Was the US right to use Atomic Bombs

[Kaiserjosh]

Do you think the US was justified to use Atomic bombs of Japan. Share you thought here.

[TheN3rdyOutcast]

Yes and No. Yes because Japan was turning into a power-hungry empire, and it needed to be stopped before something got majorly fucked up. (Also, because they kind of bombed us first.) But no, because of all the innocent civilians we killed in the process.

[Gamma Male]

No. It was completely unnecessary.

All of the excuses you hear are just propoganda put forth by the US government to justify the mass murder of civilians.

[Kaiserjosh]

The Japanese were prepared to sent every citizen to attack us troops in a kamikaze attack

[Lovelife090994]

Of course. The Japanese struck America first and were like the terrorists of today. It took the atomic bomb to end the war. We should drop more in ISIS territories. Those monsters should die. It's bad about the innocents but innocents die in every war. War has no rules.

[Kaiserjosh]

I believe that we should of waited and let the soviet union attack. They attacked the same day that the bombs were dropped and many believe it was the soviets that made them want to surrender not the bombs

I would not call the Japanese that for pearl harbor. It's war and war is hell.

Please don't double post. Use the 'edit' button instead. ~Typhlosion

[thatcountrykid]

There really was no way to avoid civilian deaths in japan. They put guns and made weapons next to or in homes and school.

[Gamma Male]

The Japanese were prepared to sent every citizen to attack us troops in a kamikaze attack
Please provide evidence to back this claim up.

There really was no way to avoid civilian deaths in japan. They put guns and made weapons next to or in homes and school.

Of course. The Japanese struck America first and were like the terrorists of today. It took the atomic bomb to end the war. We should drop more in ISIS territories. Those monsters should die. It's bad about the innocents but innocents die in every war. War has no rules.


The Japanese military desperately wanted two things before the bombings.

1: The retention of the emperor of japan as supreme leader and his safety ensured.

2: Peace.


Had we simply offered Japan the option to surrender on the condition no harm be done to their emperor, they would've accepted. Especially with the threat of Soviet invasion on the horizon.

In a cable intercepted on July 12, 1945, Hirohito revealed that he was ready to end the war on the condition that the monarchy be granted immunity from war crimes -- conditions which the U.S. only accepted after dropping two atomic bombs on the country.

In Truman’s own journal he called the message a “telegram from Jap Emperor asking for peace.” And years later, in his book Secret Surrender, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles said he had relayed a similar message.

"On July 20, 1945, under instructions from Washington, I went to the Potsdam Conference and reported there to Secretary [of War] Stimson on what I had learned from Tokyo – they desired to surrender if they could retain the Emperor and their constitution as a basis for maintaining discipline and order in Japan after the devastating news of surrender became known to the Japanese people.’"

Admiral William D. Leahy, who served as Chief of Staff for both FDR and Truman, was even more blunt:

"It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons.

On June 22 the Emperor called a meeting of the Supreme War Council, which included the Prime Minister, the Foreign Minister, and the leading military figures. "We have heard enough of this determination of yours to fight to the last soldiers," said Emperor Hirohito. "We wish that you, leaders of Japan, will strive now to study the ways and the means to conclude the war. In doing so, try not to be bound by the decisions you have made in the past."

By early July the US had intercepted messages from Togo to the Japanese ambassador in Moscow, Naotake Sato, showing that the Emperor himself was taking a personal hand in the peace effort, and had directed that the Soviet Union be asked to help end the war. US officials also knew that the key obstacle to ending the war was American insistence on "unconditional surrender," a demand that precluded any negotiations. The Japanese were willing to accept nearly everything, except turning over their semi-divine Emperor. Heir of a 2,600-year-old dynasty, Hirohito was regarded by his people as a "living god" who personified the nation. (Until the August 15 radio broadcast of his surrender announcement, the Japanese people had never heard his voice.) Japanese particularly feared that the Americans would humiliate the Emperor, and even execute him as a war criminal.





It is a myth that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the firebombings of Tokyo saved more lives than they killed. Japan was ready and willing to surrender, all we would've had to do is agree not to hurt their emperor. The only reason there's still any debate over this is because of propaganda put forth by the US government to justify the murder of 200,000 thousand innocent civilians.

You can't just excuse this as "shit happens" or "that's just war, people die, get over it". Are you fucking kidding me? We murdered well over 200,000 innocent men, women, children, and infants instantly and left many more to die slow deaths from radiation poisoning to accomplish something that we easily would've done anyway, without an invasion.

