Seventy Years Ago
- Thread starter assari
- Start date
Ace Boobtoucher
Founder and Captain of the Douchepatrol
Someone might believe you are an idiot. They would be correct.
My ****** served in the South Pacific in WW2 and if you ask any of the men and women who served there, they can tell you there was no such thing as Japanese civilians. What the opponents of using the bomb forget is "civilians" in Japan had been trained to fight any occupying *****. Which means if you think the body count was high in August 6, 1945, imagine what that body count would've been with civilians joining into the fighting. The bottom line is you have 70 years of hindsight and perspective to fall back on. The US Navy knew what it knew, which was they were fighting an enemy who would commit suicide before they'd surrender. The people with the most ***** on their hands were the Emperor and Tojo, for refusing to even listen to surrender terms, even though they knew full well theirs was a lost cause LONG before the bomb was used in Hiroshima. You should also remember right up into the 80's, they were finding Japanese soldiers, holed up in caves on South Pacific islands, refusing to surrender. I'm just about the most liberal person you're ever going to meet, but I believe Harry Truman made the right decision. The lives lost in an invasion of Japan would've been a historical obscenity in their numbers.
Jagger69
Three lullabies in an ancient tongue
This was a tragic consequence of a war with Japan the US neither served to antagonize nor initiate. While I feel tremendous compassion for the innocent civilians who were ****** in the detonation of the bomb, the action was completely justified and led directly to the elimination of the need for the execution of Operation Downfall (the planned conventional military invasion of Japan by US armed ******) and, therefore, saved hundreds of thousand of not only US but Japanese lives as well. Hiroshima was chosen as the target for the initial atomic bomb because it had been previously spared from strategic conventional bombing, was ideally suited from a geographic standpoint to maximize the illustrative power and destruction that the bomb could wield and also contained industrial and military targets that were important to eliminate in preparation for Downfall. Since the first wave of a seaborne invasion of Japan according to Downfall was slated to take place on the island of Kyushu, the two targets for our nuclear strikes were focused on cities on that island (Nagasaki being the second).
No American is proud of what happened to the citizens of those two cities. However, the fact that the actions hastened the end of the war in a significant fashion and negated the need for a massive invasion of the Japanese islands more than justifies the very difficult decision that President Truman was ****** to make. It was unquestionably the correct one under the circumstances and displayed tremendous resolve and fortitude on his behalf from my perspective. May we never forget the victims and may we never be faced with a similar decision in the future.
No American is proud of what happened to the citizens of those two cities. However, the fact that the actions hastened the end of the war in a significant fashion and negated the need for a massive invasion of the Japanese islands more than justifies the very difficult decision that President Truman was ****** to make. It was unquestionably the correct one under the circumstances and displayed tremendous resolve and fortitude on his behalf from my perspective. May we never forget the victims and may we never be faced with a similar decision in the future.
Highly unlikely that the U.S. would have lost the war at that point but it no doubt shortened it. Nobody knew what the full amount of damage would be. It happened and you can't take it back.
Now to lighten the gravity of the event just realize that if it wasn't for the bomb the world wouldn't have ever seen Godzilla.
Jagger69
Three lullabies in an ancient tongue
Sorry but this simply is not the case. Dropping the bomb was not a desperation move on the part of the US to avoid being defeated. Japan was already well on its way to defeat. Our island-hopping strategy to close in on Japan proper had taken a tremendous toll on the the Japanese military and industrial ability to wage war. Endless waves of B-29s were carpet bombing their major cities into rubble. They would have lost the war regardless.....we had them by the balls by the time Hiroshima took place. Again, the dropping of the bomb greatly accelerated what was going to be inevitable defeat for Japan in any event and saved hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides in the process.
To add to this, just look at how many ****** from both sides fought in the Battle for Okinawa. Then compare the casualties for both sides but pay close attention to the Japanese numbers.
