Strong Words... Atomic Bomb

[quote]XCelticX wrote:
Being opinionated doesn’t make me a loser. You’re right, I haven’t studied the war, and I admitted it so that those who HAVE would share their knowledge.
[/quote]

Wrong. Being opinionated about subjects you know little to nothing about does make you a loser. And based on your comment back to Rainjack, if you really think most people embrace you here you really are delusional.

which is very little

You are correct. Not having studied WW2 doesn’t equate to idiocy, trolling, being a smart ass, or being uneducated. But when you vociferously argue with others who do know quite a bit about the subject (when you do not) then it does equate to idiocy, trolling, being a smart ass, or being uneducated.

If you simply started asking questions about the war, that would show a sign of intelligence. But just blathering about with your ignorant opinions and arguing with others on a subject you self-admittedly know very little about = troll.

It wasn’t necessary. There are others here who gave a nice depiction of the events that led up to the atomic bomb drop. My contribution on this thread is to call out a troll when I see one. And you, little man, get the troll of the week award on t-nation. Congratulations!

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

  1. There is a theme that keeps showing up in this thread that simply is not supported by the words of the participants even years later (read David McCollough’s “Truman”).

While the Bombs (in addition to our overall military and economic might) may have given us a position of strentgh after the War…make no mistake about it…the decision to use the Bomb was a military one, meant to hopefully end the war and to prevent millions of casulaties that would have resulted with the invasion of the Japanese mainland…

This was not a decision meant to strenghthen our position against the Chinese and Russians. That may have well been an after effect (albiet short lived) of dropping the Bombs…but that was not the primary reason for dropping them.

  1. Historic documents and the words of many of the participants in the decision to use the Bomb are clear…Roosevelt would have come to the same decision.

  2. For those passing moral judgments 60 years later, would it have been morally “better” to have literally millions of more lives lost, when you had weapons within your arsenal that could have (and did) bring a swift end to the War?

I think History would have been MUCH more cruel on Truman and all those who had to make this difficult decision had that been the case.

Mufasa [/quote]

Great point. Dropping the bombs was a military decision about saving American (and Japanese) lives, first and foremost. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not to impress the Russians or stop them from taking Japanese land, because the Allies were trying like hell to get the Soviets into the fight against the Japanese for months before they actually did join in. And America’s leadership, especially Roosevelt, was not nearly as worried about communism as they should have been (see Yalta).

So Pookie’s theory about hidden motives is way off base. The argument about racism, which no one has brought up here, is also wrong, the first bomb was destined for Berlin until VE-Day. The issue is complicated by the fact that we did let them keep the emperor, but the bombs were dropped to defeat Japan, not scare Russia or prove an experiment.

[quote]XCelticX wrote:

By the way, its too bad that your buddy from Cornell is stuck over there. Think of all the productive things a man of that intelligence could be doing with that time… but its his life and he decides what he wants to do with it, so I can’t judge him for that.

[/quote]

Productive things like what exactly? I cannot think of anything more productive than serving your country, watching the backs of your troops, and leading a fighting unit against a terrible enemy who would rather butt-fuck a round-eye with a broom handle if he had the chance.

It’s people like the Marine who chose to forego Cornell who are out there dishing out justice to the terrible entities of this world.

Thus allowing you to stay free and persue a life that you want.

I’m glad you’re not in the Military, an obvious non-team player is a cancer to any team let alone a fighting unit where other lives hang in the balance of your performance…

And I told myself I wouldn’t get spun up over this, dangit!

[quote]XCelticX wrote:

By the way, its too bad that your buddy from Cornell is stuck over there. Think of all the productive things a man of that intelligence could be doing with that time… but its his life and he decides what he wants to do with it, so I can’t judge him for that.

[/quote]

Like liberating people from a horrible dictatorship.

I don’t think XcelticX would make it as a Marine, he’d probably try to substitute chinups with pulldowns!!!

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Like liberating people from a horrible dictatorship.

[/quote]

Nope, I have no problem with that. But you need to understand that the government of a huge country like ours doesn’t make decisions to go to war just to be nice and help some random people out. There is always some kind of economic/power benefit involved.