[ksdnfkfr]

Of course. The Japanese struck America first and were like the terrorists of today. It took the atomic bomb to end the war. We should drop more in ISIS territories. Those monsters should die. It's bad about the innocents but innocents die in every war. War has no rules.

I disagree with that. Japan used its military to attack our military. They attacked a military base, not a town or a city or civilian office buildings. Since when is one army attacking the military base of an enemy an act of terrorism? The US however nuked two large cities with the most god awful weapon ever invented. And the US has been terrified of someone doing the same to them ever since.

[thatcountrykid]

Please provide evidence to back this claim up.






The Japanese military desperately wanted two things before the bombings.

1: The retention of the emperor of japan as supreme leader and his safety ensured.

2: Peace.


Had we simply offered Japan the option to surrender on the condition no harm be done to their emperor, they would've accepted. Especially with the threat of Soviet invasion on the horizon.









It is a myth that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the firebombings of Tokyo saved more lives than they killed. Japan was ready and willing to surrender, all we would've had to do is agree not to hurt their emperor. The only reason there's still any debate over this is because of propaganda put forth by the US government to justify the murder of 200,000 thousand innocent civilians.

You can't just excuse this as "shit happens" or "that's just war, people die, get over it". Are you fucking kidding me? We murdered well over 200,000 innocent men, women, children, and infants instantly and left many more to die slow deaths from radiation poisoning to accomplish something that we easily would've done anyway, without an invasion.

We had offered for them surrender before each. Bomb was dropped. Beside why would we have pardoned their empower before investigation that a stupid way to end war.

I disagree with that. Japan used its military to attack our military. They attacked a military base, not a town or a city or civilian office buildings. Since when is one army attacking the military base of an enemy an act of terrorism? The US however nuked two large cities with the most god awful weapon ever invented. And the US has been terrified of someone doing the same to them ever since.

They actual did attack civilians in Hawaii

Merged. Use the 'multiquote' buttons next time. ~Typhlosion

[Capto]

I doubt many people here realize the sheer importance and magnitude of the Emperor to Japanese culture.

[CharlieHorse]

I disagree with that. Japan used its military to attack our military. They attacked a military base, not a town or a city or civilian office buildings. Since when is one army attacking the military base of an enemy an act of terrorism? The US however nuked two large cities with the most god awful weapon ever invented. And the US has been terrified of someone doing the same to them ever since.

exactly
i'm a little ashamed that the country i live in could do such a thing.

But now, it's in the past. Can't change the past. One can only make decisions going forward.

[Gamma Male]

We had offered for them surrender before each. Bomb was dropped. Beside why would we have pardoned their empower before investigation that a stupid way to end war.

On terms of unconditional surrender, which everyone knew Japan would never accept. The emperor of Japan held Godlike status among the military and civilian base. All we would've had to do is promise not to harm him and they would've surrendered.

That's also what ended up happening anyway after we dropped the bombs.

[Capto]

On terms of unconditional surrender, which everyone knew Japan would never accept. The emperor of Japan held Godlike status among the military and civilian base. All we would've had to do is promise not to harm him and they would've surrendered.

That's also what ended up happening anyway after we dropped the bombs.

Well, not exactly "not harm" Him.

The position of Emperor of Japan took a considerable hit due to the Allied victory that would ensure a forever changed Japan, for better of for worse.

If you recall the New Year's 1946 Ningen-sengen or Shin Nippon Kensetsu ni Kan suru Shōsho or whatever have you, you will note the following quote:

"朕ト爾等國民トノ間ノ紐帯ハ、終始相互ノ信頼ト敬愛トニ依リテ結バレ、單ナル神話ト傳説トニ依リテ生ゼルモノニ非ズ。天皇ヲ以テ現御神トシ、且日本國民ヲ以テ他ノ民族ニ優 越セル民族ニシテ、延テ世界ヲ支配スベキ運命ヲ有ストノ架空ナル觀念ニ基クモノニモ非ズ。"

"The ties between Us and Our people have always stood upon mutual trust and affection. They do not depend upon mere legends and myths. They are not predicated on the false conception that the Emperor is divine, and that the Japanese people are superior to other races and fated to rule the world. [This being the official translation as recognized by the State of Japan]"

While any renunciation of the Divinity of the Emperor would have been catastrophic for the Empire, the specific usage of 現御神/akitsumikami as opposed to 現人神/arahitogami is particularly intriguing and troubling due to the fact that it repudiated the concept of the Divine heritage of the entire Imperial Family as formally and legally established by the Dai-Nippon Teikoku Kenpō/Meiji Constitution in late 1890.

