[alyasa]

That would have been unbelievable, if the Soviets got involved...

[alyasa]

Originally Posted by floatingslowly

HOMOPHOBE.

That would have been unbelievable, if the Soviets got involved...

[SpectralJulianIsNotDead]

Originally Posted by atari 2600

True, as devoted through fear as the Nazis were to Hitler and the Third Reich, they had nothing in this department on the Japanese.
What many people do not know is that as a last-ditch effort in fending off bombing raids into Germany, Hitler, taking a page from the Japanese, formed an aerial suicide squad called the ELBA whose mission was to take their fighters and ram U.S. bomber planes. But it was much too little much too late to possibly have much effect. We had more planes, better pilots (most of their better pilots were already spent thanks to the RAF) and better technology. Nazi engineers developed the first jet fighters, but again, they were too little too late. Our tech included radar developed with British engineers and other advances that allowed fighter planes to engage at night as well. Many American troops didn't know the extent of what was going on in the death camps, but when they arrived in Germany, they were horrified. In most cases, the Americans forced the nearby townspeople and villagers around the death camps to clean up the atrocious messes of corpses not yet incinerated or buried, and rightfully so.

Now the Japanese were very ruthless in their determination to fight at any cost. Everyone knows about the Kamikaze attacks on U.S. warships, but few know that they had a reserve of 10,000 Kamikaze Zeroes that they were saving for when the attack on the Japanese mainland finally came. After seeing the indescribably inhumane effects of the Kamikaze raids in the Pacific, we weren't about to subject troops to the same sort of thing again. The A-bomb came along right around that same time and Truman decided to use two of them, as everyone knows, on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Further testament to the Japanese ruthlessness are the invention of the Ocha and their Bonzai ground tactics.
The Ocha was essentially a large missile that was dropped out of a Japanese bomber with a pilot in it. It was invented because Kamikaze Zeroes and other fighter planes had difficulty sinking larger warships like Destroyers and Aircraft Carriers. The tactic was extremely effective, but again, it was too little too late to ward off our invasion. As elucidated upon in the recent Ken Burns documentary series The War, Bonzai troops consisted of everyone that was available. The Japanese would send wave after wave of any warm bodies at American trenches to be slaughtered. Many were old men, and many had nothing for weapons besides stones or clubs. Whenever Americans would win battles and advance, the Japanese would round up all the women and children in the area and take them to an adjacent countryside to hide out. They would tell them not to ever talk to us and to kill themselves if they were ever captured. Again, as The War reveals, the straggling Japanese infantry would actually execute the women and children if their enclave of hiding was about to be discovered. Honestly, these tactics scared us shitless as we simply realized that "we were not like them...truly," at least in this peculiar and horrible psychological sense, and that overwhelming knowledge, coupled with the sheer insanity of the bravura the Japanese displayed with contemporary attacks on China, the (then) Soviet Union, and America with Pearl Harbor, I'm sure, played a large part in why atomic bombs were used on Japan.

You put that really well Atari, much better than I've heard any history teacher put it.

You should be a college professor.

[floatingslowly]

Originally Posted by alyasa

That would have been unbelievable, if the Soviets got involved...

Originally Posted by alyasa

That would have been unbelievable, if the Soviets got involved...

does anyone else hear an echo??

[alyasa]

I like yr avatar...

[floatingslowly]

if only the Japanese knew how to say "klaatu barada nikto".

[mangajunky]

 

Clatto Verata N... Necktie... Nickel... It's an "N" word, it's definitely an "N" word!

[ALIEN ANAL]

why a bomb...why not 3

ba dm tsssssh

bad joke i know

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by ThePits

I totally agree with the remarks made about the potential loss of lives without the nukes

The Japanese cult of the Emperor mentality would have caused countless more deaths

the bombs were dropped just to see if they worked, and most historians agree that they were dropped to show the russians that they existed, functioned, and could be used against them. the japanese were already defeated after the fire bombing of Tokyo, which killed as many civilians as did both atomic bombs...

the bombs were like military toys, the US could have destroyed Japan through conventional bombing (oh wait, they already did, in fact they had intentionally saved four cities as targets for the a-bomb, or they would have already destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki earlier with regular bombs) but they just had to use their new toy...

so of course they wouldn't have used it on the germans, it didn't exist when the germans were still fighting. if the japanse had already surrended by the time, then they would have waited and used it in Korea.... they just needed some people to kill with their new bomb and the japanese happened to be the people that the US were killing at the time...

