"The Last Days of WWII" (1 Viewer)

[Missouri Mule]

This will be in the news especially with the anniversary of Hiroshima tomorrow. Tonight there is a continuing series on the History Channel (Dish 120) at 7 PM CDT that has chronicled this period of time in history. Tonight has the following: "U.S. planes raid Tarumizi; America drops atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki; the Soviet government decleares war on Japan."

These are all new original programs and well worth anyone's time. I never miss these programs. Highly recommended viewing.

 

[stsburns]

I'm not going to miss the Hiroshima special on History channel! :2wave:

 

[YamiB.]

I saw one a few months ago. It was talking about how an air raid by the US forced the emperor to deviate from his normal routine which messed up a coup that was going on among some of the top military guys.

 

[Missouri Mule]

One thing that I learned tonight was that the news coming out of Hiroshima didn't get to Toyko for sometime after the bomb blast. So that delayed their ultimate decision to surrender. Another thing that I learned was that one of our POWs had taken a number of photographs with a homemade camera and documented some of the worst atrocities of the POW camps. (They were truly horrible.) Ironically he was spared from the second bomb because of weather conditions. (Nagasaki was a secondary target.) And one other thing I learned was that Secretary of State Burns told Truman that if he didn't use the bomb and in 1946 the American people found out that he didn't use it he would have been impeached. I had a conversation with a WWII vet who had his orders to report for the scheduled invasion and he told me that Truman would have suffered the fate of Mussollini if he hadn't used it. The American people were sick and tired of the war and wanted it over and done with.

And for those interested, the Museum of the Pacific War in Fredricksburg, Texas is a real treat for those who follow this subject. There is an actual decomissioned (and presumably non-radioactive) "Fat Boy" atomic bomb on display in the museum. (I've stood right next to it.) Figure on spending a good whole day (two would be better) to see everything there. The Bush museum is next door and well worth the time to see it as well. And on your way home, stop by the Pedernales River and see the LBJ ranch and the cemetery where Johnson is actually buried. If you are lucky, you might see "Lady Bird" Johnson on the grounds. This is the "Hill Country" of Texas and is quite beautiful.

 

[gordontravels]

I say look at Iwo Jima. The Japanese had a strategy that was backed with documents as well as decoded transmissions:
The Japanese strategy was unique for three reasons:
1. The Japanese didn't fight above ground. They fought the battle entirely from beneath the ground. They dug 1,500 rooms into the rock. These were connected with 16 miles of tunnels.
2. Japanese strategy called for "no Japanese survivors." They planned not to survive.
3. Japanese strategy was for each soldier to kill 10 Americans before they themselves are killed.

It was estimated that if we had invaded Honshu and the mainland of Japan we would have had over a million casualties and we would have killed over 2 million Japanese. Many of those would have been school children 9 years or older that were trained to use spears on our men. The 200,000+ that died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were a token number compared to what would have been. It also broke the hold of the Japanese Military who held the Emperor a virtual prisoner during the last year of the war.

Those who want to berate the United States for using a weapon that literally ended the war and saved millions of lives on both sides have a real problem. If you had a chance to talk to any man that actually fought at Iwo you would understand. Those guys were going to be in the invasion force against Japan itself and knew what they would face. They would say, "Drop it!" :duel

 

[rudy0908]

This will be in the news especially with the anniversary of Hiroshima tomorrow. Tonight there is a continuing series on the History Channel (Dish 120) at 7 PM CDT that has chronicled this period of time in history. Tonight has the following: "U.S. planes raid Tarumizi; America drops atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki; the Soviet government decleares war on Japan."

These are all new original programs and well worth anyone's time. I never miss these programs. Highly recommended viewing.

Does anyone know if you can get copies of these programs from somewhere? I can't get enough WWII stuff in my system, its so damn interesting and amazing, but I don't have cable. If there's anyway to get these programs (the cheaper the better) please let me know.

 

[cnredd]

Does anyone know if you can get copies of these programs from somewhere? I can't get enough WWII stuff in my system, its so damn interesting and amazing, but I don't have cable. If there's anyway to get these programs (the cheaper the better) please let me know.

