PDA

View Full Version : John Bolton: Obama’s Shameful Apology Tour Lands in Hiroshima



James Moore
05-27-2016, 09:43 PM
https://punditfromanotherplanet.com/2016/05/27/john-bolton-obamas-shameful-apology-tour-lands-in-hiroshima/



I never had a doubt that the evil creature known as "obama" hates America and will continue to do everything in it's power to destroy America.
Obama is guilty of multiple counts of treason, and I'm angry as hell that NONE of our worthless elected criminals have stood up to do their jobs and impeach the scum.

Peter1469
05-27-2016, 09:54 PM
Is he smart enough to be evil? I think he is a Manchurian Candidate. A CIA stooge bent on destroying America but without his knowledge.

decedent
05-27-2016, 09:59 PM
https://punditfromanotherplanet.com/2016/05/27/john-bolton-obamas-shameful-apology-tour-lands-in-hiroshima/



I never had a doubt that the evil creature known as "obama" hates America and will continue to do everything in it's power to destroy America.
Obama is guilty of multiple counts of treason, and I'm angry as hell that NONE of our worthless elected criminals have stood up to do their jobs and impeach the scum.

Some educated types may want examples of treason and impeachable offenses.

del
05-27-2016, 10:04 PM
bolton's always been an asshat neocon

his column would make a lot more (read, minimal) sense if obama had actually, you know, apologized

silvereyes
05-27-2016, 11:34 PM
https://punditfromanotherplanet.com/2016/05/27/john-bolton-obamas-shameful-apology-tour-lands-in-hiroshima/



I never had a doubt that the evil creature known as "obama" hates America and will continue to do everything in it's power to destroy America.
Obama is guilty of multiple counts of treason, and I'm angry as hell that NONE of our worthless elected criminals have stood up to do their jobs and impeach the scum.

Ok. Which giant LOSER are you from trinns hateboard?

gamewell45
05-28-2016, 01:21 AM
Ok. Which giant LOSER are you from trinns hateboard?

You beat me to the punch! :laugh:

Common
05-28-2016, 04:34 AM
This article is right on the mark as far as im concerned

An American president’s highest moral, constitutional and political duty is protecting his fellow citizens from foreign threats. Presidents should adhere to our values and the Constitution, and not treat America’s enemies as morally equivalent to us.
If they do, they need not apologize to anyone.
The White House says that President Obama won’t apologize as he visits Hiroshima Friday (http://nypost.com/2016/05/10/obama-to-pay-historic-visit-to-hiroshima/). But who believes his press flacks?
His penchant for apologizing is central to his legacy. He may not often say “I apologize” explicitly, but his meaning is always clear, especially since he often bends his knee overseas, where he knows the foreign audiences will get his meaning. It is, in fact, Obama’s subtlety that makes his effort to reduce America’s influence in the world so dangerous.
He started in Cairo in 2009, referring to the “fear and anger” that the 9/11 attacks provoked in Americans, saying that, “in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our traditions and our ideals.” He later said, “Unfortunately, faced with an uncertain threat, our government made a series of hasty decisions . . . based on fear rather than foresight” — a characterization Americans overwhelmingly reject.
In Europe, saved three times by America in the last century, Obama apologized because “there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.” And in this hemisphere, Obama said, “We have at times been disengaged, and at times we sought to dictate our terms,” culminating in his recent fawning visits with the Castros in Cuba.
The list goes on and on.


Then there’s his penchant for bowing to foreign leaders. He has bowed to the king of Saudi Arabia. He bowed to the emperor of Japan on a previous visit. He has bowed to China’s leader, Xi Jinping. And these are not casual nods of the head, but unmistakable gestures of obeisance.

For those who may wonder, the diplomatic protocol on bowing is clear: Heads of state don’t bow to other heads of state, monarchs or otherwise. Period. And Americans don’t bow to anyone. We fought a revolution to establish that point.

Obama’s apologies and gestures prove yet again, in his words, that he isn’t like those other presidents on our currency. And Friday, in Hiroshima, Obama may prove conclusively that, on national security, he’s no Franklin Roosevelt or Harry Truman.

Obama’s narcissism, his zeal for photo opportunities with him at the center, whether in Havana or Hiroshima, too often overcomes lesser concerns — like the best interests of the country. He puts his vanity before our nation’s pride.


Even without an express apology, there will likely be moral equivalence like: Japan bombed Pearl Harbor and we bombed Hiroshima. We’re all guilty, but let’s put it behind us.
Undeniably, World War II is history, and further strengthening the US-Japan alliance profoundly important. But there is no moral equivalence here.
Pearl Harbor was “a date which will live in infamy,” in Roosevelt’s words. Hiroshima (and Nagasaki) came after four years of brutal war and a desperate race against Nazi and Japanese efforts to develop atomic weapons. We won the race, and Truman acted decisively and properly to end the war.
Truman understood that not using the atom bombs would have condemned millions of service members to death or debilitating injury. Japanese resistance grew significantly as US forces neared Japan, and, expecting fanatical Japanese resistance, American military planners repeatedly increased projected US casualties. The calculus could not have been clearer.

http://nypost.com/2016/05/26/obamas-shameful-apology-tour-lands-in-hiroshima/

FindersKeepers
05-28-2016, 05:24 AM
The author of the OP makes good points -- albeit Obama did not say "I'm sorry;" his actions and words are apologetic in nature.

Now, there's nothing wrong with leaders agreeing that it's best we get along and not fight wars, but, in order for Obama's gesture to be acceptable, we need to see Prime Minister Shinzo Abe tour Pearl Harbor and lay a wreath at the USS Arizona memorial.

Making amends is a two-way street.

Japan started that war -- we simply ended it.

Common
05-28-2016, 05:46 AM
He didnt apologize in Hiroshima he stopped just short of that. Hes bowed all over the world.
I cant wait till this clown is gone. Even Hillary will be better than he is.

Of course there will be MANY that will say its only because hes black,and im a racist.

Peter1469
05-28-2016, 05:48 AM
Notice: Duplicate threads merged

donttread
05-28-2016, 07:59 AM
I don't really believe that you can apologize for something someone else did to people who it wasn't done to. Having said that Hiroshima was an atrocity. You can justify it as many ways from Sunday as you wish. But we are the only country to ever use nukes on people and now we ironically run around the world choosing who may have nukes and who may not because they are a weapon to terrible to use.

birddog
05-28-2016, 08:34 AM
Ok. Which giant LOSER are you from trinns hateboard?

Trinnity has a nice board. I try to see good whatever board I am on. There's much more hate coming from libs like you than from Triin's board.

Peter1469
05-28-2016, 09:05 AM
Trinnity has a nice board. I try to see good whatever board I am on. There's much more hate coming from libs like you than from Triin's board.

She bans libs. It is an echo chamber. Boring.

Tahuyaman
05-28-2016, 10:28 AM
She bans libs. It is an echo chamber. Boring.

Some people here love the echo chamber effect. It's obvious who they are. I can give you a list of names if you want.

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 10:41 AM
Obama is Obama. He hates American citizens. He enjoys the company of other tyrants and dictators. The regime's actions in Japan must be viewed with that understanding. Memorial Day is a day to remember Americans who died serving the defensive needs of our country. The anti-American president failed the nation and remembered a hostile nation's war dead instead.