Premium Link Upgrade
Estimated 67000-77000 plus another 20000-40000 conscripts. And out of those and estimated 77000-110000 were ******, 7000 captured, plus another 40000-150000 civilians were ****** or they commited suicide (more on that in a bit). That is damn near 100% dead and only 7000 captured (how many of those were willing?). What does that tell you about their willingness to surrender or fight to the last man? what if the results had been the similar for the invasion of Japan? 90-100% casualty rate for soldiers and who knows how many civilians ****** (because they took up arms) or commited suicide?
Read "The Burning Mountain" by Alfred Coppel. It is fiction, but it tells a story of how an invasion of Japan might have looked like. IIRC it used actual declassified documents as source materials so its not like the author was pulling everything out of his ass. The story is told from both sides and from several different perspective.
EDIT: another thing too if i remember my history is that despite the Japanese losing they would not surrender because of what they were offered in the Potsdam Declaration. The Japanese wanted to surrender under terms favorable to them, but the allied countries pretty much said these are *our* terms and they are not negotiable.
Jagger69
Three lullabies in an ancient tongue
True. A modern-day (at the time) manifestation of the Bushido code being in place, can you imagine the carnage that would have taken place had Downfall been enacted? Okinawa was just a dress rehearsal for the slaughter that would have followed had we been ****** to make a seaborne invasion. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were extremely unfortunate consequences of the war that Japan chose to fight with the United States. Their folly was in thinking they actually had a chance to defeat us and I am certain they never even imagined the nightmarish outcome that was in store for them as a result. Still, I don't know that advance knowledge in that regard would have dissuaded them. Again, I have great empathy for the victims of the bombing but their sacrifice undoubtedly spared hundreds of thousands of live on both sides of the conflict.
Never read The Burning Mountain but I certainly shall. Thanks for the recommendation.
Mr. Daystar
In a bell tower, watching you through cross hairs.
Hell, if it wasn't for Kissinger, Nixon would've dropped one of those ****** fuckers on North Vietnam. He wanted to, but was talked out of it. You know, we dropped more ordnance on OUR side of that war, then on the North. Or at least I seem to remember hearing, or reading that. Someone will correct me I'm sure, if I have posted an error.
John_8581
FreeOnes Lifetime Member
Last edited by a moderator:
The atomic bombs were also meant as a display of power for the Soviets to think about.
I've been to both Nagasaki and Hiroshima as a *** and stood at ground zero and toured the museums. Some of the displays are extremely graphic and heartwrenching. It felt strange being an American there, not any sense of guilt just sadness that it came to that. And thankful that we got the bomb first. Otherwise that woulda been L.A. and Seattle.
I've been to both Nagasaki and Hiroshima as a *** and stood at ground zero and toured the museums. Some of the displays are extremely graphic and heartwrenching. It felt strange being an American there, not any sense of guilt just sadness that it came to that. And thankful that we got the bomb first. Otherwise that woulda been L.A. and Seattle.
Supafly
Back for Good
I think that like the bombings of Dresden (or my hometown of Kiel, where just yesterday yet another newly found 5 ton bomb was defused) these blows HAD to be made, to break the backbone of the countries which would just ramble on in wars that needed to be stopped.
Philosophically, we can discuss if any war can be just, if any civilian life may be ******, that is all good and well. Those wars were in full blow and would have cost probably hunreds of thousands, who knows how many more.
As a German, I repeat, like in other threads before: It had to be stopped, and it sadly took Dresden, Hiroshima and so on to make it stop.
Philosophically, we can discuss if any war can be just, if any civilian life may be ******, that is all good and well. Those wars were in full blow and would have cost probably hunreds of thousands, who knows how many more.
As a German, I repeat, like in other threads before: It had to be stopped, and it sadly took Dresden, Hiroshima and so on to make it stop.
Jagger69
Three lullabies in an ancient tongue
Absolutely. No question.
