Nukes: When America wanted a Soviet invasion of Japan

[Quag]

Unanswered questions from #21:
Does the general public know what goes on behind closed doors? Are there not levels of secrecy? Do wealthy and powerful people and corporations not heavily influence American politics?

Is the US government not the lone superpower? Please note that I specifically chose "dominance" not "domination."

Please take your CT garbage to the Ct section you have no interest in history and I have no interest in discussing CTs in the history section.
I will however engage your inane Ct discussion in the proper place if you want to

 

[Antiwar]

All already addressed. The general public knows full well who made the decision during the Second World War, just as they did during the Civil War and every other conflict.

That brings back the other set of unanswered questions and comments from part of #25:
The People aren't privy to War Room decisions nor who actually makes what decisions, are we? Yes or no? At best we know who was there, but we really don't even know that. If you disagree, then post evidence of exactly who made what decisions in any of the various wars the US government has been involved with (to put it mildly) in the last 21 years. You can even limit it to the decisions to go to war, since Congress doesn't vote on going to wars anymore. No, we have the used and abused AUMF: Aye You MotherFers, stop killing people and destroying places!

Claiming that a secretive cabal runs the country because the government doesn’t tell the public every single damn thing and because “powerful people” exist is silly.

I never made that claim. You've committed yourself to this shallow line of argumentation, and you can't go any deeper. And/or your grasp of some words is insufficient. For example, dominance is different from domination.

Claiming that the US government knew that it would become the “lone superpower“ sixty plus years later, or that that idea motivated them in any way, shape or form, is even sillier.

I never made that claim, either. I suspect you're hopped up on energy drinks or something.

This was my sarcastic comment from #25 that you're misrepresenting. There might be other related comments of mine, but I'm on my phone, and your debate style is lacking. I'm not being hyperbolic like you are, I just have to occasionally state the reality of the situation.

From #25:
I mean, yeah, you must be right: The US government didn't want to become the most powerful economic and military force on Earth. What was I thinking?! Chuckle.

 

[Antiwar]

Please take your CT garbage to the Ct section you have no interest in history and I have no interest in discussing CTs in the history section.
I will however engage your inane Ct discussion in the proper place if you want to

Chuckle.

 

[craig]

So Russia negotiated a treaty with America and Britain that said the Soviets could seize all the lands Japan had taken from the Russians in the 1905 war.

America very much wanted the Soviets to declare war on Japan and open another front, both Roosevelt and Truman.

Then America's stands on Soviet help changed. America no longer wanted the Soviets to invade Japan. America wanted to end the war quickly before the Soviets could invade.

The change happened right after the German surrender.

Why the Change?

The new President Truman already feared the Soviet expansionism that he later formulated into the Truman Doctrine. The opportunity to use Nuclear weapons to quickly end the war without a long and costly American invasion kept the Soviets off the home islands. From the atomic bombings to surrender to occupation was only a few weeks. Essentially a "fait accompli".

 

[Closer]

There were plenty of Japanese targets in Manchuria and Korea. You don't need boats for that.

That and the million or so Japanese troops in China.

 

[Tigerace117]

That brings back the other set of unanswered questions and comments from part of #25:
The People aren't privy to War Room decisions nor who actually makes what decisions, are we? Yes or no? At best we know who was there, but we really don't even know that. If you disagree, then post evidence of exactly who made what decisions in any of the various wars the US government has been involved with (to put it mildly) in the last 21 years. You can even limit it to the decisions to go to war, since Congress doesn't vote on going to wars anymore. No, we have the used and abused AUMF: Aye You MotherFers, stop killing people and destroying places!


I never made that claim. You've committed yourself to this shallow line of argumentation, and you can't go any deeper. And/or your grasp of some words is insufficient. For example, dominance is different from domination.


I never made that claim, either. I suspect you're hopped up on energy drinks or something.

