Why didn?t we warn Japan we would use the bomb if they didn?t surrender? - Page 5 - GoFuckYourself.com

goldmine · 02-25-2007, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splum

Why didnt Japan warn the USA they would attack Pearl Harbor?

LOL true!!!

Splum · 02-25-2007, 09:29 AM

It just amazes me the thread starter and several people in here completely have no idea what happened during World War II. Somehow I suspect there is some anti-American sentiment behind some of the postings and probably the thread starter. Any third grader in most civilized nations knows the conventional history of World War II. I think anti-American sentiment is driving a movement to revise history and make all the United States good deeds look like simple propaganda. After all the good the people and government of the United States has done for most of the world, liberating countries from tyranical rule, given more humanitarian aid than all the countries of the world combined, etc. This country isnt perfect and we make mistakes but we make them with good intentions in mind.

Kimo · 02-25-2007, 10:05 AM

Two words : Atomic Diplomacy

Fat Panda · 02-25-2007, 10:12 AM

well those dirty fucking japs were part of the "axis of evil" a group of dirty fucks that killed over 6 million jews throughout Europe....so you tell me who has blood on their fucking hands......dirty fucking dictator and the cocksucking jap emporer deserved everything they got!

12clicks · 02-25-2007, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THEMASKEDRIDER

Or use it in a non or lesser populated area of japan, rather than on 80k civilians? At least the burden of all of those deaths would fall squarely on japan. i dont think the result would have been much different from our end, except that there is a chance, albeit small, that we could have saved those civilian lives.

idiot

Minte · 02-25-2007, 11:29 AM

The Japanese government showed the world over and over that they had absolutely no regard for human life. Truman showed incredible restraint at not dropping more of them.

MaDalton · 02-25-2007, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Did Denmark have an unconditional surrender with Germany? I mean, what do they teach you about that? I know my German friends said not much talk about WW II is done in German schools.

then your german friends must be your age

cause nowadays it's a big topic - of course. unfortunately not many kids are interested in it though - which is a shame.

i'm not a fan of feeling guilty just cause i'm german - i'm too young for that. but at least history may not be forgotten to learn from it for the future.

which would btw apply to a lot of other countries too

MaDalton · 02-25-2007, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADL Colin

So if civilian casualties at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were less than 1% of the civilian casualties of WW II and if the bombing of cities started 5 years earlier including the mass fire-bombing of cities - why would a warning even be necessary? Should the British have dialed up the Germans and told them when and where to expect every air attack so they can evacuate even though it would have increased the air defenses against them and so decreased the probability of success? Pretty dangerous job already. Over 100,000 Allied bomber crewmen were killed over Europe alone.

but it would have been a nice move - maybe then i would have met the other half of my family

but i don't complain - we started it, we got what we deserved

Alex · 02-25-2007, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

Exactly. And that is my point. If the terms were different they would have surrendered.

Terms could not be different. The allied leaders (-minus Stalin) Agreed on Unconditionally Surrender and only Unconditional Surredner.

And 99.9999999% of all people in the world, trust the Judgement of those leaders more than they trust your judgement.

Alex · 02-25-2007, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

Japan would not surrender unconditionally. They would not give up monarchy. But they would surrender if they could keep the emperor on the throne. Truman ignored this. Bombs felt. And thats it. Rest is emotions.

This is not guessing. Its history. Its facts. Its recorded. Its been to court and panels. Truman and Eisenhower said it themself. Churchill wrote about it in his books. What more can we ask for?

Having an opinion that diplomacy works, at least it should be officially tried, is not laughable IMO.

Let me ask you a question. What if Germany had agrreed to surrender if they were allowed to keep Hitler in power?

I bet you would appease them? Wouldn't you Mr. Chamberlain?

baddog · 02-25-2007, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton

then your german friends must be your age

Imagine that

Quote:

cause nowadays it's a big topic - of course. unfortunately not many kids are interested in it though - which is a shame.

I still wonder how deep they go into it. Do they discuss the atrocities, Treblinka, etc?