As a result, it was noted that Emperor Hirohito did not repudiate solely His own Divinity as derived from Amaterasu, but also the Divinity of the entire Imperial Family (which was, incidentally, a concept He was infatuated with).

In addition, this loss of faith in the Imperial Family and the Emperor led to the resurgence and rise of state-sovereign Imperial-deemphasizing political thoughts such as that spearheaded by Minobe Tatsukichi. Ten years in, the position of Emperor of Japan was reduced to a merely figurehead leader with as little power as It held during the peak of the Tokugawa Shōgunate.

So yeah, the Emperor got shafted, though not like anyone outside of Japan really noticed a difference.

[thatcountrykid]

On terms of unconditional surrender, which everyone knew Japan would never accept. The emperor of Japan held Godlike status among the military and civilian base. All we would've had to do is promise not to harm him and they would've surrendered.

That's also what ended up happening anyway after we dropped the bombs.

Actually we got our unconditional surrendered the bombs. Why should we give them what they want after that. why would we spare the emperor. The man who had "God" like power over his people.

[Gamma Male]

Actually we got our unconditional surrendered the bombs. Why should we give them what they want after that. why would we spare the emperor. The man who had "God" like power over his people.

What?

We should be agreed to spare the emperor so we wouldn't have had to kill well over 200,000 people, and then end up sparing him anyway. That's why. The only reason Japan refused to surrender was because they wanted to protect the emperor.

[thatcountrykid]

What?

We should be agreed to spare the emperor so we wouldn't have had to kill well over 200,000 people, and then end up sparing him anyway. That's why. The only reason Japan refused to surrender was because they wanted to protect the emperor.

They refused to surrender because of their fucking imperialistic "death before dishonor" radicalism. They would not have surrendered and a lot more people would have died because if we hadn't dropped the bombs we would have lost a lot more lives including young American boys.

[Gamma Male]

They refused to surrender because of their fucking imperialistic "death before dishonor" radicalism. They would not have surrendered and a lot more people would have died because if we hadn't dropped the bombs we would have lost a lot more lives including young American boys.

I believe I've already addressed these claims in my first post.

[thatcountrykid]

Tell me this. Why should we have given the emperor immunity?

[Gamma Male]

Tell me this. Why should we have given the emperor immunity?

To end the war and stop anymore people from dieing.



And we did let him off the hook in the end anyways, we just waited until after unnecessarily killing hundreds of thousands of people to do it.

[Lovelife090994]

Please provide evidence to back this claim up.






The Japanese military desperately wanted two things before the bombings.

1: The retention of the emperor of japan as supreme leader and his safety ensured.

2: Peace.


Had we simply offered Japan the option to surrender on the condition no harm be done to their emperor, they would've accepted. Especially with the threat of Soviet invasion on the horizon.









It is a myth that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the firebombings of Tokyo saved more lives than they killed. Japan was ready and willing to surrender, all we would've had to do is agree not to hurt their emperor. The only reason there's still any debate over this is because of propaganda put forth by the US government to justify the murder of 200,000 thousand innocent civilians.

You can't just excuse this as "shit happens" or "that's just war, people die, get over it". Are you fucking kidding me? We murdered well over 200,000 innocent men, women, children, and infants instantly and left many more to die slow deaths from radiation poisoning to accomplish something that we easily would've done anyway, without an invasion.

We offered surrender, they declined it. We gave them chances, they stayed silent. We appealed to their culture, the Japanese only spat at us. And the war was about to take a turn for the worse. An invasion onto Japanese or American soil would have costs millions of lives and trillions of dollars in damages. It was what happened. We can't turn back the clock. People die everyday, and war is still raging, it has shown to have no rules. What about Pearl Harbor? Civilians were killed there as well, or have you erased that from your education?

[Gamma Male]

We offered surrender, they declined it. We gave them chances, they stayed silent. We appealed to their culture, the Japanese only spat at us. And the war was about to take a turn for the worse. An invasion onto Japanese or American soil would have costs millions of lives and trillions of dollars in damages. It was what happened. We can't turn back the clock. People die everyday, and war is still raging, it has shown to have no rules.

I have literally already addressed every single one of these claims. I am not going to keep repeating myself.

What about Pearl Harbor? Civilians were killed there as well, or have you erased that from your education?

I don't condone the actions of the Japanese military at pearl harbor. But I fail to see how this is relevant to the US Military unnecessarily killing civillians.

