Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: Hiroshima AND Nagasaki?
  • Subject: Hiroshima AND Nagasaki?
Subject: Hiroshima AND Nagasaki?

http://i.imgur.com/fsISj.png

Posted by: RockdaleRooster
No point replying to him any more. Every same person ITT now agrees with you. Anybody who doesn't wouldn't change their stance if you went back in time, personally stopped the bombs being dropped and brought back the seven-figure casualty list.

  • 01.03.2013 2:25 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

blargidy blarg honk blark


Posted by: NinjaLord77

Posted by: HipiO7
Posted by: NinjaLord77
And you retaliated against innocent Afghanistanis and killed over a million of them. And killed over 700,000 Iraqis cause they "had weapons" What a peaceful nation.


What does The Cold War and The Gulf War have to do with WWII?

Stop pulling facts out of your ass that have nothing to do with whats being discussed to try and help yourself.


What Gulf war? I'm talking about the recent war in Afghanistan. Or do you think that no civilians were killed? The point is that they can kill people and it's fine, if others kill they are terrorits. Yeah OK.
There is a difference between an event like 9/11 and fighting a war in a foreign country.

  • 01.03.2013 2:32 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: XxExpungexX
I heard that Japan would have surrendered if the US recognized the emperor of japan
This. The Emperor was talking about surrendering anyway.

There was much more to the bombing than simply ending WW2.

  • 01.03.2013 2:35 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Hey, uh, if you like vs threads, then check out this little group right here, if you have the time. It's pretty fun, just hop right in.

I hear Japan was planning to surrender before we dropped the second bomb, but we 'wanted to make sure' or some -blam!- like that.

  • 01.03.2013 2:36 PM PDT


Posted by: I give tuggers

Posted by: XxExpungexX
I heard that Japan would have surrendered if the US recognized the emperor of japan
This. The Emperor was talking about surrendering anyway.

There was much more to the bombing than simply ending WW2.

Yes let's leave the man who's mere presence was the driving force behind 14 years of war in power. There's no way that can lead to another war.

[Edited on 01.03.2013 2:39 PM PST]

  • 01.03.2013 2:38 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: And Im Here Too
I hear Japan was planning to surrender before we dropped the second bomb, but we 'wanted to make sure' or some -blam!- like that.
Yep.

It wasn't a "necessary evil" at all. And people have this idea that Japan would've never given up, which is far from true.

The reality is that the US bombing had more to do with flexing muscle and testing their new toy than ending the war.

  • 01.03.2013 2:39 PM PDT

This is now my main account. My former account was xKingGhidorahx. I've been on this site since 2009.

Duh.

  • 01.03.2013 2:39 PM PDT

This is now my main account. My former account was xKingGhidorahx. I've been on this site since 2009.

Posted by: I give tuggers

Posted by: And Im Here Too
I hear Japan was planning to surrender before we dropped the second bomb, but we 'wanted to make sure' or some -blam!- like that.
Yep.

It wasn't a "necessary evil" at all. And people have this idea that Japan would've never given up, which is far from true.

The reality is that the US bombing had more to do with flexing muscle and testing their new toy than ending the war.

Oh goodness, you don't really believe that do you?

  • 01.03.2013 2:41 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: RockdaleRooster

Posted by: I give tuggers

Posted by: XxExpungexX
I heard that Japan would have surrendered if the US recognized the emperor of japan
This. The Emperor was talking about surrendering anyway.

There was much more to the bombing than simply ending WW2.

Yes let's leave the man who's mere presence was the driving force behind 14 years of war in power. There's no way that can lead to another war.
Same could be said for any world leader.

Point is, Japan was severely weakened by the end of the war. As much as people like to say they were all cold killers with crazed devotion and fanaticism, they wouldn't of continued with the Soviets nearby.

  • 01.03.2013 2:44 PM PDT

Posted by: I give tuggers

Posted by: And Im Here Too
I hear Japan was planning to surrender before we dropped the second bomb, but we 'wanted to make sure' or some -blam!- like that.
Yep.

It wasn't a "necessary evil" at all. And people have this idea that Japan would've never given up, which is far from true.

The reality is that the US bombing had more to do with flexing muscle and testing their new toy than ending the war.


Posted by: RockdaleRooster

Posted by: I give tuggers

Posted by: XxExpungexX
I heard that Japan would have surrendered if the US recognized the emperor of japan
This. The Emperor was talking about surrendering anyway.

There was much more to the bombing than simply ending WW2.

Yes let's leave the man who's mere presence was the driving force behind 14 years of war in power. There's no way that can lead to another war.

  • 01.03.2013 2:44 PM PDT

"Banhammer" - Post anything on the Waypoint forums -50g
Never forget:
Porch Day
lolReach
Gen Petitt Day
Night of the Living Alts

Dear god, this thread is still alive?

  • 01.03.2013 2:45 PM PDT

Posted by: I give tuggers
Posted by: RockdaleRooster
Posted by: I give tuggers
Posted by: XxExpungexX
I heard that Japan would have surrendered if the US recognized the emperor of japan
This. The Emperor was talking about surrendering anyway. 
There was much more to the bombing than simply ending WW2.

Yes let's leave the man who's mere presence was the driving force behind 14 years of war in power. There's no way that can lead to another war.
Same could be said for any world leader.
Point is, Japan was severely weakened by the end of the war. As much as people like to say they were all cold killers with crazed devotion and fanaticism, they wouldn't of continued with the Soviets nearby.

That's why the Supreme War Council tried to overthrow the Emperor to keep him from surrendering so they could keep the war going.

