Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ACTIONpack

rethink it: Be thankful Hilter was born?

64 posts in this topic

It wasn't useless. It only took two bombs and two cities, instead of "the entire Japan." And just so you know, Japan was still fighting across the globe, that's why the nation had to surrender, more than those "firebombed" in Japan would have died, even if it were as simple as set the paper nation of fire, which it was and is not.

I do believe America chose the route of fewest casualties to end a war with a nation gone mad, willing to kill and die before surrender. Additionally, it is because of that that these weapons are NOT used today. If it hadn't happened, and we hadn't used it against a warring maniac, someone would have eventually probably not as discriminately and calculatingly as America did.

Believe what you like, no one can stop armchair generals. The only thing we know for sure, the world was saved from evil and tyranny by America and it's allies, whom America also saved.

BTW, Japan ONLY surrendered after Nagasaki because America gave in and let the Emperor maintain his status. Japanese culture at that time was insanely about honor and tradition, the whole nation was prepare to go Kamikaze before surrender or losing the Emperor. It was the Emperor who called the surrender, not the people or the generals, for cultural reasons. Some historians also believe the Japanese believed after Hiroshima, America had use the ONLY A bomb it had, wrong.

I cant fully debate the ethics behind the nuclear weapons, specially this long after WW2. But I agree with you on the whole kamikaze and lunacy of the Japanese people during those times. America did a good job with Japan in the pacific. I'm not anti American in any way, but their contribution outside of the Pacific Front was minimal. Eastern Front always was and is World War 2. Without it, World War 2 is nothing more but a bunch of skirmishes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant fully debate the ethics behind the nuclear weapons, specially this long after WW2. But I agree with you on the whole kamikaze and lunacy of the Japanese people during those times. America did a good job with Japan in the pacific. I'm not anti American in any way, but their contribution outside of the Pacific Front was minimal. Eastern Front always was and is World War 2. Without it, World War 2 is nothing more but a bunch of skirmishes.

 

Apologies for misreading your anti-nuclear sentiment as anti-American. It is fortunate and unfortunate the bomb had to be dropped. War is hell, and it's worse if the wrong side wins.

 

As for the fronts, WWII is a complex historical event in many ways. I can see how it may appear the Eastern front is all there is to WWII but there was so much more. It seems that there wasn't much more because of the espionage and bombing that took place to minimize the Axis' ability to wage war. Of course their ground forces could take on Russia in a traditional and visible fashion, but one can't disregard the logistical support that kept Russia in the fight until the tide turned. The massive shipping off food, supplies, and steel to build tanks while dodging wolf packs. Breaking code, radar, night bombing to bring the war machine to a halt. Hunting down V1/2 factories and sites. Italy, France, Africa. Much conflict that exists today is fallout from that war it's reach was so deep as was it's ethnic cleansing and racism. The Jewish/Palenstenian ting, the Serbian persecution and the Catholic churches involvement in that genocide, convert or die. It was just a horrific time in human history. And let's not forget Stalin ... the whole period was insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While you are correct that they did not need the bomb to defeat Japan, they defeated them the old fashioned way, they did need the bomb, two in fact to force Japan to surrender and save millions of lives that would have been lost invading Japan and forcing a surrender the old fashioned way.

 

 

Might want to ditch a zero from those millions. 

Apologies for misreading your anti-nuclear sentiment as anti-American. It is fortunate and unfortunate the bomb had to be dropped. War is hell, and it's worse if the wrong side wins.

 

 

No, there was nothing fortunate about it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

by the same token, i'm thankful dumbya was born. he contributed majorly to the rise of islamic FUN&MENTALism. which in turn makes air travel everywhere both fun and mental.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many advancements came out of WWII 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many advancements came out of WWII

Many advancements came out of the industrial revolution. Most of those that came out of WWII were about killing people faster and more efficient.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without Hitler we wouldn't have many of the international frameworks we take for granted today: the UN, NATO or the EU. Japan would likely have continued its aggression towards China and Korea, with the US unwilling to intervene. The US wouldn't have landed on the moon, as there would have been no space race and they wouldn't have had the Nazi scientists to help them. A lot of the technology we take for granted simply wouldn't exist. Socially the war brought people together and united them behind a nationalist vision, so it's very likely that without it we wouldn't have seen the NHS and other universal healthcare systems. In the US patriotism wouldn't be as strong and we wouldn't have seen the reference to "Under God" added to the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

I don't have a problem with getting some history wrong, it's the anti-American sentiment. America is not perfect, and does it's share of dirt (including our own civil history), but historically America has been most willing to fight and die for others.

Anti-American sentiment is warranted when you're talking about the United States' nuking of civilian targets during WWII - Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crimes. And America has mostly been willing to fight and die for itself - it had absolutely no interest in WWII until the attack on Pearl Harbor and exploited WWII for its own financial gain. As Churchill once said: "The United States can always be relied upon to do the right thing ? having first exhausted all possible alternatives."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many advancements came out of the industrial revolution. Most of those that came out of WWII were about killing people faster and more efficient.

