Hiroshima 8/6/1945

Search

Life's a bitch, then you die!
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
28,910
Tokens
August 9th 1945, bombing of Nagasaki 63 years ago Today.

Odd....If Japan was so ready to Surrender, why didn't it happen after the first bomb?

There you go again using solid logic to fuck up an otherwise perfect Liberal argument. :missingte
 

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
33,178
Tokens
The inhumanity of some of these posts disgust me. Wether you believe it was the right thing to do or not how can you experience such joy over something so tragic?

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=433 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=jpTitle1>An intersting article on Hiroshima:</TD></TR><TR><TD class=jpTitleGap></TD></TR><TR><TD class=jpDivider></TD></TR><TR><TD class=jpTitleGapBottom></TD></TR><TR><TD class=jpTitle2>6 Aug 2008</TD></TR><TR><TD class=jpTitleGapBottom></TD></TR><TR><TD class=jpBody>In an article for the Guardian on the anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, John Pilger describes the 'progression of lies' from the dust of that detonated city, to the wars of today - and the threatened attack on Iran.

When I first went to Hiroshima in 1967, the shadow on the steps was still there. It was an almost perfect impression of a human being at ease: legs splayed, back bent, one hand by her side as she sat waiting for a bank to open. At a quarter past eight on the morning of August 6, 1945, she and her silhouette were burned into the granite. I stared at the shadow for an hour or more, then walked down to the river and met a man called Yukio, whose chest was still etched with the pattern of the shirt he was wearing when the atomic bomb was dropped.

He and his family still lived in a shack thrown up in the dust of an atomic desert. He described a huge flash over the city, "a bluish light, something like an electrical short", after which wind blew like a tornado and black rain fell. "I was thrown on the ground and noticed only the stalks of my flowers were left. Everything was still and quiet, and when I got up, there were people naked, not saying anything. Some of them had no skin or hair. I was certain I was dead." Nine years later, when I returned to look for him, he was dead from leukaemia.

In the immediate aftermath of the bomb, the allied occupation authorities banned all mention of radiation poisoning and insisted that people had been killed or injured only by the bomb's blast. It was the first big lie. "No radioactivity in Hiroshima ruin" said the front page of the New York Times, a classic of disinformation and journalistic abdication, which the Australian reporter Wilfred Burchett put right with his scoop of the century. "I write this as a warning to the world," reported Burchett in the Daily Express, having reached Hiroshima after a perilous journey, the first correspondent to dare. He described hospital wards filled with people with no visible injuries but who were dying from what he called "an atomic plague". For telling this truth, his press accreditation was withdrawn, he was pilloried and smeared - and vindicated.

The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a criminal act on an epic scale. It was premeditated mass murder that unleashed a weapon of intrinsic criminality. For this reason its apologists have sought refuge in the mythology of the ultimate "good war", whose "ethical bath", as Richard Drayton called it, has allowed the west not only to expiate its bloody imperial past but to promote 60 years of rapacious war, always beneath the shadow of The Bomb.

The most enduring lie is that the atomic bomb was dropped to end the war in the Pacific and save lives. "Even without the atomic bombing attacks," concluded the United States Strategic Bombing Survey of 1946, "air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion. Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that ... Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."

The National Archives in Washington contain US government documents that chart Japanese peace overtures as early as 1943. None was pursued. A cable sent on May 5, 1945 by the German ambassador in Tokyo and intercepted by the US dispels any doubt that the Japanese were desperate to sue for peace, including "capitulation even if the terms were hard". Instead, the US secretary of war, Henry Stimson, told President Truman he was "fearful" that the US air force would have Japan so "bombed out" that the new weapon would not be able "to show its strength". He later admitted that "no effort was made, and none was seriously considered, to achieve surrender merely in order not to have to use the bomb". His foreign policy colleagues were eager "to browbeat the Russians with the bomb held rather ostentatiously on our hip". General Leslie Groves, director of the Manhattan Project that made the bomb, testified: "There was never any illusion on my part that Russia was our enemy, and that the project was conducted on that basis." The day after Hiroshima was obliterated, President Truman voiced his satisfaction with the "overwhelming success" of "the experiment".

Since 1945, the United States is believed to have been on the brink of using nuclear weapons at least three times. In waging their bogus "war on terror", the present governments in Washington and London have declared they are prepared to make "pre-emptive" nuclear strikes against non-nuclear states. With each stroke toward the midnight of a nuclear Armageddon, the lies of justification grow more outrageous. Iran is the current "threat". But Iran has no nuclear weapons and the disinformation that it is planning a nuclear arsenal comes largely from a discredited CIA-sponsored Iranian opposition group, the MEK - just as the lies about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction originated with the Iraqi National Congress, set up by Washington.

