New Chinese Nuclear Threat to US

Wrong again. The invasion of Kyushu was scheduled for November 1945. It was still scheduled even on the last morning before Japan finally surrendered.

 

Stimson really was a worthless idiot for taking Kyoto off the target list. Mr. Truman should have kicked Stimson in the balls and put Kyoto right back at the top of the target list. Letting Stimson have his way was Mr. Truman's greatest mistake.

Had we hit Kyoto with an atomic bomb, Japan would still be whining and whimpering to this day. Just think of the beautiful firestorm that would have happened when all that ancient dry wood was smashed into kindling.

"The UNESCO World Heritage Site Historic Monuments of Ancient Kyoto (Kyoto, Uji and Otsu Cities) encompasses 17 locations in Japan within the city of Kyoto and its immediate vicinity. In 794, the Japanese imperial family moved the capital to Heian-kyō. The locations are in three cities: Kyoto and Uji in [Kyoto Prefecture]]; and Ōtsu in Shiga Prefecture; Uji and Ōtsu border Kyoto to the south and north, respectively. Of the monuments, 13 are Buddhist temples, three are Shinto shrines, and one is a castle. The properties include 38 buildings designated by the Japanese government as National Treasures, 160 properties designated as Important Cultural Properties, eight gardens designated as Special Places of Scenic Beauty, and four designated as Places of Scenic Beauty. UNESCO listed the site as World Heritage in 1994."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historic_Monuments_of_Ancient_Kyoto_(Kyoto,_Uji_and_Otsu_Cities)

 

Nopers. According to Truman's diary he felt the war was going to be over mid August. Maybe you should read the thoughts of the president who was in charge of the whole thing. And it makes sound logical sense. Why on earth would you bother with an invasion, sacrificing millions of American lives when you've already convinced the Russians to do that sacrifice?

lol

Don't hurt yerself, bud.

 

Wrong again. The invasion was scheduled for November 1945.

That does not change the reality that the US was going to invade Kyushu if we had gotten to the end of 1945 and the war turned out to not be over yet.

Good grief. Truman was not trying to have the Soviets take over Japan all by themselves.

He wanted the Soviets to attack Japan from the north while the US attacked from the south, so that Japan would have to defend in two directions at once.

The notion that after Pearl Harbor and the Bataan Death March we were going to give up making Japan surrender to us and just hand them off to the Soviets is preposterous.

Pointing out the fact that everything that you say is untrue is unlikely to harm me.

 

No bud. Both Truman and Burns felt that the invasion was no longer necessary due to the imminent invasion from Russia. There was no mention of contemplation to prevent an invasion before dropping the bomb. He specifically states that he was dropping the bomb to beat Russia to the punch. Japan was already beaten and all that was happening was a mulling around about surrender terms. Literally everything I've posted from Truman backs this up.

You've brought nothing to the table. I've quoted Generals, the President. I've detailed the situation as to what Japan was in. I can quote you communication between Russia and Japanese ministers regarding their surrender.

Know what you've done?

Not much of anything.

Smells like a big fat L over there.

 

Wrong again. The invasion of Kyushu was still scheduled for November 1945.

That does not change the fact that they were going to invade had we gotten to the end of 1945 without Japan surrendering.

That's because the plan was to invade.

Actually the reason for dropping the atomic bombs was to make Japan surrender.

That is incorrect. When the atomic bombs were dropped Japan was not talking to us about surrender terms.

That is incorrect. Nothing that Truman wrote backs up any of your untrue claims.

Japan was not offering to surrender when the atomic bombs were dropped.

Wrong again. I have brought the fact that Japan did not offer to surrender until after both atomic bombs had already been dropped.

I have also brought the fact that both atomic bombs were dropped on military targets.

Quotes that did not say what you claimed they did.

They merely expressed an opinion that Japan had been ready to surrender.

Misleading details. You had managed to leave out millions of Japanese soldiers and ten thousand kamikazes.

No you can't, because they were not talking about surrender.

They were talking about ending the war in a draw (like the way the Korean War later ended).

Yes. I have pointed out a long and seemingly endless stream of untrue claims on your part.

Wrong again. I have pointed out the fact that Japan did not offer to surrender until after both atomic bombs had already been dropped.

I have also pointed out the fact that both atomic bombs were dropped on military targets.

Of course you've lost. You don't know anything about this subject, and all of your claims are untrue.

Next time you want to talk about a subject, try learning about it first, and then only start talking when you know what you are talking about.

 

Is off topic to the thread however.

And the answer is not all that simple. Did the bombs have an impact and give Japan a way out of the war and also allowed them to save face? Without a doubt.

However, they never had and never would win the war by themselves.

 

This is a critical aspect, and why I refer to the Sato-Togo telegrams so heavily in debates like this. Because it is a peek inside of the attempts of Japan to end the war on their terms.

Over and over again Ambassador Sato tells his superior how outlandish the arrogance was that Japan could dictate terms to the Allies, and it was ultimately foolish to even hope that the Soviets would ever present such terms. In fact, towards the end the language between the two got quite salty, with Foreign Minister Togo essentially ordering Ambassador Sato to never mention any kind of surrender ever again.

