Gary
Mind. Body. Light. Sound.
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
I don't know what this thread became.
I don't know what this thread became.
Chat! culturecrossfire.slack.com
Nuking the Japanese. Cool or not cool?
- Thread starter Master Thrasher
- Start date
CBright7831
2016/17 Poster of the Year
- Messages
- 3,858
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
:
*sigh*
This thread went from talking about about a horrific earthquake/tsunami into a three page debate about WW2, which was also horrific, but has no bearing on this topic.
I'm out of here.
:
*sigh*This thread went from talking about about a horrific earthquake/tsunami into a three page debate about WW2, which was also horrific, but has no bearing on this topic.
I'm out of here.
Agent of Oblivion
Faded as fuck
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
Now I know how rescue workers feel to dig through septic tangled debris.
Now I know how rescue workers feel to dig through septic tangled debris.
BruiserBrody
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 31,108
- Reaction score
- 3,243
- Points
- 293
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
This is sort of correct. It was convenient that Germany surrendered when it did as it allowed the Allies to focus solely on the Japanese aggressor instead of the persistent German Army. The War in Europe was a real true grind and the allies were pressured several times to call a truce w/ Germany due to a lack of break troughs.
Eisenhower was greatly questioned by others in the military for his tactics and strategy and the allies took huge losses in human life due to it. (Example Ike wanted a broad attack across Germany, not an arrow like assault that may have allowed the allies to piece through Germany's heart to Berlin quicker and before the Russians, Ike's stubborn resolve lead to Hitler being able to counterstrike one final time as the stretched out forces left a hole that became "The Battle of the Bulge" through a rugged forest area where the Allies felt Hitler wouldn't consider attacking through, so it was not fortified despite various allied reports of a German build up) More lives were lost by the Allies in that one battle than Gen McArthur suffered in his brilliantly executed Pacific War plan (IIRC).
That would not have been the case had we invaded Japan, and McArthur was saving up supplies and men for that very plan and was basically figuring on a million deaths suffered just based on the Japanese defensive fortifications that had stalled Allied efforts Island to Island. McArthur was furious when he was abruptly told of the Atomic bomb and its imminent use since he was not in the "Needs to know" circle, despite being among the top 5 leaders of the Allied War effort.
So anyway, Germany surrenders and 2 months or so later the atomic bomb is ready and the Russians are planning a land grab of Eastern Asia but have not formally declared war on Japan. After nuke #1 drops, Hirohito amazingly still refuses to surrender,but Russia then choses to declare war on Japan, seeing its defeat being imminent. So a few days later nuke #2 is dropped (IIRC both cities were papered by the Army 1st to tell citizens to retreat, so its not like the US just slaughter civilians without regard.) and Hirohito finally surrenders, but feels Japan lost with honor because it was technology that defeated them, not a lack of will and resolve to fight.
So the nuclear assault served 2 purposes, it finished Japan's war effort and saved 800,000 lives or more on both sides, and it helped show Mother Russia that America is ready to whip some ass if those commie bastards want to get it on.
There was some sentiment in the US forces that since they had all those troops and weapons over in Europe already, that we might as well start fighting Russia right off and end another problem, but those opinions were not welcome and it lead to Gen Patton being silenced for his rabble rousing on that topic. McArthur, for one, was against it and he even prepared to ship US boys home from Japan quicker than the US government wanted too and that helped led the US right into another disaster in the Korean conflict 4 or 5 years later.
End rant.
bps21 said:
This is sort of correct. It was convenient that Germany surrendered when it did as it allowed the Allies to focus solely on the Japanese aggressor instead of the persistent German Army. The War in Europe was a real true grind and the allies were pressured several times to call a truce w/ Germany due to a lack of break troughs.
Eisenhower was greatly questioned by others in the military for his tactics and strategy and the allies took huge losses in human life due to it. (Example Ike wanted a broad attack across Germany, not an arrow like assault that may have allowed the allies to piece through Germany's heart to Berlin quicker and before the Russians, Ike's stubborn resolve lead to Hitler being able to counterstrike one final time as the stretched out forces left a hole that became "The Battle of the Bulge" through a rugged forest area where the Allies felt Hitler wouldn't consider attacking through, so it was not fortified despite various allied reports of a German build up) More lives were lost by the Allies in that one battle than Gen McArthur suffered in his brilliantly executed Pacific War plan (IIRC).
