I do know my history very well and you have clearly bought into the propaganda. Yes, we had two bombs but could have made more. Your argument is without merit. While there were plans to invade Japan there was no compelling reason to do so as there ability to wage war had been eliminated. The status of the Emperor was a major issue that could have easily been addressed earlier. Drawing up plans and implementing them are too different issues. The invasion plans became the excuse for dropping the bomb. Your attempted insults say a lot about your lack of character. It must really suck to be you.

Originally Posted by Guest

You're making a highly revisionist argument from the comfort of your office, safely ensconced, 70 years after the fact. The consensus at the time was Japan would not surrender and the risk of a demonstration shot was not worth it ... remember, we only had two bombs at the time.

Keep in mind also that the purpose of war is to kill the spirit, as well as the body, of the enemy so terribly as to make sure that the enenby will not rise again. That's the part your missing. Hiroshima and Nagasaki accomplished the final killing of the Japanese sprit to fight.

Operation Olympus was the planned invasion of Japan and the estimates for allied casualties ran into the millions. <--Read that last number again.

In addition, millions of Japanese would have died. They was also an attempted military coup (Kyujuo incident) after the two bombs had been dropped and it came very close to succeeding.

You don't know your history. Good thing for you, and all of us, that you never had to make a command decision like this as a senior political leader or general officer in the US Army.

Originally Posted by Guest

I do know my history very well and you have clearly bought into the propaganda. Yes, we had two bombs but could have made more. Your argument is without merit. While there were plans to invade Japan there was no compelling reason to do so as there ability to wage war had been eliminated. The status of the Emperor was a major issue that could have easily been addressed earlier. Drawing up plans and implementing them are too different issues. The invasion plans became the excuse for dropping the bomb. Your attempted insults say a lot about your lack of character. It must really suck to be you.

Sorry, but you really don't know your history, and you truly don't know what "making war" in its fullest sense is all about. I explained it earlier. Not trying to be insulting, but it's a simple statement of fact at least based on what you posted. You're indulging in easy revisionism ...

You clearly can't differentiate between facts and opinions. What I stated as facts are true. Some of what I stated was my opinion. Try rereading my post and perhaps you can start to understand the difference. Try concentrating on words such as "I believe", "may", "may very well". Please spare me your condescending, know-it-all attitude. Again, it reflects badly on you and your inability to converse in a respectful manner. You have established yourself as a light weight.

Originally Posted by Guest

Sorry, but you really don't know your history, and you truly don't know what "making war" in its fullest sense is all about. I explained it earlier. Not trying to be insulting, but it's a simple statement of fact at least based on what you posted. You're indulging in easy revisionism ...

All criticisms intended to add accuracy are accepted.
The premise of my post remains the same.
Why did we develop the nuclear bomb? To maim and kill and destroy the enemy (plug in whichever one fits the decision tree at the time).

Also the intent was to contrast the USA's existence and culture and philosophy of life and what ever other parameters would help describe us. We chose to develop and use the bomb!

The contrast was to now look at Iran and ISIS et al, proven terrorists, proudly declaring they will not be denied nuclear capability. Proudly boasting and confirming time and again they will use their weaponry to remove Israel from the earth. That they will come to the USA and burn our cities to the ground.

6th grade level....we are the good guys and we secretly developed and used the bomb knowingly killing hundreds of thousands of people.
The bad guys are developing the same capability...100% bonafide killers and terrorists. Now just how much logic is required to conclude whether they will use the bomb or not.

The point of my post.

Originally Posted by Guest

You clearly can't differentiate between facts and opinions. What I stated as facts are true. Some of what I stated was my opinion. Try rereading my post and perhaps you can start to understand the difference. Try concentrating on words such as "I believe", "may", "may very well". Please spare me your condescending, know-it-all attitude. Again, it reflects badly on you and your inability to converse in a respectful manner. You have established yourself as a light weight.

Yes it was clear you were opining. It was also clear you did not know all of your history (eg the attempted coup after two bombs dropped which invalidates your "peaceful" theory.

Likewise your ideological lens was clear when you referred to the " propoganda". It was also clear that your speculation was simply easy revisionism ... can't say it any plainer. Total victory was attained ovef Japan but, had your notion actually been followed in 1945 the Japanese military would have remained in power. How foolish would that have been?

What's clearest of all is you're offended when someone calls you on it. Try developing a thicker skin?

Originally Posted by Guest

All criticisms intended to add accuracy are accepted.
The premise of my post remains the same.
Why did we develop the nuclear bomb? To maim and kill and destroy the enemy (plug in whichever one fits the decision tree at the time).

Also the intent was to contrast the USA's existence and culture and philosophy of life and what ever other parameters would help describe us. We chose to develop and use the bomb!

