|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
 Posted - 05/26/2002 : 04:14:42 [Permalink]
|
You are going to have to do even a halfway decent job of showing what, if any, crimes were committed. This is the one aspect of this debate that you have failed miserably at. Snide remarks and conjecture do not make the cut. You can go off feeling good about it if you want but until you start putting up some real arguments i am just going to ignore you as I should have done long ago.
@tomic
 @tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
 |
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5311 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2002 : 04:28:28 [Permalink]
|
You seem to be someone who attempts to be reasonable when you ask for evidence and reasonable conversation, but when someone asks it from you, you have to ignore people and try to build yourself up by talking about encouraging "the boy." I've been patient up until this conversation with people who make a lot of noise, like you, but present no reasonable case. Even some of the other people here who often resort to childish insults have attempted to present a reasonable case in this conversation. All you've done is snipe and tell people that they shouldn't engage in "America-bashing" or shouldn't criticize your belief in a world full of good and evil spirits.
I've given you evidence. They dropped an atomic bomb on not one city but two. That wasn't enough. After that they went on a thousand-plane raid. Even if this wasn't done after knowing that Japan was done, it is an incredible crime. That is enough evidence.
quote:
You are going to have to do even a halfway decent job of showing what, if any, crimes were committed. This is the one aspect of this debate that you have failed miserably at. Snide remarks and conjecture do not make the cut. You can go off feeling good about it if you want but until you start putting up some real arguments i am just going to ignore you as I should have done long ago.
@tomic
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
|
|
|
opus
Skeptic Friend
Canada
50 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2002 : 08:31:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
What is obvious, deny it if you want, is that 2 bombs did work. Whether they would have surrendered with none, or one is conjecture. What we do know is that one was dropped....no surrender......2nd was dropped....they surrendered.
What I see going on in this thread is simple America bashing with some assumptions thrown in with little regard for facts.
You do spend time at Japanese websites taking them to task for their numerous warcrimes don't you? Or is going after the big boy a hobby?
@tomic
To state that it would only be conjecture is a little dishonest. It is clear the Japanese were wanting to surrender. With no bombs dropped. But you just ignore that.
Were is the American bashing?? Are you saying any critism of American military action is American bashing? Hasn't the issue only been whether dropping the bomb was a CAH, not whether the United States is an outlaw nation. Do you believe what ever the United States does is always right?
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5311 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2002 : 08:38:33 [Permalink]
|
Of course they do. Within certain bounds. "America" always has the proper intent. They only err when a few individuals are either corrupt or inept. Any criticism that implies anything to the contrary, of course, is by definition either the product of some conspiracy nut, or "anti-american." If you wish to have the leaders of the United States attempt to live by its own ideals, then you are a hippie that spit on Slater at the airport when he came home from what probably was on his part an heroic effort.
quote:
Do you believe what ever the United States does is always right?
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
|
|
|
Omega
Skeptic Friend
Denmark
164 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2002 : 10:27:04 [Permalink]
|
Atomic> I am asking YOU.
But if you do think it is okay to kill Japanese 250.000 civilians to save 60.000 American soldiers, how is that not racism?
And was Hiroshima a military base?
“It is up to the winners of the war to decide which targets were invalid.”
So the winners of a war can, after the war, decide if their targets were valid? Is that what you are saying?
” I think this is just the way it is.”
So there is no reason to debate whether or not the bombing of Hirsohima was a CaH? Because it is just ”the way it is”?
From the first to the second bombs there were three days. From the second to the official surrender there were five. If the logic is to hold, that the Japanese wouldn't surrender, why wasn't there a third bomb on 12th?
” What I see going on in this thread is simple America bashing with some assumptions thrown in with little regard for facts.
You do spend time at Japanese websites taking them to task for their numerous warcrimes don't you? Or is going after the big boy a hobby?”
Wipe your eyes, Atomic. Not that again! When will you understand, that it doesn't matter WHO tossed the bombs on Hiroshima. That the national origin of the bomb is not the point, but that it was not necessary to end the war?
You're completely disregarding any facts, that you do not like, with little regard for the possible truth in them. Then, when you cannot argue, you revert to personal attacks me.