That would not have been the case had we invaded Japan, and McArthur was saving up supplies and men for that very plan and was basically figuring on a million deaths suffered just based on the Japanese defensive fortifications that had stalled Allied efforts Island to Island. McArthur was furious when he was abruptly told of the Atomic bomb and its imminent use since he was not in the "Needs to know" circle, despite being among the top 5 leaders of the Allied War effort.
So anyway, Germany surrenders and 2 months or so later the atomic bomb is ready and the Russians are planning a land grab of Eastern Asia but have not formally declared war on Japan. After nuke #1 drops, Hirohito amazingly still refuses to surrender,but Russia then choses to declare war on Japan, seeing its defeat being imminent. So a few days later nuke #2 is dropped (IIRC both cities were papered by the Army 1st to tell citizens to retreat, so its not like the US just slaughter civilians without regard.) and Hirohito finally surrenders, but feels Japan lost with honor because it was technology that defeated them, not a lack of will and resolve to fight.
So the nuclear assault served 2 purposes, it finished Japan's war effort and saved 800,000 lives or more on both sides, and it helped show Mother Russia that America is ready to whip some ass if those commie bastards want to get it on.
There was some sentiment in the US forces that since they had all those troops and weapons over in Europe already, that we might as well start fighting Russia right off and end another problem, but those opinions were not welcome and it lead to Gen Patton being silenced for his rabble rousing on that topic. McArthur, for one, was against it and he even prepared to ship US boys home from Japan quicker than the US government wanted too and that helped led the US right into another disaster in the Korean conflict 4 or 5 years later.
End rant.
Jingus
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 6,351
- Reaction score
- -1
- Points
- 0
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
The sadly overlooked fact about Fat Man and Little Boy is that they caused nowhere near as much damage as conventional bombing did in that war. The exact death toll is still disputed, but by all accounts the casualties from both Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined were only somewhere between 4% to 9% of total Japanese deaths in the war. (And that's counting later secondary deaths from radiation sickness; the inital toll was much lower.) The firebombing of Tokyo alone caused many more immediate deaths than the atomic bombs ever did. There's plenty of atrocity to blame in WWII, the nukes were only a small part of it.
Another point worth considering is that in 1945, we had very little understanding of radiation and its long-term effects. The leaders at the time didn't know that it would do much more than making a great big boom. Would we have still used them if we'd known the hideous facts of radiation sickness? Well... maybe. It was a fuckin' nasty war. But the point still stands that they didn't fully comprehend the true evil of what they were doing.
Also, consider this. Would anyone have objected to dropping an atomic bomb on Berlin in 1945 and killing Hitler and his top general? Probably not, right? Well... why? Because he's become such a ridiculous meme that "Hitler" equals "worst person in history by a large margin". Despite the fact that the Japanese military actually killed more civilians than the Holocaust ever did. Seriously: the Japanese forces murdered an estimated 17 million non-military people in China alone.
Also, that oft-mentioned God Emperor wasn't quite as universally beloved as is often stated. There were multiple little coups and conspiracies during the war from various top Japanese military officials to take out Hirohito and replace him.
The sadly overlooked fact about Fat Man and Little Boy is that they caused nowhere near as much damage as conventional bombing did in that war. The exact death toll is still disputed, but by all accounts the casualties from both Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined were only somewhere between 4% to 9% of total Japanese deaths in the war. (And that's counting later secondary deaths from radiation sickness; the inital toll was much lower.) The firebombing of Tokyo alone caused many more immediate deaths than the atomic bombs ever did. There's plenty of atrocity to blame in WWII, the nukes were only a small part of it.
Another point worth considering is that in 1945, we had very little understanding of radiation and its long-term effects. The leaders at the time didn't know that it would do much more than making a great big boom. Would we have still used them if we'd known the hideous facts of radiation sickness? Well... maybe. It was a fuckin' nasty war. But the point still stands that they didn't fully comprehend the true evil of what they were doing.