If you disagree, there are plenty of other countries that could use such ‘liberation’, why aren’t we continueing the ‘crusade’?

I would venture to say that the majority of Service Members are not there just to go to war. They are there to serve their country, and if that means following the decision of the Commander in Chief (whether they like them or not) and being deployed to a combat zone then that is what they do.
This is similar to your argument when stating how horrible it is that we bombed Japan. We didn’t do it to kill civilians, we did it to end a war. People don’t join the military to go over there and die, they do it to give something back to their country.

Don’t give into the need to reexamine the “horrors” of warfare. The bottom line is that the guy with the biggest gun and the willingness to use it generally wins. Additionally think of the waste that would have occured from dropping it in some remote location and the Japanese still didn’t suurender, wasted ordinance, wasted tax money, wasted time which leads to wasted lives (take a look at the daily death tolls and see how many more soldier would have died).

Think about it, we had to drop two bombs on two major cities for them to unconditionally suurender. Do you really think that one in a remote location would have answered the mail, and Japan is a pretty crowded place I am not sure about population density compared to fallout but there may have been civilian casualties no matter where they dropped it.

You have a lot of nerve calling the Japanese innocent people in WW2.

Why don’t you look up the rape of Nanking, or the Bataan death march, or the bridge on the river Kwai, or what happend to the British garrison at Singapore before you make anymore of an ass out of yourself.

You and one or two others have a worldview of America as the bad guy so you selectively present information to try and support that prejudice. Rather than admit the truth.

Sending out a tentative peace feeler to the USSR that never got passed on to the US is not at all the same thing as trying to formally surrender to the US.

They started the war by attacking the US not the USSR. Any surrender needed to be formally discussed with the US. The US was the agrieved party, not the USSR.

Once the US started using nukes they all of a sudden got serious about surrendering and quickly made it known that they were ready to deal directly with the US. They were trying to play games with the wrong people and they got burned.

Tojo is the guilty one not Truman.

Tojo was a coward who tried to take the cowards way out.

Face it Xcelticx you are a punkass kid who still thinks it’s OK to play childish games even in a life or death situation. The sad thing is there are a lot of people like you.

The Japanese had a responsibility that they didn’t want to face up to and still don’t. That’s why they had protests in China just a few months ago.

It is bullshit revisionist history and a serious misrepresentation of the facts to say that they were trying to surrender and the US wouldn’t let them because the US wanted to experiment with nukes.

The reason why the terms were unconditional surrender was so the Germans and Japanese people would know that they had been decisively beaten. There were no other terms that would have secured the peace.

The reason for that, was because Hitlers rise to power was based upon the belief of the German people that they hadn’t been beaten in WW1. He told the Germans we didn’t lose WW1 we were betrayed by the jews.

The Japanese were trying to buy time while they produced new advanced German designed weaponry that would have made the invasion very costly.

The Japanese flew a version of the me 262 jet fighter the same day that Hiroshima was bombed. This airplane made the B29 obsolete as a delivery system. There was a window of opportunity for the US that very nearly got slammed shut.

Between Trinity, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we used up all the nukes we could produce until 1946. The bombs used on Japan had originally been intended to be used as test blasts in New Mexico. If we had done that we would have had the bomb and no way of delivering it.

The Japanese had a six engine bomber that had the range to reach San Fracisco. It’s weapon was a clay bomb that each carried a million fleas infected with Bubonic plague. We are lucky that didn’t get used because we would still be having problems today just like the Chinese.

Hind sight is 20/20, looking back now it is easy to see that we were very lucky to have ended it when we did.

[quote]wtagye wrote:
I would venture to say that the majority of Service Members are not there just to go to war. They are there to serve their country, and if that means following the decision of the Commander in Chief (whether they like them or not) and being deployed to a combat zone then that is what they do.
[/quote]

I totally respect wanting to serve your country. I have nothing against that, unless you think that what the Commander in Chief is doing is wrong. I would not fight a war I didn’t believe in.

I’ve read from numerous sources that over 5,000 Iraqi and Afghani civilians have been killed by American bombs during this War on Terror. That’s more dead innocent people than died on 9-11. It appears we responded to terrorism with more terrorism… after all, we lost less innocent people than they did.
I don’t even care if they were all complete accidents, not one of the deaths of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan was necissary.