The contrast was to now look at Iran and ISIS et al, proven terrorists, proudly declaring they will not be denied nuclear capability. Proudly boasting and confirming time and again they will use their weaponry to remove Israel from the earth. That they will come to the USA and burn our cities to the ground.

6th grade level....we are the good guys and we secretly developed and used the bomb knowingly killing hundreds of thousands of people.
The bad guys are developing the same capability...100% bonafide killers and terrorists. Now just how much logic is required to conclude whether they will use the bomb or not.

The point of my post.

Yes getting back to the point of your post, and after the abortive attempt at revisionism over dropping the two bombs in 1945, one thing becomes apparent -- your point should be self evident yet it's not

That is, we are engaged in a war with evil and there is ZERO doubt the Islamics will use a nuke when and if they get the chance. What's incredible to me is that some lefties will actually debate this or at least want to be "reasonble" and give them the benefit of the doubt etc. Simply put, this mode of thinking is somewhere between suicidal and insane.

Some people will literally never learn no matter what, or how often, history teaches us.

So how is it that China (our BFF Communist Trading Partner) gets 50% of the oil out of Iraq? No arms or military intervention needed.

Originally Posted by Guest

So how is it that China (our BFF Communist Trading Partner) gets 50% of the oil out of Iraq? No arms or military intervention needed.

That's because self-hating liberals rail against "blood for oil" and all that guilt inducing stuff. In addition, we as a country have become too terminally stupid to say hey, if our troops secured the oil fields, the drilling rights go only to American approved companies or consortiums so that the folks at home pay less for gas. Instead, as you say, Communist China achieves that.

Where is US imperialism when we need it?

Originally Posted by Guest

That's because self-hating liberals rail against "blood for oil" and all that guilt inducing stuff. In addition, we as a country have become too terminally stupid to say hey, if our troops secured the oil fields, the drilling rights go only to American approved companies or consortiums so that the folks at home pay less for gas. Instead, as you say, Communist China achieves that.

Where is US imperialism when we need it?

This is the clearest post I may have ever seen expressing the real thinking of the neocons. We get your oil because we made up a war excuse to invade your country. I am so glad I have some guilt inducing stuff in my head so I don't think like that. I guess China's invasion in the middle east paid off better than ours.

Remember how if Russia got the bomb they would 100% use it, and if China got the bomb they would 100% use it, and if Pakistan a wildly Islamist state got the bomb they would use it or give it to the Taliban to use it, or for 100% sure North Korea would use it. And yet here we are, even after 6 years of Obama, we are still here.

Maybe your post is a joke written by a liberal to impersonate a RWNJ, sort of Colbert. If so well done.

In our history of developing the atomic bomb, what do you think was our intent. Peaceful of course. What else could possibly be an acceptable answer.

I'm not clear, to the historian who posted this line... Is this actually what you believe and all those letters just came out of your fingers wrong? Or do you really believe that it is unacceptable if the US developed the bomb for military use not for peaceful intent?
The second bomb was dropped on Japan on August 9th. By Aug 13 the next bomb was complete and ready to be shipped and the development line was producing a new one due about every 10 days. The concern of the military was whether to drop them one at a time or consider waiting for a larger supply and using them tactically rather than for psychological effects. So a demonstration bombing on non-populated target would have only delayed the war by about 10 days. It is simply not true that we had 2 bombs and that was the end of our supply.

Originally Posted by Guest

I'm not clear, to the historian who posted this line... Is this actually what you believe and all those letters just came out of your fingers wrong? Or do you really believe that it is unacceptable if the US developed the bomb for military use not for peaceful intent?

The second bomb was dropped on Japan on August 9th. By Aug 13 the next bomb was complete and ready to be shipped and the development line was producing a new one due about every 10 days. The concern of the military was whether to drop them one at a time or consider waiting for a larger supply and using them tactically rather than for psychological effects. So a demonstration bombing on non-populated target would have only delayed the war by about 10 days. It is simply not true that we had 2 bombs and that was the end of our supply.

Was someone earlier in the thread actually arguing that developing the A-bomb for military purposes in WWII was somehow undesirable? If so, that's too ludicrous to even discuss so I'll leave it at that.

However, I'm not sure of your latter point. Let's agree that a production line was or would have been in place to produce additional bombs ... no surprise there.

Are you simply noting that fact? Or do you believe the US should have dropped a demonstration bomb ... ie on an uninhabited area instead of the two cities selected?

Check this out! China has a 3.3 Billion Dollar deal with Iran for LNG. Total trade deals in 2012 50 Billion Dollars. No bombs or "boots on the ground" needed. Of course we're still trading with China. No problem!