[Edited on 01.03.2013 2:46 PM PST]

  • 01.03.2013 2:46 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: OdorousLicense3
The US said they would nuke them each day until Japan surrendered.



Let that be a lesson to all who try to attack the U.S.

  • 01.03.2013 2:46 PM PDT

1LUV

It truly is amazing at how stupid some of these posters look when they think they're right, especially when they're not.

  • 01.03.2013 2:46 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: The Random
Posted by: I give tuggers

Posted by: And Im Here Too
I hear Japan was planning to surrender before we dropped the second bomb, but we 'wanted to make sure' or some -blam!- like that.
Yep.

It wasn't a "necessary evil" at all. And people have this idea that Japan would've never given up, which is far from true.

The reality is that the US bombing had more to do with flexing muscle and testing their new toy than ending the war.

Oh goodness, you don't really believe that do you?
It's better than excepting whatever textbook explanation was given to me.

A real historian questions and evaluates, and doesn't just except whatever reasoning is given to them.

Besides, it's a piss poor excuse to say the only way to stop a country is to bomb them. Especially when they were considering conceding anyway.

  • 01.03.2013 2:47 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Opt1mu5Pr1m3 15
They refused to stop fighting. So yes. It was necessary. Which was very unfortunate.

We actually would have lost more lives if we didn't drop the bombs. More soldiers would have been lost than the civilians that were killed in the bombs.

  • 01.03.2013 2:48 PM PDT

Please stop complaining about the 'death of a loved one' it's my job. They probably deserved it anyways. Here's a warning, if you keep making pentagrams out of the neighbors livestock I will personally come to your house and kill everyone you love. Now leave me alone, I got to get back to work.
~M.D~

I think we should of used more and have the second one actually be on target.

  • 01.03.2013 2:48 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Hey, uh, if you like vs threads, then check out this little group right here, if you have the time. It's pretty fun, just hop right in.

Posted by: I give tuggers

Posted by: The Random
Posted by: I give tuggers

Posted by: And Im Here Too
I hear Japan was planning to surrender before we dropped the second bomb, but we 'wanted to make sure' or some -blam!- like that.
Yep.

It wasn't a "necessary evil" at all. And people have this idea that Japan would've never given up, which is far from true.

The reality is that the US bombing had more to do with flexing muscle and testing their new toy than ending the war.

Oh goodness, you don't really believe that do you?
It's better than excepting whatever textbook explanation was given to me.

A real historian questions and evaluates, and doesn't just except whatever reasoning is given to them.

Besides, it's a piss poor excuse to say the only way to stop a country is to bomb them. Especially when they were considering conceding anyway.


I think most people just support the decision simply because we got to nuke somebody.

  • 01.03.2013 2:49 PM PDT

It's so easy to criticize events that happened in the past.

  • 01.03.2013 2:53 PM PDT


Posted by: I give tuggers

Posted by: The Random
Posted by: I give tuggers

Posted by: And Im Here Too
I hear Japan was planning to surrender before we dropped the second bomb, but we 'wanted to make sure' or some -blam!- like that.
Yep.

It wasn't a "necessary evil" at all. And people have this idea that Japan would've never given up, which is far from true.

The reality is that the US bombing had more to do with flexing muscle and testing their new toy than ending the war.

Oh goodness, you don't really believe that do you?
It's better than excepting whatever textbook explanation was given to me.

A real historian questions and evaluates, and doesn't just except whatever reasoning is given to them.

Besides, it's a piss poor excuse to say the only way to stop a country is to bomb them. Especially when they were considering conceding anyway.

That opinion wouldn't be in a textbook without significant backing. You can spout all the anti-government crap you want but when you do your research you will see there is a lot of evidence to support the bombings. As much as there was against it.

  • 01.03.2013 2:54 PM PDT

Maybe I will never be
All the things that I wanna be
But now is not the time to cry
Now's the time to find out why
I think you're the same as me
We see things they'll never see
You and I are gonna live forever

I think they only did it to scare Russia.

  • 01.03.2013 3:10 PM PDT

Posted by: Billygoat456
I'll bring the tritium laser cutters if you bring the beer!

Funny story.

If any country did the same to the U.S. they'd be tried for war crime or state terrorism.

[Edited on 01.03.2013 3:14 PM PST]

  • 01.03.2013 3:14 PM PDT


Posted by: Hayabusawarrior
Ask the the thousands of people who would have died in the invasion (on both sides) if it was necessary.

Or ask the hundreds of thousands who died in the nuking..oh..wait..we killed all those civilians.

Unethical, unjustifiable, immoral.

  • 01.03.2013 3:15 PM PDT

This is now my main account. My former account was xKingGhidorahx. I've been on this site since 2009.

Posted by: I give tuggers

Posted by: The Random
Posted by: I give tuggers

Posted by: And Im Here Too
I hear Japan was planning to surrender before we dropped the second bomb, but we 'wanted to make sure' or some -blam!- like that.
Yep.

It wasn't a "necessary evil" at all. And people have this idea that Japan would've never given up, which is far from true.

The reality is that the US bombing had more to do with flexing muscle and testing their new toy than ending the war.

Oh goodness, you don't really believe that do you?
It's better than excepting whatever textbook explanation was given to me.

A real historian questions and evaluates, and doesn't just except whatever reasoning is given to them.

Besides, it's a piss poor excuse to say the only way to stop a country is to bomb them. Especially when they were considering conceding anyway.

*Accepting

I gather from your posts that you are very confused with what reasoning went behind America's decision to use atomic weapons near the end of the war.

Here, educate yourself.

  • 01.03.2013 3:17 PM PDT