Good Morning...Boundless Barbarity at Bataan [Archive]

Okla-homey

4/10/2008, 12:26 AM

April 10, 1942: The Bataan Death March begins

http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/7105/aaaaaaaaaaabastardsbataan7rc.gif (http://imageshack.us)

On this day 66 years ago, one the most dramatic and horrible chapters of American military history begins. The day after the surrender of the main Philippine island of Luzon to the Japanese, the 75,000 Filipino and American troops captured on the Bataan Peninsula begin a forced march to a prison camp near Cabanatuan.

http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/4033/aaaaaanewspaper3bv.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

During this infamous trek, which became known for all time as the "Bataan Death March," already starved prisoners were forced to march 85 miles in six days amid tropical heat, with only one meal of rice during the entire journey.

http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/2968/aaaaaaaabataanmap5no.gif (http://imageshack.us)
Filipino civilians along the route of march tried to sneak food and water to the marchers. Many were killed for their attempted kindness.

By the end of the march, which was punctuated with atrocities committed by the Japanese guards, hundreds of Americans and many more Filipinos had died.

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/3549/aaaaaaaaphotos313ej.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Men who couldn't go on were bayoneted, shot and in some cases ritually beheaded by Japanese officers

The stage was set for this supremely inhumane period the day after Japan bombed the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor. On December 8, 1941 the Japanese invasion of the Philippines began. Within a month, the Japanese had captured Manila, the capital of the Philippines, and the U.S. and Filipino defenders of Luzon were forced to retreat to the Bataan Peninsula.

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/7608/aaaaaaa21301oc.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Only brief rest stops were allowed. The Japanese guards were changed every three hours. The sick and hungry Filipino and American GI's were only afforded 5 minute breaks at approximately 2 hour intervals.

For the next three months, the combined U.S.-Filipino army, under the command of U.S. General Jonathan Wainwright, held out impressively despite a lack of naval and air support. Finally, on April 7, with his army crippled by starvation and disease, Wainwright began withdrawing as many troops as possible to the island fortress of Corregidor in Manila Bay.

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/9829/aaaaaaaaaphotos72kd.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
The prisoners had to carry their own wounded as long as they could. They knew if they didn't carry their comrades their death would come instantly

However, two days later, 75,000 Allied troops were trapped by the Japanese and forced to surrender. The next day, the Bataan Death March began. Of those who survived to reach the Japanese prison camp near Cabanatuan, few lived to celebrate U.S. General Douglas MacArthur's liberation of Luzon in 1945.

http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/7153/aaaaaaaaaaaphotos359gh.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
The prisoners were repeatedly searched for absolutely anything of value and were denied anything that could be a source of comfort including family photos, letters and even bibles.

In the Philippines, homage is paid to the victims of the Bataan Death March every April on Bataan Day, a national holiday that sees large groups of Filipinos solemnly rewalking parts of the death route.

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/189/aaaaaaaaaaantijapan21xe.gif (http://imageshack.us)
Word of the Japanese cruelty and atrocities at Bataan spread quickly and fueled American resolve to destroy the Japanese Empire.

http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/6562/aaaaaaaaaaaatrmnltr63ib.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Letter received by a "Death March" and POW survivor after his liberation at war's end.

http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/2264/wamacwainmg6.jpg
Jonathon Wainwright is embraced by Douglas MacArthur after the former's release from captivity after the liberation of the Phillippines in 1945. Wainwright was awarded the Medal of Honor for his steadfast defense of Corregidor against overwhelming odds and was granted the superintendency of West Point in the post-war years

http://img77.imageshack.us/img77/2687/insane7zo9db.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

TUSooner

4/10/2008, 01:57 AM

"Stay on the job until every MURDERING JAP is wiped out."

Ahh, they just don't make motivational posters like they used to!

Nice job on an event worth remembering.

BigRedJed

4/10/2008, 02:37 AM

Sort of puts (still indefensible) naked pyramids of well-fed prisoners into perspective.

OUDoc

4/10/2008, 02:43 AM

I occasionally bad-mouth movie villains as being written so blatantly evil that everyone will hate them, no one is really that evil. Then you remember stuff like this.

MR2-Sooner86

4/10/2008, 03:53 AM

Very bad here and happened many more times in many areas. Yet people still **** a brick over the U.S. being a monster for dropping the atom bombs. Stupid ****ing liberals.

BlondeSoonerGirl

4/10/2008, 04:24 AM

Man, I've heard stories from Japanese folks about stuff their relatives dealt with in the military back then.

Japan DID NOT mess around. In a bad way, but they did not play. They have worked on changing that image for years and years.

They enjoy being a technology leader because they feel they're kinda contributing or sharing something to the rest of the world. They're very proud of that.

One of the biggest, most important things to the Japanese people is honor. In the way you do your job, conduct yourself personally...all that. But it's hard for me to see where that comes from when you read stuff like this. I know it had to be there somewhere but I just can't find it.

:(

C&CDean

4/10/2008, 04:29 AM

These are the kinds of things that happen in a Godless society.

yermom

4/10/2008, 04:46 AM

as opposed to the friendly Germans at the time

BigRedJed

4/10/2008, 04:52 AM

Ouch.

Frozen Sooner

4/10/2008, 04:53 AM

These are the kinds of things that happen in a Godless society.

Um, the Japanese had a religion.

Frozen Sooner

4/10/2008, 04:54 AM

Wainwright was awarded the Medal of Honor for his steadfast defense of Corregidor against overwhelming odds and was granted the superintendency of West Point in the post-war years.

Wainwright also has an Army post named after him.

BigRedJed

4/10/2008, 04:57 AM

Um, the Japanese had a religion.
Yeah, but not God with a capital G, which I think is probably Dean's point.

However, it's more of a philosophy than a religion. A philosophy which they completely ignored. Just like Hitler ignored the teachings of Christianity, or more precisely plucked out and applied the parts that bolstered the case for his savage campaign. Much the same way that Islamic extremists do.

Huh. Suddenly I see a recurring theme.

Frozen Sooner

4/10/2008, 04:57 AM

Very bad here and happened many more times in many areas. Yet people still **** a brick over the U.S. being a monster for dropping the atom bombs. Stupid ****ing liberals.

Want to tell any of us which President commissioned the building of the atomic bomb, which one dropped it, and what party they belonged to?

Frozen Sooner

4/10/2008, 05:00 AM

Yeah, but not God with a capital G, which I think is probably Dean's point.

However, it's more of a philosophy than a religion. A philosophy which they completely ignored. Just like Hitler ignored the teachings of Christianity, or more precisely plucked out and applied the parts that bolstered the case for his savage campaign. Much the same way that Islamic extremists do.

Huh. Suddenly I see a recurring theme.

Shintoism is more a philosophy than a religion?

I'm pretty sure you're wrong on that.

Shinto and Buddhism were somewhat fused, but this fusion was officially outlawed in Japan at the time of WWII and Shinto was the state religion.

C&CDean

4/10/2008, 05:03 AM

Yeah, like I said, Godless.

MR2-Sooner86

4/10/2008, 05:14 AM

Want to tell any of us which President commissioned the building of the atomic bomb, which one dropped it, and what party they belonged to?

Did I say stupid ****ing democrates? No. I said stupid ****ing liberals. You can be a democrate and be conservative just as you can be a republican and be liberal.

Frozen Sooner

4/10/2008, 05:15 AM

So FDR was a conservative?

JohnnyMack

4/10/2008, 05:15 AM

War is hell.

BlondeSoonerGirl

4/10/2008, 05:16 AM

A Japanese guy at work asked me one day about the religion of the American Indians. He was very interested in it. I sent him to a guy I worked with (a Cherokee) to talk to. The guy later told me that they sat in the bar at Charleston's that night for about 3 hours talking about their religions and comparing the similaries and what-not.

I just thought that was interesting.

JohnnyMack

4/10/2008, 05:16 AM

So FDR was a conservative?

Very. He didn't spend much on social programs. Don't you know ****?

JohnnyMack

4/10/2008, 05:17 AM

Frozen Sooner

4/10/2008, 05:19 AM

Very. He didn't spend much on social programs. Don't you know ****?

Well, I am just a stupid ****ing liberal. I mean, I probably would have thought about dropping a weapon of mass destruction on a populated area a bit before doing it and probably would have felt some remorse over it, even while recognizing it as the correct decision.

BlondeSoonerGirl

4/10/2008, 05:20 AM

It would have been cool if this story ended with them having a tomahawk and nunchuck fight out in the parking lot afterwards.

That only happened in meetings at the office.

:mack:

Frozen Sooner

4/10/2008, 05:21 AM

BSG-

Yeah, I can see that. Both religions are shamanistic and animistic. Both place a large value on personal cleanliness and honor.

MR2-Sooner86

4/10/2008, 05:26 AM

Well, I am just a stupid ****ing liberal. I mean, I probably would have thought about dropping a weapon of mass destruction on a populated area a bit before doing it and probably would have felt some remorse over it, even while recognizing it as the correct decision.

You're right, it was the correct decision. What I'm sick and tired of is people who bitch and moan about it today saying those two acts alone we're evil and shows how bad America is. That the atomic bombs were worse than anything done by radical Islamics or other terrorist.

Now who are the ones out there spouting this crap from their mouths?

Anyway, I'm done with my rant.

Frozen Sooner

4/10/2008, 05:41 AM

Ah.

Stupid ****ing conservatives who say the Civil War was wrong.

BigRedJed

4/10/2008, 05:42 AM

Shintoism is more a philosophy than a religion?

I'm pretty sure you're wrong on that.

