|
Crowsbeak posted:THey were living in areas with extensive industry used to fight that war. You see war requires one deny the other side from being able to continue to fight war. I know this is hard to fathom. ah yes i've head of cities this doesn't explain why people living in cities can be termed as human shields. people normally live and work in cities, it's one of the defining characteristics of cities actually, the people, who live in them
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 17:28 |
|
|
ugh why didn't the japanese set up rudimentary factories in rice paddies and on floating platforms on the ocean. really we had no choice but to incinerate hundreds of thousands of the silly brutes
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:what exactly were japanese civilians living in japanese cities, on the japanese mainland, human shields for? the extraordinarily dangerous bushido spirit of the japanese soil itself? The manufacture of war materiel. But enough, you're just being contrarian and arguing with you is pissing off the thread.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:The manufacture of war materiel. so were they war workers or human shields. maybe both? one of them would make the other turn out brass bullet casings at swordpoint and at lunch they'd switch off?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:ugh why didn't the japanese set up rudimentary factories in rice paddies and on floating platforms on the ocean. really we had no choice but to incinerate hundreds of thousands of the silly brutes need to remind myself that there is no point in arguing with a Stalnist fanboy.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:ah yes, the great shinto crusades where the perfidious nips set up lathes and backyard foundries not out of desperation, but to dare us to burn civilians alive. woe to them, they did not know we were made of that stern warrior stuff that can light a child on fire and say it was necessary I got away with saying a racial slur by pretending it was the other person saying it, but it was actually me! Hee hee hee hee hee!!!
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:need to remind myself that there is no point in arguing with a Stalnist fanboy. ah, so by questioning the necessity of extensive firebomb attacks against civilians, as well as the post-hoc justification of the massive deaths of civilians due to fire, i am tantamount to a Stalinist. because you know Stalinists absolutely can't stand the unnecessary deaths of masses of civilians and the extremely flimsy justifications used to excuse the act, that's one thing Stalinists are known for actually, their complete intolerance of mass murder
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
Honestly, the Rapey Yoda's make this thread a tiny bit bearable when it descends into a retarded slap fight between greasy pedants all looking for the moral high ground. So good job, whoever it was that did the Yodas.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
Nah, the biggest shame for America wasn't bombing Japan, it was actively helping Nazi Germany commit the holocaust. The post-war lies that we didn't know the holocaust was happening is just how we rationalize the shame. But we turned away those boats, refused visas, took actions to further isolate jews in Europe all because to be honest, we didn't exactly disapprove of what Hitler was doing to the "undesirables". (Until we saw exactly how they did it.) The argument was made well in this piece that we could have stopped the holocaust by negotiating with the Nazis: http://harpers.org/archive/2011/05/why-im-a-pacifist/ but that's paywalled. So here's someone else discussing it: quote:Of course, pacifism as a means to end the Holocaust seems blasphemous on the surface. We in America are instilled with the idea from birth that only an Allied military victory could have ended Nazi atrocities--against the Jews, and everyone else. But Baker's essay suggests it was, in fact, the pacifists, and in America, many of them rabbis, who were making the earliest and strongest case to save Jews. They were the ones who helped arraged the Kindertransport that saved 10,000 Jewish children; they were the ones who organized the release of Jews from Dachau and Buchenwald; they were the ones who hid Jewish children in southern France. Of course one might argue that it was better to not negotiate rather than stop X number of deaths in the holocaust. But I'm not so sure of that.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
Academician Nomad posted:There is no evidence those purple heart orders were ordered with any expectation of being used within decades of the order, much less during the invasion. Since you're going full conspiracy theory I'd like to know what you think the intent behind the conspiracy is. quote:Nah, the biggest shame for America wasn't bombing Japan, it was actively helping Nazi Germany commit the holocaust. "Actively helping" is not the same as "passively ignoring"
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
Internet Webguy posted:I found the best part: "Plaintiff BUNDY publically[sic] equated his This guy is so deep in the racism that he can't even see the light. What the hell, how are people really defending this guy.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
Pacifism is a great idea until you realize that not everyone else is a pacifist. Also you realize that some people just seek out to dick with others so they probably need the fear of punishment for them to actually function.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Nah, the biggest shame for America wasn't bombing Japan, it was actively helping Nazi Germany commit the holocaust. The post-war lies that we didn't know the holocaust was happening is just how we rationalize the shame. But we turned away those boats, refused visas, took actions to further isolate jews in Europe all because to be honest, we didn't exactly disapprove of what Hitler was doing to the "undesirables". (Until we saw exactly how they did it.) I think a very relevant point here is that the attitude is generally that everyone loved Jews except those awful Nazis, but no, America hated them too, just not as much. It was interesting visiting Germany because they're very aware of their past and the mistakes they've made, but the attitude over here is "hoorah we're the big heroes who killed all the bad guys."