I realize that, its just a damn pity that they had to die for that war to end. I do think it could have been better done with either more time after Hiroshima or a different bombsite, less purely civilian. But I also realize that it was all the fault of the Japanese fucked up leadership in the end.

Don’t give into the need to reexamine the “horrors” of warfare. The bottom line is that the guy with the biggest gun and the willingness to use it generally wins. Additionally think of the waste that would have occured from dropping it in some remote location and the Japanese still didn’t suurender, wasted ordinance, wasted tax money, wasted time which leads to wasted lives (take a look at the daily death tolls and see how many more soldier would have died).

Think about it, we had to drop two bombs on two major cities for them to unconditionally suurender. Do you really think that one in a remote location would have answered the mail, and Japan is a pretty crowded place I am not sure about population density compared to fallout but there may have been civilian casualties no matter where they dropped it.[/quote]

[quote]StevenF wrote:
I don’t think XcelticX would make it as a Marine, he’d probably try to substitute chinups with pulldowns!!! [/quote]

12 bodyweight is good enough, I can already do enough chinups to make it as a marine. I have a couple friends in the marines, and I can do more than both unless the sets go beyond 5 or so.

Having read all the latest posts that I missed before my last I’ll give you some more back ground information.

In the last two years the history channel has run some very informative programs about secret weapons of the Nazi’s, secret aircraft of the nazi’s, secret aircraft of the japanese in world war two, and one about the relationship between the SS and japan’s black dragon society which gave me a new perspective on the ss and the Japanese.

They left out the mentioning the hohenzollern as the traditional basis for the SS but I did learn about the black dragon’s.

The black dragon society were the people who took over Japan’s government and lead them to war.

The black dragon’s were the forerunner of todays Yakuza (the Japanese mafia) Hopefully this bit of onfo will give you a better perspective on the Japanese government and why things went the way they did.

Apparently fear of domestic members of the black dragon’s was a major motivation for the decision to inter Japanese Americans during the war.

The fact that the government of Japan was run by thier mafia put things into better perspective for me.

The worriesome thing is the Yakuza is still around and is a major shareholder in every major corporation in Japan.

What’s even more worriesome is the fact that many of our major corporations who have partnerships with these Japanese companies are big contributors to the republicans and democrats.

[quote]Sifu wrote:
You have a lot of nerve calling the Japanese innocent people in WW2.
[/quote]

I NEVER called all Japanese innocent, I said the civilians who died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were.

This has already been stated, and I have looked those up.

I NEVER said anything about America being ‘the bad guy’. America is hugely diverse. I hope your view on your own country isn’t that small. There are all kinds of people here who do and don’t agree with what America is doing for various reasons. Personally I think our military should be HERE and the billions and billions of dollars going into it should be snatched up and spent on things we actually need(we have the most powerful army in the world, so our leaders must have some serious security paranoia). Maybe that has something to do with the 70+ countries we are in. No country except us is arrogant enough to station troops where they obviously aren’t needed.

How bout instead of spending 30 million dollars on an airplane, you donate that to the 14% of the population below poverty level. Hell, thousands of people could be living better just from the money not being spent to make 1 jet, but America says fuck that.

What is right about that?

What do you think my last 3 posts about WW2 said?

Childish games? You’re telling me it is childish to NOT drop 2 ATOMIC BOMBS on cities full of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, working, going to school, living their lives? What if that happened here? You wouldn’t hear the end of it for 200 years.

That being said, I’m not saying America is as bad as Japan was, and I never did. I’m just trying to get you to crawl out of the box you’ve been living in and accept some of the facts of human behavior and your own country.

NO ONE ever said they were trying to surrender and the US wouldn’t let them. You are the only one who has said that, and obviously you must read from some stupid sources to even know that people write that.

Yea man, the Japanese on their tiny island out in the Pacific with only a fraction of our population at the time would have DEFINATELY taken over America, maybe even the WORLD if we hadn’t dropped the bombs when and where we did…

[/quote]

Another thing I forgot to mention. There was a huge concern of a misfire with the bomb. Reverse engineering was a very doable feat. The Japanese are the world champions of reverse engineering.