[thatcountrykid]

To end the war and stop anymore people from dieing.



And we did let him off the hook in the end anyways, we just waited until after unnecessarily killing hundreds of thousands of people to do it.

Sorry revised question. Why would we pardon him before investigation. Why would we bend to them when we can win. Why would we give them what they want. Do you understand the radicalism of the whole society?

[Lovelife090994]

I have literally already addressed every single one of these claims. I am not going to keep repeating myself.



I don't condone the actions of the Japanese military at pearl harbor. But I fail to see how this is relevant to the US Military unnecessarily killing civillians.

The Japanese had a kamikaze society then. They were willing to die for the war which means they would not have stopped. And I'm pretty sure the Japanese and US have forgiven each other now. Besides, most alive then are now dead. Hiroshima and Nagasaki are still thriving cities and it's a fact that the US and Japan are not at war.

[Buddy 912]

When a country is at war, all the citizens are at war.

[Stronk Serb]

hat about Pearl Harbor? Civilians were killed there as well, or have you erased that from your education?

Not even 50 civilians were killed at Pearl. Most of the ones that were killed died from unexploded AA shells landing into populated areas. The bombs were nothing new to Japan. The fire bombings killed more. The Soviet invasion through Manchuria is what scared them. The elite Kwantung Army which numbered almost a million quickly fell to the Soviet onslaught.

[Miserabilia]

They were willing to die for the war which means they would not have stopped.

Basicly, the point of any military.

[Gamma Male]

Sorry revised question. Why would we pardon him before investigation. Why would we bend to them when we can win. Why would we give them what they want. Do you understand the radicalism of the whole society?
So you'd be willing to sacrifice 200,000 civillian lives, including entire families, just to get revenge on one person?

That's fucked up.
The Japanese had a kamikaze society then. They were willing to die for the war which means they would not have stopped.
I have already addressed these claims. I am not going to repeat myself. Please read my first post.
And I'm pretty sure the Japanese and US have forgiven each other now. Besides, most alive then are now dead. Hiroshima and Nagasaki are still thriving cities and it's a fact that the US and Japan are not at war.

This thread is about whether or not the bombings were morally justified or necessary. I fail to see how our current relationship with Japan is relevant.

[JamesSuperBoy]

My own personal thought is that it was wrong - it was merely an experiment and show to the world the power of the atom bomb and USA. Maybes the same is true for Vietnam I really do not know -

[thatcountrykid]

So you'd be willing to sacrifice 200,000 civillian lives, including entire families, just to get revenge on one person?

That's fucked up.

I have already addressed these claims. I am not going to repeat myself. Please read my first post.


This thread is about whether or not the bombings were morally justified or necessary. I fail to see how our current relationship with Japan is relevant.

I was willing to loose 200,000 civilian lives over 100,000 American and allied soldiers. I'm willing to to loose 200,000 civilians for justice against the Japanese government. I'm willing to do it so the deaths of allied soldiers that already happened were not worthless.

[Gamma Male]

I was willing to loose 200,000 civilian lives over 100,000 American and allied soldiers.
No more loss of American lives would've been necessary. They would've surrendered had we agreed to spare the emperor.
I'm willing to to loose 200,000 civilians for justice against the Japanese government.
We would've gotten justice had we offered them the chance to surrender without bringing harm to the emperor.
I'm willing to do it so the deaths of allied soldiers that already happened were not worthless.

We had already stopped Hitler and Mussolini and could've stopped the Japanese without bombing them had we offered them the chance to surrender without harming the emperor. I fail to see how killing 200,000 civilians just to get one man, and then letting him live anyway, makes the lives lost more worth it somehow.

[Kaiserjosh]

We had already offered many times for them to surrender but they did not. The estaments of the death toll if a invasion took place which was already planned was almost a millon deaths on both sides combined. Also they were not ready surrender. If they send men with bombs strapped to them and kamikaze rocket planes to defend meaningless islands of rock what do you think they would do to protect the home islands. The days before and during the Atomic strikes Japanese Military Officials were planning a coup to remove the emperor and keep fighting. The civilians did not want to surrender for their believes and the propaganda that told of American Brutally. The Military ran the show the emperor was just a figurehead. There were plans for everything. They we prepared to just kill as many Americans as possible. A Japanese soldiers on a island in the pacific held out for i believe 30-40 years and only came out when his superior officer from the war came and told him to surrender. They had a weapon that was just a mine strapped to the end of a bamboo stick. When the Japanese left a island or were about to be overran they gave civilians hand grenades to kill themselves. Many jumped off cliffs as to not fall into American hands. Do you think the safety of one man would make a Country that has many times over sown its unwillingness to surrender and retreat would make it surrender. I am not saying it was just. I am just trying to put some stuff done. Also you have demanded evidence from people and have shown none of your own. You main thing is just saying it was American Propaganda.