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Since you're going full conspiracy theory I'd like to know what you think the intent behind the conspiracy is. it's not even a conspiracy theory, just cold war politics and the reinforcement of american righteousness through national mythmaking there are still plenty of people out there who think "domino theory was a weak justification to flex our nuts in southeast asia proxy wars" is a conspiracy theory and that vietnam was necessary to prevent the communist takeover of asia, which happened and now asia is so very communist
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
I can buy the "we did it to show the Soviets Jumbo" argument, but the "we did it because we didn't care about non-whites" seems pretty untrue, as my understanding is that on all levels, if the Germans had pulled off a miracle and stalled the Soviets in Poland til August, we would have nuked Berlin with great joy and vigor.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Since you're going full conspiracy theory I'd like to know what you think the intent behind the conspiracy is. You know if you're going to try to just dismiss someone as a conspiracy theorist because you don't like what they say, it would be wise to check the cites they provide. Or you know, provide some of your own. Because I trust Rufus E. Miles's research into WW2 documents more than your own.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:You know if you're going to try to just dismiss someone as a conspiracy theorist because you don't like what they say, it would be wise to check the cites they provide. Or you know, provide some of your own. I heard this exact argument with someone trying to get me to listen to Alex Jones. "Prove Chemtrails DON'T exist!"
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/05/donald-trump-white-nationalist-afp-delegate-californiaquote:Trump Selects a White Nationalist Leader as a Delegate in California
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:"Actively helping" is not the same as "passively ignoring" I think when Jews came fleeing to the US and we sent them back to Europe to die in the camps, that counts as actively helping.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:it's not even a conspiracy theory, just cold war politics and the reinforcement of american righteousness through national mythmaking But this doesn't make any sense, why single out the atom bombs and not all the other military actions against civilian populations if everything needs to be made righteous? The fact that people championing the "America is bad for dropping the bombs" always seem to simultaneously believe that the Soviets were the real cause of surrender despite the emperor never mentioning them even in private does seem to reek of lovely Cold War leftism though.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
SquadronROE posted:This guy is so deep in the racism that he can't even see the light. What the hell, how are people really defending this guy. they are also racist
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:But this doesn't make any sense, why single out the atom bombs and not all the other military actions against civilian populations if everything needs to be made righteous? The be fair, the guy he is citing specifically is on a board that is solely focused on nuclear disarmament.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:But this doesn't make any sense, why single out the atom bombs and not all the other military actions against civilian populations if everything needs to be made righteous? i dont think america was bad for dropping the bombs i do think that in the immediate years after the bombs they were held up as the one thing that will end war forever, probably, and this got tied into nationalist boosterism about how american ingenuity and grit created the Wonder Bomb that ended the war instead of, you know, boring old geopolitics at that point "the bombs stopped us from having to invade japan, killing millions" is an argument which is based on a flawed and illogical understanding of both the japanese willingness to fight (often tinged with racism) as well as american befuddlement at the japanese unwillingness to surrender in the first half of 1945
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
theblackw0lf posted:http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/05/donald-trump-white-nationalist-afp-delegate-california Yeah this is why I think after Trump loses there is going to be a few violent years ahead of us. Fojar38 posted:But this doesn't make any sense, why single out the atom bombs and not all the other military actions against civilian populations if everything needs to be made righteous? This is exactly what it is. The kind of lefties that any good leftist would purge. The JBS of the Left.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:You know if you're going to try to just dismiss someone as a conspiracy theorist because you don't like what they say, it would be wise to check the cites they provide. Or you know, provide some of your own. What? The dude I was responding to outright ignored all sources that contradict his position as a myth intended to cover up the truth, namely of a Truman administration/US government plot to post-facto justify the use of the atomic bombs by fabricating sources. It's straight up conspiracy speak.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:What? The dude I was responding to outright ignored all sources that contradict his position as a myth intended to cover up the truth, namely of a Truman administration conspiracy to post-facto justify the use of the atomic bombs. It's straight up conspiracy speak. no actually you're just dismissing arguments that make you uncomfortable as conspiracy gibberish without even looking into the merit of the argument