Shinto and Buddhism were somewhat fused, but this fusion was officially outlawed in Japan at the time of WWII and Shinto was the state religion.
I'm no expert, but Shintoism isn't a religion in the same way we think of religion, IMO. It's anamism, and more of a "way," or a "path." There are dieties, but they aren't worshipped as a higher power, in the same way we typically think of religious worship.

I mean, you can call it a religion, and it's commonly accepted as such, but in my understanding it's more of a "philosophy" and a way of life than religious dogma.

BigRedJed

4/10/2008, 05:49 AM

And either way, Japanese imperialism before and during WWII was a result of a bastardization of said religion. Just like Hitler's crusade against Jews was a bastardization of Chrisitan beliefs, the current mess in the middle east is a bastardization of Islam (though it is an admittedly more violent/intolerant religion, at least based on the texts of the Koran), and raping 13 year old girls in a polygamist compound is a bastardization of Mormonism and Christianity.

Frozen Sooner

4/10/2008, 06:23 AM

I'm no expert, but Shintoism isn't a religion in the same way we think of religion, IMO. It's anamism, and more of a "way," or a "path." There are dieties, but they aren't worshipped as a higher power, in the same way we typically think of religious worship.

I mean, you can call it a religion, and it's commonly accepted as such, but in my understanding it's more of a "philosophy" and a way of life than religious dogma.

Hmm.

I think you and I have a different concept of Shinto. I'm under the impression that Shinto is animist/pantheist-individual items have their own spirit, but there's also embodiments of concepts and such that are worshipped as gods-with the Emporer's family being the incarnate embodiment of their gods from post-Meiji restoration until the seppuku of Hirohito.

I could be wrong, for sure, that's just the way it's been explained to me.

And I think I also disagree with you that it was a perversion of Shintoism to make war. Japanese exceptionalism is pretty ingrained in Shinto.

Condescending Sooner

4/10/2008, 06:33 AM

So FDR was a conservative?

Wasn't Truman the one who authorized dropping the bomb?

BigRedJed

4/10/2008, 06:48 AM

Yes. He didn't even know he HAD the bomb until he was sworn in, BTW.

Frozen Sooner

4/10/2008, 06:57 AM

Wasn't Truman the one who authorized dropping the bomb?

Yes. The question was which president authorized development of the bomb, which president authorized dropping the bomb, and which party did they belong to.

This was answered by something about not all "democrates" (sic) being liberals, which would imply that the responder thought that FDR wasn't a liberal.

BigRedJed

4/10/2008, 06:58 AM

Hmm.

I think you and I have a different concept of Shinto. I'm under the impression that Shinto is animist/pantheist-individual items have their own spirit, but there's also embodiments of concepts and such that are worshipped as gods-with the Emporer's family being the incarnate embodiment of their gods from post-Meiji restoration until the seppuku of Hirohito.

I could be wrong, for sure, that's just the way it's been explained to me.
Well dangit if you didn't make me Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinto) it. Based on your post, I'm thinking you have studied it a bit more closely than me. Like I said, my knowledge is cursory at best. But I think that if you'll read that Wikipedia link you'll see items that bolster both views. In fact there are quite a few interesting contradictions within the Shinto belief system, according to that read.

Of course, most religions and like entities (as they are typically observed) also have numerous contradictions, so it shouldn't be surprising.

sooner_born_1960

4/10/2008, 06:59 AM

NormanPride

4/10/2008, 07:00 AM

Wasn't Democrates a pupil of Socrates? The gay one?

BigRedJed

4/10/2008, 07:00 AM

I think democrates are just really philosophical democrats.

BigRedJed

4/10/2008, 07:00 AM

DAMMIT NORMANPRIDE!!!

Partial Qualifier

4/10/2008, 07:01 AM

A I sent him to a guy I worked with (a Cherokee) to talk to. The guy later told me that they sat in the bar at Charleston's that night for about 3 hours talking about their religions and comparing the similaries and what-not.

actually we talked about b1tch3z & h0es, but okay.

BigRedJed

4/10/2008, 07:03 AM

Every "Indian" in Oklahoma claims to be a Cherokee. I don't believe them. Especially the ones that are good at computer games. Shady.

BlondeSoonerGirl

4/10/2008, 07:05 AM

actually we talked about b1tch3z & h0es, but okay.

Dude, go over and ask Masami-san what Shinto is.

After she bitches about you interrupting her oh-so-important work and raises her voice so that the other Japanese can hear her bedowngrading the lazy Amelican come back and tell us what she says.

:rcmad:

Frozen Sooner

4/10/2008, 07:07 AM

In other words, God. Less. :)

Heh. Differing definitions, I guess. To me, "godless" means that they don't have any imaginary friends (KIDDING!). Japanese society in from the late 1800s to the mid 20th Century was just the opposite: they had a state religion.

To me, Japan shows how dangerous a state religion can be.

C&CDean

4/10/2008, 07:31 AM

Yes. The question was which president authorized development of the bomb, which president authorized dropping the bomb, and which party did they belong to.

This was answered by something about not all "democrates" (sic) being liberals, which would imply that the responder thought that FDR wasn't a liberal.

1. FDR never would have had the balls to drop it.

2. By today's standards, FDR would be a right winger. And if he ever thought his welfare plan was going to turn into the giant titty it has for POS people he never would have gone forward with it.

Just fyi, today's liberals ain't anything like your daddy's liberals. Just sayin'. Abortion? Gays? Gun control? ***** military? God hating? No, today's liberals don't resemble your daddy's liberals in the least bit.

Partial Qualifier

4/10/2008, 07:58 AM

raises her voice so that the other Japanese can hear her bedowngrading the lazy Amelican

Sheet boy, I'd hafta userslap dat *** and pimp her out to the lawn crew for ack'in like dat

soonerscuba

4/10/2008, 08:00 AM

1. FDR never would have had the balls to drop it.

FDR oversaw a meat-grinder on the beaches of France, fire-bombed Tokyo and Dresden, and created the means to create an atomic weapon wouldn't have the stones to use it? I thought that whole winning WWII, ending the depression and being the longest serving president of all time would quell doubters, apparently I was wrong.

Jerk

4/10/2008, 08:04 AM

FDR oversaw a meat-grinder on the beaches of France, fire-bombed Tokyo and Dresden, and created the means to create an atomic weapon wouldn't have the stones to use it? I thought that whole winning WWII, ending the depression and being the longest serving president of all time would quell doubters, apparently I was wrong.

I have to agree. Curtis Lemay killed more Japanese than the atomic bombs did.

Vaevictis

4/10/2008, 08:36 AM

Shinto is definitely a religion. They have a whole pantheon of Gods/Goddesses with Amaterasu (Sun Goddess) as probably the most important.

The emperor is reputed to be descended of Amaterasu, which is why the he was worshiped as a sort of living god until we kicked their butts in.

As far as this having anything to do with not having God, I'd be happy to refer you to events in which folks with a God did things that are just as bad -- or worse. And even a few cases where God ordered or performed such acts himself. (Glass houses and throwing stones, and all that.)

The issue with the Japanese at the time is that they never placed all that much value on human lives. If you take some time to get to know the Japanese culture, you'll find that awareness of the transience of human existence (in fact, all life) is embedded pretty deeply.

As such, they tend to not value life itself very much, but rather what that life does. One of the things that they place especially high value on is their notion of honor. Honor is one of the things that makes a human life worth anything, and in surrender these troops were believed to have dishonored themselves. In doing so, they made themselves worthless as human beings in the eyes of the Japanese, and the Japanese reacted rather like some folks around here do when they decide folks are worthless human beings. (Do you see any parallels between what the Japanese did to our soldiers and what some folks say we should be doing to certain current enemies of the USA, perhaps? Yeah. Glass houses and throwing stones folks.)

C&CDean

4/10/2008, 08:56 AM

FDR oversaw a meat-grinder on the beaches of France, fire-bombed Tokyo and Dresden, and created the means to create an atomic weapon wouldn't have the stones to use it? I thought that whole winning WWII, ending the depression and being the longest serving president of all time would quell doubters, apparently I was wrong.

So what you're saying is that FDR was NOT a liberal.

SoonerProphet

4/10/2008, 09:06 AM

He was a socialist, is that different than a liberal...or even a Liberal??

C&CDean

4/10/2008, 09:14 AM

Vaevictis

4/10/2008, 09:34 AM

No...none. Japanese did those things with leadership approval. You're trying to equate that with something going on now...? Come on. :rolleyes:

So, you don't see any folks in the USA making arguments that dehumanize our enemies in an attempt to justify us treating them inhumanely? If not, you're blind.

I'm not commenting on anything our government is or is not doing right now; I'm commenting on what some folks say we should be doing.

C&CDean

4/10/2008, 09:53 AM

So, you don't see any folks in the USA making arguments that dehumanize our enemies in an attempt to justify us treating them inhumanely? If not, you're blind.

I'm not commenting on anything our government is or is not doing right now; I'm commenting on what some folks say we should be doing.

Dude, if we capture somebody who just beheaded a couple of Americans, or just blew up a IED and dismembered a dozen or so American troops then I say we put a ****ing bullet in their brain.

How is that anything like making them walk 85 miles across the barren ME desert, beating, mutilating, tortuing, stabbing, and gut shooting them.

**** poor analogy. Very **** poor.

Vaevictis

4/10/2008, 09:58 AM

Dude, if we capture somebody who just beheaded a couple of Americans, or just blew up a IED and dismembered a dozen or so American troops then I say we put a ****ing bullet in their brain.

How is that anything like making them walk 85 miles across the barren ME desert, beating, mutilating, tortuing, stabbing, and gut shooting them.