Also, consider this. Would anyone have objected to dropping an atomic bomb on Berlin in 1945 and killing Hitler and his top general? Probably not, right? Well... why? Because he's become such a ridiculous meme that "Hitler" equals "worst person in history by a large margin". Despite the fact that the Japanese military actually killed more civilians than the Holocaust ever did. Seriously: the Japanese forces murdered an estimated 17 million non-military people in China alone.
Also, that oft-mentioned God Emperor wasn't quite as universally beloved as is often stated. There were multiple little coups and conspiracies during the war from various top Japanese military officials to take out Hirohito and replace him.
Dobbs3K
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 1,911
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
This shows part of the reason using the atomic bomb was the right choice, despite how horrible an option it was (about the :30 mark).
1944 SAIPAN - Japanese Women Choose Suicide
This shows part of the reason using the atomic bomb was the right choice, despite how horrible an option it was (about the :30 mark).
1944 SAIPAN - Japanese Women Choose Suicide
Dobbs3K
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 1,911
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
Also, consider this. Would anyone have objected to dropping an atomic bomb on Berlin in 1945 and killing Hitler and his top general? Probably not, right? Well... why? Because he's become such a ridiculous meme that "Hitler" equals "worst person in history by a large margin". Despite the fact that the Japanese military actually killed more civilians than the Holocaust ever did. Seriously: the Japanese forces murdered an estimated 17 million non-military people in China alone.
By 1945, using a nuclear weapon on Germany would have been basically unnecessary. Germany was clearly on the ropes, and there were signs that the top military brass among the Nazis were cracking. They were surrounded on two sides, and it was just a matter of time before Berlin was taken. No such scenario really existed on the Japanese front when Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed.
Also, consider this. Would anyone have objected to dropping an atomic bomb on Berlin in 1945 and killing Hitler and his top general? Probably not, right? Well... why? Because he's become such a ridiculous meme that "Hitler" equals "worst person in history by a large margin". Despite the fact that the Japanese military actually killed more civilians than the Holocaust ever did. Seriously: the Japanese forces murdered an estimated 17 million non-military people in China alone.
By 1945, using a nuclear weapon on Germany would have been basically unnecessary. Germany was clearly on the ropes, and there were signs that the top military brass among the Nazis were cracking. They were surrounded on two sides, and it was just a matter of time before Berlin was taken. No such scenario really existed on the Japanese front when Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed.
Jingus
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 6,351
- Reaction score
- -1
- Points
- 0
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
Yeah, I know. I'm not talking about real-world tactics, I'm talking about the public's perception of history. To use a pop culture example: how many movies about the Japanese war crimes in mainland Asia have we ever seen? I can think of precisely one (the disgustingly hideous film Men Behind the Sun). Compare that to all the Holocaust movies we've gotten, a new one every year. And the Holocaust movies always focus on Jewish victims, when in fact the majority of Holocaust victims were not Jewish. But still, the common perception is that the very worst thing that happened in the war is "what Hitler did to the Jews", with the second-worst thing being "what America did to Hiroshima" when neither one is even close to being true when you look at the statistical facts.
Yeah, I know. I'm not talking about real-world tactics, I'm talking about the public's perception of history. To use a pop culture example: how many movies about the Japanese war crimes in mainland Asia have we ever seen? I can think of precisely one (the disgustingly hideous film Men Behind the Sun). Compare that to all the Holocaust movies we've gotten, a new one every year. And the Holocaust movies always focus on Jewish victims, when in fact the majority of Holocaust victims were not Jewish. But still, the common perception is that the very worst thing that happened in the war is "what Hitler did to the Jews", with the second-worst thing being "what America did to Hiroshima" when neither one is even close to being true when you look at the statistical facts.
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
I would object to someone dropping a nuke on Berlin to kill Hitler because innocent civilians would have been killed.
Killing civilians is never the "right" thing to do. It's always wrong. The atomic bombing of Japan was wrong but it might have been slightly less wrong than the other options. Maybe.
I would object to someone dropping a nuke on Berlin to kill Hitler because innocent civilians would have been killed.