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:at that point "the bombs stopped us from having to invade japan, killing millions" is an argument which is based on a flawed and illogical understanding of both the japanese willingness to fight (often tinged with racism) as well as american befuddlement at the japanese unwillingness to surrender in the first half of 1945 Based on what we know from Japanese sources the US military actually underestimated Japanese defenses and manpower by like 300% and what's more the Japanese also knew exactly where the Americans planned to land. But I guess Truman made all that up to justify an act that doesn't really need justification.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Based on what we know from Japanese sources the US military actually underestimated Japanese defenses and manpower by like 300% and what's more the Japanese also knew exactly where the Americans planned to land. i'm super confused as to what you think my argument even is, and i suspect you are too, so i'll restate it plainly it was very unlikely the japanese would still be at war in september, 1945, meaning that any invasion of japan would not take place, because the war would be over. meaning that regardless of whether or not the bombs were dropped, because the japanese willingness to continue to fight was based on a desperate hope that stalin woudn't enter the war, meaning that the bombs were not necessary to prevent an invasion which wasn't going to happen anyway you seem to think i'm saying the invasion was fabricated to justify the bombs which, if true, indicates a severe and shocking lack of comprehension on your part
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:no actually you're just dismissing arguments that make you uncomfortable as conspiracy gibberish without even looking into the merit of the argument His argument is a confident statement that nobody in the US military thought there would be significant casualties in an invasion of Japan and that in fact they believed that an invasion of Japan would never really be necessary, but mean old Truman ordered them bombed anyway and then engaged in a half-century coverup. Which ironically doesn't even loving matter because we have Japanese sources and because of them we know for a fact that casualties would have been way, way higher than what his article claims the estimates actually were so ???
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:His argument is a confident statement that nobody in the US military thought there would be significant casualties in an invasion of Japan and that in fact they believed that an invasion of Japan would never really be necessary, but mean old Truman ordered them bombed anyway and then engaged in a half-century coverup. no, he's saying that military casualty estimates were wildly exaggerated after the war. that's what the article says. here you can even use google to find the article and read it yourself http://www.fpp.co.uk/History/General/atombomb/strange_myth/article.html it's usually a good idea to read or at least skim an article before you start making claims about the article's contents
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:it was very unlikely the japanese would still be at war in september, 1945, meaning that any invasion of japan would not take place, because the war would be over. meaning that regardless of whether or not the bombs were dropped, because the japanese willingness to continue to fight was based on a desperate hope that stalin woudn't enter the war, meaning that the bombs were not necessary to prevent an invasion which wasn't going to happen anyway I wasn't arguing against your position, I was arguing against the guy who posted that article's position. I mean I still think that parts of your position are wrong but at least they aren't tinfoil-hat tier.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Since you're going full conspiracy theory I'd like to know what you think the intent behind the conspiracy is. Ahh yes, academic history: a big conspiracy theory. I'm not going to continue the derail, but I'll repost a few articles that together get at the current academic consensus, arrived at by a wide variety of historians from various countries and viewpoints, researching the issue in depth over decades: In blog format from Alex Wellerstein: http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2013/03/08/the-decision-to-use-the-bomb-a-consensus-view/ Walker, "The Decision to Use the Bomb: A HIstoriographical Update." Diplomatic History, vol. 14, no. 1 (1990), p. 97-114: http://dh.oxfordjournals.org/content/14/1/97.extract For a (somewhat-too-strong) view that the decision to use the bomb was mostly diplomatic, Gar Alperovitz, The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb https://www.amazon.com/Decision-Use-Atomic-Bomb-ebook/dp/B004FGMR3S On myth-making specifically: Michael Mishler, "War and Memory: The Creation of the American Memory of the Atomic Bombings and the End of the War in the Pacific" (though it's kind of poorly written) Even better: Richard Kohn, "History and the Culture Wars: The Case of the Smithsonian Institution's Enola Gay Exhibition," The Journal of American History, Vol. 82, No. 3 (Dec 1995), p. 1036-63 Michael Yavenditti, "John Hershey and the American Conscience: The Reception of 'Hiroshima,'" Pacific Historical Review Vol. 43, No. 1 (1974), p.24-49 Rufus E. Miles, Jr., “Hiroshima:The Strange Myth of Half a Million American Lives Saved,” International Security 10 (Fall 1985): 121-40 Barton J. Bemstein, “A Postwar Myth: 500,000 US. Lives Saved,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 42 (June/July 1986): 3840. If you can't access those, go to Sci-Hub or something. Fojar38 posted:What? The dude I was responding to outright ignored all sources that contradict his position as a myth intended to cover up the truth, namely of a Truman administration/US government plot to post-facto justify the use of the atomic bombs by fabricating sources. It's straight up conspiracy speak.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
Boon posted:There was a time not all that long ago when I was standing Officer of the Deck on a US warship at sea. We had made our way a quarter of the way across the world and had another quarter to go. In that time we had encountered all sorts of people and situations, we had done maneuvers with the Navies of many countries, hosted some dignitaries a time or two, encountered all sorts of nationalities at sea, and overheard far too many calls of 'Fillipino monkey'. However, I had noticed something interesting during all these events and now had the time to reflect upon. Near the back of the pilothouse we had a roster posted with a list of names and languages. It was a list of all the crew on board who were capable of speaking fluently whichever language was listed next to them. Farsi, Russian, Chinese, Arabic, Tagalog, Ewe, among more common ones, Spanish, French, etc... For most of these languages, they weren't spoken because anyone had sat in school studying them but because that's where the various members of the crew had been born and/or grew up. I remember marveling, and still do, at the sheer diversity of our crew which is shown in stark contrast when going aboard a warship of nearly any other nation. "I was on a floating war machine practicing how to wage war and kill people of various ethnic backgrounds and I saw the crew was also made up of various ethnic backgrounds. I am proud that so many different people can get together and kill others." -A war criminal probably MariusLecter fucked around with this message at 22:03 on May 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
McDowell posted:The human kingdom is a filthy place coated with blood, no one is sinless. The one good and true post.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:I wasn't arguing against your position, I was arguing against the guy who posted that article's position. you were arguing against an article you purposely did not read and you called it conspiracy nonsense before you read it to excuse yourself from having to even look at it
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:no, he's saying that military casualty estimates were wildly exaggerated after the war. that's what the article says. here you can even use google to find the article and read it yourself Notable academic website "International Campaign for Real History," a subsidiary of the website of David Irving, notable holocaust denier jesus loving christ dude
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Notable academic website "International Campaign for Real History," a subsidiary of the website of David Irving, notable holocaust denier the article was originally published in International Security, an actual journal. the website is just rehosting for free, probably illegally do you... seriously not understand how academia works
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
God drat it D&D, just tell me already if the US is literally worse than Hitler. In other present-day news, CA delegates for Trump have been selected...and in a funny coincidence, one of those delegates happens to be a white nationalist who once wrote that all minorities should be deported from this great white nation and that black people could be hired as enforcers to enact the plan.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:the article was originally published in International Security, an actual journal. the website is just rehosting for free, probably illegally And you don't think that the fact that a holocaust denier chose to host the article in question might be a little iffy?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 17:28 |
|
|
Fojar38 posted:And you don't think that the fact that a holocaust denier chose to host the article in question might be a little iffy? And Hitler was a vegan! Actually, as you keep forgetting Rufus Miles is actually a real person and is rather well regarded. But keep slinging mud at dead authors who prove you wrong.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 22:11
|
|