[Aajj333]

It was something like either kill 100,000 japanese citizens with the bomb (I think that's how many died im not positive) or kill 1,000,000 U.S. soldiers with an amphibious attack like at Normandy like the political people predicted.

[Miserabilia]

To be honest I'm just glad japan and the usa have such good relations today. Can you image if japanese people would never forgive? Thank god for honorful culture.

[Gigablue]

You can't just excuse this as "shit happens" or "that's just war, people die, get over it". Are you fucking kidding me? We murdered well over 200,000 innocent men, women, children, and infants instantly and left many more to die slow deaths from radiation poisoning to accomplish something that we easily would've done anyway, without an invasion.

While I understand that the atomic bombs were new and much more powerful than anything before, we should remember that far more people were liked by conventional weapons. If you use this argument, shouldn't you also be arguing against all the conventional bombings.

Also, 200 000 people isn't that many compared to the rest of the casualties of the war. If the bombing had actually been necessary to get the Japanese to surrender (which it wasn't), then it would have been the right thing to do. The problem really is that it was unnecessary.

This is why I really like debate. I used to support the decision to drop the bombs, but I actually looked into it more, and it really seems like a needless killing of civilians. Believe it or not, I actually like finding out I was wrong, since it means I get to change to a better position.

I was willing to loose 200,000 civilian lives over 100,000 American and allied soldiers. I'm willing to to loose 200,000 civilians for justice against the Japanese government. I'm willing to do it so the deaths of allied soldiers that already happened were not worthless.

I hope you realize just how fucked up that statement is. Why are the japanese worth less that the allies. People are people. You can't justify needlessly killing civilians.

[Capto]

Do you think the safety of one man would make a Country that has many times over sown its unwillingness to surrender and retreat would make it surrender.

Obviously.

[CosmicNoodle]

Simple, FUCK NO.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is clearly ignorant to the subject, or is just a death mongering fool.

[thatcountrykid]

While I understand that the atomic bombs were new and much more powerful than anything before, we should remember that far more people were liked by conventional weapons. If you use this argument, shouldn't you also be arguing against all the conventional bombings.

Also, 200 000 people isn't that many compared to the rest of the casualties of the war. If the bombing had actually been necessary to get the Japanese to surrender (which it wasn't), then it would have been the right thing to do. The problem really is that it was unnecessary.

This is why I really like debate. I used to support the decision to drop the bombs, but I actually looked into it more, and it really seems like a needless killing of civilians. Believe it or not, I actually like finding out I was wrong, since it means I get to change to a better position.



I hope you realize just how fucked up that statement is. Why are the japanese worth less that the allies. People are people. You can't justify needlessly killing civilians.

The world is a fucked up place and you win wars by killing the enemies and taking care you your own. You can only win if you get your hands a little dirty.

[Vlerchan]

To be honest I'm just glad japan and the usa have such good relations today. Can you image if japanese people would never forgive? Thank god for honorful culture.
Who needs National Pride when you can have a BigMac I suppose?

You can only win if you get your hands a little dirty.
Except in this case. Where there was no need to dirty your hands further.

---

I'm also not going to respond to any claims that are unsourced. Largely because I know lots of what's written here is ahistorical nonsense.

[Miserabilia]

Who needs National Pride when you can have a BigMac I suppose?



Well they do love mcdonalds
:lol:
oh my god this thread

[Gamma Male]

The reason I've only addressed the nukes and not over methods by which civillians died is because this thread is about the nukes. For the record I also believe the firebombing of Tokyo were immoral and unnecessary.


It was something like either kill 100,000 japanese citizens with the bomb (I think that's how many died im not positive) or kill 1,000,000 U.S. soldiers with an amphibious attack like at Normandy like the political people predicted.

Over 200,000 people died. Mostly innocent civillians.

And even if we had invaded, 1,000,000 deaths is a completely overinflated estimate. The only person who would agree to such a large estimate of deaths was Truman, and he did it only to attempt to justify the bombings.

