[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Please, make sure you've got your history straight before you argue either side.[/QUOTE]
Take your own advice, Caspar.
Japan never prepared an "unconditional surrender" as put forth at the Potsdam Conference, nor did they ever actually surrender "unconditionally." There was one very large condition to their surrender (I assume you allude to their July 1945 proposal), and it was the US that was willing to look past this condition when they accepted Japan's surrender.
Although the official Japanese line, as put forth by Hirohito's August 15 address to the nation, was that Japan surrendered due to the US's bombs, the Soviet invasion of Japanese territories on August 8 played a more important role in the decision, as Hirohito's Rescript to the Navy and Army details. Japan distrusted the Soviets and wished to end the war before Russia took more land.
Finally, the argument that the US dropped the second bomb in order to scare the Soviets is an old Revisionist line from the 1960s that most post-Revisionist scholars no longer follow. Academic consensus, at least among the more moderate and current post-Revisionists, is that the US dropped the bomb because of Japan's fierce resistance. Besides the military's resistance at places like Iwo Jima, the government also began to prepare its citizens on the mainland for resistance to any invasion. As George Marshall stated, both bombs were meant to shock the Japanese government into surrender.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Serry Vietinhoff wrote: [/QUOTENAME]The Hiroshima bombings in August 1945 saved millions of the Soviet lives, of course! Especially since the war was over for us in May 1945.....
[/QUOTE]
Soviets attacked Japan in August 1945, in the time in between the two A-bombs. I believe that is when Russia regained control over the Sakhalin islands lost to Japan in the Russo-Japanese War.
[/QUOTE]
Soviets attacked Japan in August 1945, in the time in between the two A-bombs. I believe that is when Russia regained control over the Sakhalin islands lost to Japan in the Russo-Japanese War.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Apart from the fact that the bombs fell the other way 'round: Japan had already prepared an unconditional surrender, but the Americans didn't know that yet, so the first bomb fell. The second one came AFTER the surrender. It was just to scare the Soviets.[/QUOTE]
Don't make fun of Caspar.
Hirohito personally sent him an IM telling him that he was going to surrender.
...and remember kids. Always check your historical facts on CasparPedia.
Apart from the fact that the bombs fell the other way 'round: Japan had already prepared an unconditional surrender, but the Americans didn't know that yet, so the first bomb fell. The second one came AFTER the surrender. It was just to scare the Soviets.[/QUOTE]
Don't make fun of Caspar.
Hirohito personally sent him an IM telling him that he was going to surrender.
...and remember kids. Always check your historical facts on CasparPedia.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zeni wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Soviets attacked Japan in August 1945, in the time in between the two A-bombs. I believe that is when Russia regained control over the Sakhalin islands lost to Japan in the Russo-Japanese War.[/QUOTE]
We still have "the peaceful conflict" with Japan about the Kuril islands too... Since 1945!
Soviets attacked Japan in August 1945, in the time in between the two A-bombs. I believe that is when Russia regained control over the Sakhalin islands lost to Japan in the Russo-Japanese War.[/QUOTE]
We still have "the peaceful conflict" with Japan about the Kuril islands too... Since 1945!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Serry Vietinhoff wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zeni wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Soviets attacked Japan in August 1945, in the time in between the two A-bombs. I believe that is when Russia regained control over the Sakhalin islands lost to Japan in the Russo-Japanese War.[/QUOTE]
We still have "the peaceful conflict" with Japan about the Kuril islands too... Since 1945![/QUOTE]
I thought so, but wasn't sure. All I really know about that "conflict" are the various fishing disputes that crop up from time to time.
Soviets attacked Japan in August 1945, in the time in between the two A-bombs. I believe that is when Russia regained control over the Sakhalin islands lost to Japan in the Russo-Japanese War.[/QUOTE]
We still have "the peaceful conflict" with Japan about the Kuril islands too... Since 1945![/QUOTE]
I thought so, but wasn't sure. All I really know about that "conflict" are the various fishing disputes that crop up from time to time.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mr.Jingles wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Apart from the fact that the bombs fell the other way 'round: Japan had already prepared an unconditional surrender, but the Americans didn't know that yet, so the first bomb fell. The second one came AFTER the surrender. It was just to scare the Soviets.[/QUOTE]
Don't make fun of Caspar.
Hirohito personally sent him an IM telling him that he was going to surrender.
...and remember kids. Always check your historical facts on CasparPedia.[/QUOTE]
I LOL'd.