I despise and loathe him.

Tahuyaman
05-28-2016, 11:10 AM
I don't despise or loathe Obama. I just have no respect for him.

He's simply a vacuous product of the hard left. As someone said recently, he's a Manchurian candidate. He's what you get when someone has been programmed over a long period of time. Left to his own devices, he proves to be incompetent.

What he has is a fairly impressive vocabulary. He hides his incompetence through the words he uses, the style in which he delivers them and his overinflated ego.

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 11:15 AM
I don't despise or loathe Obama. I just have no respect for him.

He's simply a vacuous product of the hard left. As someone said recently, he's a Manchurian candidate. He's what you get when someone has been programmed over a long period of time. Left to his own devices, he proves to be incompetent.

What he has is a fairly impressive vocabulary. He hides his incompetence through the words he uses, the style in which he delivers them and his overinflated ego.
He is not incompetent.

He said he would destroy the nation and he has succeeded. He has wrecked as much as he could. He has embedded radical leftists is every governmental organization. They will have to be rooted out and fired. He has changed our culture, damaged our language and erased our borders.

Tahuyaman
05-28-2016, 11:39 AM
He is not incompetent.

He said he would destroy the nation and he has succeeded. He has wrecked as much as he could. He has embedded radical leftists is every governmental organization. They will have to be rooted out and fired. He has changed our culture, damaged our language and erased our borders.

if he was competent, he would have runied the country. We have survived his administration.

Yes he's weakened America, but he hasn't destroyed America. Everything he's done done be repaired.

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 12:52 PM
if he was competent, he would have runied the country. We have survived his administration.

Yes he's weakened America, but he hasn't destroyed America. Everything he's done done be repaired.
We can agree to disagree.

Common Sense
05-28-2016, 01:03 PM
LOL...you all sound just like the unwashed hippies under Bush.

A little self awareness and a few more IQ points would go far with some here.

donttread
05-28-2016, 01:12 PM
He is not incompetent.

He said he would destroy the nation and he has succeeded. He has wrecked as much as he could. He has embedded radical leftists is every governmental organization. They will have to be rooted out and fired. He has changed our culture, damaged our language and erased our borders.

First of all when did he say he intended to destroy America? Seems like the kind of thing we all should of heard about.
As for incompetence: That is the government's go to excuse from Ruby Ridge to Waco, to Fast and Furious, Iraq, the fall of our embassy in 1979 , to Benghazi , to the Fed losing a few billion, to the Fed feeding and worsening the "housing boom" . Their excuse when it hits the fan is ALWAYS "aw shucs sorry we're just some really dumb motherfuckers" .
Nobody with the credentials our government police agencies and Intell have can be that fucking stupid that often.

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 01:17 PM
LOL...you all sound just like the unwashed hippies under Bush.

A little self awareness and a few more IQ points would go far with some here.
You should begin with the easiest target. You.

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 01:20 PM
I don't really believe that you can apologize for something someone else did to people who it wasn't done to. Having said that Hiroshima was an atrocity. You can justify it as many ways from Sunday as you wish. But we are the only country to ever use nukes on people and now we ironically run around the world choosing who may have nukes and who may not because they are a weapon to terrible to use.
Using atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was no atrocity. It was an efficient use of a potent, new weapon. Had Truman failed to use the two he had in his possession, history would have judged him very harshly. Truman made the right decision.

AZ Jim
05-28-2016, 01:25 PM
You should begin with the easiest target. You.In connection with you, I agree. How did you get so unhinged? Better wrap your miserable self in another bottle or two of vino and sleep it off.

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 01:26 PM
e said he would destroy the nation and he has succeeded. He has wrecked as much as he could. He has embedded radical leftists is every governmental organization. They will have to be rooted out and fired. He has changed our culture, damaged our language and erased our borders.

First of all when did he say he intended to destroy America? Seems like the kind of thing we all should of heard about.
Some of you must be spoon-fed. What do you believe Obama meant when he spoke of fundamentally transforming the US?
If that is not a sufficient clue for you, compare his words to what he has accomplished in tearing down the nation.


As for incompetence: That is the government's go to excuse from Ruby Ridge to Waco, to Fast and Furious, Iraq, the fall of our embassy in 1979 , to Benghazi , to the Fed losing a few billion, to the Fed feeding and worsening the "housing boom" . Their excuse when it hits the fan is ALWAYS "aw shucs sorry we're just some really dumb $#@!s" .
Nobody with the credentials our government police agencies and Intell have can be that $#@!ing stupid that often.
I am not claiming that Obama is incompetent. He has largely succeeded in so damaging the American middle class that it might not recover. He has erased our borders. He has damaged our language. He has harmed our American culture. he has doubled our on-book national debt. While he is not the only one he has had the greatest level of success in erasing America.

AZ Jim
05-28-2016, 01:29 PM
@MisterVeritis (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1287)...."He said he would destroy the nation and he has succeeded. He has wrecked as much as he could. He has embedded radical leftists is every governmental organization. They will have to be rooted out and fired. He has changed our culture, damaged our language and erased our borders." Like most of your posts this one is a lie. Prove me wrong. Post proof of your assertions.

Common Sense
05-28-2016, 01:29 PM
You should begin with the easiest target. You.

Predictable and lame. If you were more self aware you'd already know that. ;)

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 01:30 PM
In connection with you, I agree. How did you get so unhinged? Better wrap your miserable self in another bottle or two of vino and sleep it off.
I am self-aware. Thank you.

The wine is usually quite good. I am drinking down my stock of wine as I prepare to move. After I build my new house I will take up winemaking again. I seldom get drunk as I don't like the way it makes me feel.

If by unhinged you mean how did I come to know and appreciate the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, and the arguments surrounding the Constitution's ratification, it took years of steady reading. It is never too late to start. Well, except possibly for you.

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 01:32 PM
Predictable and lame. If you were more self aware you'd already know that. ;)
Had you been self-aware you would never have made your statement. If you were more self-aware, you'd already know that. ;)

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 01:32 PM
@MisterVeritis (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1287)...."He said he would destroy the nation and he has succeeded. He has wrecked as much as he could. He has embedded radical leftists is every governmental organization. They will have to be rooted out and fired. He has changed our culture, damaged our language and erased our borders." Like most of your posts this one is a lie. Prove me wrong. Post proof of your assertions.
Go take a nap.

Common Sense
05-28-2016, 01:33 PM
Had you been self-aware you would never have made your statement. If you were more self-aware, you'd already know that. ;)

We could do this all day. But you already knew that. ;)

donttread
05-28-2016, 01:33 PM
Using atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was no atrocity. It was an efficient use of a potent, new weapon. Had Truman failed to use the two he had in his possession, history would have judged him very harshly. Truman made the right decision.

You swallowed the propaganda book hook line and sinker didn't you. Nuking kids is simply out of bounds

Common Sense
05-28-2016, 01:34 PM
@MisterVeritis (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1287)...."He said he would destroy the nation and he has succeeded. He has wrecked as much as he could. He has embedded radical leftists is every governmental organization. They will have to be rooted out and fired. He has changed our culture, damaged our language and erased our borders." Like most of your posts this one is a lie. Prove me wrong. Post proof of your assertions.

