OK, was it wrong to bomb Japan?

I don't think any of the military leaders of the day would have suggested that. But they all said the bomb was unecessary

 

They didn't know the Big Six had no intention of surrendering so all they relied on was how things were going i. The feild which was that Japan could not make war anymore. A far cry from being defeated to the poi t where the war was won.

Once again, how do you end this with an unconditional surrender?

 

You wait. And you have no idea what military leaders were briefed on

 

I know they weren't briefed on the Big Six meetings. Know how? Because nobody but they knew lol!

All the comanders knew was that Japanese forces couldn't moint pffensive operations but had no idea about what was going on inside the nation or it's leaders minds.

Now, how do you get them to surrender unconditionally?

 

And how do you know that. Evidence?

 

Lack of any revelation that there was a US mole in the Japanese War Dept.

Now, how were you going to get unconditional surrender again?

 

By waiting and demonstrating the effects of a bomb on a uninhabited site

 

And if the bomb fails and the Big Six rally the entire nation to resist the US even more because they claim their weapons don't work what then, come a mongh later and say you found one that might work but you're not quite sure? Meanwhile you ally China is losing tens of thousands of people per month, your voters are wondering when you're going to take their husbands, sons out of harms way and stop the torture of our POWs and the tax payers wonder why you still are wasting billions floating around in the Pacific providing propagada victory for the enemy.

So, seriously, how are you going to get unconditional surrender?

 

By waiting. The bombs could have failed in Hiroshima as well. We wanted to give them a demonstration. We could have done that....and not killed anyone

- - - Updated - - -

How does anyone know we are wasting time waiting? You think all of America knew about the bomb? You think they would have been eager to invade?

 

That's the point of not telling them when and where it would be dropped as we did. You on the other hand wanted to make this into a scheduled show which it couldn't be.

So, how long do we wait? I'm asking some pretty simple questions here. Shouldn't be that hard to answer.

 

Why not a scheduled show? They couldn't do anything about it. You keep asking the same questions and get frustrated with the same answers. We wait as long as the generals recommend. Why are you against the advice of military experts?

 

Answered in post 658.

 

I find it very odd that you feel in time of war we should NOT follow the recommendations of our military leaders. It's baffling.

 

y

Politicians use the military to achieve a political end. Japan was beaten militarily remember? They were not beaten politically and would rise again as a military power if not taken apart from the bottom to the top thus, after the military victory had to co me the political one hence unconditional surrender.

So, how would you have done that?

 

By waiting and demonstrating the bomb. The military leaders got you to that point...to ignore their advice is foolish.

- - - Updated - - -

By waiting and demonstrating the bomb. The military leaders got you to that point...to ignore their advice is foolish.

- - - Updated - - -

By waiting and demonstrating the bomb. The military leaders got you to that point...to ignore their advice is foolish.

 

Which of them said that demonstrating the bomb was the right thing to do and what did they say would occur if it didn't work and Japan used it to gain propaganda victory to ensure the war would continue for years because American weapons didn't work?

 

The end, unconditional surrender, justified the means.
There is but one rule in war.
1. Win.

 

Let me rephrase. Our only option to save our own lives, while limiting the amount of Japanese we killed was to bomb them. To think otherwise is to ignore literally all the evidence that overwhelmingly suggests that it is true.

You are objectively wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

And something you are forgetting in your "research" is that we told the civilians to leave. They were aware of the incoming damage. ANd they stayed.

We bombed them.

Then japan sitll refused to surrender. Further cementing that it is their fault we had to bomb them, since we had to do it AGAIN! lolol

You are objectively wrong. You have not done any research what so ever. In this, nor in racial issues of america. You have feelings that you cling to regardless of fact.

 

Sure but conditional surrender could accomplish that too, depending upon the conditions. All conditional means is "we surrender if..." and the terms are negotiated. If the terms are unacceptable either side can walk away and nothing is really lost when compared to not talking to them until they surrender unconditionally.

 

WOW! Someone should do some research to determine if racism causes CTE. Perhaps it is more serious. I may destroy the brain resulting in village idiot zombie syndrome.

 

Producing a viable long range bomber is a challenge. Producing a craft to haul a heavy load a few miles - one way is far simply. It is all about lift.

Which begs the question: Can technology challenged fanatics produce WMD's in small packages? Yes! Yes, they can.

“North Korean soldiers 'given nuclear backpacks' as tensions rise over joint US-South Korean military exercises” “Report comes after series of weapons tests by Kim Jong-un's forces,” Independent, UK, Lizzie Dearden,8/31/16.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...nsions-us-south-korean-military-a7217401.html

I saw that headline this morning and could not wait to share it with you.

 

Hauling a heavy load for a few miles is not much of a challenge. Google "lift" formula aircraft. As to the bomb itself:

“ Several historians have claimed Japan was days away from testing an atomic weapon in Nagoya when
Hiroshima was obliterated by one American bomb on 6 August 1945.” Independent, UK, Japan was 'days away from test' of A-bomb, By David McNeill in Tokyo, 05 August 2002 .

Is the UK Independent a biased source?

 

What conditions would you have allowed? Keep all land tbey took, allow their military to remain intact, no trials for war criminals, what?

 

An for a hundred and one time that is your opinion and the facts are otherwise as they only turn the decision to surrender over to the Emperor after the second atom bombing.

The plans in placed at the time was for an invasion that was predicted to costs many hundreds of thousands of American lives and god know how many millions of Japanese lives.

Hell the military was so against them unconditional surrendering that elements of that military try to stop it with a coup against their god emperor.

Only if we had agree to allow them to keep their war leaders in power was it at all likely that they would had surrender without those two bombs.

 

They said we didn't need the bomb. We should have listened to our military experts.