- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Was the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki necessary?
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:01 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:01 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Right... but my point is that they would not have surrendered at all had we not given them that “out”
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:02 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
the point is that American casualties in the Pacific are not connected to the use of the bombs
Do you mean to say the Japanese would have surrendered on the same date, regardless of the use of the A-Bombs?
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:02 pm to Jcorye1
quote:
The easy counter argument is if they were so close to surre
Because baw, they were already decimated, but content to surrender on their own time while we lobbed nukes at them
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:02 pm to Jcorye1
quote:
The easy counter argument is if they were so close to surrendering, why didn't they after we dropped the first one.
It was a dumb thing for them to do for sure
The point is that we could have easily ended the Pacific Theater without more American casualties and without dropping the bombs had we wanted to.
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:02 pm to CptRusty
quote:
Do you mean to say the Japanese would have surrendered on the same date, regardless of the use of the A-Bombs?
we could have gotten a surrender out of them at an even earlier date
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:02 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
point is that we could have easily ended the Pacific Theater without more American casualties and without dropping the bombs had we wanted to.
Oh yeah? How
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:03 pm to Thib-a-doe Tiger
quote:
Oh yeah? How
go back to my OP
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:04 pm to Draconian Sanctions
I’m not clicking your links and your OP has no solutions
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:05 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
we could have gotten a surrender out of them at an even earlier date
apparently not

So we were just fricking about in the Pacific?
Now you've taken this one step further. No longer did we drop the bombs and "unnecessarily" kill civilians...we've also extended the war on purpose just so we can drop the bombs, presumably to intimidate the Soviets.
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:06 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Any further delays would've lead to Russians at the table.
The had their chance from July 26 to August 5 to accept Potsdam.
The had their chance from July 26 to August 5 to accept Potsdam.
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:07 pm to Thib-a-doe Tiger
You had 3 options to end the Asia pacific war.
1.starve them out
2. Invade them
3. Drop the atomic bombs.
The bombs saved a lot of lives on both sides. Lots of people always forget about the civilians starving elsewhere in the Japanese occupied territory too
1.starve them out
2. Invade them
3. Drop the atomic bombs.
The bombs saved a lot of lives on both sides. Lots of people always forget about the civilians starving elsewhere in the Japanese occupied territory too
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:07 pm to CptRusty
quote:
So we were just fricking about in the Pacific?
At that point we wouldn't accept a surrender that included keeping the Emperor
Then we dropped 2 nukes and then immediately accepted a surrender that included keeping the Emporer
So you tell me
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:07 pm to Draconian Sanctions
I’m fairly certain history details the US publicly advertising that explicit instructions were given and talks occurred....they refused....they were showboating the US for all the world to see...so if you have a combatant on the ropes and you say, hit the mat or I’ll knock you out, are you supposed to wait for him to recover or call his buddies or do you put him down? In life and war, there are choices that you make. Right or wrong there are consequences to your actions. Why are you not questioning what the Japanese leadership could have done to prevent casualties?
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:08 pm to LNCHBOX
It has to do with semantics, Japanese cultural understanding of honor, and the failure of diplomacy. Japan was willing to surrender and meet terms. It was the language of "unconditional surrender" that was culturally dishonorable. After the second bomb they were past holding on to that honor. Japanese let their people die for "honor" with out substance but we also killed a lot of people for honor with out substance.
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:08 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see your response to the question of why Japan didn't immediately surrender after the first bomb was dropped.
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:09 pm to Bayou_Tiger_225
quote:
Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see your response to the question of why Japan didn't immediately surrender after the first bomb was dropped.
It was a dumb thing for them to do for sure
The point is that we could have easily ended the Pacific Theater without more American casualties and without dropping the bombs had we wanted to.
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:09 pm to OptionRight
quote:
Why are you not questioning what the Japanese leadership could have done to prevent casualties?
that's a less interesting question
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:09 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
The point is that we could have easily ended the Pacific Theater without more American casualties and without dropping the bombs had we wanted to.
Easily huh?
Just so simple right?

Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:10 pm to Centinel
quote:
Easily huh?
Just so simple right?
Yeah, it involves accepting the terms we refused until after the bombings
Posted on 4/17/18 at 4:11 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Well hell yeah it was, frick the Japs!
Popular
Back to top