He never proves his assertions. He just makes wild claims and leaves the onus on anyone but him to prove or disprove. Reminds me of some other nut with funny hair and tiny hands.

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 01:38 PM
We could do this all day. But you already knew that. ;)
Yes, we could. But you already knew that. ;)

You may have the last word.

exotix
05-28-2016, 01:40 PM
John Bolton: Obama’s Shameful Apology Tour Lands in Hiroshima
https://punditfromanotherplanet.com/2016/05/27/john-bolton-obamas-shameful-apology-tour-lands-in-hiroshima/

I never had a doubt that the evil creature known as "obama" hates America and will continue to do everything in it's power to destroy America.
Obama is guilty of multiple counts of treason, and I'm angry as hell that NONE of our worthless elected criminals have stood up to do their jobs and impeach the scum.
Got that link that says Obama apologized ?

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 01:41 PM
He never proves his assertions. He just makes wild claims and leaves the onus on anyone but him to prove or disprove. Reminds me of some other nut with funny hair and tiny hands.
I have been posting here for years. Feel free to catch up. If you can.

I see no reason to restate over and over again for each newling, the basic issues I have with the radical Marxist.

donttread
05-28-2016, 01:41 PM
e said he would destroy the nation and he has succeeded. He has wrecked as much as he could. He has embedded radical leftists is every governmental organization. They will have to be rooted out and fired. He has changed our culture, damaged our language and erased our borders.

Some of you must be spoon-fed. What do you mean he meant when he spoke of fundamentally transforming the US?
If that is not a sufficient clue for you compare his words to what he has accomplished in tearing down the nation.


I am not claiming that Obama is incompetent. He has largely succeeded in so damaging the American middle class that it might not recover. He has erased our borders. He has damaged our language. He has harmed our American culture. he has doubled our on-book national debt. While he is not the only one he has had the greatest level of success in erasing America.


Of course! "Fundamentally transformation America" clearly mean destroy it. What was I thinking? Oh yeah sane thoughts

Tahuyaman
05-28-2016, 01:55 PM
LOL...you all sound just like the unwashed hippies under Bush.

A little self awareness and a few more IQ points would go far with some here.

unwashed hippies? Lol...

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 02:34 PM
Of course! "Fundamentally transformation America" clearly mean destroy it. What was I thinking? Oh yeah sane thoughts
Can you explain, in your own words, what you believe Barack Hussein O, the Marxist, Islamofascism supporter meant when he said he would fundamentally transform America?

donttread
05-28-2016, 02:45 PM
Can you explain, in your own words, what you believe Barack Hussein O, the Marxist, Islamofascism supporter meant when he said he would fundamentally transform America?

I'm guessing racial tension, the economy, etc. His failure to do these things is simply par for the course for politicians

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 03:07 PM
Using atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was no atrocity. It was an efficient use of a potent, new weapon. Had Truman failed to use the two he had in his possession, history would have judged him very harshly. Truman made the right decision.


You swallowed the propaganda book hook line and sinker didn't you. Nuking kids is simply out of bounds
Unlike you, I have spent a reasonable amount of time studying World War Two history. We had atomic weapons. The Japanese were not going to unconditionally surrender. We used the two weapons we had. Their use was reasonable and appropriate. In wars, people are killed. Not everyone who is killed deserves to die. Japan was responsible for the war it started.

I regret that there are people who loathe their nation as much as you do. You are not going to change. But neither will your nonsense be accepted by reasonable people.

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 03:10 PM
I'm guessing racial tension, the economy, etc. His failure to do these things is simply par for the course for politicians
Why would any of those require a fundamental transformation of the United States?
Racial tensions have never been higher in my memory than they are today. He succeeded in fundamentally transforming racial tensions.
The economy sucks. He has fundamentally transformed the nation into a fascist nation-state where the government controls much of what companies can do, including pay.

Give it some more thought. Visit some hard-left, Marxist blogs, visit your favorite suck-up-to-Obama websites. Then respond.

Tahuyaman
05-28-2016, 03:11 PM
We can agree to disagree.


I'm sticking with the idea that he's incompetent. Basically I believe we ultimately agree on principle, just for different reasons.

Common
05-28-2016, 03:13 PM
You swallowed the propaganda book hook line and sinker didn't you. Nuking kids is simply out of bounds

I agree with you by the way in theory. A few points dont read. Number 1 they really didnt expect the bomb to be that powerful. Even the german creators were stunned at the aftermath.

The US was embroiled in a war with two countries on opposite ends of the world.
The nazis in Europe and the japanese. The japanese stunned the entire country with Pearl Harbor. We were losing thousands of men a day fighting on both fronts. Our resources were wearing thin. We were fighting a land, sea and air battle in different places at the same time. We were winning but sustaining huge loss'.

Everything I read the decision to bomb didnt come easily, but I believe as ALL govts would do if it believed it was us or them they would have done it also.

I wish it hadnt happened but it did and you cant apply today with back then.

donttread
05-28-2016, 04:27 PM
Using atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was no atrocity. It was an efficient use of a potent, new weapon. Had Truman failed to use the two he had in his possession, history would have judged him very harshly. Truman made the right decision.



Unlike you, I have spent a reasonable amount of time studying World War Two history. We had atomic weapons. The Japanese were not going to unconditionally surrender. We used the two weapons we had. Their use was reasonable and appropriate. In wars, people are killed. Not everyone who is killed deserves to die. Japan was responsible for the war it started.

I regret that there are people who loathe their nation as much as you do. You are not going to change. But neither will your nonsense be accepted by reasonable people.


First of all the Japanese had already approached the Russians about a potential surrender , don't they cover stuff like that in "the winner writes the history" you have supposedly studied?
As for the rest, I am far more Patriotic than you because I take my Constitutional duty to hold the government accountable seriously whereas you simply justify everything they do. A trained chimp could do as much.
Look it up, start with "eternal vigilance" not eternal support of any actions the government ( a necessary evil to the founders) chooses to take. You and those like you who have led to our decline by questioning nothing from one half of the Donkephant make me sick.

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 04:32 PM
Using atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was no atrocity. It was an efficient use of a potent, new weapon. Had Truman failed to use the two he had in his possession, history would have judged him very harshly. Truman made the right decision.


Please, they had essentially surrendered but we didn't want any clauses. Didn't that come up in your "study time?"
That is a myth. Of course, it came up. The American hating leftists raise it every time this conversation happens.

The Japanese were trying to play the Russians against the Americans. We knew it because of the top secret MAGIC Japanese diplomatic decrypts. If you search you can find my previous messages on this topic. They are well researched and factual.

donttread
05-28-2016, 04:48 PM
Using atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was no atrocity. It was an efficient use of a potent, new weapon. Had Truman failed to use the two he had in his possession, history would have judged him very harshly. Truman made the right decision.


That is a myth. Of course, it came up. The American hating leftists raise it every time this conversation happens.

The Japanese were trying to play the Russians against the Americans. We knew it because of the top secret MAGIC Japanese diplomatic decrypts. If you search you can find my previous messages on this topic. They are well researched and factual.

Not a myth, at a minimum they had discussed the possibility of surrender with Russia.

donttread
05-28-2016, 04:52 PM
I agree with you by the way in theory. A few points dont read. Number 1 they really didnt expect the bomb to be that powerful. Even the german creators were stunned at the aftermath.