Go to historychannel.com and you can buy the videos and stuff at incredibly inflated prices.....or check your library or Blockbusters...They may have them for rent

 

[rudy0908]

Go to historychannel.com and you can buy the videos and stuff at incredibly inflated prices.....or check your library or Blockbusters...They may have them for rent

OK, thanks.

 

[cnredd]

OK, thanks.

A con helping a lib...don't let it out...we may lose our membership cards.:lol:

 

[Missouri Mule]

This is probably the most fact filled and non-propagandist program do deal with what went on during the war. I watched another program on the dropping of the bombs and it essentially demeaned Truman's decisions. The "usual suspects" were trotted out to give their "expert" contrarian opinions while other quotes from national figures were taken out of context to make the case that we shouldn't have dropped the bombs. Not one of these people, not a one; not a single one had their orders to storm the beaches of Japan. Therefore I conclude they can go straight to Hades.

Usually, they repeat this once or twice each week. Check your listings.

 

[Stinger]

It was estimated that if we had invaded Honshu and the mainland of Japan we would have had over a million casualties and we would have killed over 2 million Japanese. Many of those would have been school children 9 years or older that were trained to use spears on our men. The 200,000+ that died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were a token number compared to what would have been. It also broke the hold of the Japanese Military who held the Emperor a virtual prisoner during the last year of the war.

Don't foget that Curtis LeMay had already informed the Chiefs of Staff and the WH that he was prepared to incenerate EVERY Japaneses city into a pile of ashes and we had already started the process. The bombs SAVED lives. The "never again" protestors are misguided.

 

[Missouri Mule]

Don't foget that Curtis LeMay had already informed the Chiefs of Staff and the WH that he was prepared to incenerate EVERY Japaneses city into a pile of ashes and we had already started the process. The bombs SAVED lives. The "never again" protestors are misguided.

If I recall correctly, Toyko already had 600,000 people dead and incinerated by our incendiary bombs that we were dropping at will. The numbers killed by conventional weapons greatly exceeded the number killed by the nuclear bombs. One of the main reasons that we didn't drop it on Toyko was that the full impact of the bomb would have been obscured since the city already lay in ruins. Hiroshima was selected since it was largely intact and unaffected by the previous conventional bombing and it was to show what we had in our arsenal; the "big stuff" as it was called then.

 

[gordontravels]

If I recall correctly, Toyko already had 600,000 people dead and incinerated by our incendiary bombs that we were dropping at will. The numbers killed by conventional weapons greatly exceeded the number killed by the nuclear bombs. One of the main reasons that we didn't drop it on Toyko was that the full impact of the bomb would have been obscured since the city already lay in ruins. Hiroshima was selected since it was largely intact and unaffected by the previous conventional bombing and it was to show what we had in our arsenal; the "big stuff" as it was called then.

So tell me. Why didn't we drop it on Kyoto? And do you think that since the four target cities that included Nagasaki and Hiroshima with all the war production that had been moved into them were bad targets? :duel

 

[Missouri Mule]

So tell me. Why didn't we drop it on Kyoto? And do you think that since the four target cities that included Nagasaki and Hiroshima with all the war production that had been moved into them were bad targets? :duel

That's why you should have looked at the program. It was all covered in complete detail. That's the problem with the current generation. They are almost completely ignorant of recent WWII history. They depend on the Michael Moores and other like minded charlatans for their history.

 

[gordontravels]

That's why you should have looked at the program. It was all covered in complete detail. That's the problem with the current generation. They are almost completely ignorant of recent WWII history. They depend on the Michael Moores and other like minded charlatans for their history.

Yet you don't answer my questions? Must I watch a program on television to understand the history of WWII? Could I have understood that history from a source that just gave me the history without a possible "agenda" or "take"? Do you think I don't know because I read for years instead of watch for a few hours? Is your way better than mine? Oh and; am I uninformed?