Dirty Dane · 02-25-2007, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

Let me ask you a question. What if Germany had agrreed to surrender if they were allowed to keep Hitler in power?

I bet you would appease them? Wouldn't you Mr. Chamberlain?

Germany was not a monarchy.

MaDalton · 02-25-2007, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

I still wonder how deep they go into it. Do they discuss the atrocities, Treblinka, etc?

yeah, sure. including movies, documentaries etc. like schindlers list for example

and there are lots of documentaries on tv about this topic - including all nasty pics of auschwitz, treblinka or mauthausen.

the bad thing is: you can't force the kids to look and respect what they see while the neo nazis are waiting outside the school with free CDs of nazi music and free beer. which unfortunately happens in some parts of the country

Dirty Dane · 02-25-2007, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splum

It just amazes me the thread starter and several people in here completely have no idea what happened during World War II. Somehow I suspect there is some anti-American sentiment behind some of the postings and probably the thread starter. Any third grader in most civilized nations knows the conventional history of World War II. I think anti-American sentiment is driving a movement to revise history and make all the United States good deeds look like simple propaganda. After all the good the people and government of the United States has done for most of the world, liberating countries from tyranical rule, given more humanitarian aid than all the countries of the world combined, etc. This country isnt perfect and we make mistakes but we make them with good intentions in mind.

Splum, you tend to put it black and white. Sure, there are extremists, but just because someone disagree doesn't make people anti-american. Hitler was a bad guy, but I don't hate the German people today. Stalin was bad, but I don't hate Russians today. USA did a good job in Europe, Africa and Pacific, but I think using the atomic bombs was a wrong decision. But I don't hate american because of that, the decision was made by few people.
Today most of us live in democracy, and in democracy you have the right to disagree. Its not that simple as "either with - or against". If someone ask me to join beating up a guy, and I say no, that doesn't make me unfriendly.. I just don't want to fight.

uno · 02-25-2007, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

not exactly . . . Germany surrendered in April/May I believe, Japan in August.

And the Russians had a bit to do with Germany surrendering.

Alex · 02-25-2007, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

Germany was not a monarchy.

That means nothing? The leaders of Japan were brutal murderers who are responsible for the deaths of millions. No terms would have been negotiated that allowed them to stay in power.

Dirty Dane · 02-25-2007, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

That means nothing? The leaders of Japan were brutal murderers who are responsible for the deaths of millions. No terms would have been negotiated that allowed them to stay in power.

It was not a question of military power. It was the throne.
After the surrender he could keep his throne anyway, so why not just put that into the original terms of surrender?

baddog · 02-25-2007, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

Germany was not a monarchy.

So what? Dictatorship/monarchy tomato/tomatoe

Alex · 02-25-2007, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

It was not a question of military power. It was the throne.
After the surrender he could keep his throne anyway, so why not just put that into the original terms of surrender?

Simple: If we had started negotiating terms and given them one thing, they would have asked for more and more.

You don't appease ruthless murderers like that who have power.

Here is a quick preview of 9th grade history for you next year. Appeasement started the war.

Dirty Dane · 02-25-2007, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

So what? Dictatorship/monarchy tomato/tomatoe

So Denmark is a dictatorship then?

Alex · 02-25-2007, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

So Denmark is a dictatorship then?

Constitutional monarchy.

Dirty Dane · 02-25-2007, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

Simple: If we had started negotiating terms and given them one thing, they would have asked for more and more.

You don't appease ruthless murderers like that who have power.

Here is a quick preview of 9th grade history for you next year. Appeasement started the war.

We are talking about the ending, not the start.

webmasterchecks · 02-25-2007, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splum

It just amazes me the thread starter and several people in here completely have no idea what happened during World War II. Somehow I suspect there is some anti-American sentiment behind some of the postings and probably the thread starter. Any third grader in most civilized nations knows the conventional history of World War II. I think anti-American sentiment is driving a movement to revise history and make all the United States good deeds look like simple propaganda. After all the good the people and government of the United States has done for most of the world, liberating countries from tyranical rule, given more humanitarian aid than all the countries of the world combined, etc. This country isnt perfect and we make mistakes but we make them with good intentions in mind.

fuck you.