The role of western journalism in erecting this straw man is critical. That America's Defence Intelligence Estimate says "with high confidence" that Iran gave up its nuclear weapons programme in 2003 has been consigned to the memory hole. That Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad never threatened to "wipe Israel off the map" is of no interest. But such has been the mantra of this media "fact" that in his recent, obsequious performance before the Israeli parliament, Gordon Brown alluded to it as he threatened Iran, yet again.

This progression of lies has brought us to one of the most dangerous nuclear crises since 1945, because the real threat remains almost unmentionable in western establishment circles and therefore in the media. There is only one rampant nuclear power in the Middle East and that is Israel. The heroic Mordechai Vanunu tried to warn the world in 1986 when he smuggled out evidence that Israel was building as many as 200 nuclear warheads. In defiance of UN resolutions, Israel is today clearly itching to attack Iran, fearful that a new American administration might, just might, conduct genuine negotiations with a nation the west has defiled since Britain and America overthrew Iranian democracy in 1953.

In the New York Times on July 18, the Israeli historian Benny Morris, once considered a liberal and now a consultant to his country's political and military establishment, threatened "an Iran turned into a nuclear wasteland". This would be mass murder. For a Jew, the irony cries out.

The question begs: are the rest of us to be mere bystanders, claiming, as good Germans did, that "we did not know"? Do we hide ever more behind what Richard Falk has called "a self-righteous, one-way, legal/moral screen [with] positive images of western values and innocence portrayed as threatened, validating a campaign of unrestricted violence"? Catching war criminals is fashionable again. Radovan Karadzic stands in the dock, but Sharon and Olmert, Bush and Blair do not. Why not? The memory of Hiroshima requires an answer.


</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


They started it by killing hundreds of Americans and they were relentless in their pursue of killing more Americans. They were lucky that we curtailed our assault on them when we did. In my opinion, we should of made that Country a parking lot. That would of been the appropriate response! They got off lucky.

:toast:
 

"Things do not happen. Things are made to happen."
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
2,624
Tokens
<TABLE class=tborder style="BORDER-TOP-WIDTH: 0px" cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=6 width="100%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR title="Post 5632040" vAlign=top><TD class=alt1 align=middle width=125>Willie99</TD><TD class=alt2>Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by Total Recall
"It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were almost defeated and ready to surrender...in being the first to use it, we...adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages."
---Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy,
Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during World War II​
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
I don't dispute there were those that believed this, and they may be right.

What's missing is the "they were trying to surrender part". Big, big, big difference, don't cha think? </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Willie- no need to run right after the appetizer. The main course is always tastier.


Puny rationalizations like "we saved American lives by dropping the bombs" show the extent of the effectiveness of your brainwashing. You'd all make good Manchurian candidates Im sure.:nohead:


Heres a story by a reporter in the 40's when they still believed in the truth named Walter Trohan for the Chicago Tribune who stumbled onto the real story behind the dropping of the bombs and agreed to sit on the story until afterwards. As a loyal American he acceded to the demand to keep a lid on it. After that he went back to being a good reporter and printed this story.




Chicago Tribune, August 19,1945

JAPS ASKED PEACE IN JAN. ENVOYS ON WAY -- TOKYO

Roosevelt Ignored M'Arthur Report On Nip Proposals

By Walter Trohan
Release of all censorship restrictions in the United States makes it possible to report that the first Japanese peace bid was relayed to the White House seven months ago.
Two days before the late President Roosevelt left the last week in January for the Yalta conference with Prime Minister Churchill and Marshal Stalin he received a Japanese offer identical with the terms subsequently concluded by his successor, Harry S. Truman.


MacArthur Relayed Message to F.D.R.