Jeeps

Blood transfusions 

Dehydrated foods

Parachutes

Radar  and Sonar (doesn't necessarily need to be used for war)

Computers

Synthetic Rubber

Jet Engines (yes they were built in england a few years before the war but the germans invested more time into perfecting them during the war)

Rockets (the V2 rocket was instrumental in the development in rocketry used for space exploration)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the Middle East wouldn't be the mess that it is today, as Israel would never have been created.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anti-American sentiment is warranted when you're talking about the United States' nuking of civilian targets during WWII - Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crimes. And America has mostly been willing to fight and die for itself - it had absolutely no interest in WWII until the attack on Pearl Harbor and exploited WWII for its own financial gain. As Churchill once said: "The United States can always be relied upon to do the right thing ? having first exhausted all possible alternatives."

 

What's the difference between nuking them, and gassing them and sticking them in ovens. Or lining men women and children above a mass grave and blowing their brains out. Or Starving them? Or cutting their heads off with a Samurai sword. One might argue Nuking them is the most humane. The radiation sickness was an unknown at the time, the scope of it. The Japanese, people made war against the world and they refused to stop when the World asked so they had to be killed to stop them, that's war. That's what enables peace lovers to ignore the realities of humanity, after others have died to give them that luxury.

 

The US supported it's allies well before and after WWII. The American people did not want to get into another world war because of the horrors of WWI. They felt like if the Europeans want to kill each other, let's let them, we're good. That was one of many factors responsible for America's hesitancy to jump in to WWII. The least of which tree huggers would accuse them of war crimes for killing the murderous enemy who had no mercy.

 

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both legitimate war targets and ALL bombing has civilian casualties. Including the British incendiary bombing of German and other European cities. See, the populous was complicit and helped their minority government make war, as well as turning a blind eye to the holocaust. When a nation makes world war, it can only do so with the support and cooperation of it's civilian population. If they won't stop the warring, then we will stop it for them by destroying them.

 

As for Churchill, my response is America reserves the right to choose the course of action that results in the least American casualties when fighting someone else's war.

 

One more thing: Hiroshima had many Military installation and was headquarters to Japan's 5th division who defended all of Southern Japan. Nagasaki had sea ports. You are aware of the Battle of Midway, and all the other sea battles? Are you aware of the scope of WWII and the death tolls? Roughly 130,000 were killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, most of them instantly (humanely one could say if we get technical and morbid about it). How many died via conventional weapons in WWII at the hands of the evildoers Nazi Germany and the Japanese empire? Tell me that before you sit in judgment of America? To make it even close, don't count the 6 million slaughtered Jews. How many? You know what, don't bother. Keep fantasizing that tree huggers keep the world at peace.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without Hitler we wouldn't have many of the international frameworks we take for granted today: the UN, NATO or the EU. Japan would likely have continued its aggression towards China and Korea, with the US unwilling to intervene. The US wouldn't have landed on the moon, as there would have been no space race and they wouldn't have had the Nazi scientists to help them. A lot of the technology we take for granted simply wouldn't exist. Socially the war brought people together and united them behind a nationalist vision, so it's very likely that without it we wouldn't have seen the NHS and other universal healthcare systems. In the US patriotism wouldn't be as strong and we wouldn't have seen the reference to "Under God" added to the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

Anti-American sentiment is warranted when you're talking about the United States' nuking of civilian targets during WWII - Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crimes. And America has mostly been willing to fight and die for itself - it had absolutely no interest in WWII until the attack on Pearl Harbor and exploited WWII for its own financial gain. As Churchill once said: "The United States can always be relied upon to do the right thing ? having first exhausted all possible alternatives."

 

You incorrect about "Under God" being added to the pledge because of Hitler.  It was added officially in 1954. for additional information please see - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance

 

The US went into very deep debt as as result of WWII, over $200 billion and 112% of GDP.  The UK paid off their WWII debt to the US and Canada in 2006.  We didn't bail you out, but we certainly helped in the war effort.

 

The quote by Churchill is also incorrect - http://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/11/11/exhaust-alternatives/

 

As for the rest of your response it is off-topic and your typical anti-US propaganda. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeeps

Blood transfusions

Dehydrated foods

Parachutes

Radar and Sonar (doesn't necessarily need to be used for war)

Computers

Synthetic Rubber

Jet Engines (yes they were built in england a few years before the war but the germans invested more time into perfecting them during the war)

Rockets (the V2 rocket was instrumental in the development in rocketry used for space exploration)

Basically all of the things you listed were for the benefits of war. Kill people faster and more efficient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically all of the things you listed were for the benefits of war. Kill people faster and more efficient.

 Of course they were for the benefits of war at the time but those same advancements helped the civilian world...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You incorrect about "Under God" being added to the pledge because of Hitler.  It was added officially in 1954. for additional information please see - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance

It was added to counter communism during the Cold War, which came about in the aftermath of WWII. Without the nuclearisation of the US and Russia during WWII the Cold War wouldn't have existed or would have been so different as to be unrecognisable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.