This was my sarcastic comment from #25 that you're misrepresenting. There might be other related comments of mine, but I'm on my phone, and your debate style is lacking. I'm not being hyperbolic like you are, I just have to occasionally state the reality of the situation.

From #25:
I mean, yeah, you must be right: The US government didn't want to become the most powerful economic and military force on Earth. What was I thinking?! Chuckle.

Except, again, your entire premise is untrue. Claiming that we “don’t really know who was there“ is CTer idiocy. Likewise, claiming that “we don’t know who really makes the decisions“ is nothing more than Cter babble. I already addressed that part of your little manifesto as well; we have extensive insight into the inner decision making process of the US government during the Second World War and Civil War, to name just two examples.

Your entire “argument“ is exactly that shallow. Nobody is obligated to chase you down your rabbit holes or pretend your Cter babble has any basis in fact.

You haven’t stated the “reality of the situation“ yet.....mainly because you can’t.

 

[Antiwar]

Except, again, your entire premise is untrue. Claiming that we “don’t really know who was there“ is CTer idiocy. Likewise, claiming that “we don’t know who really makes the decisions“ is nothing more than Cter babble. I already addressed that part of your little manifesto as well; we have extensive insight into the inner decision making process of the US government during the Second World War and Civil War, to name just two examples.

Your entire “argument“ is exactly that shallow. Nobody is obligated to chase you down your rabbit holes or pretend your Cter babble has any basis in fact.

You haven’t stated the “reality of the situation“ yet.....mainly because you can’t.

So nothing on the last 21 years, huh? Ancient wars (the Civil War and WWII) are pretty damn irrelevant to modern times.

And you're still twisting. Don't bother replying unless you directly answer half of the questions. Your schtick is old.

 

[Tigerace117]

So nothing on the last 21 years, huh? Ancient wars (the Civil War and WWII) are pretty damn irrelevant to modern times.

And you're still twisting. Don't bother replying unless you directly answer half of the questions. Your schtick is old.

We have even more data from recent years as well, but both wars(neither of which are irrelevant, by the way; both are massively influential in shaping how America developed to the present day) are some of the most important and massive conflicts in American history.....and only further debunk your CTer garbage.

Buddy, I’ve directly answered your “questions“ multiple times now. I get that you are a CTer and therefore are physically unable to live in the real world, but no amount of fairy tales changes the fact that you are utterly clueless.

 

[Antiwar]

We have even more data from recent years as well, but both wars(neither of which are irrelevant, by the way; both are massively influential in shaping how America developed to the present day) are some of the most important and massive conflicts in American history.....and only further debunk your CTer garbage.

Buddy, I’ve directly answered your “questions“ multiple times now. I get that you are a CTer and therefore are physically unable to live in the real world, but no amount of fairy tales changes the fact that you are utterly clueless.

You haven't answered anything. I'm not a conspiracy theorist. We have found out about a lot of things that seemed like conspiracy theories, which ended up being true.

I'm a progressive and you're probably a center-left liberal with a penchant for militarism. Maybe you're neoliberal. Whatever you consider yourself, I'm tired of your disingenuous abrasive attitude.

 

[Tigerace117]

You haven't answered anything. I'm not a conspiracy theorist. We have found out about a lot of things that seemed like conspiracy theories, which ended up being true.

I'm a progressive and you're probably a center-left liberal with a penchant for militarism. Maybe you're neoliberal. Whatever you consider yourself, I'm tired of your disingenuous abrasive attitude.

Lol you very clearly are, with your fantasies about secret cabals making the decisions and running the country

I’ve addressed your “argument” numerous times. It is not my problem that you don’t like being called out on being a CTer

 

[Antiwar]

Lol you very clearly are, with your fantasies about secret cabals making the decisions and running the country

I’ve addressed your “argument” numerous times. It is not my problem that you don’t like being called out on being a CTer

You act like there's one true history. Get real. There are many things that are generally agreed upon by most historians, but much is left out of history. There's really no way to even have a full accounting of history. There's no way for even groups of historians working together to solve the issues inherent in history.