Killing civilians is never the "right" thing to do. It's always wrong. The atomic bombing of Japan was wrong but it might have been slightly less wrong than the other options. Maybe.
vivisectvi
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 22,198
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 178
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
I would object. We're talking about radiating our own planet. Stupid, stupid, stupid. I don't care what the reason is. The followup years of radiation poisoning more than take care of however many deaths weren't caused by the blast. It's a terrible tactic for humans to use on eachother and even worse for what it does to the environment. I'll never agree to any justification for using a nuke.
I would object. We're talking about radiating our own planet. Stupid, stupid, stupid. I don't care what the reason is. The followup years of radiation poisoning more than take care of however many deaths weren't caused by the blast. It's a terrible tactic for humans to use on eachother and even worse for what it does to the environment. I'll never agree to any justification for using a nuke.
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
I think when you deal with war the line between "right" and "wrong" is blurred, especially when you consider that Germany and Japan started the most destructive war in global history and their respective populations were solidly behind both Hitler's land grabbing and Japan's imperialistic tendencies, turning a blind eye to both the discrimination (and worse) against the Jews and the Japanese conquering of land and peoples they considered inferior to the Japanese race. They brought destruction and death upon themselves by starting the war, and the worse it is for the populace, the sooner it will be over, and the sooner it ends that many more lives (both military and civilian) will be spared.
cobainwasmurdered said:
I think when you deal with war the line between "right" and "wrong" is blurred, especially when you consider that Germany and Japan started the most destructive war in global history and their respective populations were solidly behind both Hitler's land grabbing and Japan's imperialistic tendencies, turning a blind eye to both the discrimination (and worse) against the Jews and the Japanese conquering of land and peoples they considered inferior to the Japanese race. They brought destruction and death upon themselves by starting the war, and the worse it is for the populace, the sooner it will be over, and the sooner it ends that many more lives (both military and civilian) will be spared.
Dobbs3K
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 1,911
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
Like someone else pointed out earlier, I don't think the long term affects of radiation were fully understood in 1945. Ever see video footage of the US sailors standing around on battleship decks near atomic bomb tests?
dubq said:
Like someone else pointed out earlier, I don't think the long term affects of radiation were fully understood in 1945. Ever see video footage of the US sailors standing around on battleship decks near atomic bomb tests?
BruiserBrody
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 31,108
- Reaction score
- 3,243
- Points
- 293
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
Pilots also flew through the mushroom clouds to test effects IIRC
Dobbs3K said:
Pilots also flew through the mushroom clouds to test effects IIRC
Jingus
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 6,351
- Reaction score
- -1
- Points
- 0
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
Yeah. It took us a long fucking time to figure out what radiation did. I vividly remember a story my stepdad told me: his father was a doctor in the West, sometime in the 50s. They were still having open-air nuclear bomb tests in Nevada at that time. This guy, just curious, took an unexposed X-ray plate and put it out under the rain one night when the government weather warning came that the rain would be "mildly radioactive", but posed no significant threat. Afterwards, that negative plate showed pictures in the shape of raindrops which had been burned into the film. They had no fucking clue what they were messing with back then.
Yeah. It took us a long fucking time to figure out what radiation did. I vividly remember a story my stepdad told me: his father was a doctor in the West, sometime in the 50s. They were still having open-air nuclear bomb tests in Nevada at that time. This guy, just curious, took an unexposed X-ray plate and put it out under the rain one night when the government weather warning came that the rain would be "mildly radioactive", but posed no significant threat. Afterwards, that negative plate showed pictures in the shape of raindrops which had been burned into the film. They had no fucking clue what they were messing with back then.
BruiserBrody
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 31,108
- Reaction score
- 3,243
- Points
- 293
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
See also: Videos of kids playing in the DDT clouds
See also: Videos of kids playing in the DDT clouds
Danville_Wrestling
Danville_Wrestling
- Messages
- 4,442
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 111
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
I actually think the use of the nuclear weapon was beneficial for the world. Think about it, using it on Japan showed the world the horrible nature of atomic weaponry and I don't think it's a coincidence that we haven't had a major world conflict since that time period (although I consider the Cold War to be World War III since we had lots of asymetrical conflicts going on, but nothing on the scale of WW2). A nuke free world probably would've had us fighting the Soviets at a later date for control of Europe and I doubt anyone here would've wanted that. I definitely don't want to go back to the days of WW1 and WW2.