There was a handful of Japanese physicists who had an understanding of fission. Their German allies were the ones who had discovered it. These physicists were the people who explained to the emporer how the Americans could all of a sudden wipe out a whole city with one bomb.

One of the biggest hurdles in bomb making is establishing the exact amount of fissionable material needed for a critical mass. Even today this number is a tightly kept secret. Once you have a working bomb to dismantle all you need is a reasonably accurate scale.

You also have enough U-235 or Plutonium make your own bomb.

It has been a while since I read about the missions, so I could be wrong. But I seem to remember that there were plans in place to massively bomb the drop zone in case of a dud.

[quote]endgamer711 wrote:

Well maybe. But didn’t he also say that the Physicists had tasted sin? From what I’ve read, most of them searched their consciences. The war was often appealed to, otherwise more than a few would just as soon have resisted this particular sweetness.

Many of them were Europeans. Most of those working on the project envisoned that the bomb would be used on the Germans. When VE Day came there was something of a subtle sea change in attitudes about the enterprise, a lot more concern with what practically they were working for.[/quote]

My bad. This is the only Oppenheimer quote I’ve heard. It seems like what you’re saying has more to do with the general conscience of the defense engineer than with the peculiarities of the ‘technically sweet’ frontier of innovation. It takes a different kind of man to build a weapon, especially for a flag that is only nominally his. This is all outside of the waterfall-chasing aspect of the revolutionary accomplishment that was the Bomb, which I’ll argue is what got it done, especially in view of the focus issues you’ve just outlined. On the other hand, I can’t imagine these men seeing the Japanese, and beyond them the Soviets, as sympathetic.

…and I almost forgot, Celtic is a dirt-poor man’s Al Shades.

No one is that poor.

[quote]Soldierslim wrote:
XCelticX wrote:

I did a little research: They NEVER refused to surrender. I also read that “Japanese feelers for peace had already been received and ignored by the Allies”.{quote}

Very true. The Japanese were willing to surrender before any of these events took place, under ONE condition; that they be allowed to keep thier Emperor after the War. BUT, the U.S. called for “unconditional surrender” and the Japanese’ plea to keep their emperor was, indeed, a condition. So the War dragged on.

The quote that you surfaced is also true. The Emperor himself personally pleaded with the Soviets (an Allied power) to make peace with the U.S. for him. The Soviets however refused to pass this info on the the U.S. Why would the Soviets choose to not be a peacful mediator between the two waring nations? Control of the post-war world. They knew that if they entered the war against Japan they could spread their influence. [/quote]

If you read all the posts on your own thread you might have seen that someone has more or less asserted that peace could have been had if it weren’t for America’s terms.

The way you talk about people just going about their lives, you make it sound like Switzerland. A lot of the people who died had family members fighting in the war committing terrible atrocities. For many of them living their meant supporting the war effort.

If we had invaded all of those people were expected to become kamakazi’s including the school kids.

If you think that wouldn’t have happened. you should watch the film of an entire village throwing themselves off of a cliff in Saipan.

It’s some of the most heartwrenching film I’ve ever watched. What makes it bad is the knowledge that they most likely wouldn’t have been mistreated.

The American, Canadian and British forces had a fairly good record during the war. Certainly better than the Axis.

The worst things usually happened with frontline troops. Which makes sense. Sending prisoners back to the rear, can take needed men away from a front line unit.

By childish games I mean not facing up to what they did at Pearl Harbor. Instead of talking to the Americans or the British, countries they attacked they started trying to drag the Soviets into it.

As Winston Churchill said aboutthe Germans “They sowed the breeze and they reaped the whirlwind.”

We were lucky that the war didn’t drag into 1946-47. The Japanese had kamakazi weapons that would have wreaked terrible loss of life on the allies. Look up what happened to the USS Franklin. They planned to do this to all the US carriers with a piloted version of the V1 flyingbomb.

If the Japanese had managed to feild jet fighters it would have given their war effort a whole new lease on life. It would have enabled them to shoot down the B29’s which could fly too high for most of japans propeller driven planes to reach.

It also would have made it unsafe for Mustangs.

The active ingredients in A bombs were not easily produced. We wouldn’t have wanted to risk sending them out in planes that couldn’t get through.