What Japan wanted was never a surrender, it was an armistice with Japan retaining all territory prior to the war and much of what it had gained. All territories lost would be returned, and any they had even held they would administer. Including the Philippines, which in their earlier failed attempts with the Swiss and Sweden would have been demilitarized but under Japanese Administration. And no occupation, and no war crimes trials.

Those proposals by Japan were so bad that neither Switzerland nor Sweden would even present the proposal to the allies. Ambassador Sato was aware of that, and was constantly berating his superior to the fact that Japan was attempting to make demands through the Soviets that were an absolute joke.

Such as one of the most interesting, Ambassador Sato to Foreign Minister Togo on 12 July 1945.

http://www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/library/correspondence/togo-sato/corr_togo-sato.htm

I myself find the Sato-Togo telegrams fascinating, for many reasons. First, it lets us see inside the "thought process" that the Japanese Leadership were going through between Potsdam and the surrender. Of course we now know that the Soviets had no intention of ever presenting any proposal from Japan, because they had their own plans already in place to attack themselves. But it is interest that the top Japanese diplomat over and over was trying to tell his bosses to "get real", and to realize that the war was over and that they needed to start to negotiate with the Allies themselves. As opposed to the "Mokusatsu" response that the Prime Minister gave to Potsdam.

The very words used by Foreign Minister Togo was never "surrender", but interestingly enough "Peace". That things would return to how they had been in 1941, with no repercussions against Japan at all. No demilitarization, no occupation, no war crime trials, no loss of territory (and return of any territory lost while retaining any gained).

And the exchanges were completely unfiltered, as the Japanese had no idea the US had broken their codes. And interestingly, they were almost word for word copies of those found after the war in the Foreign Ministry archives.

 

And to finish, there is a reason why I say that the Sato-Togo telegrams are so critical. And especially true when one gets to the exchange of 25 July 1945:

This is of course referring to the Atlantic Charter of 14 August 1941. Most specifically, the first three paragraphs.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_16912.htm

There is a reason why I keep urging people to look at original documents and to study them, because that paragraph is the key to what Japan was wanting. That by demanding to any peace be in accordance to the Atlantic Charter, that they lose no territory, and their government remain 100% in place as they want it.

Of course, that was never going to happen. Even the Soviets knew that, which is why they just played them for time. If not for that, they likely would have seen Japan packing just as Switzerland and Sweden had done when Japan approached them to try and negotiate an end to the war. Because no nation was going to lose diplomatic respect by even proposing such an outlandish and unacceptable end to the war. As Toggle Almendro stated, not a surrender but a draw (to be more accurate armistice). A pro quo ante bellum.

And the Allied Powers had already seen the results of a World War ending with an Armistice. With no surrender, no occupation, no demilitarization. That was how the first World War ended, and they were not about to make that mistake a second time.

 

Literally nothing of substance was said in this post! LOL Wake me up when you have an argument beyond "nuh unh"

 

That is incorrect. The following substantive facts are in my post:

The United States was going to invade Japan had we gotten to the end of 1945 without Japan surrendering.

Japan had millions of soldiers and ten thousand kamikazes awaiting our invasion.

Before the atomic bombs were dropped, Japan was not talking about surrender. They were talking about ending the war in a draw (like the way the Korean War later ended).

Both atomic bombs were dropped on military targets.

 

Nope. As I've stated and back up with quotes from the men in charge including the president's own thoughts on the subject. There was no American invasion that was going to happen once he got Russia to agree to invade.

 

That is incorrect. We were going to invade Japan had we gotten to the end of 1945 without Japan surrendering, and there is no quote that backs up your untrue claim to the contrary.

 

Well according to the president who gives the orders...you weren't.

He convinced Russia to waste their lives instead.

 

Thank you for making me aware of more of the specifics on this threat!

In my opinion...... this one fact is sufficient reason for Hunter Biden to be indicted.....and then Sleepy Joe........ and many others!

 

Trying to guess the actions of an enemy by their past actions is folly. Japan never attacked Pearl Harbor... until they attacked Pearl harbor. When you start thinking you can predict the actions of your enemy, is exactly when you can expect the unexpected.

The poster seems to think that we will find solace in knowing we can kill a lot of our enemies... as we count our own millions of dead. It doesn't work that way.

 

However, even then Japan was recognized as one of the major Naval powers of the world. And was even making port visits to Hawaii and the West Coast in the 1930s. They had by the 1930s become a navy with a Global reach, even paying port calls in the UK and British India.

Exactly how often has the Chinese Navy done that? How often are PLAN ships spotted off the US coast, or making port calls as US Navy facilities?

And Japan had already invaded Manchuria and China, as well as dealing Russia a major blow before taking over much of their protectorate in China.

Sorry, this claim does not work because the two are not really alike at all. It was well known that Japan had the experience and capability to strike Hawaii, which is why the defenses were increased and the US Pacific Fleet was moved there in 1940. It was hoped that would deter an attack there, as they knew Japan could reach it.