The Jap offer, based on five separate overtures, was relayed to the White House by Gen. MacArthur in a 40-page communication. The American commander, who had just returned triumphantly to Bataan, urged negotiations on the basis of the Jap overtures.
The offer, as relayed by MacArthur, contemplated abject surrender of everything but the person of the Emperor. The suggestion was advanced from the Japanese quarters making the offer that the Emperor become a puppet in the hands of American forces.
Two of the five Jap overtures were made through American channels and three through British channels. All came from responsible Japanese, acting for Emperor Hirohito.
General's Communication Dismissed
President Roosevelt dismissed the general's communication, which was studded with solemn references to the deity, after a casual reading with the remark, "MacArthur is our greatest general and our poorest politician."
The MacArthur report was not even taken to Yalta. However, it was carefully preserved in the files of the high command and subsequently became the basis of the Truman-Attlee Potsdam declaration calling for surrender of Japan.
This Jap peace bid was known to the Chicago Tribune and the Washington Times-Herald shortly after the MacArthur comunication reached here. It was not published under the paper’s established policy of complete co-operation with the voluntary censorship code.
Must Explain Delay
Now that peace has been concluded on the basis of the terms MacArthur reported, high administration officials prepared to meet expected congressional demands for explanation of the delay. It was considered certain that from various quarters of Congress charges would be hurled that the delay cost thousands of American lives and casualties, particularly in such costly offensives as Iwo Jima and Okinawa.
It was explained in high official circles that the bid relayed by MacArthur did not constitute an official offer in the same sense as the final offer which was presented through Japanese diplomatic channels at Bern and Stockholm last week for relay to the four major Allied powers.
No negotiations were begun on the basis of the bid, it was said, because it was feared that if any were undertaken the Jap war lords, who were presumed to be ignorant of the feelers, would visit swift punishment on those making the offer.
It was held possible that the war lords might even assassinate the Emperor and announce the son of heaven had fled the earth in a fury of indignation over the peace bid.
Defeat Seen Inevitable
Officials said it was felt by Mr. Roosevelt that the Japs were not ripe for peace, except for a small group, who were powerless to cope with the war lords, and that peace could not come until the Japs had suffered more.
The Jap overtures were made on acknowledgment that defeat was inevitable and Japan had to choose the best way out of an unhappy dilemma -- domination of Asia by Russia or by the United States. The unofficial Jap peace brokers said the latter would be preferable by far.
Jap proposals to Gen. MacArthur contemplated:
1. Full surrender of all Jap forces on sea, in the air, at home, on island possessions and in occupied countries.
2. Surrender of all arms and munitions.
3. Occupation of the Jap homeland and island possessions by Allied troops under American direction.
Would Give Up Territory
4. Jap relinquishment from Manchuria, Korea and Formosa as well as all territory seized during the war.
5. Regulation of Jap industry to halt present and future production of implements of war.
6. Turning over of any Japanese the United States might designate as war criminals.
7. Immediate release of all prisoners of war and internees in Japan proper and areas under Japanese control.
After the fall of Germany, the policy of unconditional surrender drew critical fire. In the Senate Senator White (R.) of Maine Capehart (R.) of Indiana took the lead in demanding that precise terms be given Japan and in asking whether peace feelers had not been received from the Nipponese.
Terms Drafted in July
In July the Tribune reported that a set of terms were being drafted for President Truman to take to Potsdam. Capehart hailed the reported terms on the floor of the Senate as a great contribribution to universal peace.
These terms, which were embodied in the Potsdam declaration did not mention the disposition of the Emperor. Otherwise they were almost identical with the proposals contained in the MacArthur memorandum.
Just before the Japanese surrender the Russian foreign commissar disclosed that the Japs had made peace overtures through Moscow asking that the Soviets mediate the war. These overtures were made in the middle of June through the Russian foreign office and also through a personal letter from Hirohito to Stalin Both overtures were reported to the United States and Britain.
------------------------------------------------------------

As you can see the Japs were trying to surrender the whole year of 1945 through all channels available. Stalin declared war on Japan on Aug 8th. They had no planes no ships no oil no weapons and were about as likelly to fight an invasion on two fronts as Saddam's soldiers in the Gulf war.

When are you going to admit you applaud the bombs dropped because you had bloodlust. Just say it. You condoned mass murder to inflict punishment on innocent civilians - women and children to satisfy this bloodlust. You all are murderers after the fact for thinking that. No man of honor would think like that.

May your stay in Hell be as hot as it was for the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.


Do I need to produce any more proof that the Japs had already surrendered before the bombs were dropped. If so let me know because I have more- the truth is out there...:smoker2:
 