Yeah, they have more evidence about the Civil War and WWII than shortly after those wars because more evidence is revealed. But evidence is always in need of interpretation. Evidence is lost, untruthful, destroyed, etc. Nixon destroyed evidence, but much of Nixon's evidence was damning.

Then there's classified information. Eventually some of it is made public, but it's usually redacted.

Then there's trying to determine motives. Did GW Bush's administration lie about WMDs? All of the main players?

Hell, evidence on Reagan's "October Surprise" recently surfaced. Guess what? That's still subject to interpretation.

There's more. You're deluding yourself if you think you know much about history.

 

[Tigerace117]

You act like there's one true history. Get real. There are many things that are generally agreed upon by most historians, but much is left out of history. There's really no way to even have a full accounting of history. There's no way for even groups of historians working together to solve the issues inherent in history.

Yeah, they have more evidence about the Civil War and WWII than shortly after those wars because more evidence is revealed. But evidence is always in need of interpretation. Evidence is lost, untruthful, destroyed, etc. Nixon destroyed evidence, but much of Nixon's evidence was damning.

Then there's classified information. Eventually some of it is made public, but it's usually redacted.

Then there's trying to determine motives. Did GW Bush's administration lie about WMDs? All of the main players?

Hell, evidence on Reagan's "October Surprise" recently surfaced. Guess what? That's still subject to interpretation.

There's more. You're deluding yourself if you think you know much about history.

Oh look, more grasping at straws. None of that actually proves any of what you contend. There is no evidence that someone other than Nixon was making decisions. There is no evidence that some secret cabal was running things in 2001(or any other time). You can’t just screech that “things were destroyed” or “secrets exist” and think that that means you can just toss out any wild claim you want and expect it to be taken seriously.

 

[Quag]

Chuckle.

Your posts would be amusing in the Ct section here it is just uneducated prattle

 

[Antiwar]

Oh look, more grasping at straws. None of that actually proves any of what you contend. There is no evidence that someone other than Nixon was making decisions. There is no evidence that some secret cabal was running things in 2001(or any other time). You can’t just screech that “things were destroyed” or “secrets exist” and think that that means you can just toss out any wild claim you want and expect it to be taken seriously.

Today's guess: You're a "patriot." You have a need to believe that US government militarism cannot do wrong. Uncle Sam is a cowboy that wears a white hat. John Wayne. Bombing for democracy. Bombing for humanity. Maybe you're a Christian. Who would Jesus bomb and starve? You probably have strong military ties. You and/or your dad? What branch? How long? Still in? Have you been in combat?

 

[Tigerace117]

Today's guess: You're a "patriot." You have a need to believe that US government militarism cannot do wrong. Uncle Sam is a cowboy that wears a white hat. John Wayne. Bombing for democracy. Bombing for humanity. Maybe you're a Christian. Who would Jesus bomb and starve? You probably have strong military ties. You and/or your dad? What branch? How long? Still in? Have you been in combat?

Again, last time I checked Jesus didn’t say “turn a blind eye to genocide”. As I recall, Jesus was rather blunt in denouncing those who ignored the suffering of the less fortunate. So, once again, your “argument” falls flat.

Your meltdown because I pointed out how absurd your favorite conspiracy theories are is amusing to watch, as always. No amount of babbling about “John Wayne” changes the fact that there’s no secret cabal “pulling the strings” and making decisions. Deal with it.

 

[craig]

So Russia negotiated a treaty with America and Britain that said the Soviets could seize all the lands Japan had taken from the Russians in the 1905 war.

America very much wanted the Soviets to declare war on Japan and open another front, both Roosevelt and Truman.

Then America's stands on Soviet help changed. America no longer wanted the Soviets to invade Japan. America wanted to end the war quickly before the Soviets could invade.

The change happened right after the German surrender.

Why the Change?

Was post #54 right?