when it suits their purposes but in reality think of them as suckers and losers and prove that on all the other days.

 

Well please Don't think I'm attacking you or dissrespect you. As a non veteran shooter will always respect those who are. I mean no dissrespect.
In fact you offer the most reasoned counter to shooter's opinions in a long time.

You're wrong, but well reasoned (a joke, at least an attempt at one)

With this discourse Shooter hasn't felt a strong need to source much and hasn't expected any back from you. We're just a couple of forum members having a discussion over beers about who did what in the war.

You are correct that the Victor writes the history. Especially in terms of Pearl Harbor much of what shooter has read comes from Japanese records.

But shooter does have to remind you, Germany declared war on America on December 8. Shooter doesn't believe we wanted a two front war, and it was Churchill who made the very strong case that we needed a holding action in the Pacific while we helped defeat Germany.

 

Hey American hater?
Yes you, who calls America a "shithole country" and a "banana republic", who attacks America and America's allies using propaganda from our mortal enemies. Who regularly demonizes first responders while never honoring their sacrifices.
Who never misses a chance to smear any patriotic gesture with slime and hatred. Who has never tolerated any opinion not in lockstep with his own.
Yes, you.

Fuck off.

 

One of the most moving part of D-DAY remberance was a US Veteran being helped out of his wheel chair to get a small amount of beach sand and put it in to a plastic bag to take it home.

 

Here you are using D Day troops for political props pushing the right wing false propaganda talking point of today's males not being masculine. You used D Day for a right wing lie.

And if you are such a great patriot let's see you attack these people.



Don Jr. calls US ‘third-world s‑‑‑hole’ after Trump’s guilty verdict
https://thehill.com/homenews/4696468-don-jr-calls-us-third-world-s-hole-after-trump-guilty-verdict/


Trump Verdict Makes NYC “Venezuela-on-the-Hudson”
https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/trump-verdict-makes-nyc-venezuela-the-hudson


Rubio gets blowback for comparing Trump trial to Cuban 'show trials,' executions
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino...trial-cuban-show-trials-executions-rcna154931

Kinzinger blasts Trump for calling US third-world country: ‘Eat dirt scumbag’
https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...ling-us-third-world-country-eat-dirt-scumbag/

 

Your opinion is noted and rejected.
Anyone calling America a "shithole country" and a "banana republic" and using HAMAS propaganda to demonize our allies will never have respect for their opinions.

As usual you make up lies about posts. To be clear, the point Shooter was making was that the fight was about freedoms guaranteed and worth fighting for, even when those making the sacrifice might not agree with others who take advantage of those freedoms.
And no, today's American male as a group would have trouble making the same sacrifice our best and brightest did in WWII.

Shooter notes that neither Trump, Rubio, or Don Jr. have attacked Shooter for honoring our D Day veterans. And Trump, Don Jr. and Rubio are all ten times the patriots on their worst day than you are on your best day. Propaganda bullshit does not change that.

It is telling that you can't wait to come around any patriotic thread and smear it with your hate and unamerican spew. You clearly have no time or interest to show a bit of respect and to honor America's brightest and best for their sacrifices. But plenty of time to spew hate and bullshit.

Can't hate America more than that, can you?

Fuck. off.