**** poor analogy. Very **** poor.

Putting a bullet in their brain? Fine. No problem. However, I know folks who sit there and talk about how we ought to be doing much, much worse things to our enemies. Stuff that isn't all that different from what the Japanese did to our soldiers. And like the Japanese, they justify it by dehumanizing our enemies.

Stoop Dawg

4/10/2008, 11:16 AM

These are the kinds of things that happen in a Godless society.

Rawanda is over 90% Christian.

You don't get out much, do you?

Stoop Dawg

4/10/2008, 11:19 AM

Very bad here and happened many more times in many areas. Yet people still **** a brick over the U.S. being a monster for dropping the atom bombs. Stupid ****ing liberals.

I'm guessing that some of our resident military folk can explain the difference between killing soldiers and killing civilians.

Just because torturing soldiers is wrong doesn't make killing civilians right. Dropping the first bomb is somewhat defensible (although dropping it on an unpopulated area would have been better). The second, not so much.

JohnnyMack

4/10/2008, 11:25 AM

War is hell.

True dat man, true dat.

Okla-homey

4/10/2008, 02:18 PM

IMHO, the philosophy that infected Imperial Japan was bushido, not the religion. It was bushido that taught anyone who surrenders is already morally dead and therefore not worthy of being treated as a human being. It is also why the US, (under the plenary power exerted by US proconsul Douglas MacArthur) insured the philosophy was outlawed in post-war Japan.

Think about that folks. Obligatory thought-control. Just like our criminalizing fascisim in Europe. And it worked! Can you imagine the uproar if we tried to dictate to Afghan and Iraq that henceforth, the practice of militant Islam was officially a crime? Perhaps that's one of the reasons things have gone the way they've gone since we moved in to those two places. Or maybe not. Just food for thought.

BTW, Nagasaki had the largest Christian Church in Japan in 1945.

just sayin'

Okla-homey

4/10/2008, 02:28 PM

see below.

I'm guessing that some of our resident military folk can explain the difference between killing soldiers and killing civilians.

Civilians make it logistically possible for a nation to wage war. Thus, they are valid strategic targets. They are not, however, valid targets for tactical forces. Perhaps an absurd distinction to one who has not studied the law of armed conflict, but there it is. Oh, and before you ask, if Al-Q had officially and diplomatically put the US on notice it had formally declared war on the US, that whole 9/11 thing would have been legit. It's the sucker punch sneak attack thingy that is illegal.

Just because torturing soldiers is wrong doesn't make killing civilians right. Dropping the first bomb is somewhat defensible (although dropping it on an unpopulated area would have been better). The second, not so much.

Drop bomb number one. Enemy no quit. Therefore, drop bomb two. Enemy quit. It's really that simple actually. That, and the fact we were'nt sure bomb number one would work, thus we didn't want to set up some big demonstration over an unpopulated area only to have it go "poof." Oh yeah, we only had two bombs ready. If they hadn't thrown in the towel, it would have been months before we would have had another ready to vaporize another target.

Vaevictis

4/10/2008, 02:45 PM

IMHO, the philosophy that infected Imperial Japan was bushido, not the religion. It was bushido that taught anyone who surrenders is already morally dead and therefore not worthy of being treated as a human being.

I would agree with you. Bushido was Japan's feudal code, and Japan had only just started emerging from feudalism subsequent to Adm. Perry's arrival. IOW, the folks who were in charge remembered what it was like to be samurai because they knew actual samurai. Many of them likely had parents who were part of that system, almost all of them had grandparents who were.

And if you think that the Bushido code is dead because we outlawed it, I'd say you're wrong. Consider that duty and honor are of the utmost importance in Bushido. It is dishonor of the highest order -- demanding suicide -- to surrender. It is also dishonor of the highest order -- again, demanding suicide -- to refuse an order from your liege.

Now consider that the Emperor -- liege of the highest order -- required you to not only lay down arms, but to also refrain from suicide! The combination of orders delivered by Hirohito cut out the heart of the Bushido code, not any law we passed and enforced. He made it utterly impossible to follow.

Oh, and before you ask, if Al-Q had officially and diplomatically put the US on notice it had formally declared war on the US, that whole 9/11 thing would have been legit.

Al-Qaeda, as a non-state entity can't diplomatically put the US on notice though, yes?

Okla-homey

4/10/2008, 02:47 PM

Al-Qaeda, as a non-state entity can't diplomatically put the US on notice though, yes?

well they could have run a legal notice in the paper or something.

Vaevictis

4/10/2008, 02:51 PM

You mean like this?

On that basis, and in compliance with God's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims:

The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim.

(...)

We -- with God's help -- call on every Muslim who believes in God and wishes to be rewarded to comply with God's order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan's U.S. troops and the devil's supporters allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they may learn a lesson.

Signed 1998 by Bin Laden, al-Zawahiri, and others.

Frozen Sooner

4/10/2008, 03:10 PM

Homey, near as I remember, direct attacks against civilians are in opposition to the concept of jus in bello as promulgated by Augustine under the concepts of both distinction and military necessity. However, that line blurs in the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings-both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were military targets in that both were industrial centers that were devoted to production of war materiel. Hiroshima in particular was used as an extremely large supply depot.

SoonerBOI

4/10/2008, 03:24 PM

My grandpa was killed in the Bataan Death March. He was a young Lieutenant from the Academy. The Japanese didn't want to waste their bullets, so they bayoneted him and the other POWs. He survived the march with serious injuries. Three days later he was executed together with his brother. His body was never recovered...

Stoop Dawg

4/10/2008, 04:51 PM

Drop bomb number one. Enemy no quit. Therefore, drop bomb two. Enemy quit. It's really that simple actually. That, and the fact we were'nt sure bomb number one would work, thus we didn't want to set up some big demonstration over an unpopulated area only to have it go "poof." Oh yeah, we only had two bombs ready. If they hadn't thrown in the towel, it would have been months before we would have had another ready to vaporize another target.

I'm insulted that you think I may actually be stupid enough to buy that.

Nagasaki was bombed 3 days after Hiroshima. 3 DAYS!! Japan was considering conditions for surrender. It took 6 days for Japan to surrender after the second bomb.

Don't want to drop it over an unpopulated area because it might not work? What if it didn't work when dropped on Hiroshima? What would have been the difference? Other than the obvious difference, I mean - that this "God fearing" country has more respect for human life than our enemy.

Months before we had another bomb? You need to get started editing on Wikipedia because they evidently have it all wrong.

The United States expected to have another atomic bomb ready for use in the third week of August, with three more in September and a further three in October.[46] On August 10, Major General Leslie Groves, military director of the Manhattan Project, sent a memorandum to General of the Army George Marshall, Chief of Staff of the United States Army, in which he wrote that "the next bomb . . should be ready for delivery on the first suitable weather after 17 or 18 August."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

Stoop Dawg

4/10/2008, 05:00 PM

No...none. Japanese did those things with leadership approval. You're trying to equate that with something going on now...? Come on. :rolleyes:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080411/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/interrogation_tactics

I know, I know, "Why do I hate America?" I don't, I love America. I wouldn't live anywhere else. But some of you need to open your freakin eyes to the things this country does wrong. America isn't perfect. Far from it.

olevetonahill

4/10/2008, 08:59 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080411/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/interrogation_tactics

I know, I know, "Why do I hate America?" I don't, I love America. I wouldn't live anywhere else. But some of you need to open your freakin eyes to the things this country does wrong. America isn't perfect. Far from it.

I nevar said we were Perfect
But I will say we closer than them ! G**ks :rolleyes:

soonerboomer93

4/10/2008, 09:12 PM

I'm insulted that you think I may actually be stupid enough to buy that.

Nagasaki was bombed 3 days after Hiroshima. 3 DAYS!! Japan was considering conditions for surrender. It took 6 days for Japan to surrender after the second bomb.

Don't want to drop it over an unpopulated area because it might not work? What if it didn't work when dropped on Hiroshima? What would have been the difference? Other than the obvious difference, I mean - that this "God fearing" country has more respect for human life than our enemy.

Months before we had another bomb? You need to get started editing on Wikipedia because they evidently have it all wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

It's been a while since I've read it, and it's off in Colorado, but as I recall according to Oppenheimers book, it was atleast 2 months before they expected to have additional bombs ready. Estimated causualties for an invasion of Japan was atleast 1 million. That's just the initial landing.

There was a hurry to end the war before the soviets go involved in the Pacific though. That's no doubt.

oh, and there's reasons wikipedia isn't considered a credible source for academic purposes, just an fyi

SicEmBaylor

4/10/2008, 09:12 PM

Want to tell any of us which President commissioned the building of the atomic bomb, which one dropped it, and what party they belonged to?

They don't make Democrats like they use to Mike.

olevetonahill

4/10/2008, 09:26 PM

It's been a while since I've read it, and it's off in Colorado, but as I recall according to Oppenheimers book, it was atleast 2 months before they expected to have additional bombs ready. Estimated causualties for an invasion of Japan was atleast 1 million. That's just the initial landing.

There was a hurry to end the war before the soviets go involved in the Pacific though. That's no doubt.

oh, and there's reasons wikipedia isn't considered a credible source for academic purposes, just an fyi

I may get another Post deleted
But My Daddy was fightin them Japs in the PTO
He was preparing for the Jap invasion .
Sorry I had to go fight the Gooks My self . Glad My Daddy Missed that Invasion !

olevetonahill

4/10/2008, 09:34 PM

Any one that can Stand up and Defend the Gooks for this Crap . Needs to turn In their American Card !
Just ****in sayin !:mad:

Vaevictis

4/10/2008, 09:35 PM

Did anyone actually defend what the Japanese did? If so, I must have missed it.