The US was embroiled in a war with two countries on opposite ends of the world.
The nazis in Europe and the japanese. The japanese stunned the entire country with Pearl Harbor. We were losing thousands of men a day fighting on both fronts. Our resources were wearing thin. We were fighting a land, sea and air battle in different places at the same time. We were winning but sustaining huge loss'.

Everything I read the decision to bomb didnt come easily, but I believe as ALL govts would do if it believed it was us or them they would have done it also.

I wish it hadnt happened but it did and you cant apply today with back then.

Pearl Harbor was a military target. Had we nuked Japanese Army bases or perhaps just dropped regular bombs on the emperor I'd have no issue

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 04:55 PM
Not a myth, at a minimum they had discussed the possibility of surrender with Russia.
Right. The decryption of Japanese Imperial diplomatic cables made it clear they were trying to play the Russians off against the Americans. I have already said it once. The vanquished do not set surrender terms. The victors do.

It took two atomic weapons plus the complete destruction of the Japanese Kwangtung Army before the Emperor was willing to surrender. Following the destruction of Hiroshima, the Japanese made no mention, whatever, in the diplomatic traffic. They failed to recognize its significance. Compared to the destruction of all of their other cities Hiroshima was unimportant.

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 04:56 PM
Pearl Harbor was a military target. Had we nuked Japanese Army bases or perhaps just dropped regular bombs on the emperor I'd have no issue
Hiroshima, Nagasaki, plus all of the other cities on the lists were military targets. You have no good argument. You are just against it. I suspect even you do not know precisely why.

Peter1469
05-28-2016, 05:15 PM
Right. The decryption of Japanese Imperial diplomatic cables made it clear they were trying to play the Russians off against the Americans. I have already said it once. The vanquished do not set surrender terms. The victors do.

It took two atomic weapons plus the complete destruction of the Japanese Kwangtung Army before the Emperor was willing to surrender. Following the destruction of Hiroshima, the Japanese made no mention, whatever, in the diplomatic traffic. They failed to recognize its significance. Compared to the destruction of all of their other cities Hiroshima was unimportant.

The Japs thought the US only had one bomb. We called their buff and they folded with the second strike. It would have take several months to make more.

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 05:40 PM
First of all the Japanese had already approached the Russians about a potential surrender , don't they cover stuff like that in "the winner writes the history" you have supposedly studied?
I have read the TOP SECRET MAGIC Summaries. Have you?
Do you know what the top secret magic summaries are? Think of them as Presidential Daily Briefing taken from intercepted, decrypted top secret Japanese diplomatic traffic. In other words, this is what the Japanese leadership was saying amongst themselves. The Japanese revealed themselves as racists, militaristic, unyielding, implacable enemies. They also revealed how much involvement the Emperor had in the efforts to pit the Russians against the Americans in the so-called surrender discussions. The Japanese were willing to carve up Asia with Stalin in order to save themselves.

The day to day summaries made it very clear.


As for the rest, I am far more Patriotic than you because I take my Constitutional duty to hold the government accountable seriously whereas you simply justify everything they do.
Patriotism requires more than simple knee-jerk reactions. It also requires wisdom informed by knowledge. Unfortunately, you have shortchanged yourself. The things you "know" are, at best, leftist half truths. And, it is painfully obvious that you are unwilling to learn


A trained chimp could do as much.
Look it up, start with "eternal vigilance" not eternal support of any actions the government ( a necessary evil to the founders) chooses to take. You and those like you who have led to our decline by questioning nothing from one half of the Donkephant make me sick.
I suspect that you believe your mal-informed patriotism is superior to knowledge-based reason.

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 05:52 PM
The Japs thought the US only had one bomb. We called their buff and they folded with the second strike. It would have take several months to make more.
Based on the top secret magic decrypts the Japanese were blissfully unaware of what happened at Hiroshima. The destruction of that small city was unimportant compared to the "routine" bombings of every important city in Japan. The only thing that made it unique was the very small number of attacking airplanes. Nearly all American attacks involved raids of up to 100 B-29s. What harm could possibly come from a single bomb from a single aircraft?

From memory, we believed we could make one Nagasaki-style bomb every two months.

Dangermouse
05-28-2016, 08:25 PM
The Japs thought the US only had one bomb. We called their buff and they folded with the second strike. It would have take several months to make more.

The second bomb was dropped to tell Russia to back off, and suggest to THEM there were more, if needed. The Japanese didn't even know you had one, till you dropped it.

As for Bolton, did anyone ever take what he said seriously?

donttread
05-28-2016, 08:44 PM
Right. The decryption of Japanese Imperial diplomatic cables made it clear they were trying to play the Russians off against the Americans. I have already said it once. The vanquished do not set surrender terms. The victors do.

It took two atomic weapons plus the complete destruction of the Japanese Kwangtung Army before the Emperor was willing to surrender. Following the destruction of Hiroshima, the Japanese made no mention, whatever, in the diplomatic traffic. They failed to recognize its significance. Compared to the destruction of all of their other cities Hiroshima was unimportant.

We nuked kids on purpose, no "collateral damage " If you find that OK then you're not OK

donttread
05-28-2016, 08:50 PM
I have read the TOP SECRET MAGIC Summaries. Have you?
Do you know what the top secret magic summaries are? Think of them as Presidential Daily Briefing taken from intercepted, decrypted top secret Japanese diplomatic traffic. In other words, this is what the Japanese leadership was saying amongst themselves. The Japanese revealed themselves as racists, militaristic, unyielding, implacable enemies. They also revealed how much involvement the Emperor had in the efforts to pit the Russians against the Americans in the so-called surrender discussions. The Japanese were willing to carve up Asia with Stalin in order to save themselves.

The day to day summaries made it very clear.


Patriotism requires more than simple knee-jerk reactions. It also requires wisdom informed by knowledge. Unfortunately, you have shortchanged yourself. The things you "know" are, at best, leftist half truths. And, it is painfully obvious that you are unwilling to learn


I suspect that you believe your mal-informed patriotism is superior to knowledge-based reason.

Did you happen to read these "Top Secret MAGIC Summaries " after you took the Magic mushrooms? I realize that WW2 and many wars prior waged war on civilians to achieve government surrender , but that knowledge doesn't make going so right. Like Dresden, which should be a war crime.

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 09:13 PM
The second bomb was dropped to tell Russia to back off, and suggest to THEM there were more, if needed. The Japanese didn't even know you had one, till you dropped it.

As for Bolton, did anyone ever take what he said seriously?
That is more leftist propaganda. Where do you guys come from?

Our plan was to use them as fast as we could manufacture and ship them.

I like John Bolton.

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 09:15 PM
Did you happen to read these "Top Secret MAGIC Summaries " after you took the Magic mushrooms? I realize that WW2 and many wars prior waged war on civilians to achieve government surrender , but that knowledge doesn't make going so right. Like Dresden, which should be a war crime.
Why do you choose to look utterly foolish?

You are not a serious person. You are not a serious poster. I suspect you did significant damage to yourself during your wasted youth. That is a personal problem.

You have proven yourself incapable of learning. It is a pity, really.