Besides, would we REALLY have wanted a North/South Japan like we have with a North/South Korea? That's exactly what we would've gotten if the Soviets had invaded and taken Japanese territory. I don't think the Japanese would've loved living under Stalin's thumb.
Did the dropping of the bomb cause untold destruction and misery? You bet. But did it benefit some of Japan in the long run and save lots of American lives? Yes on both counts. I will concede that it might've been a better policy option to test the weapon off of Japan's shores to show their government what destruction Truman was talking about before we dropped it on Hiroshima. However, let's not forget that it took TWO atomic bombs to get the Japanese government to surrender and that's when the Emperor finally overruled the Japanese military who wanted to keep fighting.
On another count, I have read that if the D-Day invasion failed, Germany could've been hit with a nuclear weapon before Japan. Hell, if D-Day failed we might've ended up with the entirety of Western Europe behind the Iron Curtain nuke or no nuke. Also, after the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima we had German scientists who defected to us in Britain and we showed a news clip to them, one of which was Werner Heisenberg, who was in charge of Germany's uranium program. Within 24 hours Heisenberg was able to break down how to build an atomic bomb leading some historians to speculate that he knew how to build one from the beginning of the war, but that he wasn't going to let one fall into Hitler's hands. Scary thought.
I actually think the use of the nuclear weapon was beneficial for the world. Think about it, using it on Japan showed the world the horrible nature of atomic weaponry and I don't think it's a coincidence that we haven't had a major world conflict since that time period (although I consider the Cold War to be World War III since we had lots of asymetrical conflicts going on, but nothing on the scale of WW2). A nuke free world probably would've had us fighting the Soviets at a later date for control of Europe and I doubt anyone here would've wanted that. I definitely don't want to go back to the days of WW1 and WW2.
Besides, would we REALLY have wanted a North/South Japan like we have with a North/South Korea? That's exactly what we would've gotten if the Soviets had invaded and taken Japanese territory. I don't think the Japanese would've loved living under Stalin's thumb.
Did the dropping of the bomb cause untold destruction and misery? You bet. But did it benefit some of Japan in the long run and save lots of American lives? Yes on both counts. I will concede that it might've been a better policy option to test the weapon off of Japan's shores to show their government what destruction Truman was talking about before we dropped it on Hiroshima. However, let's not forget that it took TWO atomic bombs to get the Japanese government to surrender and that's when the Emperor finally overruled the Japanese military who wanted to keep fighting.
On another count, I have read that if the D-Day invasion failed, Germany could've been hit with a nuclear weapon before Japan. Hell, if D-Day failed we might've ended up with the entirety of Western Europe behind the Iron Curtain nuke or no nuke. Also, after the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima we had German scientists who defected to us in Britain and we showed a news clip to them, one of which was Werner Heisenberg, who was in charge of Germany's uranium program. Within 24 hours Heisenberg was able to break down how to build an atomic bomb leading some historians to speculate that he knew how to build one from the beginning of the war, but that he wasn't going to let one fall into Hitler's hands. Scary thought.
Dobbs3K
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 1,911
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
I also doubt this moral revisionist consternation over the use of the atomic bomb exists in Japan. I have heard residents of other Japanese cities acknowledge that their own lives were probably saved when Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed.
I also doubt this moral revisionist consternation over the use of the atomic bomb exists in Japan. I have heard residents of other Japanese cities acknowledge that their own lives were probably saved when Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed.
vivisectvi
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 22,198
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 178
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
Go interview a survivor some day and we'll see how well your "doubt" holds up.
Go interview a survivor some day and we'll see how well your "doubt" holds up.
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
You couldn't be more wrong. The atomic bombing is extremely controversial in Japan and I've known a number of Japanese people who are very bitter about it and say the feeling is common in Japan.
Dobbs3K said:
You couldn't be more wrong. The atomic bombing is extremely controversial in Japan and I've known a number of Japanese people who are very bitter about it and say the feeling is common in Japan.