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
87,149
Tokens
On August 6, 1945, the world dramatically entered the atomic age: without either warning or precedent, an American plane dropped a single nuclear bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. The explosion utterly destroyed more than four square miles of the city center. About about 90,000 people were killed immediately; another 40,000 were injured, many of whom died in protracted agony from radiation sickness. Three days later, a second atomic strike on the city of Nagasaki killed some 37,000 people and injured another 43,000. Together the two bombs eventually killed an estimated 200,000 Japanese civilians.
Between the two bombings, Soviet Russia joined the United States in war against Japan. Under strong US prodding, Stalin broke his regime's 1941 non-aggression treaty with Tokyo. On the same day that Nagasaki was destroyed, Soviet troops began pouring into Manchuria, overwhelming Japanese forces there. Although Soviet participation did little or nothing to change the military outcome of the war, Moscow benefitted enormously from joining the conflict.
In a broadcast from Tokyo the next day, August 10, the Japanese government announced its readiness to accept the joint American-British "unconditional surrender" declaration of Potsdam, "with the understanding that the said declaration does not compromise any demand which prejudices the prerogatives of His Majesty as a Sovereign Ruler."
A day later came the American reply, which included these words: "From the moment of surrender the authority of the Emperor and the Japanese Government to rule the State shall be subject to the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers." Finally, on August 14, the Japanese formally accepted the provisions of the Potsdam declaration, and a "cease fire" was announced. On September 2, Japanese envoys signed the instrument of surrender aboard the US battleship Missouri in Tokyo Bay.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Boy, how easy it was for them to surrender and announce such to the world, eh?

Especially perplexing is that they didn't announce this to the world until after the second bomb.


I know these little things like thinking something through don't play well in your world TR, you like to rely on the written word of the vast minority that raises 10,000x more questions than it answers while totally ignoring little things like "it's not that difficult to let the world know you want to surrender, not even in 1945".


Spyweb, please tell us again how poor Japan was goaded into starting WWII. Could you please explain when this "goading" occurred? Was it before their military buildup?, during their military buildup?, before they invaded China? before they tried to Annex the Asia Pacific rim? or were their silly willy leaders suckered into attacking American? Did FDR hoodwink the stupid Japanese in the same fashion that Bush hoodwinked Democratic Senators? Is that it?

:lol:
 

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
87,149
Tokens
and for the record, I'm one that thinks the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were tragedies and should have been avoided if possible. I think both of those events are individually larger than Pearl Harbor. However, millions of civilians died because of Japanese aggression, so it's not difficult to understand why such a decision could be made and why I'm in the minority on this issue. I am not going to knock Truman for a decision that was made under very trying circumstances at very trying times.

However, I'm sick and tired and bored with all the half witted conspiracy theories that leave far more unanswered questions than they think they answer and that tend to be void of any and all common sense and presented without an analytical thought to be found.

Somebody typed it, so it's true, even if it doesn't take much to make it look silly and discredited, you're all fucking sheep. Oh, and did I mention, "I'm brilliance at work".

329_lg_clr.gif
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
5,412
Tokens
IMO the most telling evaluation of the rightness or wrongness of the bombings is the attitude of the Japanese since then. The overwhelming sentiment over there is that they deserved it. Having 60+ years of development, demographics, studying history with the benefit of hindsight, etc. etc. there is still almost no change on this consensus sentiment. That speaks volumes.
 

"Things do not happen. Things are made to happen."
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
2,624
Tokens
<TABLE class=tborder style="BORDER-TOP-WIDTH: 0px" cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=6 width="100%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR title="Post 5635778" vAlign=top><TD class=alt1 align=middle width=125>Willie99</TD><TD class=alt2>On August 6, 1945, the world dramatically entered the atomic age: without either warning or precedent, an American plane dropped a single nuclear bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. The explosion utterly destroyed more than four square miles of the city center. About about 90,000 people were killed immediately; another 40,000 were injured, many of whom died in protracted agony from radiation sickness. Three days later, a second atomic strike on the city of Nagasaki killed some 37,000 people and injured another 43,000. Together the two bombs eventually killed an estimated 200,000 Japanese civilians.
Between the two bombings, Soviet Russia joined the United States in war against Japan. Under strong US prodding, Stalin broke his regime's 1941 non-aggression treaty with Tokyo. On the same day that Nagasaki was destroyed, Soviet troops began pouring into Manchuria, overwhelming Japanese forces there. Although Soviet participation did little or nothing to change the military outcome of the war, Moscow benefitted enormously from joining the conflict.
In a broadcast from Tokyo the next day, August 10, the Japanese government announced its readiness to accept the joint American-British "unconditional surrender" declaration of Potsdam, "with the understanding that the said declaration does not compromise any demand which prejudices the prerogatives of His Majesty as a Sovereign Ruler."
A day later came the American reply, which included these words: "From the moment of surrender the authority of the Emperor and the Japanese Government to rule the State shall be subject to the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers." Finally, on August 14, the Japanese formally accepted the provisions of the Potsdam declaration, and a "cease fire" was announced. On September 2, Japanese envoys signed the instrument of surrender aboard the US battleship Missouri in Tokyo Bay.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Boy, how easy it was for them to surrender and announce such to the world, eh?