The main concern for the Americans was the potential for huge casualty rates. Nearly every senior officer involved in the planning did his own research regarding American casualties – this was based on the experience America had fighting the Japanese since*Pearl*Harbour

The Joint Chiefs of Staff estimated thatOlympic*alone would cost 456,000 men, including 109,000 killed. Including*Coronet, it was estimated that America would experience 1.2 million casualties, with 267,000 deaths.

Staff working for*Chester Nimitz, calculated that the first 30 days of Olympic alone would cost 49,000 men.*MacArthur’s*staff concluded that America would suffer 125,000 casualties after 120 days, a figure that was later reduced to 105,000 casualties after his staff subtracted the men who when wounded could return to battle.

General Marshall, in conference withPresident Truman, estimated 31,000 in 30 days after landing in Kyushu. Admiral Leahy estimated that the invasion would cost 268,000 casualties. Personnel at the Navy Department estimated that the total losses to America would be between 1.7 and 4 million with 400,000 to 800,000 deaths.




So yes, if we had invaded lots of soldiers would've died. But definitely not millions.


However, neither the nukes not an invasion were necessary. I've already explained how in my first post the Japanese were ready and willing to surrender, on the sole condition the emperor be spared.

[Kaiserjosh]

Ok everyone I am glad that there was some real discussion. I believe most of you had good and valid points for boths sides. So I would like to thank you for being here. Good Day

[BeachBlonde]

It was either drop the bomb or have another D-Day with even more casualties from both sides. Japan had a chance to surrender before each bomb and refused.

[Nikolai.Pavlov]

It was either drop the bomb or have another D-Day with even more casualties from both sides. Japan had a chance to surrender before each bomb and refused.

My thoughts exactly.

[Gamma Male]

My thoughts exactly.

It was either drop the bomb or have another D-Day with even more casualties from both sides. Japan had a chance to surrender before each bomb and refused.

Sometimes I think it's like everybody just completely ignores my posts.

Japan was willing to surrender on the condition their emperor be spared. We knew this. We would not have had to murder 200,000 civilians if we had offered them the chance to surrender without bringing harm to their emperor. Up until them we had only offered them unconditional surrender. We did not have to murder 200,000 civilians. We only did so to test out our new bombs and show off to the Soviet Union. The US Military killed 200,000 innocent civilians because of a pissing contest with the Soviet Union. The myth that the bombs were necessary is a lie spewed out the US propaganda machine.

Had Hitler won I'm sure you two would be arguing that the Holocaust was necessary to prevent some greater tragedy. Because that's what it would say in the history books.

[phuckphace]

the real reason for nuking Japan was to serve as a warning to the Soviets ("don't even think about fucking with us or this will happen to you too.") of course that backfired big time.

imo they should have just accepted the unconditional surrender the first time. now to be fair the Japanese probably expected to have the same done to them by us that they themselves had done to their other defeated enemies (think of the goriest guro you've seen - it's kinda like that). Americans on the other hand may be prone to making idiotic military decisions, but we aren't usually wantonly cruel, certainly not to the barbaric levels of the Japanese Army when it invaded China and Korea. I don't know about you but if I'm going to die in a war I'd rather be instantly vaporized by a nuke than be tortured for hours by a Japanese officer shoving bamboo splinters under my fingernails.

[Hyper]

I just wonder if these brain washed patriot kids even know how to read?

The ''2nd D-Day'' bullshit is just that bullshit.

In my opinion the American government just took a chance to test a new weapon. Twice.

And any kind of talk of how ''heroic'' the American or British governments of WW II are makes me puke, being born in one of the countries that America and Britain gifted to the Soviet Union at Jalta.

[jessie3]

What would of happend to the United States, if it had not drop the bomb?
What would Japan do to the USA if no WMD where used in the fight?
How long would it take, till the war finally ended, if no country where to step up and take control of the situation?

[tovaris]

Ofcourse not, such an atack on the civilian populatin os unacceptable.

[Stronk Serb]

Ofcourse not, such an atack on the civilian populatin os unacceptable.

USA:
- Bombs Belgrade in 1944, kills little to no German occupational forces, kills a lot of civilians. Not completely sure about the body count, but it was more than a few hundred civilians.
- Supports dropping atomic bombs and says it's for the sake of peace.
- Calls 9/11 an act of terrorism, exaggerates it so badly as if 3 million people died, not 3000.

I mean the Japanese got over it and now the US and Japan are great partners.

EDIT: looked it up, 1160 civilians and 18 Germans died in the bombing of Belgrade on Easter 1944.

[dakeep18]

being a german i feel kind've iffy about this but the future would've changed completely so yes i think it was right