How is that sceptic? How is that rational?
I say dropping the bomb on Hiroshima was a CaH. I supply evidence and arguments for my point of view. How is that ”America bashing”?
Badger> No problem. But there is a valid discussion topic about Revisionism in History.
Back to topic: So the evidence that it was not necessary to drop the bomb on Hiroshima to end the war, is just imagination? Japan was ready to surrender before August 9th.
Truman's own diary reveals a telegram from the Japanese Emperor on July 18th asking for peace. But subsequent discussions at Potsdam made clear that the plan was to use the bomb before the war ended.
Before the war ended, not to end the war.
TokyoDreamer> I read the link with the elderly Japanese Woman over again, and would like to know, if there is anything to tell us, that the flyers warned about the dropping of an Atomic Bomb? The lady herself said she didn't see them, because the military collected the flyers.
I found this in THE ATOMIC BOMBINGS OF HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI report, by The Manhattan Engineer District, June 29, 1946.
PROPAGANDA
On the day after the Hiroshima strike, General Farrell received instructions from the War Department to engage in a propaganda campaign against the Japanese Empire in connection with the new weapon and its use against Hiroshima. The campaign was to include leaflets and any other propaganda considered appropriate.
With the fullest cooperation from CINCPAC of the Navy and the United States Strategic Air Forces, he initiated promptly a campaign which included the preparation and distribution of leaflets, broadcasting via short wave every 15 minutes over radio Saipan and the printing at Saipan and distribution over the Empire of a Japanese language newspaper which included the description and photographs of the Hiroshima strike.
The campaign proposed:
1. Dropping 16,000,000 leaflets in a period of 9 days on 47 Japanese cities with population of over 100,000. These cities represented more than 40% of the total population.
2. Broadcast of propaganda at regular intervals over radio Saipan.
3. Distribution of 500,000 Japanese language newspapers containing stories and pictures of the atomic bomb attacks.
The campaign continued until the Japanese began their surrender negotiations. At that time some 6,000,000 leaflets and a large number of newspapers had been dropped. The radio broadcasts in Japanese had been carried out at regular 15-minute intervals.
This started the day after the Hiroshima bombing.
"All it takes to f |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2002 : 10:33:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Atomic> I am asking YOU.
But if you do think it is okay to kill Japanese 250.000 civilians to save 60.000 American soldiers, how is that not racism?
And was Hiroshima a military base?
That is so far up Bullshit Avenue and I am so sick of your brand of propaganda that I through with this topic.
The same for Opus.Your logic, and Gorgo and Omega's is that if you don't criticize all policies you accept all policies. If the US ever committed any crime then all acts by the US are crimes. You then have the gall to call that skepticism. Well go ahead. I do not have the time for it.
@tomic
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5311 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2002 : 10:39:24 [Permalink]
|
No, you just have time to blabber nonsense when you have nothing to back yourself up. You're so incapable of rational thought you make yourself sick. Everything is black or white to you. Either someone supports your ideas or they're "evil" spirits. Why did you start these forums if you don't care about rational thought? What you are sick of has nothing to do with anything.
quote:
That is so far up Bullshit Avenue and I am so sick of your brand of propaganda that I through with this topic.
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
|
|
|
Badger
Skeptic Friend
Canada
257 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2002 : 12:43:31 [Permalink]
|
Opus, you said "You couldn't just take him aside and let him know he hadn't ought to kill the jews when he gets the chance. Since it is a fantasy to even have the chance, why not try positive steps to change the outcome. Surely the boy Hitler would remember a visit from the future.
So dropping the bomb was justified because it did not work??? Are you sure you are Canadian?? That logic is wacked out eh! you must be a member of the Alliance. "
To the first part, no. If his parents and society hadn't gotten across that it was wrong to kill Jews, then I doubt I could have said anything of value in just one visit from the future.
With regard to the second part, would that wars were settled so easily as one side quitting after the first time things didn't go their way. But that's not quite why or how things happen in war in reality.
Yes, I'm truly Canadain, and yes I did vote for Preston Manning, and do currently support the Canadian Alliance. And you?