[floatingslowly]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

the bombs were dropped just to see if they worked

there are some three-headed lizards in the New Mexican desert that might disagree with this statement.

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

the japanese were already defeated after the fire bombing of Tokyo, which killed as many civilians as did both atomic bombs...

let's analyze that statement using facts:

• Firebombing of Tokyo: March 9-10, 1945
• Lil' Boy: August 6, 1945
• Fat Man: August 9, 1945
• Japan surenders: August 15, 1945

one of these kids is doing their own thing.

[SpectralJulianIsNotDead]

Most historian's agree? Sort of like 4 out of 5 dentists recommend?

That honestly doesn't make a lot of sense to me. They demonstrated it with the first test. The Russians could see how powerful the bombing was from the pictures of the original test.

If "using our new toy to kill people to show the Russians" was a policy, wouldn't the H-bomb have been used on people then later ICBMs?


That said, I don't think a conventional bombing of nagasaki and hiroshima would have forced a Japanese surrender.

The bomb wasn't just a big ass powerful bomb that could kill a lot of people. It was also a huge psychological weapon.

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

the bombs were dropped just to see if they worked, and most historians agree that they were dropped to show the russians that they existed, functioned, and could be used against them. the japanese were already defeated after the fire bombing of Tokyo, which killed as many civilians as did both atomic bombs...

the bombs were like military toys, the US could have destroyed Japan through conventional bombing (oh wait, they already did, in fact they had intentionally saved four cities as targets for the a-bomb, or they would have already destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki earlier with regular bombs) but they just had to use their new toy...

so of course they wouldn't have used it on the germans, it didn't exist when the germans were still fighting. if the japanse had already surrended by the time, then they would have waited and used it in Korea.... they just needed some people to kill with their new bomb and the japanese happened to be the people that the US were killing at the time...

[SpectralJulianIsNotDead]

Also. . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing...n_World_War_II

firebombing took more lives and was much more gruesome

conventional bombing wasn't effective

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by SpectralJulianIsNotDead

The bomb wasn't just a big ass powerful bomb that could kill a lot of people. It was also a huge psychological weapon.

that is precisely what I am saying?! The bomb was dropped just to show its effects. Oh yeah, the russians had their own bomb (almost) and they could easily see how destructive it could be, but why not just show them how destructive it actually is, by using it on people. and the japanse, well in WWII people didn't care to much about japanese civilian life... in fact, after years of killing on massive scales, people didn't seem to respect life at all..

in other words they dropped the bomb to prove that it worked (on people) at the only time in history they could do it, because popular support was on their side.. they could not do it by the time of thermonuclear devices, because people were beginning to feel bad about about killing people on massive scales. why do you think we never returned to carpet bombing cities like in the war? (because after the fact people began to develop a conscience)

[ThePits]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

the bombs were dropped just to see if they worked, and most historians agree that they were dropped to show the russians that they existed, functioned, and could be used against them. the japanese were already defeated after the fire bombing of Tokyo, which killed as many civilians as did both atomic bombs...

the bombs were like military toys, the US could have destroyed Japan through conventional bombing (oh wait, they already did, in fact they had intentionally saved four cities as targets for the a-bomb, or they would have already destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki earlier with regular bombs) but they just had to use their new toy...

so of course they wouldn't have used it on the germans, it didn't exist when the germans were still fighting. if the japanse had already surrended by the time, then they would have waited and used it in Korea.... they just needed some people to kill with their new bomb and the japanese happened to be the people that the US were killing at the time...

In what parallel universe did this take place?

