Tweet
He must have really hated his mother.
-
-
Nothing wrong with revising original propoganda.Originally posted by Nickdfresh
[B]Actually, you're wrong. It's the revisionist history that doesn't stand up, Sesh...
Comment
-
What "propaganda?" That the Japanese were ready to surrender? I think they contacted the Russians as an intercessor for peace talks. But the Soviets promptly invaded China, so that was just pissing up a rope. The fact is that the Japanese were banking on a strategy of attrition in hopes of gaining a favorable angle in negotiations...Originally posted by Seshmeister
Nothing wrong with revising original propoganda.
http://www.doug-long.com/hiroshim.htm
The fact remained that if an invasion took place, there were going to be massive casualties on both sides. The US war plans included provisions for wide scale chemical warfare to overcome Japanese defenses since a surprise that was pulled off in Normandy was not going to happen. There was only one place to land. Not to mention the kamikazes probably sinking troop ships with thousands dying at a crack, or the civilian population, ALL men, women, and children, were considered to be in a militia and were ordered to fight to the last. I'm not saying they all would have, but judging the numbers of Japanese civilians killing themselves on Okinawa after the US victory, it's not a stretch to say that many would have died...
I do not believe the highest of the casualty estimates because the Japanese Imperial Army would have eventually collapsed in open terrain warfare against US tanks and airpower. But a lot of US and UK personnel were going with them...Last edited by Nickdfresh; 11-02-2007, 08:23 PM.Comment
-
Nick I totally respect your knowledge on the WWII stuff but my worry on the thing is
a) After the bombs nothing changed. The Japs stll refused to surrender until the US agreed to keeping the emperor which they then did.
b) Nagasaki. You have a country that is fucked up and in a mess and they only give them 3 days?
c) If you are arguing against the US flexing it's muscles for the future cold war and using Jap cities as a testing ground, don't you think it's a bit fucking suspicious they used a plutonium bomb in Nagasaki after the Uranium one in Hiroshima?
d) In modern definitions it's terrorism because it was killing innocent people on mass to cause a political outcome. You can cite the firebombing of Tokyo or Dresden but that at least didn't fuck up the survivors for the rest of their lives with radiation poisoning. It was the biggest single two acts of terrorism in human history and you can dress it up all you like but that is a fact. The reason that Hiroshima was such a good target was that as a non strategic military target it hadn't been bombed up to that point so was the perfect place for the new toy to be tested.
I'm not alone on this. I cited dozens of historians in my last post.
Hiroshima was just plain wrong. Nagasaki was even worse.
Different times though I guess which is a good thing.
Cheers!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Seshmeister
Nick I totally respect your knowledge on the WWII stuff but my worry on the thing is
a) After the bombs nothing changed. The Japs stll refused to surrender until the US agreed to keeping the emperor which they then did.
There was no effective means of communications between the US and IJ at that time. The only intermediary finally joined the War in August, and effectively shut down whatever communications there were. I suspect the Japanese bare a greater blame than the US in this, because what sensible, realistic men were in the IJ gov't were effectively menaced into submission by a hyper-aggressive Imperial Army, willing to fight to the last Japanese. Another aspect that people also ignore is that the Emperor was also a cunt, that presided over some of the most heinous war crimes in modern times conducted by any nation-state calling itself civilized. He had no right to demand anything. Although, the Viceroy Gen. MacArthur was smart enough to let things be...
Yes, but the shock effect was considered necessary. Again, I've said in the past that I do not agree with the targeting list, and that a military or naval target such as the Tokyo Naval Yard should have been at least one of the targets.b) Nagasaki. You have a country that is fucked up and in a mess and they only give them 3 days?
Well, they didn't have a lot of choice as far as bombs went. I think the US had only three total at the time. But one could also argue that the bombings made subsequent uses more unlikely because little was known regarding "fallout" and the long term peripheral effects...c) If you are arguing against the US flexing it's muscles for the future cold war and using Jap cities as a testing ground, don't you think it's a bit fucking suspicious they used a plutonium bomb in Nagasaki after the Uranium one in Hiroshima?
Of course the cities were kept pristine, even the Japanese living there knew this. But the Japanese were all inducted into the militia (the exact name escapes me) and were considered to be warriors (very unfairly, as the IJA's bastardization of the Code of Bushido was completely pseudo and a a recent construction).d) In modern definitions it's terrorism because it was killing innocent people on mass to cause a political outcome. You can cite the firebombing of Tokyo or Dresden but that at least didn't fuck up the survivors for the rest of their lives with radiation poisoning. It was the biggest single two acts of terrorism in human history and you can dress it up all you like but that is a fact. The reason that Hiroshima was such a good target was that as a non strategic military target it hadn't been bombed up to that point so was the perfect place for the new toy to be tested.
The question is, was it better to kill 150,000 Japanese via atomic bombings, or to have a possible humanitarian catastrophe that could amount to millions. Also, you're discounting the experience of the US in the Iwo Jima and Okinawa invasions, in which entire Japanese armies fought to the last man, and inflicted some of the highest casualty rates in proportion with numbers, in all WWII...Then thousands of Japanese civilians started committing suicide and throwing their babies over cliffs before they jumped after them, because the Japanese has so ingrained in the population that the Americans were barbarians intent on raping and eating them.
