Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere

Don't rewrite history. Hirohito was QUOTED saying how pleased he was with the military actions.

Don't argue with me. Argue with those who were there and QUOTED him VERBATIM.

Better yet, Google Hirohito and read.

Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere

Especially when it is we who are attacked.

MarvinSussman

Son? I will be 93 years old in August. You are a name-calling, kindergarten-level argument-wielding moron.

A coward is somebody who reads Admiral Leahy's statement and cannot deal with it.

You couldn't find Japan on the map.

Loki Loc: Georgia

The North Vietnamese, and for that matter the South Vietnamese killed far more civilians than we did. North Vietnamese civilians were actively involved in the war. I provided figures that showed actual US involved killings at a high of about 10,000. This is in South Vietnam. There are no accurate figures for North Vietnamese deaths IN North Vietnam, because of the Communist government's policy of using extremely inflated figures of civilian casualties. You are including civilians killed by the North Vietnamese and our allies as attributable to us.

Loki Loc: Georgia

My late uncle and our former family veterinarian were both Marines in the Pacific theater. The former was at Saipan, and the latter at Iwo Jima. They were not looking forward to any continuation of the war. The Japanese record of cruelty and human rights abuses is well documented. Stomping them flat appears to have been the accepted thing to do. Perhaps, as another poster suggested, we wanted to demonstrate to the Russians. Since they had declared war on the Japanese, they would have wanted a slice of the pie in retaliation for the Japanese victory in their pre WWI disagreement. By hastening the surrender in using those bombs it is quite possible that we saved countless Japanese lives as well as those of the Allies.

MarvinSussman

Loki, Loki, Loki! Et tu Brute! I would think that you would have the courage to deal with Admiral Leahy's statement instead of justifying useless cruelty to children.

The Russians got their slice of the pie and still have it. Stalin knew more about the atomic bomb than Truman the haberdasher. And the Russians defeated the Japanese in all their clashes.

Let's hear your take on the Admiral.

Loki Loc: Georgia

My take on the Admiral is that his was a lonely voice. First he thought the bomb would not work, then he thought others would use it against us.
I disagree with this, because we showed our reluctant willingness to actually use it. The Admiral was in the minority. From what I gather, a very small minority. Japan may or may not have been ready to surrender. As I said, my uncle and our family vet, who fought them on Saipan and Iwo Jima, both commented on their unwillingness to surrender. I think had the bomb not been used, the continued heavy firebombing of Japanese cities that would certainly have continued would have caused a far greater loss of life. As far as the Japanese civilians being "innocent," I consider them to be as "innocent" as the German civilians who lived within shouting and smelling distance of the concentration camps and swore they had no idea what was going on.

Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere

Been there. Try again. I don't care what you or anyone thinks dusty, when you are attacked and defeat your attacker you do not accede to their wishes.

We rebuilt their country. We could have left them broken and in ruins.

Don't for a minute find anything this country ever did to be proud of. Just sit and run the nation down while you enjoy every thing you get by living here.

Move to Japan.

speedeesam

It is a fact that President Harry S Truman made the decision to use the atomic bomb over Japan after long, agonizing thought. He was pressed for time. Thousands of Japanese civilians were being killed and their government refused to relent. Our forces were suffering great loss and it was known if the American forces had to invade Japan untold death and misery would result. The only solution was to stop them which saved Japanese lives as well as the rest of the Pacific along with the American forces. Obama also "Failed" to inform the world with his Memorial Day speech that the United States Armed Forces bombed Japan with thousands of leaflets telling civilians and the world they were going to be bombed for three straight days before the bomb was dropped, giving Japan the opportunity to surrender. There was NO response from the Japanese. History records the problem, the solution and any sane person will forever agree, Lives Were Saved and the War ended. Also, while Obama is so intent in downgrading this nation, isn't it curious no mention was/is made regarding the recovery of Japan under the leadership of General Douglas MacArthur?

MarvinSussman

You did not deal with the Admiral. You dismissed him. It won't do, old chap.

All children are innocent.

Loki Loc: Georgia

You did not "deal with the Admiral" Marvin. You simply accepted his extreme minority dissenting opinion as the only one with validity, because it agreed with your own. Given the Japanese slaughter of these same innocents in a war the Japanese started, there were not many people interested in the innocence of any Japanese of any age. As a matter of fact, you are the first WWII vet I have communicated with who either does not or did not support the use of the bomb.
To this day, Japan has demanded apologies for use of the bomb, but has absolutely refused to apologize for the atrocities they committed which had much to do with the decision to use it.

MarvinSussman

This is not about the Japanese. This is about conscience, something you religious nuts are incapable of understanding. The only question to ask is: were the Japanese suing for peace with just the demand to keep their emperor, which eventually was granted after unconditional surrender. If that is the case, the killing of innocent chilluns is due only to the arrogance of American leaders, among whom Truman was only a lucky haberdasher.

Admiral Leahy was more than a lucky haberdasher. He was an accomplished warrior who had seen the world as it was and was in the "know" as much as anybody. There is no reason to believe he was mistaken in his opinion.

You live in a fantasy world where our flag is waving in the breeze and the US gummint can do no wrong. Wake up!

Loki Loc: Georgia

It most certainly is, and was, about the Japanese. Where did you get the idea that I was religious?
Regarding Admiral Leahy, there were many accomplished warriors who had seen the world as it was who disagreed with his assessment. Once more, his was a minority opinion.

MarvinSussman

For me, it was about Japanese children. Welcome to the atheist club. Give me a quote from a warrior contemporary to Admiral Leahy who contradicts him. Then we can count the votes and talk about minority opinions.

You are gullible because:
http://econintersect.com/pages/contributors/contributor.php?post=201605312338&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily%20Global%20Economic%20Intersection%20Newsletter%20Feed&utm_content=Daily%20Global%20Economic%20Intersection%20Newsletter%20Feed+CID_de3fdc1712c166375d5bb4bc44ada384&utm_source=newsletter&utm_term=Read%20more

Loki Loc: Georgia

In 1943, Roosevelt stated that the US objective was the unconditional surrender of Japan with occupation by US forces and such political changes as we saw fit. Not many people agree with your contention that Japan was ready to surrender. Operation Downfall, which was the planned invasion of Kyushu, had horrific casualty projections, MUCH higher than the casualty count of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Japanese had heavily reinforced Kyushu. Civilians were being trained to fight as guerillas. In case you forgot, the Japanese fought almost to the last man on Okinawa, and Iwo Jima. Their plan was to force a US invasion of Kyushu which would have such a high butcher's bill that we would drop our demand for unconditional surrender. They were not, by most accounts, "ready to surrender."

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2016/05/27/no-america-dropping-atomic-bombs-on-japan-was-a-good-thing-n2161273

http://time.com/4346336/atomic-bombs-1945-history/

This next one is a very good article by Philip Jenkins about the facts and realities in 1945:

http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2016/05/19/4465414.htm