Skip to comments.Hiroshima, Nagasaki to pitch for 2020 Olympics
Posted on 10/11/2009 9:12:32 AM PDT by traumer
click here to read article
By 2020, Tel Aviv will probably qualify also ....
She always looked like that.
By contrast, there was probably not a single Japanese general or admiral who wanted to overthrow the emperor
Shaking head on that one.
ahhhh....actually, officers tried to stage a coupe to prevent the Emperor from issuing the surrender broacast. Seems there were plenty who were willing to sacrifise the entire population.
Shows how FANATICAL they were.
Guess what, the war is over. Japs surrendered, Fritz is dead and both are democratic allies of the free world.
War’s a bitch ain’t it? Guess they shouldn’t had started it because it opens door there weren’re ready for.
>>> Truman was not locked into this false dichotmy. There was always a third choice: a conditional surrender. The chief sticking point from beginning to end was the Japanese insistence that they keep the emperor. Prior to the dropping of the bombs, however, the Truman administration summarily rejected pursuing that option. Even after the dropping of the second bomb, the Japanese STILL insisted on this condition. <<<
Truman had several choices; for example, he could have continued the blockade of the Japanese islands and starved the Japanese out. Luckily for the Japanese and for us, that option was not chosen.
However, speaking of “false dichotomies,” the one you make between unconditional surrender/conditional surrender certainly counts as one. Even though US policy since Cairo had been that of unconditional surrender, all parties knew that there were obvious conditions being presented to the Japanese Imperial Gov’t by the US (the wonders of diplomatic language never cease to amaze me). And this was true up to the Potsdam Declaration of 26 July 1945.
>>> Had he pursued the option of a conditional at the beginning, he could have avoided both the mass slaughter of innocents AND an invasion. <<<
Both FDR and Truman pursued surrender with conditions. The Japanese Imperial Gov’t didn’t like those conditions, and prepared for a “final conflict” on the Japanese home islands. Yes, the deaths at Tokyo, Horishima, and Nagasaki could have been avoided — if the Japanese had surrendered earlier instead of intentionally sacrificing their “subjects” in an attempt to gain a better post-war outcome.
>>> Even if we assume that you are right, however, dropping the bombs would still be evil. Under the long established rules of war it is immoral to INTENTIONALLY target babies, little old ladies, and other non-combatants. Collateral damange is unavoidable but intentional targeting is beyond the rules of war. If an enemy did it to us or our allies during war. we would not hesitate to later prosecute them for war crimes. <<<
If the Japanese Imperial Gov’t didn’t want us to target cities like Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they should have made sure that these cities didn’t possess war factories, naval shipping yards and army barracks. Possession of such facilities made these cities legitimate targets for attack given the rules of war followed at the time.
There was NO intentional attack on Japanese civilians. Your SLANDER of US Army forces who carried out the aerial attack on Japan is reprehensible.
>>> As a sidelight, let me point out the Nagasaki was the heart of traditional Japanese Christianity. The Christians had held on to their faith despite tremdendous pressure for hundreds of years....only to be slaughtered by fellow Christians. <<<
As another sidelight, there used to be a certain nutter on FR who would post that Truman intentionally targeted the Christians of Nagasaki when that city was nuked. Something about Truman being part of some Freemason conspiracy against Christians, I seem to recall. You wouldn’t be part of an attempt to revive an old nutter tradition, would you?
Why do you continue to regurgitate old lying Soviet agitprop about the Pacific War (from the old Soviet toadies like Gar Alperovitz)? The old Soviet Union’s been gone for almost 20 years.
>>> It didnt save a single life. An invasion could have been avoided agreed to let the Japanese keep the emperor. <<<
An invasion, and a lot of aerial bombing could have been avoided if the Japanese Imperial Govt’ had surrendered. Stop trying to shift the blame.
>>> The emperor was very much an issue. To New Deal hardliners, he (and all he represented) the main source of the problem and had to be totally destroyed. If it was really a non-issue the U.S. would have agreed at the outset to a conditional surrender. <<<
Oh, so now it’s a New Dealer conspiracy to slaughter Japanese civilians? How novel... and how irrelevant and preposterous.
It was the NEOCONS Kirk. /s
EVIL!!? that sounds like more bleeding heart liberal blame America crap. I suppose those B-29 conventional bombing runs just dropped M&M’s.. or maybe cigars?? those B-29 firebombing raids didn’t kill anyone did they? were those raids EVIL also? those raids would have continued until there was nothing left of those japs. if the two big ones were not dropped the ENTIRE country would have been obliterated by continued B-29 raids. the jap people would have held out until the very end. (If they fought and died as they did defending countless south pacific Islands, how hard long and determined do you think they would have battled to save their very homeland)? those 2 bombs SAVED the lives of American pilots, American POW’s and also the American lives of those who would have been involved with the ground/sea invasion of japan. never mind that the russians very well could have over run the entire country by the time our conventional bombing ceased.
Apologizing will become an Olympic event.
From that wikipedia article
“On Monday, August 6, 1945, at 8:15 AM, the nuclear bomb ‘Little Boy’ was dropped on Hiroshima by an American B-29 bomber, the Enola Gay, directly killing an estimated 80,000 people. By the end of the year, injury and radiation brought total casualties to 90,000-140,000. Approximately 69% of the city’s buildings were completely destroyed, and about 7% severely damaged.”
Do you agree with these numbers ?
Thanks for the link to the Frank essay. The section on Joseph Grew was especially immuminating.
“There are a good many more points that now extend our understanding beyond the debates of 1995... The Japanese did not see their situation as catastrophically hopeless. They were not seeking to surrender, but pursuing a negotiated end to the war that preserved the old order in Japan, not just a figurehead emperor. Finally, thanks to radio intelligence, American leaders, far from knowing that peace was at hand, understood—as one analytical piece in the “Magic” Far East Summary stated in July 1945, after a review of both the military and diplomatic intercepts—that “until the Japanese leaders realize that an invasion can not be repelled, there is little likelihood that they will accept any peace terms satisfactory to the Allies.” This cannot be improved upon as a succinct and accurate summary of the military and diplomatic realities of the summer of 1945.”
This reminds me of the most famous last words ever spoke...
“What the Fu(k was that?!?!?”
Mayor of Hiroshima
August 6, 1945