I only know what happened in this reality

Sorry

[SpectralJulianIsNotDead]

No, what I'm saying is that it was used as a psychological weapon to force Japan's surrender.

You don't need to prove something like that works on humans. You see an explosion on fake town with dummies, obviously it is gonna kill a bunch of humans just as well.

What would you have done if you were fighting Japan?

There is no right way to win a war, only wrong ones. The best thing you can do is play the numbers game and hope you're right.

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

that is precisely what I am saying?! The bomb was dropped just to show its effects. Oh yeah, the russians had their own bomb (almost) and they could easily see how destructive it could be, but why not just show them how destructive it actually is, by using it on people. and the japanse, well in WWII people didn't care to much about japanese civilian life... in fact, after years of killing on massive scales, people didn't seem to respect life at all..

in other words they dropped the bomb to prove that it worked (on people) at the only time in history they could do it, because popular support was on their side.. they could not do it by the time of thermonuclear devices, because people were beginning to feel bad about about killing people on massive scales. why do you think we never returned to carpet bombing cities like in the war? (because after the fact people began to develop a conscience)

[floatingslowly]

oh, sweet tedium.

I've come to the conclusion that there's no use in arguing with the kooks on this board.

a tenuous grasp on reality prevents any sort logic from seeping through the cranium.

can you people not handle yr drugs?

[HaydenAsche]

Originally Posted by sonicl

Dropping the A-bomb on Japan, in the middle of the Pacific = no risk of collateral damage to friendly neighbours.
Dropping the A-bomb on Germany, in the middle of Europe = highf risk of collateral damage to friendly neighbours.

Exactly what I thought as soon as I read the first post.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by ThePits

In what parallel universe did this take place?

I only know what happened in this reality

Sorry

ato balewleta (kind sir):

could you politely explain what happened in "reality" that shows my inaccuracies?

[ThePits]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

ato balewleta (kind sir):

could you politely explain what happened in "reality" that shows my inaccuracies?

I think floatingslowly did it already

• Firebombing of Tokyo: March 9-10, 1945
• Lil' Boy: August 6, 1945
• Fat Man: August 9, 1945
• Japan surenders: August 15, 1945

I note you failed to address the point he made so succinctly

I've seen plenty of your "facts" blown out of the water in a few threads, and instead of you admitting "I got that wrong" all I see is "its the whites fault"

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by ThePits

I think floatingslowly did it already

• Firebombing of Tokyo: March 9-10, 1945
• Lil' Boy: August 6, 1945
• Fat Man: August 9, 1945
• Japan surenders: August 15, 1945

I note you failed to address the point he made so succinctly

I've seen plenty of your "facts" blown out of the water in a few threads, and instead of you admitting "I got that wrong" all I see is "its the whites fault"

so the fact that they dropped the atomic bomb months after tokyo proved what? i said that the war could have been won aside from nuclear technology, and that conventional bombing, as in tokyo, would have been just as 'successful' to 'win' the war (if such a thing can really happen, are there really winners or losers when everybody is dying?) implying that the a-bomb was not the cause of 'victory' and that it was not needed to prevent a land invasion, as is the justification given by US military historians... it is all bullshit is what I said, and I stick too it, and thus far no one has corrected me here.

With the gun stats, I am sorry, I was wrong, apparantly in 2005 52% of all gunshot related homicides in America were committed by black Americans, an considering that black Americans make up less then 15% of the overall population this is obviously a problem. However, I jumped to the bigger conclusion, the racism involved, like the origin of these guns and also the social/environmental circumstances of living in a racist country, which in fact was founded on the principles of racism, which are perpetuated even unto this day. There is a myth that individuals are somehow entirely responsible for all of their actions, but this is not always the case, especially when there is outside influence. Sure, the black man who shoots another is responsible, but is not manufacturer, distributer, government regulators, and even our gun-oriented society at large also responsible for allowing such conditions to exist where person has access to such a tool of human destruction to begin with?

oh yeah, and what other fact did I get proved wrong on so quickly, the English situation of JA immigration? hardly...