Okla-homey

4/10/2008, 11:11 PM

I'm insulted that you think I may actually be stupid enough to buy that.

Nagasaki was bombed 3 days after Hiroshima. 3 DAYS!! Japan was considering conditions for surrender. It took 6 days for Japan to surrender after the second bomb.

Don't want to drop it over an unpopulated area because it might not work? What if it didn't work when dropped on Hiroshima? What would have been the difference? Other than the obvious difference, I mean - that this "God fearing" country has more respect for human life than our enemy.

Months before we had another bomb? You need to get started editing on Wikipedia because they evidently have it all wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

I'm insulted that you think I'm stupid enough to consider Wiki an authoritative source. Its the "scholarly" equivalent of writing on a bathroom wall. Anonymous and unaccountable.

SoonerTerry

4/11/2008, 12:21 AM

In other words, God. Less. :)

God Lite:D

Vaevictis

4/11/2008, 01:43 AM

I'm insulted that you think I'm stupid enough to consider Wiki an authoritative source. Its the "scholarly" equivalent of writing on a bathroom wall. Anonymous and unaccountable.

Well, in this particular case, the wiki article does cite its source, which you can evaluate on your own:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/72.pdf

TUSooner

4/11/2008, 01:58 AM

I'm insulted that you think I'm stupid enough to consider Wiki an authoritative source. Its the "scholarly" equivalent of writing on a bathroom wall. Anonymous and unaccountable.

Whoa there, learned counsellor.
Wikipedia gets a bad rap because of a couple of publicized frauds - which were detected btw. So it's not unaccountable. Most Wiki stuff is supported by other authorities, and if it's not, the lack of support is noted.
I cross-check anything I see there, as I do other sources. But don't ****can Wikipedia out-of-hand based on the latest buzz and cant of the smarter-than-thou set. At least as far as the vast spectrum of internet sources go, Wikipedia is pretty dad gum reliable. I find it's a good place to start, if not to finish. Take it from a guy who has sought, found, and vetted a whole heckuva lot of random knowledge over the past 6 years or so.
End of digression.

Harry Beanbag

4/11/2008, 02:03 AM

I may get another Post deleted
But My Daddy was fightin them Japs in the PTO
He was preparing for the Jap invasion .
Sorry I had to go fight the Gooks My self . Glad My Daddy Missed that Invasion !

Yep. My grandpa was sitting in Germany waiting on orders to invade mainland Japan. Millions upon millions of people should be grateful to Harry S Truman for having the balls to make the correct decision.

I've heard, not positive if it's true or not, that all the Purple Heart medals given out during Korea and most of Vietnam were actually made for the initial invasion of Japan...

TUSooner

4/11/2008, 02:12 AM

Anybody who second guesses dropping the bomb is engaged in the great fallacy of our age: reading history backwards. Post-hoc rationalizations are crapola.
Anybody who had lived through the war, and especially anybody who wanted to live through the rest of it, was DELIGHTED that we had the bomb and used it to knock all the "****-you" right out of the Japs.
So you say war is hell? The bomb was tragic and had terrifying consequences? Think we ought to make sure no other ones are ever used? Sure. But letting the Japs roll on would have been a worse hell. Before you pronounce judgment, read your history from then to now, not the other way around.

85Sooner

4/11/2008, 02:18 AM

and We should close Gitmo for all of our atrocities Blagh Blagh blagh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TUSooner

4/11/2008, 02:29 AM

***
I've heard, not positive if it's true or not, that all the Purple Heart medals given out during Korea and most of Vietnam were actually made for the initial invasion of Japan...

Better check Wikipedia! :O

sooner_born_1960

4/11/2008, 02:36 AM

Tens of thousands of these medals are stored in various locations around the U.S., in large part because the Pentagon ordered the production of 500,000 Purple Hearts in 1945, anticipating an invasion of Japan that later became unnecessary.
This senator implies as much.

http://cornyn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ForPress.TexasTimesWeeklyColu mn&ContentRecord_id=d28d981c-802a-23ad-493f-0240f483bf76&Region_id=&Issue_id=

TUSooner

4/11/2008, 02:48 AM

In 2000, for the first time in years, the government ordered a new supply of Purple Hearts. The old supply, manufactured in anticipation of the invasion of the home islands of Japan during World War II, had begun to run low.~~http://hnn.us/articles/1801.html (cited in Wikipedia)

Type IV (1970's-current): bronze gilt, plastic heart, unnumbered, crimp brooch. No Purple Hearts were manufactured for the Army for 25 years after WWII. In anticipation of the invasion of Japan, approximately 500,000 Purple Hearts were manufactured. This stock lasted through the Vietnam War. ~~ http://www.purplehearts.net/id6.html

Of course, this could be mere repetition of an urban legend type thing. But I have not seen any refutation.

Okla-homey

4/11/2008, 02:53 AM

Whoa there, learned counsellor.
Wikipedia gets a bad rap because of a couple of publicized frauds - which were detected btw. So it's not unaccountable. Most Wiki stuff is supported by other authorities, and if it's not, the lack of support is noted.
I cross-check anything I see there, as I do other sources. But don't ****can Wikipedia out-of-hand based on the latest buzz and cant of the smarter-than-thou set. At least as far as the vast spectrum of internet sources go, Wikipedia is pretty dad gum reliable. I find it's a good place to start, if not to finish. Take it from a guy who has sought, found, and vetted a whole heckuva lot of random knowledge over the past 6 years or so.
End of digression.

All I know for sure is, if someone cited to Wiki in a law review article or pleading he or she would be politely instructed to "try again moose breath.";)

Harry Beanbag

4/11/2008, 02:57 AM

Of course, this could be mere repetition of an urban legend type thing. But I have not seen any refutation.

Just call me Harrypedia. :)

C&CDean

4/11/2008, 02:59 AM

Rawanda is over 90% Christian.

You don't get out much, do you?

I'm sure you have a point, but I'm also sure it's a scatterbrained one.

TUSooner

4/11/2008, 03:11 AM

All I know for sure is, if someone cited to Wiki in a law review article or pleading he or she would be politely instructed to "try again moose breath.";)

OH YEAH! Well Wikipedia probably has enough sense not to cite any student law review articles . . . like this piece of lamentable fluff: Minnesota v. Dickerson: Inviting the Policeman’s Sensitive Touch, 39 Loy. L. Rev. 685 (1993)

C&CDean

4/11/2008, 03:13 AM

Putting a bullet in their brain? Fine. No problem. However, I know folks who sit there and talk about how we ought to be doing much, much worse things to our enemies. Stuff that isn't all that different from what the Japanese did to our soldiers. And like the Japanese, they justify it by dehumanizing our enemies.

Oh, so you know people who sit around and talk about beheading muslims with a butter knife? You know people who sit around talking about hammering bamboo under their fingernails? You know people who sit around talking about gut-stabbing them and leaving them to die a slow, agonizing death? You really need to find new friends I'm thinking.

And on the "dehumanizing" thing: anybody who can cold bloodily torture, maim, behead, blow up, etc., etc., etc. other innocent human beings, encourage others to do the same, and do it with a ****ing smile on their face and a glow in their heart doesn't need any dehumanizing. They're ****ing animals who deserve nothing but immediate euthanizing.

Don't compare our troops - or the average American citizen - to those Godless POS ever again.

TexasLidig8r

4/11/2008, 04:00 AM

I may be a parochial SOB on this issue, but.. if dropping the bombs saved even one American life, then... bombs away. And, quite frankly, no one can seriously argue that dropping the bombs saved thousands, and thousands, of American lives.

WWII taught us that Japan had a supply of men who followed the will of their leaders blindly with no regard for their own life.. The Divine Wind. Do we naively believe that Japan would fight almost to the last man against the invading horde of gaijin? It would have been bloody.

Further, the Potsdam Proclamation in July 1945 demanding an unconditional surrender with no assurances that the Japanese Emperor would remain in place, made it less likely that Japan would seek an honorable conclusion to the war. For them to lose face if not faced with even greater consequences would have been unthinkable.

If we had the means to quickly end the war, and as a result save thousands of life, but not the will, what would that have said about our leadership? Try to explain that to the thousands of women, children, parents who would have gone through the horror and grief after receiving the news of the death of their loved one.

Another consideration not yet discussed was the impending declaration of war by Russian against Japan. In fact, the Russians did declare war, but it was on August 8, 1945. Had the bombs not been used, would Japan have become in essence, the Eastern block in the Pacific? Tensions between the US and Russia in 1945 were becoming more pronounced and escalating. The Japan of post WWII would have been significantly different had the bombs not been used, had Russia become involved and fought with us to determine the hegomeny of Japan post WWII.

JohnnyMack

4/11/2008, 04:06 AM

Further, the Potsdam Proclamation in July 1945 demanding an unconditional surrender with no assurances that the Japanese Emperor would remain in place, made it less likely that Japan would seek an honorable conclusion to the war. For them to lose face if not faced with even greater consequences would have been unthinkable.

Ummm....Hirohito wanted to surrender and was almost assassinated by his own military for doing so.

Beef

4/11/2008, 04:20 AM

Sounds like we did the Japanese a huge favor by saving millions of their lives by dropping the bombs.

Tulsa_Fireman

4/11/2008, 04:22 AM

Sounds like we did the Japanese a huge favor by saving millions of their lives by dropping the bombs.

Boys, I think we have a winner.

Vaevictis

4/11/2008, 01:04 PM

Don't compare our troops - or the average American citizen - to those Godless POS ever again.

"Some folks" doesn't mean our troops. If I had meant our troops, I damned well would have said it. Have you ever seen me *****-foot around when I thought our troops were doing something that they shouldn't be doing? Or our government? Or hell, just about anyone?