Maybe you would consider that and also answering my question. :duel

 

[Missouri Mule]

Yet you don't answer my questions? Must I watch a program on television to understand the history of WWII? Could I have understood that history from a source that just gave me the history without a possible "agenda" or "take"? Do you think I don't know because I read for years instead of watch for a few hours? Is your way better than mine? Oh and; am I uninformed?

Maybe you would consider that and also answering my question. :duel

Well, you could start here. It would help explain why Kyoto was not selected.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto#History

http://www.wsulibs.wsu.edu/holland/masc/Kyoto.htm

 

[gordontravels]

Well, you could start here. It would help explain why Kyoto was not selected.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto#History

http://www.wsulibs.wsu.edu/holland/masc/Kyoto.htm

I'll be more forthcoming. I know why Kyoto was not a target. I know who advised the President on that target and why. I knew this when I read it in 1972. I also know the history of the bomb from Einstein and Edward Teller to Oppy. I have read histories written by Japanese survivors and have been to Kyoto twice in my lifetime. I would love to go back. I have been to Hiroshima (1977). I am familiar with President Truman's conduct of WWII as well as Winston Churchill telling him to use the "damn thing".

I am also aware that the History Channel skips some of our world history because they may not agree with it. I pick and choose what I view on the History Channel because I rely on television very seldom for either information or education. I read. I don't just read a book. I read a book and then seek another in the same frame of reference. I like to read one side and then the other. I like to hear conservative and liberal. I like to see history from one perspective and then another. I like to make up my own mind.

I'm not saying that the History Channel isn't worthwhile. What I am saying, and not to you but about learning in general, is that sometimes people rely on the easy way to learn - a one hour program or a series of programs on television. Reading takes comprehension and time and it is the time involved that is important if comprehension is achieved. I read for education. I watch television for entertainment. That's why I usually refer to the media as news/entertainment. Dan Rather lost the ability to report the news years ago. That's when it becomes entertainment and you need to read some newspapers, watch Dan and watch another network that you may not like.

I listen to Al Franken and Rush Limbaugh. I know why Kyoto wasn't bombed. :duel

 

[Missouri Mule]

I'll be more forthcoming. I know why Kyoto was not a target. I know who advised the President on that target and why. I knew this when I read it in 1972. I also know the history of the bomb from Einstein and Edward Teller to Oppy. I have read histories written by Japanese survivors and have been to Kyoto twice in my lifetime. I would love to go back. I have been to Hiroshima (1977). I am familiar with President Truman's conduct of WWII as well as Winston Churchill telling him to use the "damn thing".

I am also aware that the History Channel skips some of our world history because they may not agree with it. I pick and choose what I view on the History Channel because I rely on television very seldom for either information or education. I read. I don't just read a book. I read a book and then seek another in the same frame of reference. I like to read one side and then the other. I like to hear conservative and liberal. I like to see history from one perspective and then another. I like to make up my own mind.

I'm not saying that the History Channel isn't worthwhile. What I am saying, and not to you but about learning in general, is that sometimes people rely on the easy way to learn - a one hour program or a series of programs on television. Reading takes comprehension and time and it is the time involved that is important if comprehension is achieved. I read for education. I watch television for entertainment. That's why I usually refer to the media as news/entertainment. Dan Rather lost the ability to report the news years ago. That's when it becomes entertainment and you need to read some newspapers, watch Dan and watch another network that you may not like.

I listen to Al Franken and Rush Limbaugh. I know why Kyoto wasn't bombed. :duel

Then you are both an educated and worldly experienced person who has investigated this situation and understand it well. That's good. I posted this thread because I thought it would be useful for the uneducated and gullible to learn a little history without all of the liberal propaganda that passes for education today. This was not for you. it was for the others.