Apart from the fact that the bombs fell the other way 'round: Japan had already prepared an unconditional surrender, but the Americans didn't know that yet, so the first bomb fell. The second one came AFTER the surrender. It was just to scare the Soviets.[/QUOTE]
Don't make fun of Caspar.
Hirohito personally sent him an IM telling him that he was going to surrender.
...and remember kids. Always check your historical facts on CasparPedia.[/QUOTE]
I LOL'd.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zeni wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Please, make sure you've got your history straight before you argue either side.[/QUOTE]
Take your own advice, Caspar.
Japan never prepared an "unconditional surrender" as put forth at the Potsdam Conference, nor did they ever actually surrender "unconditionally." There was one very large condition to their surrender (I assume you allude to their July 1945 proposal), and it was the US that was willing to look past this condition when they accepted Japan's surrender.
Although the official Japanese line, as put forth by Hirohito's August 15 address to the nation, was that Japan surrendered due to the US's bombs, the Soviet invasion of Japanese territories on August 8 played a more important role in the decision, as Hirohito's Rescript to the Navy and Army details. Japan distrusted the Soviets and wished to end the war before Russia took more land.
Finally, the argument that the US dropped the second bomb in order to scare the Soviets is an old Revisionist line from the 1960s that most post-Revisionist scholars no longer follow. Academic consensus, at least among the more moderate and current post-Revisionists, is that the US dropped the bomb because of Japan's fierce resistance. Besides the military's resistance at places like Iwo Jima, the government also began to prepare its citizens on the mainland for resistance to any invasion. As George Marshall stated, both bombs were meant to shock the Japanese government into surrender.
[/QUOTE]
The only condition, the Emperor remaining in office, was a proposal made by the allies, because they realized that the Japanese would not accept them otherwise.
Please, make sure you've got your history straight before you argue either side.[/QUOTE]
Take your own advice, Caspar.
Japan never prepared an "unconditional surrender" as put forth at the Potsdam Conference, nor did they ever actually surrender "unconditionally." There was one very large condition to their surrender (I assume you allude to their July 1945 proposal), and it was the US that was willing to look past this condition when they accepted Japan's surrender.
Although the official Japanese line, as put forth by Hirohito's August 15 address to the nation, was that Japan surrendered due to the US's bombs, the Soviet invasion of Japanese territories on August 8 played a more important role in the decision, as Hirohito's Rescript to the Navy and Army details. Japan distrusted the Soviets and wished to end the war before Russia took more land.
Finally, the argument that the US dropped the second bomb in order to scare the Soviets is an old Revisionist line from the 1960s that most post-Revisionist scholars no longer follow. Academic consensus, at least among the more moderate and current post-Revisionists, is that the US dropped the bomb because of Japan's fierce resistance. Besides the military's resistance at places like Iwo Jima, the government also began to prepare its citizens on the mainland for resistance to any invasion. As George Marshall stated, both bombs were meant to shock the Japanese government into surrender.
[/QUOTE]
The only condition, the Emperor remaining in office, was a proposal made by the allies, because they realized that the Japanese would not accept them otherwise.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mr.Jingles wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Apart from the fact that the bombs fell the other way 'round: Japan had already prepared an unconditional surrender, but the Americans didn't know that yet, so the first bomb fell. The second one came AFTER the surrender. It was just to scare the Soviets.[/QUOTE]
Don't make fun of Caspar.
Hirohito personally sent him an IM telling him that he was going to surrender.
...and remember kids. Always check your historical facts on CasparPedia.[/QUOTE]
I LOL'd.[/QUOTE]
Don't forget to also check HaystackPedia
You'll find a very insightful article on how the Democrats advised Hirohito to attack Pearl Harbor at sunset.
Apart from the fact that the bombs fell the other way 'round: Japan had already prepared an unconditional surrender, but the Americans didn't know that yet, so the first bomb fell. The second one came AFTER the surrender. It was just to scare the Soviets.[/QUOTE]
Don't make fun of Caspar.
Hirohito personally sent him an IM telling him that he was going to surrender.
...and remember kids. Always check your historical facts on CasparPedia.[/QUOTE]
I LOL'd.[/QUOTE]
Don't forget to also check HaystackPedia
You'll find a very insightful article on how the Democrats advised Hirohito to attack Pearl Harbor at sunset.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]The only condition, the Emperor remaining in office, was a proposal made by the allies, because they realized that the Japanese would not accept them otherwise.[/QUOTE]
It was a condition made by the Japanese not the allies.
