do you think the bombings of hiroshima was good or bad.

[King Next]

reading your post is comical the way you personalise the sitaution and lash out at me for providing an argument against you and repeatedly contradict yourself

grow up and/or calm down

[kumorilastangel]

Was it good? No. Killing civilians and genetically scaring people for decades to come is never good. Would the Japanese have stopped any other way?...(IMO)....No. Not until every last Japanese man,woman and child was dead and gone. Was there another way to end this without dropping the bombs, without killing more American soldiers?.............(To my limited knowledge and IMO) No. At this point in the war it would have (IMO) Been a major insult to their honer to offer anything less that complete Victory or Utter Defeat. It would have effectively dishonored the men who fought and died for the country.

[Jon88]

I can make a guess for why we went to war. Wealth. I can also make a guess as to why we used the atomic bombs too; to show Russia we had them and we were willing to use them.

Originally Posted by kumorilastangel

Was it good? No. Killing civilians and genetically scaring people for decades to come is never good. Would the Japanese have stopped any other way?...(IMO)....No. Not until every last Japanese man,woman and child was dead and gone. Was there another way to end this without dropping the bombs, without killing more American soldiers?.............(To my limited knowledge and IMO) No. At this point in the war it would have (IMO) Been a major insult to their honer to offer anything less that complete Victory or Utter Defeat. It would have effectively dishonored the men who fought and died for the country.

I would say the Soviets played a larger role in the accelerated ending of the war than the atomic bombs.

[Colby]

Originally Posted by King Next

for some who spends a lot of time on serious discussion

you have little idea about what you know and dont know. yet you feel so strongly about it that u just open your mouth and let it all out

ill summarise wat u said:

-japan deserved it
-'we' warned them they invited us to bomb them
-'we' shud be blamed for anything we did the right thing

u need to understand that we dont know why the decisions were made and what the real interests and reasons were.

'japan got mad at us for the oil embargo so they bombed us first'

honestly^ think of the bigger picture here, u need to get it into your head that you dont know ****

and no im not from japan

See, you have the funny knack of twisting words, nobody is saying that Japan deserved the bombs, we had no other choice that would lead to less death. I'm also sure that Japan did not "invite" us to drop the bombs, what actually occurred is the Japanese leaders refused to surrender, so they were being stubborn in the situation. I absolutely think we should be blamed for the deaths of those people, and I don't think we are pushing the blame off, but the fact remains, we had NO OTHER CHOICE.

Well we never know what politicians are thinking, of course not, but we aren't talking about government conspiracy, we are talking about the morality of a decision made, and as it stands there is no proof pointing to any other possible solution than drop the bombs, or don't drop the bombs. We decided the first as it would cause the least deaths. This was WAR, like slingblader said, in War there is no flower power peace to all solution, and is in fact the opposite.

I think I do know the facts, I know that the bombs were dropped, I know that there is no evidence pointing to some government plot, I know that WWII was a war and as such it meant death. I know that innocent people are innocent people and that Japan did actually attack us without warning. I know that we retaliated with armed forces thus begging our war, and thus the death destruction and the ultimate end (the bombs).

Nobody said you were, but I think you're just honestly not thinking about this enough, you want to push off the decision to drop the bombs as some huge government plot to do what? Give back rightful ownership to land? To secure Japan and make sure no one else would lead it back into war? I think you are mistaken.

Originally Posted by Jon88

I can make a guess for why we went to war. Wealth. I can also make a guess as to why we used the atomic bombs too; to show Russia we had them and we were willing to use them.

I would say the Soviets played a larger role in the accelerated ending of the war than the atomic bombs.

I can't imagine we were eager to go to war after the post WWI depression. Yes though, we did want to show the Soviets up a bit, we wanted to ensure they weren't going to double cross us (as we couldn't trust them).

[slingblader]

for some who spends a lot of time on serious discussion
you have little idea about what you know and dont know. yet you feel so strongly about it that u just open your mouth and let it all out

Yah, I'm clearly the one lacking in historical knowledge in this... And every single thing i've said through out this whole thing has been factually backed up. Just because you think you're ideas are right, doesn't mean they are.

ill summarise wat u said:

-japan deserved it - No, in fact, I specifically stated that no one ever said they "deserved it." Good try though

-'we' warned them they invited us to bomb them - Again, never said anything about them "inviting us" And we did warn them... So yes.

-'we' shud be blamed for anything we did the right thing - Again, Winners get to write the history books. Say what you will, it obviouly worked.

u need to understand that we dont know why the decisions were made and what the real interests and reasons were.

'japan got mad at us for the oil embargo so they bombed us first'
honestly^ think of the bigger picture here, u need to get it into your head that you dont know ****

Then enlighten me oh wise one? What is the big picture? I think YOU need to realize that most of the time, something is what it is. There were no truly hidden agendas, the history been examined more then enough times.

America wasn't happy with Japan's efforts in China, so we economically retaliated
Japan escalated to violence
America ends the war

Those were the interests, those were the reasons. There was no conspiracy, deal with it.


"reading your post is comical the way you personalise the sitaution and lash out at me for providing an argument against you and repeatedly contradict yourself

grow up and/or calm down"

Always comes back to that... Didn't personalize anything. Don't know you, could care less. It's a discussion, if you takes things personally, that's not my problem. Lash out? I'm sorry, are you sitting here with me? I'm perfectly calm. Again, if you can't handle the discussion, leave.

Find me one point where I contradicted myself in any serious manner, and I will never again post in this thread.