Additionally, and not disregarding the firebombing of Dresden in any manner, but perhaps the most ****** ****** of the entire war took place in Tokyo on the night of March 9, 1945. 300 B-29s dropped over 500,000 M-69 incendiary bombs (using jellied gasoline....napalm) over a 16 square mile area of the city that created temperatures as high as 1800 degrees Fahrenheit and incinerated approximately 100,000 civilians. There is a great deal of controversy over the decision to carry out this mission. The US military argued that it needed to be done for strategic reasons. I'm not so sure. Like Dresden, I would imagine it was done more for shock and awe purposes....not to impress the Japanese nearly so much as the Russians.
Let these horrific reminders of wars in the past always serve to dissuade us from initiating wars now or in the future. :******:
Luxman
#TRE45ON
American planes dropped thousands of flyers warning the Japanese people to evacuate their cities before and after the destruction of Hiroshima.
But like the German people, the Japanese people were prisoners of their totalitarian fascist governments.
Premium Link Upgrade
Countless millions of innocent lives destroyed by the greed of a few evil assholes.
But like the German people, the Japanese people were prisoners of their totalitarian fascist governments.
Premium Link Upgrade
Countless millions of innocent lives destroyed by the greed of a few evil assholes.
The Japanese started the second wold war with America by attacking Pearl Harbor, they had lost many of their industires and manufacturing plants with the B17, B25, B24 and B29 non stop bombings. The F4u corsair with ace Greg Pappy Boyington and the P38 Lighting with aces Thomas Guire and Richard Bong as well as P51 D flying aces of the pacific including Colonel Kearby went on to score 22 aerial victories. Other aerial aces were Lt. Colonel W.D. Dunham and Lieutenant Colonel William M. Banks with 16 and 9 victories. Japanese fighting planes were much inferior to their american counterparts, they didn't have 50 cal machine guns and didn't have the same ascentionnal speed nor the same manoeuvrability. Battleships like the Yorktown and Missouri also inflicted severe damages to the Japanese fleet.
This is just me nitpicking and i'm only going from memory since i used to be a big military buff back in the day but not so much anymore. But iirc early on in the war the Japanese Zeros were actually superior to the American Aircraft. But halfway through the war they introduced those aircraft that you mentioned such as the Corsair and Lightning as well as the Hellcat or Bearcat, the one with eight 50 cal guns. Also they changed around their tactics a bit like the Hellcat or Bearcat wasnt very maneuverable but it had a powerful engine and if coming in at a dive on a target it had much greater speed. They also studied Japanese tactics in those early engagements in the war and they adjusted accordingly. The Japanese did not adjust as much and they also retained much of the same aircraft. Eventually the guns which were adequate before were not as adequate and their aircraft were never quite as sturdy as their American counterparts cause they didnt for example use self sealing fuel tanks.
Also i believe WW2 was mostly a Carrier based war at sea. The Yorktown that you mentioned for example was an Aircraft Carrier not a Battleship. One of the goals of the ****** on Pearl Harbor was to sink the American Aircraft Carriers at port, but they were late going into port and they were actually still out at sea during the ******. There was also the Battle of Midway mostly carrier based (Midway with Henry Fonda is a movie i like to watch sometimes). There was also the Battle of Leyte Gulf but i havent watched any movies of that hehe, so i only know the name of the battle and little about the actual details.
Ace Boobtoucher
Founder and Captain of the Douchepatrol
I'm fairly certain the Marines and soldiers who fought that island hopping campaign across the Pacific would disagree.
Mr. Daystar
In a bell tower, watching you through cross hairs.
You have a point, but it did bring the carrier to the forefront of navel power. The Pacific changed the way sea battles, and navel formations were used, from then on.
But yeah, a helluva lot better place to be, then Okinawa.
What's worse...heat, humidity, and what they faced in the pacific, or the Arden forest, with it's brisk sub-zero temps, and lively shelling?