It was a condition made by the Japanese not the allies.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mr.Jingles wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mr.Jingles wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Apart from the fact that the bombs fell the other way 'round: Japan had already prepared an unconditional surrender, but the Americans didn't know that yet, so the first bomb fell. The second one came AFTER the surrender. It was just to scare the Soviets.[/QUOTE]
Don't make fun of Caspar.
Hirohito personally sent him an IM telling him that he was going to surrender.
...and remember kids. Always check your historical facts on CasparPedia.[/QUOTE]
I LOL'd.[/QUOTE]
Don't forget to also check HaystackPedia
You'll find a very insightful article on how the Democrats advised Hirohito to attack Pearl Harbor at sunset.[/QUOTE]
Hmmm...it's hard to make the same joke work twice. For the record, I would have LOL'd equally as much at this one if it had come first.
Apart from the fact that the bombs fell the other way 'round: Japan had already prepared an unconditional surrender, but the Americans didn't know that yet, so the first bomb fell. The second one came AFTER the surrender. It was just to scare the Soviets.[/QUOTE]
Don't make fun of Caspar.
Hirohito personally sent him an IM telling him that he was going to surrender.
...and remember kids. Always check your historical facts on CasparPedia.[/QUOTE]
I LOL'd.[/QUOTE]
Don't forget to also check HaystackPedia
You'll find a very insightful article on how the Democrats advised Hirohito to attack Pearl Harbor at sunset.[/QUOTE]
Hmmm...it's hard to make the same joke work twice. For the record, I would have LOL'd equally as much at this one if it had come first.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
The only condition, the Emperor remaining in office, was a proposal made by the allies, because they realized that the Japanese would not accept them otherwise.[/QUOTE]
Oh, by all means, that is wrong, as Pieter also pointed out. The Japanese government wanted to maintain the kokutai and the Emperor was central to that. It was their intention all along, not America's.
Besides, keeping the emperor, however symoblic he became after the war, and not trying him for war crimes is a pretty significant concession by the Allies, thus no "unconditional surrender."
The only condition, the Emperor remaining in office, was a proposal made by the allies, because they realized that the Japanese would not accept them otherwise.[/QUOTE]
Oh, by all means, that is wrong, as Pieter also pointed out. The Japanese government wanted to maintain the kokutai and the Emperor was central to that. It was their intention all along, not America's.
Besides, keeping the emperor, however symoblic he became after the war, and not trying him for war crimes is a pretty significant concession by the Allies, thus no "unconditional surrender."
Thank God they executed Saddam! Fox News was behind it, I tell you!
Thanks for the breaking news, Hadrian. Haven't you been paying attention here?
It's TQ's History Of The World Part 47:
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME] ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]You are extremely daft in your response. I'll break it up into segments.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME] ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]too much to swallow at once.[/QUOTE]
"no one mentions the war really ended when the US exploded the bomb on Nagasaki and Hiroshima."
Apart from the fact that the bombs fell the other way 'round: Japan had already prepared an unconditional surrender, but the Americans didn't know that yet, so the first bomb fell. The second one came AFTER the surrender. It was just to scare the Soviets.
THAT'S ONE OF THE DUMBEST RESPONSES YOU'VE COME UP WITH YET! HOW DID THE SECOND ONE SCARE THE SOVIETS AND THE FIRST DID NOT, MORON?
(Soviet #1: Let's go kill the Americans with TQ)
(Soviet #2: Oh Crap, they have more than one bomb)
(Soviet #1: Yeah, forget that. Let's drink Vodka)
"They ran like little rats after that."
Apart from the racist connotations (I can't expect any better from you), it's also extremely stupid. They had lost already. No one 'ran' after the bombs.
THE SHITLER DID. RIGHT INTO HIS LITTLE BUNKER AND BLEW HIS FREAKIN HEAD OFF. MAYBE HE GOT SCARED OF THE SECOND BOMB?
"And it saved a whole lot of Soviet lives"
How? They weren't taking the bulk of the Japanese force at that point. They were too busy being attacked by the British in Greece (yes, England fought its ally).
IF THE JAPANESE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN SO OVERCONFIDENT IN ATTACKING THE US, THEY WOULD HAVE INSTEAD TURNED THEIR ATTENTION TO THE SOVIETS, WHO WOULD HAVE THEN BEEN FACED WITH A TWO-FRONT ATTACK.
Please, make sure you've got your history straight before you argue either side.