If you think it's work, you're doing it wrong. |
|
|
|
opus
Skeptic Friend
Canada
50 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2002 : 16:17:53 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Opus, you said "You couldn't just take him aside and let him know he hadn't ought to kill the jews when he gets the chance. Since it is a fantasy to even have the chance, why not try positive steps to change the outcome. Surely the boy Hitler would remember a visit from the future.
So dropping the bomb was justified because it did not work??? Are you sure you are Canadian?? That logic is wacked out eh! you must be a member of the Alliance. "
To the first part, no. If his parents and society hadn't gotten across that it was wrong to kill Jews, then I doubt I could have said anything of value in just one visit from the future.
With regard to the second part, would that wars were settled so easily as one side quitting after the first time things didn't go their way. But that's not quite why or how things happen in war in reality.
Yes, I'm truly Canadain, and yes I did vote for Preston Manning, and do currently support the Canadian Alliance. And you?
You really do not think a visit from the future would have a big effect on a person?? I agree with you on the point that Hitler was a product of his time. However, given that you do not know that killing him would have improved the course of history, trying to change his behavior would seem to me possessing a greater chance to succeed.
My point was you were using the fact that the first bomb failed to get the japanese to surrender as justifcation for droppng it in the first place. The justification should have been up front before the bomb was dropped.
As a side bar to the above. After spending all that money developing the bomb I do not think there would have been very much chance it was not going to be used. Maybe, from a long term perspective it was better that it was used sooner rather than later. That is in Korea. Who knows where that would have lead?
In general I vote Liberal, but lately my vote is a little soft as they are curving a little too much to the right. Where I live most Alliance people are bible thunpers that want evolution and pray back in the schools. In general I concider the party the home of professional whiners, racist, that are more loyal to their ideology than the country and people who can't accept the fact that 2/3rd of the people live in the east and they actually get a whole vote each. I, by the way, was born in and live in B.C.
|
|
|
|
opus
Skeptic Friend
Canada
50 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2002 : 16:26:37 [Permalink]
|
quote:
The same for Opus.Your logic, and Gorgo and Omega's is that if you don't criticize all policies you accept all policies. If the US ever committed any crime then all acts by the US are crimes. You then have the gall to call that skepticism. Well go ahead. I do not have the time for it.
@tomic
Nah?? No such thing was ever said or implied by me. I don't even understand where you are coming from with what you wrote above. If the goal is to run down the United States the dropping of the bomb is not even the place to do so. Events in Chile in the 70's would be much more usefull. Sorry if you are offended but I do not understand why.
|
|
|
|
Badger
Skeptic Friend
Canada
257 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2002 : 20:33:11 [Permalink]
|
Opus, nope, I don't think a visit from a "guy from the future" would do much. How do I prove that I'm from the future? It'd take a bunch of time and energy, and the risk of being locked away/strung up as a loony.
"My point was you were using the fact that the first bomb failed to get the japanese to surrender as justifcation for droppng it in the first place. The justification should have been up front before the bomb was dropped. "
Well, that's a kind of weird way of looking at it. I probably should have been more clear. What I was trying to say is that to end the war with Japan, extreme measures had to be taken. This could be throwing thousands of men at their shore for extended periods of time, firebombing cities, etc. Dropping an atomic bomb on one city was also another extreme measure.
The impact of dropping one atomic bomb was insufficient to cause Japan to immediately surrender. I don't know if this was forseen or not, but would assume that there was a chance of it, as they had a second bomb on site (there are other factors such as if the first one hadn't worked they'd need a second one handy).
So they dropped a second, probably bluffing, in part, wanting Japan to think this could go on longer, while in fact that was all the bombs the states had.
But the key is that extreme measures had to be taken, in which large numbers of lives would be lost. So they dropped a bomb and killed a huge number of people in a heartbeat.
You said "In general I vote Liberal, but lately my vote is a little soft as they are curving a little too much to the right. Where I live most Alliance people are bible thunpers that want evolution and pray back in the schools. In general I concider the party the home of professional whiners, racist, that are more loyal to their ideology than the country and people who can't accept the fact that 2/3rd of the people live in the east and they actually get a whole vote each. I, by the way, was born in and live in B.C."
