Truman dropped A-Bomb to iintimidate Soviet Union, not end WWII..

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Hardrock69
    DIAMOND STATUS
    • Feb 2005
    • 21834

    Truman dropped A-Bomb to iintimidate Soviet Union, not end WWII..

  • kentuckyklira
    Veteran
    • Sep 2004
    • 1770

    #2
    Re: Truman dropped A-Bomb to iintimidate Soviet Union, not end WWII..

    And cos the US military wanted to compare the effects of an A-Bomb explosion at ground level (Nagasaki) to an A-Bomb explosion at a few 100 ft above ground level, of course using real people (aka innocent civilians) and buildings to do so!
    http://images.zeit.de/gesellschaft/z...ie-540x304.jpg

    Comment

    • ODShowtime
      ROCKSTAR

      • Jun 2004
      • 5812

      #3
      Re: Re: Truman dropped A-Bomb to iintimidate Soviet Union, not end WWII..

      Originally posted by kentuckyklira
      And cos the US military wanted to compare the effects of an A-Bomb explosion at ground level (Nagasaki) to an A-Bomb explosion at a few 100 ft above ground level, of course using real people (aka innocent civilians) and buildings to do so!
      Now now fritz, lets not condemn the US for inhumane wartime experiments.
      gnaw on it

      Comment

      • Seshmeister
        ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

        • Oct 2003
        • 35157

        #4
        I don't think this is new, it was always my understanding of the situation.

        The argument at the time that the Japanese would have fought to the last man is BS otherwise they would have fought to the last nuked man.

        Also they would have given them longer to surrender before Nagasaki.

        On the plus point I think it maybe kept the Cold war cold because everyone knew for an absolute fact what the bomb did in real life rather than in theory.

        Comment

        • Serling
          Groupie
          • Jul 2005
          • 62

          #5
          Revisionist history is always so subjective.

          Comment

          • Nickdfresh
            SUPER MODERATOR

            • Oct 2004
            • 49125

            #6
            Some estimates have the Allies suffering a million casualties, and the Japanese would have suffered even far worse, horrendous dead of both civilians and military. These estimates were based on US experience fighting on Pacific islands, esp. Iwo Jima and Okinawa.

            Some theorists have the US suffering only 10,000 dead because the Japanese had no real defense against massed armor (something that was almost impossible to do on rocky, mountainous Pacific islands). The Red Army showed this in Manchuria where the Japanese army mass surrendered after being outflanked and shocked in a matter of hours. The US was preparing a fleet of Shermans and newer Pershing tanks as a result. Japan, like France, is perfect tank country in most parts.

            This is one of my interest actually, so sorry about the geek stuff.
            Last edited by Nickdfresh; 07-21-2005, 09:04 PM.

            Comment

            • Seshmeister
              ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

              • Oct 2003
              • 35157

              #7
              As you say revisionist history is everywhere and there are accepted myths all over the place.

              e.g.

              The US Civil War was about freeing slaves YET Unionists who owned more than 20 slaves were excused from conscription!

              The US and to a lesser extent the UK won WWII YET we destroyed 3 German divisions the Russians destroyed 50!

              The Romans were good guys and their culture is something to aspire to in our public architecture YET they were nasty aggresive tyranical cunts nuff said.

              England defeated the Spanish armada in one of her finest hours YET 90% of their fleet were destroyed in storms.

              In Braveheart William Wallace is a common man good guy YET he was a minor noble who strung up people that didn't join his army.

              In the movie U-571 the Americans capture an Enigma machine shortening the war YET it was actually British forces that captured it from U-110 shortening the war by several months. Ironically U-571 was a very successful submarine.

              Israel say they will NEVER negotiate with terrorists YET in the 1930s the guys that went on to be their founding fathers used to set off bombs in public places.

              The Alamo was a bunch of good guys defending themselves against a Mexican hoard and was effectively a victory YET they got their asses kicked after illegally trying to steal land.

              Another classic one is the Indians(Native Americans) as the bad guys. I was talking to my Dad about this the other week and he was brought up in the 1940s with the magic of cinema and he was telling me how he used to dream of shooting Indians with a gatling gun and how they were seen as the personification of evil. He knows better now but was still surprised when I told him squaw was Native American for cunt.

              These are all just off the top of my head. I should start a website or something...

              Cheers!

              Last edited by Seshmeister; 07-21-2005, 09:51 PM.

              Comment

              • Seshmeister
                ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

                • Oct 2003
                • 35157

                #8
                I'm looking forward to BigBadBills comments on this...

                Comment

                • Seshmeister
                  ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

                  • Oct 2003
                  • 35157

                  #9
                  Anyone got any others?

                  This would make a great thread in itself maybe the mods could rearrange things....

                  Comment

                  • academic punk
                    Full Member Status

                    • Dec 2004
                    • 4436

                    #10
                    The Civil War was not really about freeing slaves.

                    Just like W. uses "We did this to free the oppressed good people of Iraq!" to justify this war, Lincoln was able to use "Free the slaves" as his rallying cry.

                    The reason Lincoln opposed slavery was b/c it made it difficult for lower class whites to land work. After all, employers would have to pay them far more than he'd have to pay a slave...and the slave he owns for life.

                    Makes you wonder how the future text books will look at the past four years...

                    Comment

                    • Seshmeister
                      ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

                      • Oct 2003
                      • 35157

                      #11
                      Originally posted by academic punk
                      Makes you wonder how the future text books will look at the past four years...
                      It's interesting if you think about it.

                      For example we know far more about Roman times than we do about William Wallace and all that Braveheart stuff because we have dozens of Roman sources(who don't mention Jesus but that's another argument) but maybe half a dozen on medieval Scotland.

                      You can just picture someone in a hundred years time doing a docrorate thesis on 'contemporary attitudes to the Iraq war and 21st century music' based in part on archived internet postings on this site.

                      And I've just made it a little more likely by making this post...

                      Ooof!

                      Cheers!

                      Last edited by Seshmeister; 07-21-2005, 11:11 PM.

                      Comment

                      • Nickdfresh
                        SUPER MODERATOR

                        • Oct 2004
                        • 49125

                        #12
                        Originally posted by Seshmeister
                        As you say revisionist history is everywhere and there are accepted myths all over the place.

                        ...

                        Cheers!

                        Actually, I've mentioned stuff like this periodically, this would be a grate thread BTW...

                        Everyone should read the book "Dirty Little Secrets: Military Information You're Not Supposed to Know."



                        One controversy I was flamed for is that American Patriots used terrorism during the American Revolutionary War (why do you think all of the Tories fled to CANADA? Surely not for the weather!).

                        This was true of both sides, but American guerillas used rape, summary execution, and property destruction, especially in the south. You didn't see that in "The Patriot."

                        Comment

                        • academic punk
                          Full Member Status

                          • Dec 2004
                          • 4436

                          #13
                          May I offer you a blanket, Nick?

                          It'll keep you warm and help you sleep (not to mention give you a heaping dose of small pox)

                          Comment

                          • Nickdfresh
                            SUPER MODERATOR

                            • Oct 2004
                            • 49125

                            #14
                            Originally posted by academic punk
                            May I offer you a blanket, Nick?

                            It'll keep you warm and help you sleep (not to mention give you a heaping dose of small pox)
                            Ah yes, the bio weapons to the Native Americans...But that's almost a part of official history now.

                            Comment

                            • Seshmeister
                              ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

                              • Oct 2003
                              • 35157

                              #15
                              Not to mention Washington raping his slaves on a day to day basis...

                              Comment

                              Working...