B
Brendan
Guest
So was Hawaii, but that does not mean that Hawaiians are not Americans.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Piece by Michael Barone concerning Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
S
starshiptrooper
Guest
After WWI, we did not completely crush Germany, and they came back for the sequel. After WWII, the treaty with Japan put severe restrictions on their military forces and we occupied the country. We have never had any trouble with them.There is no evidence for those statements.
Ed
Continuing the war would have cost more lives of both soldiers and prisoners held by the Japanese. You cannot deny that.
Z
zamyrabyrd
Guest
How about a blockade? That would not have cost lives.So, if we did not have the atomic bomb, we would have had to land. Casualties would have been enormous … 1/2 million Americans.
Millions of Japanese.
The problem with having exploded an atomic bomb is the radiation not only on Japan but seeping over to the rest of the world. How many cancers are due to the cumulative radioactive pollution of testing? A good question to ponder.
Z
zamyrabyrd
Guest
Some people argue the opposite saying it was precisely because of the crushing and humiliating conditions wrought upon Germany in the Treaty of Versailles that their resentment was such to get even and claim lost territory.After WWI, we did not completely crush Germany, and they came back for the sequel. After WWII, the treaty with Japan put severe restrictions on their military forces and we occupied the country. We have never had any trouble with them.
E
edwest2
Guest
The monetary reparations imposed by the French were very high, and the Germans got around the limitations of parts of the treaty. For example, their “pocket” battleships, having submarines being built outside of the country and other examples. Even though the massive Maginot Line existed, the Germans simply flew troops over them. Circus acrobats with satchel charges were sent in who, using their skills, threw them through the gun slits. No historian to this day has explained the rapid fall of France. The French signed surrender papers in the same train car used at the end of World War I where the German surrender was signed.Some people argue the opposite saying it was precisely because of the crushing and humiliating conditions wrought upon Germany in the Treaty of Versailles that their resentment was such to get even and claim lost territory.
Ed
E
edwest2
Guest
A very good point. In the military publications that are only available in large libraries, I viewed maps of the degree of fallout that was dispersed across the US from numerous nuclear tests which occurred in the air, on the ground and underground. Even more appalling were the ground level tests where soldiers were positioned at various locations, in trenches, to study the effects on troops should the Russians attack Western Europe. The US Atomic Veterans Association appealed to the government, as was the case with the British government, who conducted similar tests in Australia, were called on the carpet regarding how much the soldiers were told about the possible effects on them from exposure after testing. Not to mention the rest of the country where fallout drifted, carried by the wind. These men were covertly monitored for 30 years to determine long-term effects.How about a blockade? That would not have cost lives.
The problem with having exploded an atomic bomb is the radiation not only on Japan but seeping over to the rest of the world. How many cancers are due to the cumulative radioactive pollution of testing? A good question to ponder.
But scientists needed real human data to help mitigate the effects or help survival rates should soldiers have to go into combat.
Back to Japan, the blockade was working. They were only a few weeks away from surrender. The problem was this: They had to surrender to the US, not the Russians, who became our enemy right before the last bullets of World War II were fired. Had the US done nothing, the Russians would invade, lose as many men as it took, and we would have lost any claim to Japan.
Ed
Z
zamyrabyrd
Guest
From Liddell Hart’s “History of the Second World War”Back to Japan, the blockade was working. They were only a few weeks away from surrender. The problem was this: They had to surrender to the US, not the Russians, who became our enemy right before the last bullets of World War II were fired. Had the US done nothing, the Russians would invade, lose as many men as it took, and we would have lost any claim to Japan.Ed
p. 712 “The Japanese empire was basically a sea empire, and even more dependent on oversea supplies than the British empire. Her war making capacity depended on large seaborne imports of oil, iron ore, bauxite, coking coal, nickel, magnesium, aluminum, tin, cobalt, lead, phosphate, graphite and potsh, cotton, salt and rubber. Moreover, for her food supplies she had to import most of her sugar and soya beans, as well as 20% of her wheat and 17% of her rice.”
p. 725 "It was the Emperor himself who moved to cut the knot. On June 20th he summoned to a conference six members of the inner Cabinet, the Supreme War Direction Council, and there told them: “You will consider the question of ending the war as soon as possible.”
p. 727 “The (bomb’s) effect on the Japanese Government, however, was much less thatn was imagined on the Western side at the time…As for the people of Japan, they did not know until after the war what had happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Russia’s declaration of war on August 8th, and immediate drive into Manchuria next day, seems to have been almost as effective in hastening the issue, and the Emperor’s influence even more so…
The use of the atomic bomb was not really needed to produce this result (end of war). With 9/10ths of Japan’s shipping sunk or disabled, her air and sea forces crippled, her industries wrecked, he collapse was already certain - as Churchill said.”
M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
One of our posters … GKC … has written EXTENSIVELY on Hiroshima.
Do a search for his previous posts.
Instead of just making stuff up.
Do a search for his previous posts.
Instead of just making stuff up.
G
GKC
Guest
Sure there is, Ed.There is no evidence for those statements.
Ed
OTOH, I’m not unhappy I missed this thread. I don’t need another 600 posts for my total.
And OYAH, the bombings ended the war, in the shortest time frame, with the least casualties, of any possible method,save if we had surrendered to them. Long reading list, accumulated over my 20+ years of studying this topic, available on request. Start with Frank’s DOWNFALL: THE END OF THE IMPERIAL JAPANESE EMPIRE. But you knew that.Move on to, at least, Kort/ THE COLUMBIA GUIDE TO HIROSHIMA AND THE BOMB.
Now everyone go and have a Merry Christmas,
G
GKC
Guest
I thank you.One of our posters … GKC … has written EXTENSIVELY on Hiroshima.
Do a search for his previous posts.
Instead of just making stuff up.
One day, I’m going to retire from this subject. I promise myself, regularly.
T
Tim_D
Guest
I would really like to see some corroboration for this because for the many years that I have read and watched documentaries about WWII, I have never heard this.Circus acrobats with satchel charges were sent in who, using their skills, threw them through the gun slits.
Sure they have; it was called “blitzkrieg.”No historian to this day has explained the rapid fall of France. The French signed surrender papers in the same train car used at the end of World War I where the German surrender was signed.
E
edwest2
Guest
Your last sentence would require a great deal of research. I’ve done as much as I can, and it is still not fully explained.I would really like to see some corroboration for this because for the many years that I have read and watched documentaries about WWII, I have never heard this.
Sure they have; it was called “blitzkrieg.”
Ed
T
Tim_D
Guest
What is there to explain? Panzer tanks ripping through Belgium bypassing the Maginot line, coming up behind where the guns were unable to be turned around; stuka dive bombers and mobilized infantry ripping through the country side. It was a combination of technical and military science innovation. Looking at a map, the distances were not great and the “lightning” assault made it that much more effective.Your last sentence would require a great deal of research. I’ve done as much as I can, and it is still not fully explained.
G
GKC
Guest
I would like to hear more about the circus acrobats.What is there to explain? Panzer tanks ripping through Belgium bypassing the Maginot line, coming up behind where the guns were unable to be turned around; stuka dive bombers and mobilized infantry ripping through the country side. It was a combination of technical and military science innovation. Looking at a map, the distances were not great and the “lightning” assault made it that much more effective.
Flying over something and attacking with airborne troops sounds more like Eben-Emael than the Maginot.
T
Tim_D
Guest
Good luck.I would like to hear more about the circus acrobats.
.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.