Seriously, back away from the innertubes and chill out for awhile. You're reading things that aren't there.

Vaevictis

4/11/2008, 01:06 PM

Sounds like we did the Japanese a huge favor by saving millions of their lives by dropping the bombs.

Did just about everyone a huge favor. They were training kids in guerilla tactics.

Atom bombs are nasty things, let's not pretend otherwise. But the alternative in this case was several orders of magnitude nastier. And let's not forget that we had already done much nastier things -- firebombing of Tokyo comes to mind.

The bombs make the news because of what they are, not because they were so much more awful than anything that came before or would have come after.

Tulsa_Fireman

4/11/2008, 01:19 PM

And let's not forget that we had already done much nastier things -- firebombing of Tokyo comes to mind.

Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

Or corrected for applicability, those that pick fights from paper houses should not be surprised to get their asses firebombed.

Is that even the same thing? Wait... I dunno.

C&CDean

4/11/2008, 01:53 PM

"Some folks" doesn't mean our troops. If I had meant our troops, I damned well would have said it. Have you ever seen me *****-foot around when I thought our troops were doing something that they shouldn't be doing? Or our government? Or hell, just about anyone?

Seriously, back away from the innertubes and chill out for awhile. You're reading things that aren't there.

OK, then tell me, who are these "some folks" you're talking about then?

Personally, I haven't heard anyone (other than maybe a drunk dumbass in a bar or something) go "we oughta go behead 20 of them mother****ers and cut off their peckers and stick em' in their neck."

The only thing I've heard regularly is "turn the ME into a sheet of glass." But I don't really see how that is anything like the whole "dehumanizing our enemies" crock of horse**** you're selling.

Stoop Dawg

4/11/2008, 02:23 PM

I'm insulted that you think I'm stupid enough to consider Wiki an authoritative source. Its the "scholarly" equivalent of writing on a bathroom wall. Anonymous and unaccountable.

Well, right now I've got "info posted by an anonymous source on an internet message board" vs "Wikipedia".

Until you find the time to post a better source, I'm taking Wikipedia.

Stoop Dawg

4/11/2008, 02:28 PM

yermom

4/11/2008, 02:29 PM

OK, then tell me, who are these "some folks" you're talking about then?

Personally, I haven't heard anyone (other than maybe a drunk dumbass in a bar or something) go "we oughta go behead 20 of them mother****ers and cut off their peckers and stick em' in their neck."

The only thing I've heard regularly is "turn the ME into a sheet of glass." But I don't really see how that is anything like the whole "dehumanizing our enemies" crock of horse**** you're selling.

how about the "they are animals and deserve torture" crowd that resides on the board?

i'm sure i could find links if you'd like.

the bottom line is we are the good guys, how can you condemn the Japanese when we torture and kill people that are POWs or that we think might have maybe been a terrorist

Stoop Dawg

4/11/2008, 02:31 PM

OK, then tell me, who are these "some folks" you're talking about then?

Personally, I haven't heard anyone (other than maybe a drunk dumbass in a bar or something) go "we oughta go behead 20 of them mother****ers and cut off their peckers and stick em' in their neck."

The only thing I've heard regularly is "turn the ME into a sheet of glass." But I don't really see how that is anything like the whole "dehumanizing our enemies" crock of horse**** you're selling.

You even posted in this thread.

http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=110762

that our new policy is to respond in kind to whatever the enemy does, if they behead a POW, we behead 10 pows

C&CDean

4/11/2008, 02:32 PM

Lots of posts about dropping the bomb saving lives (both Japanese and American). I agree that fewer people were likely killed by the atomic bombs than would have been by continued war.

However......

Those killed by continued war would have been predominantly military, not civilian.

None of you have taken into account the possibility that the bomb could have been dropped over an unpopulated area as a demonstration of our power. If there was still no surrender, then consider dropping on a populated area.

The first bomb got them talking about surrender. It's a bit of a shame that we thought it was necessary to drop the second one so quickly.
I don't neccessarily disagree with this, but the atrocities commited by the Japanese in China, the Phillipines, Okinawa, etc. are well documented. I'm not sure they would have been willing to listen to anything - except the very real possibility of their entire country getting vaporized city-by-city.

Vaevictis

4/11/2008, 02:32 PM

OK, then tell me, who are these "some folks" you're talking about then?

Well, heck, if you want specifics:

"You see, the big flaw in your deal here is that they don't sign up. They're born into it. They draw the hate from their mothers' placenta in the womb, they suck the hate from their mothers' tits, and then they're spoon fed the hate from their fathers' knees. By the time they're old enough to breed themselves, their brains are crispy little nuggets capable of knowing only one thing: hate. They hate the infidels. Period. End of discussion. Lights out. Stick a mother ****ing fork in it. Over. And. Out."

C&CDean

4/11/2008, 02:35 PM

Well, heck, if you want specifics:

"You see, the big flaw in your deal here is that they don't sign up. They're born into it. They draw the hate from their mothers' placenta in the womb, they suck the hate from their mothers' tits, and then they're spoon fed the hate from their fathers' knees. By the time they're old enough to breed themselves, their brains are crispy little nuggets capable of knowing only one thing: hate. They hate the infidels. Period. End of discussion. Lights out. Stick a mother ****ing fork in it. Over. And. Out."

And this post by me says "let's go torture them" to you? You suck at reading.

Vaevictis

4/11/2008, 02:37 PM

And this post by me says "let's go torture them" to you? You suck at reading.

No, it doesn't. But I do see parallels. When the really nasty stuff happens, it's almost always preceded by or accompanied by **** like that.

I've heard rants that are almost the same as that out of the mouths of KKK members justifying their behavior towards blacks.

C&CDean

4/11/2008, 02:41 PM

No, it doesn't. But I do see parallels. When the really nasty stuff happens, it's almost always preceded by or accompanied by **** like that.

I've heard rants that are almost the same as that out of the mouths of KKK members justifying their behavior towards blacks.

Meh. I've heard rants like yours out of the mouth of Cindy Sheehan justifying her hatred towards George Bush. Meh again.

And you've never heard a KKK rant about anything in your life. You've read about it or seen it on TV.

Besides, what I posted there isn't "****." It isn't opinion. It's fact. Look it up.

JohnnyMack

4/11/2008, 02:41 PM

Well, heck, if you want specifics:

"You see, the big flaw in your deal here is that they don't sign up. They're born into it. They draw the hate from their mothers' placenta in the womb, they suck the hate from their mothers' tits, and then they're spoon fed the hate from their fathers' knees. By the time they're old enough to breed themselves, their brains are crispy little nuggets capable of knowing only one thing: hate. They hate the infidels. Period. End of discussion. Lights out. Stick a mother ****ing fork in it. Over. And. Out."

We discussed this already. He was talking about Aggie Lite.

Vaevictis

4/11/2008, 02:47 PM

And you've never heard a KKK rant about anything in your life. You've read about it or seen it on TV.

You don't know **** about what I've heard. Try again.

yermom

4/11/2008, 02:50 PM

Lots of posts about dropping the bomb saving lives (both Japanese and American). I agree that fewer people were likely killed by the atomic bombs than would have been by continued war.

However......

Those killed by continued war would have been predominantly military, not civilian.

None of you have taken into account the possibility that the bomb could have been dropped over an unpopulated area as a demonstration of our power. If there was still no surrender, then consider dropping on a populated area.

The first bomb got them talking about surrender. It's a bit of a shame that we thought it was necessary to drop the second one so quickly.

what if Al Qaeda had nukes, and said, "we are going to bomb Omaha if you don't pull out of Iraq"? what if they had bombed Lincoln first?

how is that really different? the only real difference is who you think is right in the war.

the truth of the matter is that we would not do the same thing now, and we don't want anyone else to either. i'm not saying anyone should be condemned for it back then, but to ignore what it really was is kinda dishonest.

Vaevictis

4/11/2008, 02:50 PM

http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=79401

Homey sums it up:

Almost a third of us say any form of torturing jihaadis is fine because they forfeited their human card when they signed-up for jihaadism.

Tulsa_Fireman

4/11/2008, 03:13 PM

Those killed by continued war would have been predominantly military, not civilian.

Including our own. Sorry, but I'm not trading the lives of American soldiers for Japanese regulars, Japanese civilians, or anybody. The bomb was a sound move. Period.

None of you have taken into account the possibility that the bomb could have been dropped over an unpopulated area as a demonstration of our power. If there was still no surrender, then consider dropping on a populated area.

The first bomb got them talking about surrender. It's a bit of a shame that we thought it was necessary to drop the second one so quickly.

We were at WAR. Not against the Yamato, not against a squadron of Zeros, not against some ol' boy in a uniform, but at war with Japan as a nation. Surrender was to be unconditional. Surrender was to be under the grind of the American bootheel. Surrender was to be purchased through the loss of the very thing that enabled Japan to become what she was.

Her people.

This whole 'omg civilians' argument is crap. Good guy or bad guy, war isn't clean, surgical flicks of a scalpel aimed at just the parts that will neuter offensive capability. War is dirty, and as such, should include the targets that will not only disable stratecically and tactically, but morally, the ability of an opposing nation to fight. And that option, the leveling of a city, should be the ultimate trump card in a nation's deck.

The bullet that flies and the sword that cuts knows no law or boundary. And when bullets fly and swords flash, it is life, military or no, that suffers. It is an ugly, abhorrent beast. Yet when a people rise up and accept the mantle of war, when the representatives of a nation strike forth in service to their people and decide to shed blood, it is that nation, not pieces of or representatives of, but the people of that nation that can, will, and should pay the price. Win OR lose.