And on the radiation question, limited numbers of the Japanese victims were actually severally irradiated since the fallout was dispersed by the air burst, much like a "radiation bomb" and the Japanese gov't continues to harp on this, blaming every death in the two cities on the A-bombs, to this day. This while they continually orchestrate a campaign effectively decontextualizing history, and most egregiously of all, their own perverse actions of murdering six-million Chinese civilians by starvation, bullet, and Samurai sword (just for starters).
The deaths of the civilians was horrifying. But at the same time, the Japanese claim on martyrdom on this issue is just repugnant, and judging the US bombings while avoiding discussions on The Rape of Nanjing and the fact that the Japanese effectively started WWII (Not at Pearl Harbor, but in their invasion of China some 10 years earlier)...
You're not alone, but that doesn't make them right...I'm not alone on this. I cited dozens of historians in my last post.
True. And in my own speculations was that the one positive that came out of these bombings was the horrific demonstrations provided may have caused a stigma that prevented their use in the Cold War. Who knows? And I'm a Japophile. I love their culture, but please, their statements on this stuff is just silly without taking responsibility for their "advances in Asia" during WWII. Even the ex-Japanese Defense Minister was forced to resign when he dared say that he could sort of see why the US dropped the bomb. Because there were only effectively military options left before "talks" could come about, invasion (Operation Downfall with the two subcomponents Olympia and Cornet) or a blockade, in both cases the misery would have gone on into 1946 or 47.'Hiroshima was just plain wrong. Nagasaki was even worse.
Different times though I guess which is a good thing.
Cheers!
Last edited by Nickdfresh; 11-03-2007, 11:39 AM.Comment
-
I just don't think the two choices were drop two bombs or have a hellish invasion.
There were other options.
The Japanese government was horrendous but I don't think for example you would want your family to be held to account for Bush's actions.
I seem to remember the US only had 3 bombs at the time too but still there was no need for Nagasaki at least.
And I'm not a Japophile, I think they have a uniquely odd outlook even to this day.
e.g. Vendng machines with schoolgirls panties?
Jeez.
Cheers!
Comment
-
It's easy to sit on our high horses and judge the past. None of us were on the Bataan Death March or spent time in a Japanese prison camp hell.
The war ended. The US and Japan got on with life and both prospered in the end. Life goes on.No! You can't have the keys to the wine cellar!Comment
-
For some anyway....Originally posted by Nitro Express
Life goes on.
It's been said: History is written by the Victors.
And rewritten by Bushco, but I digress......
I was just wondering what's gone through this guy's mind for 60 years.
Wish he'd written a book.
The moral implications from BOTH sides in that war [or all wars for that matter] fascinate me.
The differences in the way people think about war and killing are important to study.
And I've actually learned some things from both sesh and nick by reading this.
Which is reallly saying something considering I'm here for the grins and the giggles.
Originally posted by KristyOriginally posted by cadaverdogComment
-
I think you or me could have dropped that bomb if we lived during those times. Nobody saw the end of the war and the Japanese military was absolutely brutal. Plus, the prejudice against anything not of white European desent was high. That Japanese were Japs and hardly human in the eyes of many.Originally posted by LoungeMachine
For some anyway....
It's been said: History is written by the Victors.
And rewritten by Bushco, but I digress......
I was just wondering what's gone through this guy's mind for 60 years.
Wish he'd written a book.
The moral implications from BOTH sides in that war [or all wars for that matter] fascinate me.
The differences in the way people think about war and killing are important to study.
And I've actually learned some things from both sesh and nick by reading this.
Which is reallly saying something considering I'm here for the grins and the giggles.
It's all a sad story but on the other hand, General Marshall and General MacArther did an excellent post war job. The Japanese got on with life and in the end, the prejudices melted away and we have had a great relationship with Japan.
What frustrates me is I see tyranny in our own govt. and the sheepish American people do nothing about it. We are going to lose our country because the citizens have been pacified by easy credit and entertainment. If Bubba can put it on his credit card and get it, he doesn't care what Bush does.
Who will use the next nuclear device? Probably either the US or Israel. We live in an age where the president thinks he's a law unto himself and he wants war. Nuclear weapons dissapear and then show up on a bomber at another base. There's dissention in the upper tiers of the Air Force and one high end brass commits suicide. Stuff you used to read about post communist Russia but now it's going on here.No! You can't have the keys to the wine cellar!Comment
-
Made Hitler look like a pussy.Originally posted by Nickdfresh
The Rape of NanjingComment
-
We went from The Rape of Nanjing, the Batan Death March, Japanese Prison Camp Hell, Tokyo firebombing, Hiroshima and Nagazaki nuking to Japanese nerds pretending they are Jimi Hendrix.
I would say things got better :D
<object width="425" height="366"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9KuXs_dOBYA&rel=1&border=0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9KuXs_dOBYA&rel=1&border=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="366"></embed></object>No! You can't have the keys to the wine cellar!Comment
Comment