I doubt that you and I will agree on much, but who knows? At least we'll learn something from eachother. I'm not the bible thumper or creationist type. I just believe in personal and fiscal responsibility.
If you think it's work, you're doing it wrong. |
|
|
|
opus
Skeptic Friend
Canada
50 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2002 : 09:11:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
But the key is that extreme measures had to be taken, in which large numbers of lives would be lost. So they dropped a bomb and killed a huge number of people in a heartbeat.
I disagree with your thoughts on this. Everybody assumes that the Americans would have stormed ashore and have to face the mass of the Japanese might. I am not so sure that this would have been the case.
How the Americans would have invaded Japan is an interesting topic. The Japanese would have been faced with the prospect of defending everything. While the Americans would only have to attack in the one place they thought right. More than likely the first target would have been one or more of the smaller islands first. Establish a gound based air presence. The kamikazi attacks were a threat, but a couple of weeks after these bases would have been established there would have been little threat from the Japanese air force. All this would have taken much more time than what ulitmately did happen. That is not to say there would have been few casualties to the Americans.
I am not against the idea of vigorous fighting of a war. I was taught as part of my training when fighting through an objective you do so until you have completed the tasks. There are no prisoners untill then. Compassion came after the battle. But that is different than intentionally targeting civilians. Now it must be said that in general and in Europe the USAAF took particular concern not target civilians. Most of the time they had specific war targets they wanted to attack. The RAF on the otherhand made little effort to bomb a specific target they were out to destroy cities and kill as many civilains as possible. To me that and dropping the atomic bomb on a city is no different. Well except that dropping an atomic bomb will actually do the job.
The part about your stand I don't understand is why the method of killing matters. If the dead of Hiroshima were shot with a rifle it would most certainly have been seen as a crime. Why because it was one bomb is it ok? quote:
I doubt that you and I will agree on much, but who knows? At least we'll learn something from eachother. I'm not the bible thumper or creationist type. I just believe in personal and fiscal responsibility.
Don't be so sure, maybe I am off base but that Gold in hockey was pretty sweet. As for politics your pessimism might be justified.
|
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2002 : 10:11:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
The part about your stand I don't understand is why the method of killing matters. If the dead of Hiroshima were shot with a rifle it would most certainly have been seen as a crime. Why because it was one bomb is it ok?
Not if Japanese soldiers were hiding behind civilians firing on U.S. soldiers who were in the process of storming a location.
------------
Truth above pride and ego; truth above all |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2002 : 12:28:36 [Permalink]
|
Truman said publicly that Hirsoshima was a military base. Was that the truth?
Why yes it was. Hirsohima was a huge base of Naval and Air Force operations. It is where the attacks on Hawaii, Midway and the Aleutians were staged. It had been a military base since the 1800's
Here's some parts from the Hiroshima City governments own website. The emphasis is mine, but the pride they have in Hiroshima as a military base is all theirs
http://www.city.hiroshima.jp/kikaku/joho/toukei/History-E/c03.html
3.1 The Pacific war
Along with expansion of its role as a military city, Hiroshima became a modern city.
After the Manchurian Incident, the Shanghai Incident, and the outbreak of the full-scale war between Japan and China, the Japanese army and navy launched an attack on the northen Malay Peninsula and attacked Pearl Harbor in Hawaii on December 8, 1941 (Japan time). Japan rushed into the Pacific War. In Hiroshima, a center of military affairs since the Sino-Japanese and the Russo-Japanese wars, military installations were expanded and various heavy industries developed rapidly. …
3.2 Preparations for the Decisive Battle on the Mainland
After the outbreak of the war, the air defense setup of the city was rapidly strengthened and was much stronger than in other cities.However, after Japan, which had been victorious in the early stages of the war, lost the battle of Guadalcanal in 1943, the military situation grew steadily worse, and it appeared that the mainland of Japan would be turned into a battlefield. The army hurriedly prepared for a decisive battle on the mainland. With these preparations Hiroshima was to take on a new role. Japan was divided into two parts; the First General Headquarters was placed in Tokyo, and the Second General Headquarters (under the command of Marshal Shunroku Hata) in Hiroshima, where the headquarters of the Chugoku District Governor-General (led by Isei Otsuka), the highest administrative body commissioned by the central government, was also established.