Reverse the role. Had the U.S. been on the dying end of the battle for the Pacific, I can guarantee the United States would have fought to the last man, civilian and soldier alike. Were it to happen again, I would like to think we'd still be capable of such a feat. How many thousands of enemy lives would be taken by such acts of what we'd call patriotism? How many "civilian" lives would be lost as well?

It ain't a higher standard. It ain't a matter of good guys and bad guys. It's a matter of death, and who deals it most efficiently.

We just happened to be on the positive side of that equation.

Beef

4/11/2008, 03:14 PM

Vaevictis

4/11/2008, 03:16 PM

Those killed by continued war would have been predominantly military, not civilian.

Just for what it's worth: You're wrong. Very wrong. They were training women and even children for guerilla war once we landed.

It would have been a bloodbath for everyone involved. They were dead serious about defending to the last. And if Hirohito hadn't taken the unprecedented step of personally addressing Japan over the radio with what he wanted done, they would have.

Stoop Dawg

4/11/2008, 03:46 PM

Just for what it's worth: You're wrong. Very wrong. They were training women and even children for guerilla war once we landed.

Well, that would make the combatants then, wouldn't it?

It would have been a bloodbath for everyone involved. They were dead serious about defending to the last. And if Hirohito hadn't taken the unprecedented step of personally addressing Japan over the radio with what he wanted done, they would have.

They were dead serious about defending to the last, until their leader folded. What if a bomb over an unpopulated area had made their leader fold? Even if it didn't, it would have made dropping a bomb on a populated area "necessary". Fact is, we didn't even try to scare them with a demonstration, we just dropped two in a row on densly populated cities. That's what I'm questioning.

Stoop Dawg

4/11/2008, 03:50 PM

blah, blah, blah

All's fair in love and war, eh?

Why then does our military spend billions of dollars creating hi-tech weapons designed to avoid civilian casualties? Evidently, they disagree with you. As do I.

Stoop Dawg

4/11/2008, 03:57 PM

All I know for sure is, if someone cited to Wiki in a law review article or pleading he or she would be politely instructed to "try again moose breath.";)

It is apparently sufficient for message board debate, though.

Moreover, I'll never refer to MLK as "doctor" because its a fact he plagiarized substantial portions of his doctoral thesis. Thousands of words in paragraph-sized chunks, were taken from the thesis of a fellow student, Jack Boozer, an ex-army chaplain who returned to Boston University after the war to get his degree.

Wiki does a pretty good job of laying it out.

Frozen Sooner

4/11/2008, 03:58 PM

Stoop Dawg, I could be completely wrong on this, but I think we actually offered to show them film of the tests and they either refused to review them or said we'd never nut up to actually use them.

Stoop Dawg

4/11/2008, 04:07 PM

Stoop Dawg, I could be completely wrong on this, but I think we actually offered to show them film of the tests and they either refused to review them or said we'd never nut up to actually use them.

If true, that goes a long way toward justifying the first bomb being dropped on Hiroshima. I still wonder if actually seeing the bomb explode on their own country (in a less populated area) would have changed their mind. I've never seen an atom bomb explode, but I imagine it's much more impressive in person than in film (most things are, super-models excluded). I also still think that 3 days was not enough time for them to evaluate the damage and consider the consequences before another was dropped.

I don't know these things for fact, and I'm not condemning the actions of our military. It's entirely possible that they had knowledge which I will never posses. All I'm saying is that given the information that I have, I believe that more could have been done to try to avoid such large civilian casualties.

sooneron

4/11/2008, 04:07 PM

It's a known fact in the preparation for war, you have to de-humanize your enemy to a certain extent, otherwise, you won't be able to follow through with the commitment to war.

JohnnyMack

4/11/2008, 04:08 PM

Just for what it's worth: You're wrong. Very wrong. They were training women and even children for guerilla war once we landed.

It would have been a bloodbath for everyone involved. They were dead serious about defending to the last. And if Hirohito hadn't taken the unprecedented step of personally addressing Japan over the radio with what he wanted done, they would have.

That's what we tell ourselves.

I imagine if the U.S. were facing an invasion force that its people would rise up and help....kinda like...oh I dunno......maybe:

http://ephemerist.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/wolverines.jpg

sooneron

4/11/2008, 04:09 PM

I've never seen an atom bomb explode, but I imagine it's much more impressive in person than in film (most things are, super-models excluded).

Disagree, I saw Elle M. out one time and she smiled at me, I nearly fell to the floor like discarded spaghetti.

JohnnyMack

4/11/2008, 04:09 PM

And that, mother****ers, is how you work Red Dawn into a thread.

Didn't see it coming, did you?

That's. Cause. I. Rule.

yermom

4/11/2008, 04:10 PM

Well, that would make the combatants then, wouldn't it?

They were dead serious about defending to the last, until their leader folded. What if a bomb over an unpopulated area had made their leader fold? Even if it didn't, it would have made dropping a bomb on a populated area "necessary". Fact is, we didn't even try to scare them with a demonstration, we just dropped two in a row on densly populated cities. That's what I'm questioning.

part of the problem is that back then information didn't travel as fast. they didn't have CNN broadcasting the whole thing like we would today. it's not like everyone in the country knew what had happened before the they dropped the 2nd bomb

C&CDean

4/11/2008, 04:12 PM

And that, mother****ers, is how you work Red Dawn into a thread.

Didn't see it coming, did you?

That's. Cause. I. Rule.

And here I was thinking Rambo.

BigRedJed

4/11/2008, 04:13 PM

Rubbing one out, were you?

JohnnyMack

4/11/2008, 04:19 PM

Look all I know is that if the U.S. of A. ever did get invaded. Every hillbilly between North California and South Alabama would be humming "A Country Boy Can Survive" while he sharpened up his knife and loaded his shotgun. And I don't think said hillbilly would show much restraint when it came to dealing with the random, imaginary invasion force either.

yermom

4/11/2008, 04:43 PM

as opposed to the pansies in Europe that barely are able to have kitchen knives in their house...

Frozen Sooner

4/11/2008, 04:46 PM

Yeah, those Frenchies didn't resist at ALL once the government folded.

soonerscuba

4/11/2008, 05:05 PM

Yeah, those Frenchies didn't resist at ALL once the government folded.
Prepare for the onslaught of revisionists that will swear that all of France embraced the Nazis and welcomed them with candy and flowers.

Stoop Dawg

4/11/2008, 05:21 PM

I heard they spat at the Allies who "liberated" them.

Edit: better put one of these on there, just in case ;)

ric311

4/11/2008, 06:19 PM

as opposed to the friendly Germans at the time

By almost every account, the Germans conducted themselves with honor when it came to dealing with enemy combatants. If you were Jewish, gay or a gypsy, well then the story is a lot different. But enemy combatants were treated with respect. Of course, on the field of battle, the Germans were tough as nails.

Frozen Sooner

4/11/2008, 06:29 PM

And of course the whole "Godless" argument ignores the treatment of Union soldiers at Andersonville-which our very own Homey has written about.

Tulsa_Fireman

4/11/2008, 06:31 PM

All's fair in love and war, eh?

Why then does our military spend billions of dollars creating hi-tech weapons designed to avoid civilian casualties? Evidently, they disagree with you. As do I.

Because the increasingly accurate nature of said weapons allows for increasingly accurate strikes on strategic and tactical targets, eliminating much of the need of hundreds of bombers supported by hundreds of fighters in the skies to essentially lay waste to thousands of acres in an effort to try and hit the tens of acres of target you're trying to hit.

If you're saying precision guided ordnance is a multi-billion dollar endeavor of the Department of Defense based solely on a means to minimize collateral damage, I'll call you silly.

Okla-homey

4/11/2008, 07:25 PM

Because the increasingly accurate nature of said weapons allows for increasingly accurate strikes on strategic and tactical targets, eliminating much of the need of hundreds of bombers supported by hundreds of fighters in the skies to essentially lay waste to thousands of acres in an effort to try and hit the tens of acres of target you're trying to hit.

If you're saying precision guided ordnance is a multi-billion dollar endeavor of the Department of Defense based solely on a means to minimize collateral damage, I'll call you silly.

its about probability of kill. Expressed at pK. Weapons with a circular error of probability (CEP) of three meters or less have a pK very close to 1. Thus, more accurate weapons equals efficiency. And given the mission of the United States Air Force is to kill people and break things, pK's as close to 1 as possible are good things.

Harry Beanbag

4/11/2008, 08:18 PM

By almost every account, the Germans conducted themselves with honor when it came to dealing with enemy combatants. If you were Jewish, gay or a gypsy, well then the story is a lot different. But enemy combatants were treated with respect. Of course, on the field of battle, the Germans were tough as nails.

You don't know much about the Eastern Front do you.

Vaevictis

4/11/2008, 08:43 PM

Well, that would make the combatants then, wouldn't it?

Yep. Part of the problem with Japan was that attempting to distinguish between combatant and civilian in Japan would have been pointless.

They were arming 12 year olds with spears and training the smarter kids how to run guerilla style campaigns. At that point, can you really say that there's a civilian populace?

They were dead serious about defending to the last, until their leader folded. What if a bomb over an unpopulated area had made their leader fold? Even if it didn't, it would have made dropping a bomb on a populated area "necessary". Fact is, we didn't even try to scare them with a demonstration, we just dropped two in a row on densly populated cities. That's what I'm questioning.

I believe that Hirohito's actions were a complete surprise to our military. That he was both willing and able is quite surprising. By all rights, his own military should have assassinated him before he got in front of the microphone -- and they certainly tried.

I think a big part of the issue is that Hirohito was not our intended target, as far as intimidation was concerned. I think we were aiming at the military leadership itself, and breaking their will really would have required nothing less than what we did. Probably more, IMO.