MisterVeritis
05-28-2016, 09:17 PM
We nuked kids on purpose, no "collateral damage " If you find that OK then you're not OK
You are a fool. That is okay. You are an American-hating leftist. Each city on the target list contained a military target. But you are too lazy, too leftist to find that out.

silvereyes
05-28-2016, 10:12 PM
Trinnity has a nice board. I try to see good whatever board I am on. There's much more hate coming from libs like you than from Triin's board.

Bwahahahaha! That's complete bullshit. I was just there this AM. That place reeks of NOTHING BUT HATE towards anyone even slightly left. The things said about libs there are vicious and disgusting

silvereyes
05-28-2016, 10:13 PM
if he was competent, he would have runied the country. We have survived his administration.

Yes he's weakened America, but he hasn't destroyed America. Everything he's done done be repaired.

Ok. Now see most of this I don't hate.

Dr. Who
05-28-2016, 10:14 PM
Did you happen to read these "Top Secret MAGIC Summaries " after you took the Magic mushrooms? I realize that WW2 and many wars prior waged war on civilians to achieve government surrender , but that knowledge doesn't make going so right. Like Dresden, which should be a war crime.
Then you are also aware that concentrating the Pacific Fleet in Pearl Harbor would be viewed as a threat to the Japanese and that FDR put them there.

silvereyes
05-28-2016, 10:15 PM
In connection with you, I agree. How did you get so unhinged? Better wrap your miserable self in another bottle or two of vino and sleep it off.

He does make his own. He promised me a nip. I'm still waiting. ;)

Tahuyaman
05-28-2016, 10:23 PM
Ok. Now see most of this I don't hate.

There's hope for you yet.

Subdermal
05-28-2016, 10:30 PM
I don't despise or loathe Obama. I just have no respect for him.

He's simply a vacuous product of the hard left. As someone said recently, he's a Manchurian candidate. He's what you get when someone has been programmed over a long period of time. Left to his own devices, he proves to be incompetent.

What he has is a fairly impressive vocabulary. He hides his incompetence through the words he uses, the style in which he delivers them and his overinflated ego.

He is not incompetent; he's the reverse of that. What he's doing, he's doing intentionally, and with great calculation - and he's been extraordinarily successful.

To call him incompetent is a disservice to what should be the proper strategy to oppose his goals - because he is by no means the only one with these goals.

Subdermal
05-28-2016, 10:31 PM
if he was competent, he would have runied the country. We have survived his administration.

Yes he's weakened America, but he hasn't destroyed America. Everything he's done done be repaired.

You think mere competence is all it would have taken to destroy America?

Subdermal
05-28-2016, 10:46 PM
Bwahahahaha! That's complete bull$#@!. I was just there this AM. That place reeks of NOTHING BUT HATE towards anyone even slightly left. The things said about libs there are vicious and disgusting

...as opposed to the delightful prose directed at conservatives here.

:biglaugh:

Tahuyaman
05-28-2016, 10:52 PM
I'm sticking with the total incompetence thing.

donttread
05-29-2016, 08:14 AM
That is more leftist propaganda. Where do you guys come from?

Our plan was to use them as fast as we could manufacture and ship them.

I like John Bolton.

No I think the big dog was marking it's territory. So what if it wasn't a military target, dead kids invoke more fear

MisterVeritis
05-29-2016, 08:17 AM
He does make his own. He promised me a nip. I'm still waiting. ;)
Feel free to set up a time to visit. The Honey Grapefruit I had last night was pretty good.

MisterVeritis
05-29-2016, 08:22 AM
No I think the big dog was marking it's territory. So what if it wasn't a military target, dead kids invoke more fear
What impresses me the most about you, in addition to your inability to learn, is you willingness to outright lie.

In the days following the successful attack on Hiroshima, the Japanese leadership did not even mention it. It was a small attack on one minor city. The war the Japanese started in the Pacific had finally reached the Islands. Every major city had been bombed in hundred plane bombing raids.

Given your complete failures maybe the right way to pronounce your name is don't read.

donttread
05-29-2016, 08:22 AM
Why do you choose to look utterly foolish?

You are not a serious person. You are not a serious poster. I suspect you did significant damage to yourself during your wasted youth. That is a personal problem.

You have proven yourself incapable of learning. It is a pity, really.

First of all if I was too serious all the time I'd be like you and I sure as hell don't want that.
Secondly, I've come to recognize the kind of post people make when they have no real logical counter response. And they look just like your post #58.

MisterVeritis
05-29-2016, 08:25 AM
First of all if I was too serious all the time I'd be like you and I sure as hell don't want that.
Secondly, I've come to recognize the kind of post people make when they have no real logical counter response. And they look just like your post #58.
You are a failure.

donttread
05-29-2016, 08:25 AM
What impresses me the most about you, in addition to your inability to learn, is you willingness to outright lie.

In the days following the successful attack on Hiroshima, the Japanese leadership did not even mention it. It was a small attack on one minor city. The war the Japanese started in the Pacific had finally reached the Islands. Every major city had been bombed in hundred plane bombing raids.

Given your complete failures maybe the right way to pronounce your name is don't read.


You realize that 90% of us on this board know that post 71 is just another "I have no counter argument so I'll act all condescending, righteous, knowledgeable and intelligent and hope they buy it " epic fail, right?

MisterVeritis
05-29-2016, 08:27 AM
You realize that 90% of us on this board know that post 71 is just another "I have no counter argument so I'll act all condescending, righteous, knowledgeable and intelligent and hope they buy it " epic fail, right?
You are a failure. Go away and lick your wounds.

donttread
05-29-2016, 08:32 AM
You are a failure.

You are making this way too easy by proving my point. Or did you think that a pompous ass with no originality in his brain calling me a failure would somehow ruin my day? LOL
But here's a serious question. Why wouldn't the first nukes in history be dropped on military targets? If as you and your "winner written history believing friends " say we knew this would end the war why drop them on kids instead of military targets? Just plain sadism maybe?

Peter1469
05-29-2016, 08:34 AM
You are making this way too easy by proving my point. Or did you think that a pompous ass with no originality in his brain calling me a failure would somehow ruin my day? LOL
But here's a serious question. Why wouldn't the first nukes in history be dropped on military targets? If as you and your "winner written history believing friends " say we knew this would end the war why drop them on kids instead of military targets? Just plain sadism maybe?

Using the bombs on two Japanese cities was not novel. Most cities in Europe and Japan had already been targeted with bombing raids.

Context.

donttread
05-29-2016, 08:35 AM
What impresses me the most about you, in addition to your inability to learn, is you willingness to outright lie.

In the days following the successful attack on Hiroshima, the Japanese leadership did not even mention it. It was a small attack on one minor city. The war the Japanese started in the Pacific had finally reached the Islands. Every major city had been bombed in hundred plane bombing raids.

Given your complete failures maybe the right way to pronounce your name is don't read.

So wait a minute, let me get this straight? Your intensive study of WW 2 history has come to the conclusion that one nuke was "a small unmentioned attack" but two brought about quick surrender? Do you realize how stupid that sounds?

MisterVeritis
05-29-2016, 08:38 AM
You are making this way too easy by proving my point. Or did you think that a pompous ass with no originality in his brain calling me a failure would somehow ruin my day? LOL
But here's a serious question. Why wouldn't the first nukes in history be dropped on military targets? If as you and your "winner written history believing friends " say we knew this would end the war why drop them on kids instead of military targets? Just plain sadism maybe?
In addition to being a failure, you continue to play the fool's role. One can only wonder why.