"completely no idea of what happened" is a fucking stretch

It occurred to me there may have been a different way and i brought the topic up for debate. Whats funny, or maybe even not, is how insecure some of you guys are. Ive been lurking on gfy for years and ive learned very much from those that comment with a perspective that ive never seen before. This thread got me to read wikipedia for about an hour about the war, i brought up a way that we could have achieved the same result with less civilian casualties, and some great points were brought up along the way, by rochard adl colin and others, at no point in this discussion was i dead set on my point

but there is no reason to call me an idiot, as it was debated for some time, it is certainly was not a "no-brainer" decision, and it reiterates how close-minded and inflexible some of posters are

Minte · 02-25-2007, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THEMASKEDRIDER

fuck you.

"completely no idea of what happened" is a fucking stretch

It occurred to me there may have been a different way and i brought the topic up for debate. Whats funny, or maybe even not, is how insecure some of you guys are. Ive been lurking on gfy for years and ive learned very much from those that comment with a perspective that ive never seen before. This thread got me to read wikipedia for about an hour about the war, i brought up a way that we could have achieved the same result with less civilian casualties, and some great points were brought up along the way, by rochard adl colin and others, at no point in this discussion was i dead set on my point

but there is no reason to call me an idiot, as it was debated for some time, it is certainly was not a "no-brainer" decision, and it reiterates how close-minded and inflexible some of posters are

You are talking to the wrong generation about WW2. If you actually are interested in what the real mindset was,talk to someone who lived through or even better,someone who fought in that war.

Splum · 02-25-2007, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THEMASKEDRIDER

"completely no idea of what happened" is a fucking stretch.
This thread got me to read wikipedia for about an hour about the war, i brought up a way that we could have achieved the same result with less civilian casualties, and some great points were brought up along the way, by rochard adl colin and others, at no point in this discussion was i dead set on my point

It is not my fault you are uneducated about the topic you started.

Dirty Dane · 02-25-2007, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THEMASKEDRIDER

This thread got me to read wikipedia for about an hour about the war, i brought up a way that we could have achieved the same result with less civilian casualties, and some great points were brought up along the way, by rochard adl colin and others, at no point in this discussion was i dead set on my point

I think you should not use wikipedia as source. Everyone can go in and edit and just say "its on wikipedia, so it must be true".

IllTestYourGirls · 02-25-2007, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

I think you should not use wikipedia as source. Everyone can go in and edit and just say "its on wikipedia, so it must be true".

I agree, the death toll looks really low. My college textbooks have higher numbers than that.

webmasterchecks · 02-25-2007, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minte

You are talking to the wrong generation about WW2. If you actually are interested in what the real mindset was,talk to someone who lived through or even better,someone who fought in that war.

im sure you are right

baddog · 02-25-2007, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THEMASKEDRIDER

im sure you are right

You had better hurry.

webmasterchecks · 02-25-2007, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

You had better hurry.

when do you have time to talk?

Bdiddy · 02-25-2007, 05:31 PM

This was my senior thesis in college...this argument is in a state of perpetual circular logic here

If you can take anything from what happened...be constructive

notabook · 02-25-2007, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THEMASKEDRIDER

when do you have time to talk?

Splum · 02-25-2007, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bdiddy

This was my senior thesis in college...this argument is in a state of perpetual circular logic here If you can take anything from what happened...be constructive

Its historical fact that we did warn Japan before we used atomic weapons on them. What "argument" is there?

Bdiddy · 02-25-2007, 05:53 PM

Well...the argument in this thread is whether it should have been used on a metropolis or if another location could have been an effective demonstration. That's the initial post.

And yes, they were warned. Several times.

Pleasurepays · 02-25-2007, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THEMASKEDRIDER

when do you have time to talk?

hahaha

Barefootsies · 02-25-2007, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

we did . . . even dropped leaflets and told them to hit the road

Correct.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pornopete

Japan struck military targets.