But the bottom line for me was when I spoke to an elderly gentleman several years ago and we discussed his WWII experiences. He had served in the European theater and survived it (obviously) and he related what he and his buddies had to do to survive it. But then he said that when that was wrapped up he got his orders to report for the invasion of Japan. It was his belief that this really amounted to a death warrant. He went on to say that had Truman not dropped the bombs that Truman would have suffered the same fate as Musollini. I was already convinced that it was the right decision but this further hardened my views and further enhanced my utter contempt for the history revisionists who moan and groan whenever these anniversaries come about. I despise them because they are both stupid and uninformed and they will never tell you that they would be willing to storm those beaches. That makes their words both empty and immoral because they expect others to do the dying and suffering for their freedom. As far as I am concerned that is unforgivable.

BTW, Clement Atlee, who succeeded Churchill, also gave his approval to use the bomb. And he was the "liberal."

 

[gordontravels]

Then you are both an educated and worldly experienced person who has investigated this situation and understand it well. That's good. I posted this thread because I thought it would be useful for the uneducated and gullible to learn a little history without all of the liberal propaganda that passes for education today. This was not for you. it was for the others.

But the bottom line for me was when I spoke to an elderly gentleman several years ago and we discussed his WWII experiences. He had served in the European theater and survived it (obviously) and he related what he and his buddies had to do to survive it. But then he said that when that was wrapped up he got his orders to report for the invasion of Japan. It was his belief that this really amounted to a death warrant. He went on to say that had Truman not dropped the bombs that Truman would have suffered the same fate as Musollini. I was already convinced that it was the right decision but this further hardened my views and further enhanced my utter contempt for the history revisionists who moan and groan whenever these anniversaries come about. I despise them because they are both stupid and uninformed and they will never tell you that they would be willing to storm those beaches. That makes their words both empty and immoral because they expect others to do the dying and suffering for their freedom. As far as I am concerned that is unforgivable.

BTW, Clement Atlee, who succeeded Churchill, also gave his approval to use the bomb. And he was the "liberal."

Amen to the death warrant. My dad spent his WWII in the Pacific and although he didn't have to land on the beaches he saw plenty of action. The war there was much more difficult than in Europe where your enemy was above ground. Japan itself would have been the death of millions on all sides and our troops could have expected the usual no surrender policy they had seen in all the islands they had taken up til then.

Our guys that fought in the Pacific saw the hardest that any military has ever seen. I don't blame either the uniformed or the biased when they trot out their distain for the a-bomb; only their ignorance of what an invasion of Japan would have cost us and the Japanese. It was and is a terrible weapon and the new varieties are so much worse. To use it today would be unthinkable but looking at invading Japan in 1945 or 6 would have cost so many their lives that some who whine today may have lost their father in that battle. What would that do for their protest today?

The problem wasn't the Japanese people but their military who just couldn't seem to get past losing face if they lost the war. Our terms weren't beyond reality except that they didn't want to surrender at all and if they did, they wanted it on their terms. Didn't work that way in Germany. Wouldn't have worked that way in Japan.

As far as the "uneducated and gullible"? That's me sometimes too so don't think I don't read something or never will view something. I just like to set my priorities. Well, I like to think I do. :duel

 

[Stinger]

This is probably the most fact filled and non-propagandist program do deal with what went on during the war. I watched another program on the dropping of the bombs and it essentially demeaned Truman's decisions. The "usual suspects" were trotted out to give their "expert" contrarian opinions while other quotes from national figures were taken out of context to make the case that we shouldn't have dropped the bombs. Not one of these people, not a one; not a single one had their orders to storm the beaches of Japan. Therefore I conclude they can go straight to Hades.

Usually, they repeat this once or twice each week. Check your listings.

Interesting article in last weeks Weekly Standard making the case, based on newly disclosed transcripts or intercepts and memos that in fact we may not have invaded and the majority of the military leaders were advising against it as the loses would have been way too high and the Japaneses were much stronger than had been disclosed and were, as already known, prepared to fight to the end. Sort of puts the question to an end, the bombs were the ONLY way to end the war with an unconditional surrender.

 

[Missouri Mule]

Interesting article in last weeks Weekly Standard making the case, based on newly disclosed transcripts or intercepts and memos that in fact we may not have invaded and the majority of the military leaders were advising against it as the loses would have been way too high and the Japaneses were much stronger than had been disclosed and were, as already known, prepared to fight to the end. Sort of puts the question to an end, the bombs were the ONLY way to end the war with an unconditional surrender.