 

If you believe that the past actions of a historically backward and almost indigent nation that has risen to rival, and some say surpass, the dominant nation in the world have relevance to its new position in the world, then we should just agree to disagree.

PS - Their nukes can reach anywhere.

 

Which is exactly why I find most of this thread laughable. It does not matter where they are at.

But tell me, what exactly has China actually done to become any worse of a threat than they were 5 or 10 years ago? Are they expanding the area their fleet operates? Are they putting them out to sea on long distance extended cruises?

Hell, are they even operating them as an actual fleet, instead of a bunch of random ships acting alone?

Are they spending 4-6 months at sea, practicing and improving their UNREP capabilities? Are they sending them out to sail in other areas of the world, participating in fleet operations, making port calls, and the like in other nations they do not border?

The answer to all of those is simple, it's no. They are doing none of that, and their navy is being used as it always has, as a upgunned coast guard. And you can not take such a force and suddenly become an actual "blue water navy" in even a few years. The PLAN is still largely a glorified coast guard, their airlift capability is a complete and utter joke, and they are only a threat to nations that they share a land border with. Because that is the only way they can move their army around, by land.

 

That is incorrect. Truman never decided to "not invade even if Japan refused to surrender". And he never gave any order to that effect. The orders to go ahead and invade Kyushu remained in effect all the way up to the moment that Japan surrendered.

The notion that Truman would have been content to let the Soviets capture all of Japan for themselves is absurd to the extreme.

Truman did his best to shut the Soviets out of Japan entirely.

 

China is building an ICBM force that is equal to the US ICBM force.

They are also building stealth fighters. I'm not sure how many. But enough to be a problem if we go to war in defense of Taiwan.

Their shore-based anti-ship missiles will also be a problem if we go to war in defense of Taiwan. Granted our carriers are used to the problem of potent anti-ship missiles, but China is doing their part to make sure that the issue remains a problem.

Everyone always (rightly) derides Chinese nuclear submarines, but their diesel attack submarines will also be a problem if we go to war in defense of Taiwan.

 

Those are deterrents, unless you actually think they will conduct a first strike.

The J-20? Not really "stealth", just low observable. India announced it has had no problem spotting and tracking them on RADAR several years ago. Not all that big of a threat to be honest.

Really? What missiles are those, exactly? Because only a few have the range to reach Taiwan, and the Navy would not be putting its fleet between Taiwan and China if there was a conflict. They would be on the other side of the island, where not only are they out of range of their shore based missiles, acquisition would pretty much be impossible.

And once again, how often are they deployed and how experienced are their crews? I can tell you now, they are rarely deployed and pretty much only in their coastal waters. And sailing a sub into a fleet during actual combat conditions is very different than trying it when they are not in a combat condition.

In the modern era, diesel subs are great for defensive operations because they can hide on the bottom and wait. But trying to approach a fleet with all of the ASW? I can think of better ways to commit suicide.

 

You make it sound as if they have no Army or Air Force, just a Navy. China's ULTIMATE goal may be world conquest but they are very patient. Their near term goals are pretty evident. They watch the US make itself weaker and weaker with continuing acts of cowardice from Afghanistan to the Black Sea to its own undefended airspace, while watching America deplete its land warfare weaponry in the Ukraine. When the time is right (probably when it looks like Biden is about gone) they invade Taiwan. With over half the world's microprocessor manufacturing in its pocket, they expand in the Pacific and start working on their next step in global conquest.

China's in no hurry.

 

Have I not clearly stated multiple times that they are largely only a threat to nations they share a border with? That is directly addressing their Army. Yes, it is large and formidable. However, it has no "legs".

Their air mobility capability is a complete joke, the California Air National Guard by itself has far more airlift capability than all of the Chinese military. These are things I have brought up over and over again. And when talking about Taiwan, it is the Navy which will be of critical importance because that is how any military force would get there. The PLA is not going to swim to the island. All of their airlift capability combined can not even bring over a Regiment.

Now on the ground, it is a very different matter. India, Vietnam, Mongolia, North Korea, Afghanistan, Russia, Pakistan, Laos, all those and more would likely be quickly overrun if China decided to attack. Hell, the closest thing they have had to a "war" was back in 1979. When they had enough of Vietnam oppressing minority Chinese in their country (a joke I know with their own behavior against ethnic minorities) and the invasion of Cambodia and staged a 1 month punitive invasion. Largely destroying any force that Vietnam sent at them. Destroying anything they came across, then after a month of raising hell simply turned around and went home.

And remember it was largely the same when they entered the Korean War. But once again, via land. Even then like today, China has no "legs". And you can't take over a country with an Air Force.

Now if we were discussing a conflict between say China and India, my response would be very different. But you keep proposing Taiwan, so I am responding with what would be in play and a potential threat in such a situation. And it would be the same if the nation in conflict was Philippines or Japan. China simply lacks the capability to invade any of those nations.

And if they were to try, I think I can predict what much of the reaction globally would be. Likely, International Condemnation. Followed quickly by nations throwing off the "One China Policy" and reverting to the earlier Two China Policies.

 

Ya sorry but no. His personal diary detailed his thoughts on the matter.