Yeah, true hero...
Hero is a word thrown around too much. We're calling every soldier serving in Iraq a "hero", when they all volunteered, and are doing the job they were hired to do.
This guy isn't a hero. He isn't a bastard, as some revisionists want us to believe. He was doing his job. And, the revisionists aside, his job, while it had some horrific human results, saved a lot of American lives, and saved even more Japanese lives in the long run.
However I believe that Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings were not necessary.
I disagree, and I think history backs up President Truman. He knew what was coming-a massive invasion of Japan. And, in July of '45, he was told about the Manhattan project, and the potential for this weapon. He had no choice but to use it. It ended the war, for goodness sake, so how can anyone argue with it's use? It cost about 200,000 lives-a terrible toll, but would you rather have had another 3 or 4 million added to the total of the dead in the Second World War? Because that's what you probably would have gotten.
The war would have been won anyways with Soviet and American troops invading Japan.
Again, that invasion would have cost at least 10 times the number of lives lost in the atomic attacks, of that I have no doubt. It's a no-brainer.
With regards to the military state of the conflict in Japan and surrounding area in fall 1945 - the war was supposed to end without loosing more then 200.000 lives.
There's ignorance for you. What are you talking about? If the invasion had begun in November, 1945, do you REALLY think less than 200,000 would have died in that invasion? Remember, the invasion, codename Operation Downfall, would have taken place Nov 1, 1945, if the bombs had not been dropped. And, with Japan's history of fighting and dying to the last person, the toll would have been horrendous. Again, you come off as incredibly igonrant to think no lives were saved. A few million were saved at the expense of 200,000.
Invasion was on its way. Red Army even performed some reconnaissance landings on the Japanese land.
Actually, the USSR
did declare war on Japan, right after Hiroshima. So what you say is a moot point. They had joined, albeit too late, the fighting.
And you say invasion is on the way-what do YOU think would have been the results of a two-tiered invasion of the Home Islands? A few thousand dead? Get real!
I don't remember exactly, but nothing unnecessary------I don't know why his post was deleted.
It was deleted because what I had responded to was deleted. It's no big deal. Perfectly acceptable to me.
No one argues about that. Japan had to be defeated. The method is questionable.
So was Japan's suprise attack on Pearl. You start a war, you take a combatants chances. All is fair, remember?
To that, I say bullshit.
Why is it bullshit? It's historical fact: without the bomb, the Allies WOULD have launched Operation Downfall Nov 1, 1945. There's no denying it. The forces were already being gathered-many from the same units who had stormed Normandy and defeated the Germans. Say bullshit all you want, but the bomb stopped the invasion, and the deaths of a few millions, American and Japanese.
The point of the bomb was to say "surrender, or we'll eradicate you".
Gee, and that's what happened, isn't it? Duh. You contratict yourself into showing the use of The Bomb in this case-it ended the war, which was what Truman had said he would do.
The unanswered question, however, is "Could the United States not have chosen a less sever means of sending the message?"
We had done everything else-carpet bombing, incindeary bombing of civilian centers. Still Japan fought on. What were we to do? We had tried every known method up to the point.
Put yourself in Harry's place for a minute: you know this invasion is coming; you know it will make the war last another year or two; you know it will cost a few million lives-on both sides. Then, in July of '45, you're told of this new weapons, so powerful, that your military leaders are convinced that Japan will surrender if it's used. YOU HAVE NO CHOICE. Simply, as C-in-C, to save the lives of those you'll be sending to die in Japan, you owe it to them to make the attempt-and be damned revisionists 60 years later...
Hiroshima and Nagasaki will go down as one of the darkest chapters of human history.
It certainly was no picnic, and nothing anyone should be proud of, for what had to happen. But it would have been darker, had Americans found out their president had the means to stop the war, didn't use it, and a million GI
's had died, and a few million Japanese to boot. That would have made it much darker. Your revisionism is rejected.