...and we hit industrial.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splum

Why didnt Japan warn the USA they would attack Pearl Harbor?

Exactly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

You are an idiot. How many more people would have died had the war continued?

Based on the fanaticism the US was coming across in the populations as they retook the island, the US would have had to fight military, and civilans. There were plenty of Japanese killing themselves as the Americans had gotten closer. The bomb saved 100,000's of American and Japanese lives.

Dirty Dane · 02-25-2007, 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

Quote:

we did . . . even dropped leaflets and told them to hit the road

Correct.

The warning leaflets you talk about, were dropped after the first bomb. They told people to leave the cities, but not which city bombed next.

02-25-2007, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Did Denmark have an unconditional surrender with Germany? I mean, what do they teach you about that? I know my German friends said not much talk about WW II is done in German schools.

Actually that is not true. My mother has a good friend from Germany that is in her fifties. She said they talked about WW II in school and made them feel ashamed about it. They do talk about it still in schools.

Barefootsies · 02-25-2007, 10:21 PM

250 leaflets

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

The warning leaflets you talk about, were dropped after the first bomb. They told people to leave the cities, but not which city bombed next.

The cities bombed were secondary targets.

They were chosen because of the weather conditions on those days.

Do the research.

Bozena X · 02-25-2007, 10:27 PM

jesus christ are we really arguing about WW2?

Dirty Dane · 02-25-2007, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

Quote:

The warning leaflets you talk about, were dropped after the first bomb. They told people to leave the cities, but not which city bombed next.

The cities bombed were secondary targets.

They were chosen because of the weather conditions on those days.

Do the research.

What is the point of your reply? I said the first bombing was not warned with leaflets

Barefootsies · 02-25-2007, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

What is the point of your reply? I said the first bombing was not warned with leaflets

And I clarified why.

Dirty Dane · 02-25-2007, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

And I clarified why.

No, read the posts, you misunderstand what Im trying to say.
Some people say they were warned, but I say they were not. Its not about the targets, but if there were leaflets before the first bomb.

Anyway, before the second bomb, they warned people to evacuate every city in Japan and not the specific cities. 2 days to evacuate each city in the hole country was kinda short time.

CDSmith · 02-26-2007, 01:08 AM

Question: when was anyone warned prior to any other bombing raid in the entire 5+ years of WWII? Was the warning of the target a common practice? If it was it's news to me. "Hey Germany, we're coming with 350 B-29's to level one of your cities this Tuesday night, just giving you fair warning"

Why not get off the cock about warnings and focus on the more relevant fact that they (Japan) were given ample opportunities to surrender prior to the nukings.

Why do you people insist on blathering on and on and ON with this when everything, every miniscule point, has already been posted about and yapped about on this thread? Really, what else is there to say?

You could take this to 20 pages and guess what? You still won't have everyone agreeing with you, and the nukes back in 1945 will still have been dropped.

I walk among raging packs of master debaters.

Dirty Dane · 02-26-2007, 01:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDSmith

Question: when was anyone warned prior to any other bombing raid in the entire 5+ years of WWII? Was the warning of the target a common practice? If it was it's news to me. "Hey Germany, we're coming with 350 B-29's to level one of your cities this Tuesday night, just giving you fair warning"

Warning about where they came would be strategic unwise - but human.

baddog · 02-26-2007, 01:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaneB

Actually that is not true. My mother has a good friend from Germany that is in her fifties. She said they talked about WW II in school and made them feel ashamed about it. They do talk about it still in schools.

Okay, my friends lied to me I guess.

baddog · 02-26-2007, 01:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

Warning about where they came would be strategic unwise - but human.

Bet you wish Germany had extended the same kindness.

Dirty Dane · 02-26-2007, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Bet you wish Germany had extended the same kindness.

Does that make it look better?

MaDalton · 02-26-2007, 05:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Bet you wish Germany had extended the same kindness.

you know what's funny? nowadays we get the shit cause we DON'T want to follow blindly when others go to war - weird, isn't it?