Again, perfectly calm. I think you need to grow up and gain a realistic view of just how this world really works. It's not black and white, good and evil. Decision are made based on necessity, and it was obviously the right decision in at least one way.

[Jon88]

Originally Posted by Billionz

I can't imagine we were eager to go to war after the post WWI depression.

What do you think ended the Great Depression? Surely not F.R.R's, "New (socialistic) Deal"?

Roosevelt is the one that wanted to go to war (along with Standard Oil, bankers, etc), it's no secret. After the Tripartite Treaty all he had to do was get one to attack us and we were in, the rest is history. Pear Harbor is just what he wanted (and I would say he knew Pearl Harbor was going to happen before it did, and that's why he sabotaged the Pacific fleet with those nonsense orders).

[kumorilastangel]

Originally Posted by Jon88

I would say the Soviets played a larger role in the accelerated ending of the war than the atomic bombs.

I can agree with that. But even if the war was over for everyone else would they have stopped fighting? (Again IMO) No. The war wouldn't have been over for them. Not until complete Victory or Utter Defeat.

[TheCriminal]

Along with everything else, I'd like to add that the Japs never accept defeat.

They would stick their bayonets in the ground and dive on them, before they let themselves be captured/killed by us.

The nukes actually saved more of them in the long run than if we just stuck to guns.

[King Next]

Originally Posted by slingblader

Then enlighten me oh wise one? What is the big picture? I think YOU need to realize that most of the time, something is what it is. There were no truly hidden agendas, the history been examined more then enough times.

Those were the interests, those were the reasons. There was no conspiracy, deal with it.

so basically you claim to know everything that you need to know about the war and that there is only 1 way of thinking: america is best

ok this is the point where i realise that you are not intelligent enough to take seriously


think about the war in iraq. do u think america did that to protect 'the lives of the innocent' and find and stop those very dangerous weapons of mass destruction

or do you think that they were just dying for a reason to invade iraq for oil control and power related reasons. the trade centre incident was the perfect occasion to invade a country in the middle east who just so fortunatly happened to be islamic while keeping the support of the american population

so ok at the start everyone was so startled by september 11 that we believed whatever we were told by the government. but in time its obvious wat was/is really the case and exactly what was going on

now by the way, in killing saddam and bringing down his regime (aka. bringing the peace) the idiots let a bunch of terrorists run free and kill eachother, a bunch of kurds being given guns and money, while the remaining few residents vote for which party (chosen by america of course) should run (under the control of america) the country

ok so explain to me how you can be so sure about the 'interests' and 'hidden agendas'.

[Bartender]

^I do believe slingblader said, "I think YOU need to realize that most of the time, something is what it is."

Now this is MOST of the time, and you're twisting his words once again, as he had never said that there are no hidden agendas 100% of the time, and he obviously did not ever say "america is best"

[Dogs]

Atomic Bomb=we kill a bunch of people. We didn't do a land invasion that would have destroyed the Japanese gene pool/extinction of Japan basically.the Japanese were willing to do this.

Land Invasion=Japan wouldn't surrender. They are honorable and proud. They were willing to use EVERY citizen to fight.

[slingblader]

Originally Posted by King Next

so basically you claim to know everything that you need to know about the war and that there is only 1 way of thinking: america is best

ok this is the point where i realise that you are not intelligent enough to take seriously


think about the war in iraq. do u think america did that to protect 'the lives of the innocent' and find and stop those very dangerous weapons of mass destruction

or do you think that they were just dying for a reason to invade iraq for oil control and power related reasons. the trade centre incident was the perfect occasion to invade a country in the middle east who just so fortunatly happened to be islamic while keeping the support of the american population

so ok at the start everyone was so startled by september 11 that we believed whatever we were told by the government. but in time its obvious wat was/is really the case and exactly what was going on

now by the way, in killing saddam and bringing down his regime (aka. bringing the peace) the idiots let a bunch of terrorists run free and kill eachother, a bunch of kurds being given guns and money, while the remaining few residents vote for which party (chosen by america of course) should run (under the control of america) the country

ok so explain to me how you can be so sure about the 'interests' and 'hidden agendas'.

Bartender has covered most of this for me, but I'll elaborate a little bit more. At no point did I claim to know "everything" backing up the entire decision. I said I know the true motivation behind it, regardless of the minute influences of the politicians behind it.

Again, as I said no REAL hidden agendas. If anyone considers America's desire to control oil a "hidden agenda" then they obviously have no intelligence at all. I for one, was very aware of the fact that America's efforts would lead to America with a fair bit of control. Find me someone who wasn't aware of that fact on some level.

And for the record, talk about all the negative you want, there is some good being done there.

[Jon88]

Originally Posted by King Next

so ok at the start everyone was so startled by september 11 that we believed whatever we were told by the government. but in time its obvious wat was/is really the case and exactly what was going on

Not everyone!

ok so explain to me how you can be so sure about the 'interests' and 'hidden agendas'.

He is speaking of the things he can be sure about. There was a war. We used a bomb against a enemy. The war soon after ended.

Now sling even went to say more Japanese lives may have been saved. That's sweet and all, but all one really needs to say is, ONE American life, was saved to justify using it. That would mean it was a military success on America's part. What more is there to question?

[King Next]

this doesnt work when its 10 vs 1 counter argument

[slingblader]

Originally Posted by King Next

this doesnt work when its 10 vs 1 counter argument

It'd work fine if you could reasonably back up your arguments.