Without a reliable delivery system the bomb was useless.

We should also consider that in some ways Japan was in a better position to produce A bombs than Germany. Thanks to their ownership of Korea. Which has significant uranium reserves.

As for today’s military commitments, the reasons why there is such a divergence of views are numerous. One big problem is a lack of knowledge.

There are a lot of kids on college campuses who don’t know much about history or geography who derive the bulk of their understanding of war from watching Vietnam war movies and listening to their old hippy teachers.

Like it or not the American military is the glue that is holding the world order together. Look at the Chinese and Taiwan or North and South Korea.
Japan is a nice juicy prize that the chinese or koreans could just walk over. What would the Russians be acting like.

Everytime the United States has drastically downsized it’s military, it has found itself in a war. It’s nice to think about peace dividends but it’s dangerous to let wishful thinking delude into lowering your guard too soon.

That’s one of the lessons we learned from the Barbary pirates, and from world war two. The worlds first and hopefully last nuclear war.

Right now the US military so far outclasses any potential rivals that it’s not worth trying to compete. This is why Europe shouldn’t sell high tech weapons to the Chinese.

It also could set off an arms race in Asia, that would slow the Asian Tigers economic growth.

The most seminal minds in the grouping were ordinary men and physicists, not just engineers. Their waterfall got redirected for the war. Physics per se didn’t need the bomb. It was not regarded as an attractive innovation. Sure as Physicists they were able to use the data afterwards, but it was not an experiment anyone really wanted or needed to perform. Astrophysics was the discipline that got some actual juice out of it as an experiment, though: all that data on ‘opacity’ comes in handy for calibrating your models of stellar interiors.

They didn’t care very much about flags in those days, not like we do now. There was the Axis and there were the Allies. Hitler was the devil many of these folks were fighting. They saw themselves as in a race with the Nazis to get the bomb. They knew perfectly well from intelligence sources that the Germans had such a program. That’s why after VE day folks started wondering why they were still doing what they were doing. The other contestant is out of the race now, you mean we actually still must cross that dreadful finish line?

At the time, there was a terrible concern that some of them were in sympathy with the Soviets. Oppenheimer had some things in his background they gave him real trouble for.

[quote]XCelticX wrote:
I NEVER called all Japanese innocent, I said the civilians who died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were.
[/quote]

Why bother to make the distinction? Innocence only matters in peacetime. It’s not fair to bring it up now as if it should have been considered then. It definitely should not have been considered then.

Many of these Japanese civilians were as innocent as Rosie the Riveter - which is to say, not very. They were no more innocent than any other of the civilian populations that got the bejesus bombed out of them in WWII. Bombing ‘innocent’ civilians - men, women and children - was an inevitable collateral effect of an important military strategem in that war, for all sides. At that scale of conflict, warfare is directed as much as possible at the economic means of warfare, also at the logistical tail. This means ‘innocent civilians’ take it in the neck big time.

After years in which innocent civilians on all sides had died like flies, nobody cared if five million further Japanese had to die in a heartbeat, if that’s what it took to end the war even one week sooner. There were no innocent Japanese. Not even the ones living in this country as US citizens, which were rounded up and put into camps.

By corollary, there were no innocent Americans either.

[quote]XCelticX wrote:
StevenF wrote:
I don’t think XcelticX would make it as a Marine, he’d probably try to substitute chinups with pulldowns!!!

12 bodyweight is good enough, I can already do enough chinups to make it as a marine. I have a couple friends in the marines, and I can do more than both unless the sets go beyond 5 or so.

[/quote]

Chinups or not you’re still retarded. Focker, out.

I didn’t mean ‘engineers’ so literally. Also, it seems as if what you said about possible Soviet sympathies contradicts what you said about ‘flaglessness’. After V-E day, they were manufacturing an exclusively American weapon (no knowledge sharing with any of the Allies, and definitely not the Russians) for use to end the war and to deter the next enemy, of course the Communists. Those without whose intellects we would have no Bomb, the ‘waterfall chasers’ of whatever sort (to disambiguate completely), had to have some motivation whose roots were determinist/objectivist in nature in order to finish the race without an opponent running alongside.