Stephen McTowelie · 02-26-2007, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pornopete

what a conveniant excuse.

rephrase your question old man.

how many soldiers would have died?

There is a difference in somebody dieing fighting for what they believe in and a child dieing on the way to school.

Maybe before posting you should check your history !
If you had you would know
a) The US warned Japan about the bomb before they dropped it !
B)The US dropped a bomb and Japan still didn't surrender
C)If you look at what happened when the allies invaded the Japanese home islands the japanese faught to the very last man woman and child including suicide bombers.
D)The Germans had sent a U-boat filled with all sorts of booty including nuclear scientists and material,Plans for V1 ,V2 and other revenge weapons !
E)The US killed more people in firebombing raids over Japan than the A bombs did so this is a pretty pointless thread !
and relax !

02-25-2007, 10:05 AM	#203
Kimo ... Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Maryland ICQ:87038677 Posts: 11,542	Two words : Atomic Diplomacy __________________ ...

02-25-2007, 11:29 AM	#206
Minte Babemeister Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Madison Posts: 7,081	The Japanese government showed the world over and over that they had absolutely no regard for human life. Truman showed incredible restraint at not dropping more of them. __________________ You might not be as anonymous as you think you are.

02-25-2007, 05:31 PM	#231
Bdiddy Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Seattle & Manila Posts: 2,456	This was my senior thesis in college...this argument is in a state of perpetual circular logic here If you can take anything from what happened...be constructive __________________ "..and which one of you had the prime rib?" - Waiter "frankly, I don't see how that's any of your business!" - Peter Griffin

02-25-2007, 05:53 PM	#234
Bdiddy Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Seattle & Manila Posts: 2,456	Well...the argument in this thread is whether it should have been used on a metropolis or if another location could have been an effective demonstration. That's the initial post. And yes, they were warned. Several times. __________________ "..and which one of you had the prime rib?" - Waiter "frankly, I don't see how that's any of your business!" - Peter Griffin

02-26-2007, 01:08 AM	#244
CDSmith Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: My network is hosted at TECHIEMEDIA.net ...Wait, you meant where am I located at? Oh... okay, I'm in Winnipeg, Canada. Oops. :) Posts: 51,460	Question: when was anyone warned prior to any other bombing raid in the entire 5+ years of WWII? Was the warning of the target a common practice? If it was it's news to me. "Hey Germany, we're coming with 350 B-29's to level one of your cities this Tuesday night, just giving you fair warning" Why not get off the cock about warnings and focus on the more relevant fact that they (Japan) were given ample opportunities to surrender prior to the nukings. Why do you people insist on blathering on and on and ON with this when everything, every miniscule point, has already been posted about and yapped about on this thread? Really, what else is there to say? You could take this to 20 pages and guess what? You still won't have everyone agreeing with you, and the nukes back in 1945 will still have been dropped. I walk among raging packs of master debaters. __________________ *Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!* ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!! Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634

02-25-2007, 09:29 AM	#202
Splum Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Location: USA Posts: 6,195	It just amazes me the thread starter and several people in here completely have no idea what happened during World War II. Somehow I suspect there is some anti-American sentiment behind some of the postings and probably the thread starter. Any third grader in most civilized nations knows the conventional history of World War II. I think anti-American sentiment is driving a movement to revise history and make all the United States good deeds look like simple propaganda. After all the good the people and government of the United States has done for most of the world, liberating countries from tyranical rule, given more humanitarian aid than all the countries of the world combined, etc. This country isnt perfect and we make mistakes but we make them with good intentions in mind.

02-25-2007, 10:12 AM	#204
Fat Panda Porn is Dead. Move along. Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 13,296	well those dirty fucking japs were part of the "axis of evil" a group of dirty fucks that killed over 6 million jews throughout Europe....so you tell me who has blood on their fucking hands......dirty fucking dictator and the cocksucking jap emporer deserved everything they got!

02-25-2007, 10:27 PM	#240
Bozena X Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: West Cost Posts: 1,139	jesus christ are we really arguing about WW2?