Especially perplexing is that they didn't announce this to the world until after the second bomb.


I know these little things like thinking something through don't play well in your world TR, you like to rely on the written word of the vast minority that raises 10,000x more questions than it answers while totally ignoring little things like "it's not that difficult to let the world know you want to surrender, not even in 1945".


Spyweb, please tell us again how poor Japan was goaded into starting WWII. Could you please explain when this "goading" occurred? Was it before their military buildup?, during their military buildup?, before they invaded China? before they tried to Annex the Asia Pacific rim? or were their silly willy leaders suckered into attacking American? Did FDR hoodwink the stupid Japanese in the same fashion that Bush hoodwinked Democratic Senators? Is that it?

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


Spy- Willie wont answer your assertion - yet he asks seven questions of you?

What a style huh?

Willie- your reply over this Tribune story is of no substance in as far as it being "easy to surrender even in 1945"- it was as difficult as you never hearing about this until now. Yet it happened. You didnt hear about them trying to surrender because the papers wouldnt print it!!!! Did you even read it? Read the piece again. This wasnt somebody types something - this was a reporter for the Chicago Tribune and also the entire editorial staff all saw the letter. Macarthur was whistle blowing this and made sure it went to the Press. This is the real reason he was dismissed and demoted by Truman. Plus you have McArthur being rebuffed after delivering the promise to surrender right to FDR's face. That get through your skull yet? There is factual evidence- testimonials by the major players and people who knew- generals- presidents like Hoover - and in 1963 the CIA chief at the time Dulles admitted that Japan tried to surrender before Hiroshima. So why is it these FACTS dont play well in your world oh great "deluded? -never!! one? True facts like you so casually dismiss and are as usual numb to the overall picture here of a country having gotten so desparate to surrender to anybody they even resorted to the Russians at the end?:nohead: Come on Gomer you and I both know the truth- "Hey FDR the Japs are on the phone. They say they want to surrender
"Tell thm Im not here right now and call back in a few months please or at least until we drop these two big suprises on you HaHa...":smoker2:
The moneymasters wanted to begin the biggest arms race in the history of the world- ans with Russia the co-winner of WWII thats exactly what we got. why - business was so good that fallout sjelters were being bought by the thousands touted by congressman as necessary to have. They used to tell me to get under my desk at school whenever we heard the air-raid which they did often. I refused saying the power of the bomb which I knew from my fathers work would render the desk useless as protection. So they threatened me. Thats when I discovered where people put their snots when theyre done chewing on them.:puke1:
 

"Here we go again"
Joined
Jul 1, 2006
Messages
4,507
Tokens
It's one thing to truly despise America, as TR does. I'm sure he has a reason for continuing to live here, but I promise you if I felt as he did I wouldn't.

But it's quite another thing for folks who claim to love America to condemn, 63 years later after the fact, a decision that decisively ended the war and saved tens of thousands of American lives. I wasn't around at the time, but from what I've read the decision to drop the bomb was almost universally supported. Americans realized who the enemy was, and how important it was that we defeated them. They realized there was no moral relativism between the US, with all of our faults, and the people responsible for the Bataan death march and the Nanking massacre.

It's indicative of why winning the war against terrorism is going to be so difficult. When large portions of the population care more about the rights of terrorists than the lives of American soldiers (and the Supreme Court backs them up); when a man who may well be the next President goes abroad and claims that the US engages in torture; when people want telephone companies prosecuted because they had the audacity to assist OUR government in attempting to identify and prevent terrorist plots - well, we're in trouble, folks.


Most of the american population is now smart enough to realize the government isn't being transparent with the people. They need to tap all of our phones, and spy on everyone because of "Al Qaeda"...

Meanwhile, the border are wide open, border agents are routinely imprisoned for apprehending drug smugglers/potential "terrorists" and illegal aliens are literally above the law....

2+2=5. :ohno:
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
45,000
Tokens
Most of the american population is now smart enough to realize the government isn't being transparent with the people. They need to tap all of our phones, and spy on everyone because of "Al Qaeda"...

Meanwhile, the border are wide open, border agents are routinely imprisoned for apprehending drug smugglers/potential "terrorists" and illegal aliens are literally above the law....

2+2=5. :ohno:

Yup, all our phones are tapped, and we're all being spied on by
the US government. Every one of us. It's the big bad US
government that is causing all the evil in the world.

:pucking:
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,925
Messages
13,575,359
Members
100,883
Latest member
iniesta2025
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com