BruiserBrody
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 31,108
- Reaction score
- 3,243
- Points
- 293
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
Read about Unit 731, The Rape of Nanking, The Baatan Death March, and the other 10,000 Japanese atrocities from the 30's til 1945 then cry me a river about 100,000 civilians that the bombs killed that ended a God forsaken 6+ year War
dubq said:
Read about Unit 731, The Rape of Nanking, The Baatan Death March, and the other 10,000 Japanese atrocities from the 30's til 1945 then cry me a river about 100,000 civilians that the bombs killed that ended a God forsaken 6+ year War
vivisectvi
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 22,198
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 178
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
No one is saying that their military didn't do horrible things themselves, you idiot.
No one is saying that their military didn't do horrible things themselves, you idiot.
BruiserBrody
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 31,108
- Reaction score
- 3,243
- Points
- 293
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
So why cry about the means it took to end the war?
Would door to door fighting til 1953 been a better plan? Bullets and flame throwers FTW?
dubq said:
So why cry about the means it took to end the war?
Would door to door fighting til 1953 been a better plan? Bullets and flame throwers FTW?
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
Because it was a horrible event? It doesn't matter whether or not it was the best option. It is still a fucking tragedy.
Because it was a horrible event? It doesn't matter whether or not it was the best option. It is still a fucking tragedy.
BruiserBrody
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 31,108
- Reaction score
- 3,243
- Points
- 293
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
Ends. Means. Justification. Christ.
cobainwasmurdered said:
Ends. Means. Justification. Christ.
The Metal Maniac
Wow-ee!
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
Two things I wanted to toss in:
I've never heard the argument that the bombs were dropped to beat Japan before Russia had a chance to invade.
I have heard the argument that the bombs were dropped to show off what the American military was now capable of, and as basically a warning against the Russians. That said, I'd imagine the Cold War would've turned out different had no bombs ever been used against people. Hard to say though.
Also, while I can see justification for bombing Hiroshima, I think bombing Nagasaki as quick as they did was a fucking prick move. There was what, 3-4 days in between the two bombings? They should've given them more time; I could easily see the top Japanese brass not really comprehending what had happened to Hiroshima, and then the same thing happened to Nagaski.
Two things I wanted to toss in:
I've never heard the argument that the bombs were dropped to beat Japan before Russia had a chance to invade.
I have heard the argument that the bombs were dropped to show off what the American military was now capable of, and as basically a warning against the Russians. That said, I'd imagine the Cold War would've turned out different had no bombs ever been used against people. Hard to say though.
Also, while I can see justification for bombing Hiroshima, I think bombing Nagasaki as quick as they did was a fucking prick move. There was what, 3-4 days in between the two bombings? They should've given them more time; I could easily see the top Japanese brass not really comprehending what had happened to Hiroshima, and then the same thing happened to Nagaski.
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
The Japanese took a stance of defiance after the first one, so Truman basically said "We're dead serious" and dropped another on Nagasaki. They surrendered after that one.
The Japanese took a stance of defiance after the first one, so Truman basically said "We're dead serious" and dropped another on Nagasaki. They surrendered after that one.
vivisectvi
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 22,198
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 178
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
No, I'm not getting baited into that, thanks. I'm actually glad for this thread, though. It's really pointing out, for me, who the chest-thumping numbskulls are at this board.
BruiserBrody said:
No, I'm not getting baited into that, thanks. I'm actually glad for this thread, though. It's really pointing out, for me, who the chest-thumping numbskulls are at this board.
Jingus
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 6,351
- Reaction score
- -1
- Points
- 0
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
Yeah. After the first bomb, the message was "surrender right fucking now, or else we'll keep dropping these forever". Hell, we're lucky they gave up after only two, because we only had two and it would have been weeks or months before we could've manufactured another one.AboveAverage484 said:
BruiserBrody
Integral Poster
- Messages
- 31,108
- Reaction score
- 3,243
- Points
- 293
Nuking the god damn japs. Cool or not cool?
So what would have been your solution dubq? Hand to Hand combat? Pulling back and letting the Japanese re-arm? Offering tea and crumpets over a spot of tea? I'm not saying its not tragic, but what was option B, C, D and E? You want to call names, but are bringing nothing to the discussion.
dubq said:
So what would have been your solution dubq? Hand to Hand combat? Pulling back and letting the Japanese re-arm? Offering tea and crumpets over a spot of tea? I'm not saying its not tragic, but what was option B, C, D and E? You want to call names, but are bringing nothing to the discussion.