"Hiroshima was a city of considerable military importance. It contained the 2nd Army Headquarters, which commanded the defense of all of southern Japan. The city was a communications center, a storage point, and an assembly area for troops. To quote a Japanese report, "Probably more than a thousand times since the beginning of the war did the Hiroshima citizens see off with cries of 'Banzai' the troops leaving from the harbor.""

http://www.atomicarchive.com/Docs/MED/med_chp6.shtml

donttread
05-29-2016, 08:45 AM
In addition to being a failure, you continue to play the fool's role. One can only wonder why.

"Hiroshima was a city of considerable military importance. It contained the 2nd Army Headquarters, which commanded the defense of all of southern Japan. The city was a communications center, a storage point, and an assembly area for troops. To quote a Japanese report, "Probably more than a thousand times since the beginning of the war did the Hiroshima citizens see off with cries of 'Banzai' the troops leaving from the harbor.""

http://www.atomicarchive.com/Docs/MED/med_chp6.shtml


But yet according to your own post Hiroshima was "not even mentioned the next day" and " a small attack on a small city" . You can't have it both ways? Or can you in the "history" you so closely studied?

donttread
05-29-2016, 08:48 AM
You are a failure. Go away and lick your wounds.

I have no wounds, in fact your attacks contradict themselves. ?This is easy pickins.

donttread
05-29-2016, 08:50 AM
Using the bombs on two Japanese cities was not novel. Most cities in Europe and Japan had already been targeted with bombing raids.

Context.

Context doesn't make it right, it just means that the other nations were also child murderers and we were child murders in Europe , not just Japan.

MisterVeritis
05-29-2016, 08:51 AM
So wait a minute, let me get this straight? Your intensive study of WW 2 history has come to the conclusion that one nuke was "a small unmentioned attack" but two brought about quick surrender? Do you realize how stupid that sounds?
I cannot recall ever saying that the use of two atomic weapons brought about quick surrender. You missed a crucial fact. On August 9th, the same day we destroyed Nagasaki, the Soviet Union launched "August Storm". In nine days the Soviet Union destroyed the Japanese Kwangtung Army. It was an extraordinary strategic feat. I believe it was the two bombings combined with the Soviet Union's rapid, decisive defeat of their Army deployed in the field, is what led to the Japanese surrender.

I cannot help you. You have chosen the left-path of ignorance. By now, if you wanted to know the truth you would know it.

donttread
05-29-2016, 08:56 AM
I cannot recall ever saying that the use of two atomic weapons brought about quick surrender. You missed a crucial fact. On August 9th, the same day we destroyed Nagasaki, the Soviet Union launched "August Storm". In nine days the Soviet Union destroyed the Japanese Kwangtung Army. It was an extraordinary strategic feat. I believe it was the two bombings combined with the Soviet Union's rapid, decisive defeat of their Army deployed in the field, is what led to the Japanese surrender.

I cannot help you. You have chosen the left-path of ignorance. By now, if you wanted to know the truth you would know it.

So then nukes were insignificant and we unnecessary? We just liked to kill innocents maybe? C'mon man , you've got to stop painting yourself into a corner. This is too damned easy. I've got to find another thread

MisterVeritis
05-29-2016, 08:57 AM
In addition to being a failure, you continue to play the fool's role. One can only wonder why.

"Hiroshima was a city of considerable military importance. It contained the 2nd Army Headquarters, which commanded the defense of all of southern Japan. The city was a communications center, a storage point, and an assembly area for troops. To quote a Japanese report, "Probably more than a thousand times since the beginning of the war did the Hiroshima citizens see off with cries of 'Banzai' the troops leaving from the harbor.""

http://www.atomicarchive.com/Docs/MED/med_chp6.shtml

But yet according to your own post Hiroshima was "not even mentioned the next day" and " a small attack on a small city" . You can't have it both ways? Or can you in the "history" you so closely studied?
Do facts confound you? I believe they do.

The MAGIC Summaries show that the Japanese leadership failed to recognize the significance of the Hiroshima attack in the days following the attack.

Are you aware that there was a war going on? A few months earlier, Operation Iceberg, the battle for Okinawa, was extraordinarily bloody. Here is the Google summary.

Summary: The battle of Okinawa, also known as Operation Iceberg, took place in April-June 1945. It was the largest amphibious landing in the Pacific theater of World War II. It also resulted in the largest casualties with over 100,000 Japanese casualties and 50,000 casualties for the Allies.

You could see the truth if you would just pull your head out of your ass.

Peter1469
05-29-2016, 09:16 AM
Context doesn't make it right, it just means that the other nations were also child murderers and we were child murders in Europe , not just Japan.

Incorrect. Sovereigns don't play by the rules they impose on the individual. We used the nukes to let the world know that the US was in charge. It was just to do so.

MisterVeritis
05-29-2016, 09:22 AM
So then nukes were insignificant and we unnecessary? We just liked to kill innocents maybe? C'mon man , you've got to stop painting yourself into a corner. This is too damned easy. I've got to find another thread
This indicates a near-fatal reading comprehension problem. It is time for you to run away.

donttread
05-29-2016, 09:23 AM
In addition to being a failure, you continue to play the fool's role. One can only wonder why.

"Hiroshima was a city of considerable military importance. It contained the 2nd Army Headquarters, which commanded the defense of all of southern Japan. The city was a communications center, a storage point, and an assembly area for troops. To quote a Japanese report, "Probably more than a thousand times since the beginning of the war did the Hiroshima citizens see off with cries of 'Banzai' the troops leaving from the harbor.""

http://www.atomicarchive.com/Docs/MED/med_chp6.shtml

Do facts confound you? I believe they do.

The MAGIC Summaries show that the Japanese leadership failed to recognize the significance of the Hiroshima attack in the days following the attack.

Are you aware that there was a war going on? A few months earlier, Operation Iceberg, the battle for Okinawa, was extraordinarily bloody. Here is the Google summary.

Summary: The battle of Okinawa, also known as Operation Iceberg, took place in April-June 1945. It was the largest amphibious landing in the Pacific theater of World War II. It also resulted in the largest casualties with over 100,000 Japanese casualties and 50,000 casualties for the Allies.

You could see the truth if you would just pull your head out of your ass.


So a city of "considerable military importance" was totally obliterated but they hardly noticed .Then the second nuke also a "small attack on a small city" and the people here were told it "saved lives and ended the war early" vs a ground war. ( the very point of the Okinawa summary in your post) But it actually had little effect and the Russians really forced the surrender, we then took credit for and lied to our own people? LMFAO. That's what you're going with? Fuckin A man.
Keep painting you almost in that corner now. LOL

donttread
05-29-2016, 09:32 AM
This indicates a near-fatal reading comprehension problem. It is time for you to run away.


Firstly since post 87 was developed from the statements in your post any "near fatal reading comprehension is partly yours.
More importantly please answer one more question as it feels good to laugh this hard.
If nukes merely constituted "small attacks on small cities" and conventional bombs could do the same thing, why did we go to all that trouble and expense to develop, produce and drop the two nukes to begin with? And then credit them with ending the war a few years and saving hundreds of thousands of lives?