WHY? YOU DON'T. IN FACT, I WONDER IF YOU MAKE UP HAVE THE HORSECRAP YOU SHOVEL ON HERE. YOU SURE MAKE ME FEEL SMARTER, THOUGH!
It's TQ's History Of The World Part 47:
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME] ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]You are extremely daft in your response. I'll break it up into segments.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME] ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]too much to swallow at once.[/QUOTE]
"no one mentions the war really ended when the US exploded the bomb on Nagasaki and Hiroshima."
Apart from the fact that the bombs fell the other way 'round: Japan had already prepared an unconditional surrender, but the Americans didn't know that yet, so the first bomb fell. The second one came AFTER the surrender. It was just to scare the Soviets.
THAT'S ONE OF THE DUMBEST RESPONSES YOU'VE COME UP WITH YET! HOW DID THE SECOND ONE SCARE THE SOVIETS AND THE FIRST DID NOT, MORON?
(Soviet #1: Let's go kill the Americans with TQ)
(Soviet #2: Oh Crap, they have more than one bomb)
(Soviet #1: Yeah, forget that. Let's drink Vodka)
"They ran like little rats after that."
Apart from the racist connotations (I can't expect any better from you), it's also extremely stupid. They had lost already. No one 'ran' after the bombs.
THE SHITLER DID. RIGHT INTO HIS LITTLE BUNKER AND BLEW HIS FREAKIN HEAD OFF. MAYBE HE GOT SCARED OF THE SECOND BOMB?
"And it saved a whole lot of Soviet lives"
How? They weren't taking the bulk of the Japanese force at that point. They were too busy being attacked by the British in Greece (yes, England fought its ally).
IF THE JAPANESE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN SO OVERCONFIDENT IN ATTACKING THE US, THEY WOULD HAVE INSTEAD TURNED THEIR ATTENTION TO THE SOVIETS, WHO WOULD HAVE THEN BEEN FACED WITH A TWO-FRONT ATTACK.
Please, make sure you've got your history straight before you argue either side.
WHY? YOU DON'T. IN FACT, I WONDER IF YOU MAKE UP HAVE THE HORSECRAP YOU SHOVEL ON HERE. YOU SURE MAKE ME FEEL SMARTER, THOUGH!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Micrówave wrote: [/QUOTENAME]THAT'S ONE OF THE DUMBEST RESPONSES YOU'VE COME UP WITH YET! HOW DID THE SECOND ONE SCARE THE SOVIETS AND THE FIRST DID NOT, MORON?
(Soviet #1: Let's go kill the Americans with TQ)
(Soviet #2: Oh Crap, they have more than one bomb)
(Soviet #1: Yeah, forget that. Let's drink Vodka)[/QUOTE]
How about because Bomb #2 was Plutonium, while Bomb #1 was Uranium, and Bomb #2 was about 1.5x as strong as the original one. Would that not be scary? And would dropping an unnecessary bomb just to show how strong it is not create fear with a party that is working on one, perhaps to best you?
[QUOTE]THE SHITLER DID. RIGHT INTO HIS LITTLE BUNKER AND BLEW HIS FREAKIN HEAD OFF. MAYBE HE GOT SCARED OF THE SECOND BOMB?[/QUOTE]
Hitler killed himself in APRIL '45. The bombs fell in AUGUST. Can you do the math?
[QUOTE]IF THE JAPANESE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN SO OVERCONFIDENT IN ATTACKING THE US, THEY WOULD HAVE INSTEAD TURNED THEIR ATTENTION TO THE SOVIETS, WHO WOULD HAVE THEN BEEN FACED WITH A TWO-FRONT ATTACK.[/QUOTE]
You don't seem to understand Japanese policy at all. They didn't want more than Manchuria. And what they wanted from the US? Their Pacific islands and no more. And that's what they took, didn't they?
[QUOTE]WHY? YOU DON'T. IN FACT, I WONDER IF YOU MAKE UP HAVE THE HORSECRAP YOU SHOVEL ON HERE. YOU SURE MAKE ME FEEL SMARTER, THOUGH![/QUOTE]
That would be really sad, as you didn't get but ONE thing right here. Check any history book you like.
(Soviet #1: Let's go kill the Americans with TQ)
(Soviet #2: Oh Crap, they have more than one bomb)
(Soviet #1: Yeah, forget that. Let's drink Vodka)[/QUOTE]
How about because Bomb #2 was Plutonium, while Bomb #1 was Uranium, and Bomb #2 was about 1.5x as strong as the original one. Would that not be scary? And would dropping an unnecessary bomb just to show how strong it is not create fear with a party that is working on one, perhaps to best you?