Harry Beanbag

4/11/2008, 10:29 PM

Another consideration not yet discussed was the impending declaration of war by Russian against Japan. In fact, the Russians did declare war, but it was on August 8, 1945. Had the bombs not been used, would Japan have become in essence, the Eastern block in the Pacific? Tensions between the US and Russia in 1945 were becoming more pronounced and escalating. The Japan of post WWII would have been significantly different had the bombs not been used, had Russia become involved and fought with us to determine the hegomeny of Japan post WWII.

There is a little known chapter of WWII. The Soviets attacked the Japanese in Manchuria the same day Nagasaki was bombed and systematically obliterated an entire Japanese army within about 3 weeks. Fighting didn't end until early September after the Soviets had taken the Kuril Islands.

Okla-homey

4/12/2008, 07:53 AM

Another perhaps interesting aside to US-Soviet relations in the context of the Soviet's very late declaration of war vs. Imperial Japan involves a class of very technologically advanced submarines.

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/7379/iii4002zm0.jpg
I-400 class Japanese submarine aircraft carrier

The Japanese had designed and built the I-400 class of aircraft carrying submarines. Our Navy got three after the Japnese surrender. These boats were very cool in that they were HUGE had a special watertight hangar bay in which they could store three aircraft and the front of the boat had a launch catapult.

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/8058/ii755pxi400hangarxs8.jpg
Hangar bay of an I-400. It held three warplanes.

The Russians, who had recently become our allies vs. Japan got wise and insisted they were entitled to get one of these very sophisticated submarines in order to study it as we had.

After completing our study, we scuttled all three and essentially said, "oopsie, and sorry Ivan, they all got sunk while we were studying them. No I-400 for you!"

Submarine historians generally accept the notion the I-400 inspired our modern ballistic missile submarine. (a/k/a "boomers")

Jerk

4/12/2008, 08:28 AM

Made in America; Tested in Japan

http://blog.dreamhost.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/atomic-bomb.jpg

Jerk

4/12/2008, 08:41 AM

Prepare for the onslaught of revisionists that will swear that all of France embraced the Nazis and welcomed them with candy and flowers.

Well, there was Vichy France, but I never heard anyone claim that ALL of France were on the side of the Axis. I know they had at least one Foriegn Legion division and part of their Navy fight for the Germs. Paris surely was pro Ally because just about every American soldier got "lucky" the night we liberated the city.

Okla-homey

4/12/2008, 09:54 AM

Paris surely was pro Ally because just about every American soldier got "lucky" the night we liberated the city.

well, in the interest of being fair and balanced, quite a few kraut soldiers got lucky during the nazi occupation of France from 1940-1944 too. Perhaps its simply a matter of the fact French girls are easy and will lay down with whomever is currently large and in charge.;)

Jerk

4/12/2008, 10:00 AM

well, in the interest of being fair and balanced, quite a few kraut soldiers got lucky during the nazi occupation of France from 1940-1944 too. Perhaps its simply a matter of the fact French girls are easy and will lay down with whomever is currently large and in charge.;)

So all it takes is to be the alpha male?

Tulsa_Fireman

4/12/2008, 01:06 PM

its about probability of kill. Expressed at pK. Weapons with a circular error of probability (CEP) of three meters or less have a pK very close to 1. Thus, more accurate weapons equals efficiency. And given the mission of the United States Air Force is to kill people and break things, pK's as close to 1 as possible are good things.

Thanks for the clarification, Homey!

Okla-homey

4/12/2008, 01:14 PM

So all it takes is to be the alpha male?

don't kid yourself my brutha. It's always been that way and will remain so until someone figgers out a way to rewire wimmen's brains. Its kinda Darwinian actually. That female brain hardwiring helps ensure the best man's DNA gets reproduced.

I've a pet theory that the best French are the ones descended from Germans. I know that's the case in Italy. All the quality Italian manufacturing occurs in the north.;)

Ditto animals. That's also why bucks fight. Doe in heat breeds with the winner. Winners DNA gets reproduced. Loser has to be content with humping a knot-hole.

Tulsa_Fireman

4/12/2008, 02:01 PM

Loser has to be content with humping a knot-hole.

A lil' lipstick, some perfume...

Uhh, I mean, uhhh.

How 'bout them Mets, huh?

soonerscuba

4/12/2008, 02:38 PM

Well, there was Vichy France, but I never heard anyone claim that ALL of France were on the side of the Axis. I know they had at least one Foriegn Legion division and part of their Navy fight for the Germs. Paris surely was pro Ally because just about every American soldier got "lucky" the night we liberated the city.
There were Vichy divisions in Syria that presented a real problem for the French Free Forces in that it was thought it could lead to civil war (with FFF Frogs vs. Vichy Frogs), it didn't. The Vichy government was a collection of far-right, xenophobic (incredibly ironic, but I digress), and monarchist peeps that either saw a shield of protection for the historical antiquity of France, or they fully supported Hitler. While I won't deny that there is state responsibility for the Vichy government, it was a minority supported by occupying powers. Furthermore, to downplay the importance of the Resistance in the liberation of France based on current stereotypes is revisionist; the French military sucked, her citizens turned up quite brave, IMO. And as stated, apparently very grateful to our boys for their efforts.

Stoop Dawg

4/12/2008, 05:16 PM

I believe that Hirohito's actions were a complete surprise to our military. That he was both willing and able is quite surprising. By all rights, his own military should have assassinated him before he got in front of the microphone -- and they certainly tried.

I think a big part of the issue is that Hirohito was not our intended target, as far as intimidation was concerned. I think we were aiming at the military leadership itself, and breaking their will really would have required nothing less than what we did. Probably more, IMO.

You make my point well. We evidently didn't know **** about who controlled the country and what it would take to make them surrender. Maybe one bomb would have been enough. Impossible to say now.

Vaevictis

4/13/2008, 02:33 AM

You make my point well. We evidently didn't know **** about who controlled the country and what it would take to make them surrender. Maybe one bomb would have been enough. Impossible to say now.

Obviously, I don't see it that way. Think of all the bad things that can happen every day that they hold off dropping the next bomb. Every day they wait is another day soldiers become ready to fight, materiel rolls off the line, and their best military minds spend trying to come up with a trump card. If the military had no reason to expect surrender, why would they yield the initiative?

I mean, what happens if their intel department cracks our codes in the intervening time frame? Maybe they figure out how, when and where the next bomb is being transported and figure out a way to capture it. See those sub/carrier hybrids Homey posted up above?

olevetonahill

4/13/2008, 05:32 AM

Why dont you 2 just get a room and Have fun .
Ill wager Neither Of ya have ever cut yourself . Let alone another Human !
Debates Fine , But when It comes to the Nut Cuttin Time Give Me MEN .

Stoop Dawg

4/14/2008, 12:22 PM

Why dont you 2 just get a room and Have fun .

Ill wager Neither Of ya have ever cut yourself . Let alone another Human !
Debates Fine , But when It comes to the Nut Cuttin Time Give Me MEN .

Why don't you stay the hell out of threads where thinking is involved? I'll wager you didn't make it much past 2nd grade.

4/14/2008, 01:40 PM

I just hope someone got Jonathon Wainwright a sandwich.

olevetonahill

4/14/2008, 03:32 PM

Why don't you stay the hell out of threads where thinking is involved? I'll wager you didn't make it much past 2nd grade.

Only Idiot lefties could turn a thread about the Barbaric way the Japs treated Our guys, Into Crying over the poor Bombed Jap civilians
And what does My educational level have to do with any thing ?
Ill have you Know I made it all the way to 3 rd grade 1:P

Stoop Dawg

4/14/2008, 03:44 PM

And what does My educational level have to do with any thing ?

Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

Here are some crayons. Have fun.

TexasLidig8r

4/14/2008, 03:53 PM

olevetonahill

4/14/2008, 03:57 PM

Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

Here are some crayons. Have fun.

Why thank you . Your too good to me .

C&CDean

4/14/2008, 04:37 PM

WTF are you gonna do with crayons? You can't smoke em', or snort em', or drink em'. Maybe you could color a pretty picture of our resident pinko wannabe.

soonerscuba

4/14/2008, 04:37 PM

But.. wasn't it actually the French who were the first to kill Americans at the start of Operation Torch.... our invasion of North Africa?

Snooty Parisian Bastadges.. if it weren't for us, they'd all be speaking German.
Yes, Vichy forces resisted American landings, after resistance fighters within the Vichy government failed to deliver a coup.

Also, it could be argued that we'd be a bunch snaggle-tooth queen humpers without the French.

Harry Beanbag

4/14/2008, 05:21 PM

Also, it could be argued that we'd be a bunch snaggle-tooth queen humpers without the French.

That's a stretch, but perhaps. Of course we'd still be speaking English. ;)

Harry Beanbag

4/14/2008, 05:23 PM

Why don't you stay the hell out of threads where thinking is involved? I'll wager you didn't make it much past 2nd grade.

From reading your posts in this thread, perhaps you should take your own advice.

BigRedJed

4/14/2008, 05:28 PM

Heh. "Snaggle-tooth queen humpers."

olevetonahill

4/14/2008, 05:30 PM

WTF are you gonna do with crayons? You can't smoke em', or snort em', or drink em'. Maybe you could color a pretty picture of our resident pinko wannabe.

Im trying to be quite .and Play with My crayons .
I dont think he Gave me any pink tho .

olevetonahill

4/14/2008, 05:48 PM

WTF are you gonna do with crayons? You can't smoke em', or snort em', or drink em'. Maybe you could color a pretty picture of our resident pinko wannabe.