In 1944, U.S. forces occupied Saipan, the last strategic point of the Japanese army on the south Pacific front, and established an air base from which to attack the mainland of Japan. In November full-scale air raids were begun, devastating the cities of Japan one by one.
Under such conditions, Hiroshima City began the evacuation of students above the third grade of elementary school and of other citizens whose presence was not essential. With the threat of incendiary bombings, demolition of buildings to make fire lanes was carried out on a wide scale. For the demolition of buildings, volunteer army corps in various places, organized according to the National Volunteer Army Conscription Law, and mobilized students of various middle schools and girls' schools were gathered to engage in the work each day.
An evacuation plan for citizens was made in preparation for the outbreak of a major conflagration caused by air raids. The evacuation destination of each neighborhood association was specified in advance in order to avoid confusion. The evacuation of people that had been organized at the outset of the air raids was prohibited near the end of the war in order to secure personnel necessary for air defense.
------------
Little girls for air defense? That's a funny thing to do for a country that's about to give up. It also makes it a mote point about them being civilians if they were conscripted en masse to perform military duties.
-------
My business is to teach my aspirations to conform themselves to fact, not to try and make facts harmonize with my aspirations. ---Thomas Henry Huxley, 1860
Edited by - slater on 05/28/2002 12:30:29 |
|
|
|
Omega
Skeptic Friend
Denmark
164 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2002 : 19:19:01 [Permalink]
|
Atomic> “That is so far up Bullshit Avenue and I am so sick of your brand of propaganda that I through with this topic.”
What a rational, sceptical and mature response. When you can't reply, it's “BS”, it's “propaganda” and instead of replying and responding in a civilised manner this is what I get?
If I'm so far off, it should be easy to show I'm wrong. Why can't you?
“The same for Opus. Your logic, and Gorgo and Omega's is that if you don't criticize all policies you accept all policies. If the US ever committed any crime then all acts by the US are crimes. You then have the gall to call that skepticism. Well go ahead. I do not have the time for it.”
What are “all the policies”? We're discussing whether or not it was justified to drop an atomic bomb on Hiroshima or not.
Can you, to justify your own claim, show where I (or the other you mention for that matter) have written that anything the US does is a crime?
Questioning a accepted view of history is scepticism. Instead of just buying anything we're being told.
Badger> May I point you to my two previous posts? And the discussions at Potsdam where the it became clear the intend was to use the atomic bombs (uranium and plutonium) before the war ended. Not to end it.
That, for example, Truman in his diary wrote about a telegram from the Japanese Emperor in July asking for peace.
Slater> Hiroshima was a military base??? Hiroshima was a city, with a military installations, it was not a military base. If it had such high importance to the Japanese military, why was it not bombed by conventional means, prior to August 6th 1945?
”Little girls for air defense? That's a funny thing to do for a country that's about to give up. It also makes it a mote point about them being civilians if they were conscripted en masse to perform military duties.”
I can read that students of various middle schools and girls' schools were mobilised to demolise buildings. But I can't see where the school-girls were conscripted for air-defence.
What bothers me here is, that if the Japanese were not about to surrender at all, why did two amotic bombs change that? If the fanaticism ran ”so high”? Secondly, that the Japanese governemnt gave no outward signs to its population, that it was trying to reach peace, doesn't prove that it was not the case. It only shows that the Japanese government didn't tell it's population how bad the situation was.
So the Japanese Emperors telegram to Truman in July 1945 was… ?
” The evacuation of people that had been organized at the outset of the air raids was prohibited near the end of the war in order to secure personnel necessary for air defense.”
It does not say everybody in Hiroshima was in air-defence. So it is not a moot point.
Finally: In my second to last post I responded to your remarks and posted questions to you.
"All it takes to fly is to fling yourself at the ground... and miss."
- Douglas Adams |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
