re: Was the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki necessary?

Stop trying to change the subject.

Link up where Japan was ready to accept the following prior to the dropping of the A-Bombs:

quote:

---

The role of the Emperor as head of the State Shinto religion was exploited during the war, creating an Imperial cult that led to kamikaze bombers and other fanaticism. This in turn led to the requirement in the Potsdam Declaration for the elimination "for all time [of] the authority and influence of those who have deceived and misled the people of Japan into embarking on world conquest". In State Shinto, the Emperor was believed to be a Arahitogami (a living god). Following Japan's surrender, the Allies issued the Shinto Directive separating church and state within Japan. Current constitution Edit The constitution provides for a parliamentary system of government and guarantees certain fundamental rights. Under its terms, the Emperor of Japan is "the symbol of the State and of the unity of the people" and exercises a purely ceremonial role without the possession of sovereignty. The constitution, also known as the "Constitution of Japan" (????? Nihonkoku-Kenpo, formerly written ????? (same pronunciation)), "Postwar Constitution" (???? Sengo-Kenpo) or the "Peace Constitution" (???? Heiwa-Kenpo), was drawn up under the Allied occupation that followed World War II and was intended to replace Japan's previous militaristic and quasi-absolute monarchy system with a form of liberal democracy. Currently, it is a rigid document and no subsequent amendment has been made to it since its adoption.

---

quote:

---

Dwight D. Eisenhower,future president of the United States

---

Politician.
Can't trust anything he says.

So the United States Strategic Bombing Survey report that you linked appears to be pure hindsight regarding the necessity of the atomic bombings unless I'm missing something.

Nagasaki is more debateable.

People question the atomic bombs but they never discuss the Bombing of Tokyo with Operation Meetinghouse, the single most destructive bombing raid in history. 100,000 civilian deaths and Japan fought on for another 6 months.

They simply didn't want to quit. Hell, the Japanese military attempted a coup d'état even after Hirohito agreed to surrender.

I will tell you like my boy told Hoyt in training day, this is chess, this ain’t checkers....

Your point being the US did not come clean and has blood on their hands regarding dropping two nukes? Is this your point? Ok, thank you for your input. I’m sure we can sit and visit this and go round and round with arguments and counter arguments but the fact remains, ain’t nobody fricking with us much until 9/11....right? If if I’m keeping count, we putting in work on their asses supplying all expense paid trips to 72 virgin land....so, what’s your point? The bully on the block punched the mouthbreathing idiot unfairly across the pond? Ok, mission accomplished.

Ok I read all of you links. A couple of wiki links, a britannica article on the battle of leyte gulf, and a gem of an article from the nation.com that ends like this...

quote:

---

Even now, for instance, we see how difficult it is for the average US citizen to come to terms with the brutal record of slavery and white supremacy that underlies so much of our national story. Remaking our popular understanding of the “good” war’s climactic act is likely to be just as hard. But if the Confederate battle flag can come down in South Carolina, we can perhaps one day begin to ask ourselves more challenging questions about the nature of America’s global power, and what is true and what is false about why we really dropped the atomic bomb on Japan.

---

You also may want to review one of the sources of your wiki link here LINK

It clearly states that only 3 of the 6 members of a war council were ready to accept unconditional surrender. After the bombs all 6 agreed to unconditional surrender

So your own source just proved you wrong

quote:

---

Because we did not accept a conditional surrender.

---

but we did, except we just called it unconditional surrender so people like you could argue it was different than what Japan had already offered even though by all accounts it wasn't.

quote:

---

did it save at least 1 american life? 

---

This is stupid. There is no world where killing a few hundred thousand is worth "1 American life".

That said it's a complex question with no clear answer.

Overall I say yes it was the right call. But it is a grey area