Dean I was told to Tell you to Not be such a dick !
there I did it . Now can I have My pink crayons ?

JohnnyMack

4/14/2008, 08:01 PM

That's a stretch, but perhaps. Of course we'd still be speaking English. ;)

You could also thank them for their assistance during the rebolushunary war as well.

Okla-homey

4/14/2008, 09:28 PM

That assistance wasn't provided out of any sense of obligation or even grudging regard for our patriot forebears. What it was, plain and simple, was a way to tweak the nose of the their hereditary enemy, the British lion.

JohnnyMack

4/14/2008, 09:53 PM

Harry Beanbag

4/15/2008, 06:59 AM

You could also thank them for their assistance during the rebolushunary war as well.

Isn't that what scuba was referring to before? Hence my hilarious still speaking English joke.

Okla-homey

4/15/2008, 07:31 AM

So?

so?

Thus we don't owe them a thing. In fact, about five times more Americans were lost fighting in France during WWI than the French lost in America during the Revolution. Therefore, if we owed their pompous gallic a$$es anything after the Revolution, it was paid in full with interest in 1917-1918.

And that, is not to mention WWII when we bailed their sorry syphllitic kiesters out again.

olevetonahill

4/15/2008, 07:34 AM

Homey you keep it up and Im gonna have to Share My crayons .:mad:

C&CDean

4/15/2008, 08:09 AM

You're gonna have to mix red with white to get that pink.

sooneron

4/15/2008, 08:19 AM

WTF is this thread about anywho?

C&CDean

4/15/2008, 08:37 AM

WTF is this thread about anywho?

I think it's about a couple of your apologist socialist buddies calling people with opposing views stupid, or something like that.

olevetonahill

4/15/2008, 08:53 AM

You're gonna have to mix red with white to get that pink.

:D

Stoop Dawg

4/15/2008, 10:08 AM

I think it's about a couple of your apologist socialist buddies calling people with opposing views stupid, or something like that.

Very insightful. You're doing a good job of keeping this thread civil. Perhaps you can go into some more detail on how wishing the first atomic bomb had been dropped on an unpopulated area makes one a socialist. It should be interesting to hear.

Actually, it'll probably go like this "You don't agree with me so I call you names and try to peg you in an unfavorable light so that other people won't like you". That about it?

Grow up.

Tulsa_Fireman

4/15/2008, 10:14 AM

Grow up.

No.

Vet, pass the brown crayon. I wanna draw this big turd on a picture of the idea of dropping an atomic bomb over an unpopulated area.

sooner_born_1960

4/15/2008, 10:20 AM

I can't see dropping an atomic bomb on a unpopulated area ending the war sooner than it ended.
The first goal was to defeat the Japs.
The second goal was to suffer the minimum number of U.S. casualties while reaching goal #1.

The fact of the matter is; war involved bombing cities

TexasLidig8r

4/15/2008, 11:12 AM

so?

Thus we don't owe them a thing. In fact, about five times more Americans were lost fighting in France during WWI than the French lost in America during the Revolution. Therefore, if we owed their pompous gallic a$$es anything after the Revolution, it was paid in full with interest in 1917-1918.

And that, is not to mention WWII when we bailed their sorry syphllitic kiesters out again.

Oh.. and let us not forget....

"Oh, I am so sorry President Reagan. I know you have tracked terrorist activity to Libya and wish to make a strategic air strike there, but you cannot fly over our sovereign country and instead, must divert south which will dramatically increase the likelihood of your planes being detected. C'est la vie."

"Oh, I know as sitting members of the Security Council, we are supposed to enforce orders and sanctions of the UN.. so despite the fact that Hussein continues to flaunt UN sanctions and refuses UN weapons inspectors access, we refuse to enforce the very UN sanctions we voted in because we are collecting millions and millions of illegal kickbacks and payments from the Iraqi government. C'est la vie."

Cheese eating surrender monkey unbathed bastadges.

C&CDean

4/15/2008, 11:38 AM

Very insightful. You're doing a good job of keeping this thread civil. Perhaps you can go into some more detail on how wishing the first atomic bomb had been dropped on an unpopulated area makes one a socialist. It should be interesting to hear.

Actually, it'll probably go like this "You don't agree with me so I call you names and try to peg you in an unfavorable light so that other people won't like you". That about it?

Grow up.

Meh. It's all your other snappy and astute political comment that makes you a socialist wannabe. Besides, I think it was you that went on the offensive calling other posters stupid.

And if people don't like you I'm pretty sure you've managed to get that rap all by yourself. You don't need my help.

SoonerBorn68

4/15/2008, 12:07 PM

None of you have taken into account the possibility that the bomb could have been dropped over an unpopulated area as a demonstration of our power. If there was still no surrender, then consider dropping on a populated area.

...and maybe the Japs could have not killed 20 million Chinese and millions of others.

http://members.iinet.net.au/~gduncan/massacres_pacific.html

Read that & then maybe you can have an intelligent discussion.

Us nuking the Japs didn't begin to render any "payback" for the Allies. The Japs only understood the sword, and they got it.

Something to leave you with:

http://www.dismalworld.com/im/violence/nanjing-massacre-whitewash-06.jpg

http://starbulletin.com/98/11/20/features/art.gif

http://www.chinasageconsultants.com/assets/images/Hist_Nanking_Bayonet.jpg

http://www.cnd.org/njmassacre/photos/head1.jpg

If you and Vaevictus want to be Japanese defenders/apologists, you should at least know what you are talking about.

yermom

4/15/2008, 12:23 PM

i'm not sure how the actions of the Japanese military has much to do with killing Japanese civilians

back then people bombed civilian targets without much regard, it's just what happened. with better technology, and more media coverage, we have changed policies a bit

SoonerBorn68

4/15/2008, 12:30 PM

The Japanese civilians bought into the Bushido BS as much as the military--who do you think supplied the Japanese war machine?

picasso

4/15/2008, 12:31 PM

Very insightful. You're doing a good job of keeping this thread civil. Perhaps you can go into some more detail on how wishing the first atomic bomb had been dropped on an unpopulated area makes one a socialist. It should be interesting to hear.

Actually, it'll probably go like this "You don't agree with me so I call you names and try to peg you in an unfavorable light so that other people won't like you". That about it?

Grow up.

huh? so we dropped the first one IN a populated area and they still didn't get the message.

:confused:

picasso

4/15/2008, 12:33 PM

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0140277447.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

yermom

4/15/2008, 12:37 PM

The Japanese civilians bought into the Bushido BS as much as the military--who do you think supplied the Japanese war machine?

it's not like they were a volunteer army...

picasso

4/15/2008, 12:39 PM

Every "Indian" in Oklahoma claims to be a Cherokee. I don't believe them. Especially the ones that are good at computer games. Shady.
don't forget all the white people in them Chickisaw commoycials.

olevetonahill

4/15/2008, 02:37 PM

it's not like they were a volunteer army...

Yea they were bro
They couldnt get in line fast to enough to Die for the Emperor .

shaun4411

4/15/2008, 02:42 PM

reason #435 not go join the marines

Stoop Dawg

4/15/2008, 07:46 PM

huh? so we dropped the first one IN a populated area and they still didn't get the message.

:confused:

How do we know? We only waited 3 days to drop the second. That's my simple, yet seemingly controversial point. It took 6 days for them to surrender after the second bomb. If you follow that logic, we should have kept dropping bombs every 3 days until they gave up - which means we shorted them 2 bombs. Maybe some of our resident cowboys will be kind enough to deliver them now, since we clearly still "owe" them for their atrocities.

Stoop Dawg

4/15/2008, 07:47 PM

Meh. It's all your other snappy and astute political comment that makes you a socialist wannabe.

Show me one post where I was even quasi-socialist. I'm the biggest capitalist pig on this board.

Besides, I think it was you that went on the offensive calling other posters stupid.

You're wrong. As usual.

Stoop Dawg

4/15/2008, 07:52 PM

...and maybe the Japs could have not killed 20 million Chinese and millions of others.

Abso-****ing-lutely.

If you and Vaevictus want to be Japanese defenders/apologists, you should at least know what you are talking about.

I'm no such thing, and I defy you to find something that implies that I am. I've made no claims that the Japs were justified or should be excused for any of their war atrocities.

olevetonahill

4/15/2008, 07:59 PM

olevetonahill

4/15/2008, 08:01 PM

Why don't you stay the hell out of threads where thinking is involved? I'll wager you didn't make it much past 2nd grade.

This is where I think ya called someone stupid .
Course I aint figured it out yet .

Harry Beanbag

4/15/2008, 09:41 PM

How do we know? We only waited 3 days to drop the second. That's my simple, yet seemingly controversial point. It took 6 days for them to surrender after the second bomb. If you follow that logic, we should have kept dropping bombs every 3 days until they gave up - which means we shorted them 2 bombs. Maybe some of our resident cowboys will be kind enough to deliver them now, since we clearly still "owe" them for their atrocities.

Since none of us are privy to the internal communications between the two governments at the time, I would hazard a guess that Japanese leadership gave us a big "**** you" after Hiroshima. After Nagasaki, they probably wired a "Holy ****!1!, Whoa..." type message. You have to remember, beginning on the 9th, the same day the 2nd bomb was dropped, their army in Manchuria began to get totally annihillated by the Russians. Just another guess of mine, but I think they were scared to death by the Soviets, and back door dealings between them and Truman paved the way for a surrender before Hokkaido got bulldozed by the Red Army.

Some conjecture on my part? Sure, but way more believable than ending the war by dropping a big bomb out in the open ocean. You also can't revise history by totally ignoring the mindset of the period, but I know you've been told that before.