MisterVeritis
05-29-2016, 09:33 AM
So a city of "considerable military importance" was totally obliterated but they hardly noticed .Then the second nuke also a "small attack on a small city" and the people here were told it "saved lives and ended the war early" vs a ground war. ( the very point of the Okinawa summary in your post) But it actually had little effect and the Russians really forced the surrender, we then took credit for and lied to our own people? LMFAO. That's what you're going with? $#@!in A man.
Keep painting you almost in that corner now. LOL
I can point out what the facts were then. Facts do not appear to make any difference to you.

Every city on the target lists contained at least one military target with strategic significance. You can stop your anti-American, left-lie any time now.

I do not know what damage you did to your brain in your youth. For others, who are not so damaged, the things I write offer insights into our use of two atomic weapons on two cities containing military targets. Operation Iceberg, the battle for Okinawa, indicated how bloody the fighting would be.

On 6 August and again on 9 August, the US destroyed two small cities using two bombs. At midnight, on 9 August the Soviet Union began their attack in Manchuria. Nine days later the Kwangtung Army surrendered. The Japanese military wanted to continue the fight. The Emperor surrendered.

It is almost as if you have no clue how the real world works. Well, don't read. Don't read.

MisterVeritis
05-29-2016, 09:39 AM
Firstly since post 87 was developed from the statements in your post any "near fatal reading comprehension is partly yours.
More importantly please answer one more question as it feels good to laugh this hard.
If nukes merely constituted "small attacks on small cities" and conventional bombs could do the same thing, why did we go to all that trouble and expense to develop, produce and drop the two nukes to begin with? And then credit them with ending the war a few years and saving hundreds of thousands of lives?
It is far simpler to deploy one aircraft to destroy one target with one bomb that it is to deploy hundreds of aircraft with thousands of bombs to destroy one target.

I have not said that the use of an atomic bomb was a small attack on a small city. So why do you make it appear as if you are directly quoting me? I believe what has you confused is my characterization of the Japanese non-response to Hiroshima's destruction. Given all of the other calamities of the war gone badly for the Japanese, it explains why they did not even comment on its novel destruction the day after the attack.

As for the reason why we began the Manhattan Project, one must look to NAZI Germany. The race to create atomic weapons was a race with Hitler.

You are not very good at this.

donttread
05-29-2016, 12:44 PM
It is far simpler to deploy one aircraft to destroy one target with one bomb that it is to deploy hundreds of aircraft with thousands of bombs to destroy one target.

I have not said that the use of an atomic bomb was a small attack on a small city. So why do you make it appear as if you are directly quoting me? I believe what has you confused is my characterization of the Japanese non-response to Hiroshima's destruction. Given all of the other calamities of the war gone badly for the Japanese, it explains why they did not even comment on its novel destruction the day after the attack.

As for the reason why we began the Manhattan Project, one must look to NAZI Germany. The race to create atomic weapons was a race with Hitler.

You are not very good at this.

Wait a minute . Developing , building and dropping the atomic bomb was "far similar" than a normal air raid? ROFLMAO
Please keep em coming they are funny.
If it suits your argument you say Hiroshima was not important to Japan because the "A" bomb did no more damage than a conventional bombing run . At other times you say we rushed to create the bomb ( the same bomb that's really no more effective and certainly way more expensive that a normal bombing mission, to beat the Nazi's to it)
Why so the Nazi's couldn't match the same destructive power from the air they'd had for the whole war? Or so we could spend millions to match destructive capabilities we already had?
And then of course the most obvious question of all: "If we built the bomb to best the German Armed forces why the hell did we drop it on Japanese children ?

That's because I'm looking for truth while you have apparently read several competing versions of history." "No more destructive than a normal raid." Wen I say why did cause surrender then you say " It didn't the Russians did" Then when I say why the expensive rush to develop it then You respond

MisterVeritis
05-29-2016, 01:22 PM
It is far simpler to deploy one aircraft to destroy one target with one bomb that it is to deploy hundreds of aircraft with thousands of bombs to destroy one target.


Wait a minute . Developing , building and dropping the atomic bomb was "far similar" than a normal air raid? ROFLMAO

I suppose "simpler" and "similar" are easy enough to confuse. And you are confused. Constantly.

Once again you show yourself to be a fool. I did not say it was simpler to develop, build and drop atomic bombs.

MisterVeritis
05-29-2016, 01:39 PM
I have not said that the use of an atomic bomb was a small attack on a small city. So why do you make it appear as if you are directly quoting me? I believe what has you confused is my characterization of the Japanese non-response to Hiroshima's destruction. Given all of the other calamities of the war gone badly for the Japanese, it explains why they did not even comment on its novel destruction the day after the attack.

As for the reason why we began the Manhattan Project, one must look to NAZI Germany. The race to create atomic weapons was a race with Hitler.


If it suits your argument you say Hiroshima was not important to Japan because the "A" bomb did no more damage than a conventional bombing run .
Reading is not a skill you mastered, is it?


At other times you say we rushed to create the bomb ( the same bomb that's really no more effective and certainly way more expensive that a normal bombing mission, to beat the Nazi's to it)
Reading is not a skill you mastered, is it?


Why so the Nazi's couldn't match the same destructive power from the air they'd had for the whole war? Or so we could spend millions to match destructive capabilities we already had?
This makes no sense. Writing is not a skill you mastered, is it?


And then of course the most obvious question of all: "If we built the bomb to best the German Armed forces why the hell did we drop it on Japanese children ?
This contains the seeds of a decent question if one strips away the anti-American leftism. I will restate it. If we built atomic weapons to defeat the national socialists in Germany, why did we use two weapons to destroy two Japanese cities?

By the time we had working weapons the war in Europe against the national socialists in Germany was over. The war against Japan continued. We used them against an enemy not yet defeated. I believe that if we had three working weapons we would have used three weapons against three cities.


That's because I'm looking for truth while you have apparently read several competing versions of history." "No more destructive than a normal raid." Wen I say why did cause surrender then you say " It didn't the Russians did" Then when I say why the expensive rush to develop it then You respond
You are not looking for the truth. If you were you would already have it.

In terms of weapons effects on targets, there is no real difference between what happens when one bomb destroys a significant portion of a city and a thousand bombs destroy an identical portion.

I did not write that the Russians caused the Japanese to surrender. I would suggest that you try reading again but it is clear that you lack the ability to do so. Find an adult to read it and explain it to you. I have done what I am willing to do.

donttread
05-29-2016, 04:04 PM
I have not said that the use of an atomic bomb was a small attack on a small city. So why do you make it appear as if you are directly quoting me? I believe what has you confused is my characterization of the Japanese non-response to Hiroshima's destruction. Given all of the other calamities of the war gone badly for the Japanese, it explains why they did not even comment on its novel destruction the day after the attack.

As for the reason why we began the Manhattan Project, one must look to NAZI Germany. The race to create atomic weapons was a race with Hitler.

Reading is not a skill you mastered, is it?


Reading is not a skill you mastered, is it?


This makes no sense. Writing is not a skill you mastered, is it?


This contains the seeds of a decent question if one strips away the anti-American leftism. I will restate it. If we built atomic weapons to defeat the national socialists in Germany, why did we use two weapons to destroy two Japanese cities?