[QUOTE]THE SHITLER DID. RIGHT INTO HIS LITTLE BUNKER AND BLEW HIS FREAKIN HEAD OFF. MAYBE HE GOT SCARED OF THE SECOND BOMB?[/QUOTE]
Hitler killed himself in APRIL '45. The bombs fell in AUGUST. Can you do the math?
[QUOTE]IF THE JAPANESE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN SO OVERCONFIDENT IN ATTACKING THE US, THEY WOULD HAVE INSTEAD TURNED THEIR ATTENTION TO THE SOVIETS, WHO WOULD HAVE THEN BEEN FACED WITH A TWO-FRONT ATTACK.[/QUOTE]
You don't seem to understand Japanese policy at all. They didn't want more than Manchuria. And what they wanted from the US? Their Pacific islands and no more. And that's what they took, didn't they?
[QUOTE]WHY? YOU DON'T. IN FACT, I WONDER IF YOU MAKE UP HAVE THE HORSECRAP YOU SHOVEL ON HERE. YOU SURE MAKE ME FEEL SMARTER, THOUGH![/QUOTE]
That would be really sad, as you didn't get but ONE thing right here. Check any history book you like.
Caspar writes:
"And would dropping an unnecessary bomb..."
It was not unnecssary from the US perspective. Again, Japan did not surrender after the first bomb. Your argument that the US dropped the second bomb to scare Russia is an old and tired Revisionist argument made by those who grew angry with American foreign policy in the 1960s. More current scholarly opinion openly debates this (as I mentioned earlier and you seemed to ignore).
Caspar also writes:
"You don't seem to understand Japanese policy at all."
Neither do you.
Caspar continues:
"They didn't want more than Manchuria. And what they wanted from the US? Their Pacific islands and no more. And that's what they took, didn't they?"
The Greater Japanese Empire had grown steadily since the early 1900s and bristled at Western attempts to hamper their growth. By the outbreak of the Pacific theater, Japan controlled or had a strong military presence in much of East Asia like China, Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, scattered islands throughout the ocean, the Philippines, the Dutch East Indies, and had their eyes on Australia. The US had the Pacific in their sphere of influence and had placed an embargo on raw materials, including oil, from entering Japan, which then spurred on Pearl Harbor in 1941.
It is safe to say that most countries and colonies in the Pacific were under threat from Japan. This says nothing to their treatment of foreign prisoners and citizens such as the Comfort Women.
Finally, Caspar states:
"Check any history book you like."
Overconfidence and bloviating gets you nowhere.
-----
And for the record, Microwave does seem to overstate the threat the Soviets posed to Japan. Japan attacked the US because of the control and importance America had in the Pacific. Russia did not have a similar importance or status in the region. Japan did not trust the Soviets, but they did have a peace treaty with them (until the Soviets broke it and attacked in August 1945).
"And would dropping an unnecessary bomb..."
It was not unnecssary from the US perspective. Again, Japan did not surrender after the first bomb. Your argument that the US dropped the second bomb to scare Russia is an old and tired Revisionist argument made by those who grew angry with American foreign policy in the 1960s. More current scholarly opinion openly debates this (as I mentioned earlier and you seemed to ignore).
Caspar also writes:
"You don't seem to understand Japanese policy at all."
Neither do you.
Caspar continues:
"They didn't want more than Manchuria. And what they wanted from the US? Their Pacific islands and no more. And that's what they took, didn't they?"
The Greater Japanese Empire had grown steadily since the early 1900s and bristled at Western attempts to hamper their growth. By the outbreak of the Pacific theater, Japan controlled or had a strong military presence in much of East Asia like China, Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, scattered islands throughout the ocean, the Philippines, the Dutch East Indies, and had their eyes on Australia. The US had the Pacific in their sphere of influence and had placed an embargo on raw materials, including oil, from entering Japan, which then spurred on Pearl Harbor in 1941.
It is safe to say that most countries and colonies in the Pacific were under threat from Japan. This says nothing to their treatment of foreign prisoners and citizens such as the Comfort Women.
Finally, Caspar states:
"Check any history book you like."
Overconfidence and bloviating gets you nowhere.
-----
And for the record, Microwave does seem to overstate the threat the Soviets posed to Japan. Japan attacked the US because of the control and importance America had in the Pacific. Russia did not have a similar importance or status in the region. Japan did not trust the Soviets, but they did have a peace treaty with them (until the Soviets broke it and attacked in August 1945).