By the time we had working weapons the war in Europe against the national socialists in Germany was over. The war against Japan continued. We used them against an enemy not yet defeated. I believe that if we had three working weapons we would have used three weapons against three cities.


You are not looking for the truth. If you were you would already have it.

In terms of weapons effects on targets, there is no real difference between what happens when one bomb destroys a significant portion of a city and a thousand bombs destroy an identical portion.

I did not write that the Russians caused the Japanese to surrender. I would suggest that you try reading again but it is clear that you lack the ability to do so. Find an adult to read it and explain it to you. I have done what I am willing to do.

I know the war in Europe was over. But like most war mongers the idea of NOT using the bright, shiny new killing machine at all , doesn't even cross your mind does it?
Look please quit the "holier than thou" "arrogant condescending " pompous ass routine?
Nobody buys it. If you had real arguments you'd be using them. Oh, and while we are at it stop answering questions with quotes you obviously support and the distancing yourself from them later when you get pinned in a corner. It's bad faith posting IMO. And it will never fool me or the other 90% of our board who are intelligent.

MisterVeritis
05-29-2016, 04:33 PM
I know the war in Europe was over.
I am sure you know NOW. If you knew the war in Europe was over before the weapons were created why ask the question?


But like most war mongers the idea of NOT using the bright, shiny new killing machine at all , doesn't even cross your mind does it?
I suppose this is a legitimate question for a radical anti-American leftist. No. A failure to use atomic weapons to defeat Japan would have been an impeachable offense for Truman if not a rationale for assassination.

One way or another Japan would have to be rubbled and defeated. Atomic weapons were just as good a way as any other. Preparations for invasion would have killed and injured hundreds of thousands of Japanese in the coastal regions. Japan had a couple of millions of home defense troops in addition to a few hundred thousand regular Army troops preparing to counter our invasion. After the bloody fighting on Okinawa the American casualty estimates rose.


Look please quit the "holier than thou" "arrogant condescending " pompous ass routine?
Nobody buys it. If you had real arguments you'd be using them. Oh, and while we are at it stop answering questions with quotes you obviously support and the distancing yourself from them later when you get pinned in a corner. It's bad faith posting IMO. And it will never fool me or the other 90% of our board who are intelligent.
You are welcome to pull your head out of your ass anytime you like.

I am amused that you believe you have pinned me in a corner. Reading comprehension and self-awareness have failed you.

Others can decide who offers the better arguments. I have given you the best information I am aware of.

Peter1469
05-29-2016, 05:49 PM
We had no need to invade Japan. They were beaten. We did need to use the bombs to demonstrate our dominance in the post war era.


I am sure you know NOW. If you knew the war in Europe was over before the weapons were created why ask the question?


I suppose this is a legitimate question for a radical anti-American leftist. No. A failure to use atomic weapons to defeat Japan would have been an impeachable offense for Truman if not a rationale for assassination.

One way or another Japan would have to be rubbled and defeated. Atomic weapons were just as good a way as any other. Preparations for invasion would have killed and injured hundreds of thousands of Japanese in the coastal regions. Japan had a couple of millions of home defense troops in addition to a few hundred thousand regular Army troops preparing to counter our invasion. After the bloody fighting on Okinawa the American casualty estimates rose.


You are welcome to pull your head out of your ass anytime you like.

I am amused that you believe you have pinned me in a corner. Reading comprehension and self-awareness have failed you.

Others can decide who offers the better arguments. I have given you the best information I am aware of.

AZ Jim
05-29-2016, 05:57 PM
We had no need to invade Japan. They were beaten. We did need to use the bombs to demonstrate our dominance in the post war era.Fuckin uninformed kid, picks apart the thinking of those times when you were still in someones balls.

Ethereal
05-29-2016, 06:05 PM
If you look at the thesaurus entry for "credible", John Bolton is listed as one of the antonyms.

Peter1469
05-29-2016, 07:21 PM
Fuckin uninformed kid, picks apart the thinking of those times when you were still in someones balls.

Recall the reasons the Japs would not surrender. Then recall what we allowed them to do after they surrendered. There you will find your answers.

valley ranch
05-29-2016, 07:39 PM
What ObamA did was not to apologise but go around the world talking badly about America and it's people. The Japanese have a better opinion of us~US than he.

Hidden in plain view. He went behind our back, to the rest of the world, right before our eyes.

MisterVeritis
05-29-2016, 08:15 PM
We had no need to invade Japan. They were beaten. We did need to use the bombs to demonstrate our dominance in the post war era.
Hindsight is awesome. I have the opposite view. Had the Soviet Union not started August Storm at midnight on 9 August preparations for invasion would have continued. Preparations included a massive bombardment of the coastal areas. Hundreds of thousands of additional Japanese people would have died in the bombardments.

Their military did not accept defeat. And wars take on a life of their own. Many of us who are here today arguing over whether or not the use of atomic weapons was right or not would not be here today if the invasion had taken place. Our fathers would have perished in the invasion.

The US was war weary. In my opinion, we would have invaded in order to decisively defeat Japan. As far as dominance goes the Soviet Union had human spies inside our Manhattan Project. What fascinates me, for reasons I shall not divulge, is that some documents concerning what we knew about that spying are still classified.

donttread
05-30-2016, 09:27 AM
Hindsight is awesome. I have the opposite view. Had the Soviet Union not started August Storm at midnight on 9 August preparations for invasion would have continued. Preparations included a massive bombardment of the coastal areas. Hundreds of thousands of additional Japanese people would have died in the bombardments.

Their military did not accept defeat. And wars take on a life of their own. Many of us who are here today arguing over whether or not the use of atomic weapons was right or not would not be here today if the invasion had taken place. Our fathers would have perished in the invasion.

The US was war weary. In my opinion, we would have invaded in order to decisively defeat Japan. As far as dominance goes the Soviet Union had human spies inside our Manhattan Project. What fascinates me, for reasons I shall not divulge, is that some documents concerning what we knew about that spying are still classified.

Disagree, but respectfully as your post is respectful

MisterVeritis
05-30-2016, 09:33 AM
Recall the reasons the Japs would not surrender. Then recall what we allowed them to do after they surrendered. There you will find your answers.
The victor, not the vanquished decide what will, or will not be allowed. Unconditional surrender was the key.

Peter1469
05-30-2016, 10:15 AM
The victor, not the vanquished decide what will, or will not be allowed. Unconditional surrender was the key.

We didn't need the nukes for that. We used to nukes to demonstrate our dominance. And rightly so.

MisterVeritis
05-30-2016, 10:20 AM
We didn't need the nukes for that. We used to nukes to demonstrate our dominance. And rightly so.
If post-war dominance was part of the targeting strategy it failed to make it into the documents from that era. What is clear, at least to me, is that we intended to build and use atomic weapons as fast as we could to prepare for the invasion. I believe that the "dominance" angle was an added benefit.

With or without fission weapons we would have dominated Europe and Asia. Our nation was intact.

donttread
05-30-2016, 11:02 AM
The victor, not the vanquished decide what will, or will not be allowed. Unconditional surrender was the key.

For ego? Message to the rest of the west that we were top dog? Or specific clauses in the surrender?