It's pretty simple when one thinks about it. All the Japanese had to do was to send a single communication to the U.S. that they were folding their hand. That's all that it would have took. They wanted to play games, play kissy-face with the Soviets, who up to that point, were not yet at war with. They were preparing their citizens to fight to the last person and we were supposed to throw our young boys into a meat grinder. Insane. Critics never had to report for the invasion but they know it all. They always expect someone else to do the fighting and dying. Why on earth do we listen to these people? I'll never understand it.

For Thomas Sowell's take on this, see this link and excerpt.

Trashing our history; Hiroshima
Thomas Sowell

August 9, 2005

Every August, there are some Americans who insist on wringing their hands over the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, so it was perhaps inevitable that such people would have an orgy of wallowing in guilt on the 60th anniversary of that tragic day. Time magazine has page after page of photographs of people scarred by the radiation, as if General Sherman had not already said long ago that war is hell...

(Snip)

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/ts20050809.shtml

 

[rudy0908]

It's pretty simple when one thinks about it. All the Japanese had to do was to send a single communication to the U.S. that they were folding their hand. That's all that it would have took. They wanted to play games, play kissy-face with the Soviets, who up to that point, were not yet at war with. They were preparing their citizens to fight to the last person and we were supposed to throw our young boys into a meat grinder. Insane. Critics never had to report for the invasion but they know it all. They always expect someone else to do the fighting and dying. Why on earth do we listen to these people? I'll never understand it.

Just out of curiosity, has anything been said about the Russians not playing the role of mediator honestly for the Japanese? What I mean is, could they have purposely tried to string out the war between Japan and US? I've never heard anything about this, but it just occurred to me that the Russians would have plenty of motive for lengthening the war.

 

[ludahai]

One thing I have always wondered about the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima was the large number of Americans living in Hiroshima at the time. Did President Truman KNOW that there were Americans living there? If he did know, did that influence his decision or did he share the prevailing view of the day that Nisei (and even a few Sansei) couldn't be trusted and weren't truly American?

 

[Missouri Mule]

Just out of curiosity, has anything been said about the Russians not playing the role of mediator honestly for the Japanese? What I mean is, could they have purposely tried to string out the war between Japan and US? I've never heard anything about this, but it just occurred to me that the Russians would have plenty of motive for lengthening the war.

Hmmm. Well, Stalin knew about the bomb as he had spies within our "Manhatten Project." So that was no surprise to him when Truman told him of it. As I recall we had wanted them to open a new front against Japan as we were taking tremendous casualties coming up from the south to the mainland of Japan. It would appear that they had motive for lengthening the war in order to tie us down while they consolidated their hold on Eastern Europe. It is a plausible scenario and I don't offhand know if it was deliberate or not. I think it was more opportunism than anything when they finally declared war on Japan at the end. Part of the reasons we did use the bomb was to keep the Soviets from capitalizing on the situation by showing our willingness to use the "big stuff" against Japan. In any event, the American people were sick of the war and wanted it to end. Truman had the bomb. All of the various scenarios were thoroughly hashed out; such as the demonstration of the bomb, etc., etc., but in the end it was decided that the bomb would be dropped on relatively unscathed cities to show the utter devestation that awaited the Japanese if they didn't capitulate.

To some extent, it was a bluff. We didn't have an inexhaustible supply of nuclear bombs and in fact reverted to conventional bombing although Toyko was essentially burned to the ground. We had built 4,000 B-29's and had complete control of the air but yet Japan didn't surrender until the bombs were dropped and even a palace coup on the eve of surrender almost prevented that. As I recall, the coup plotters committed hari-kari.

The bottom line is that Truman was looking to end the war with as few casualties as possible to our forces. And in so doing it also reduced Japanese casualties because the war finally ended. Otherwise we were looking at perhaps 10,000,000 Japaneses deaths from a land invasion and 1,000,000 American deaths. That was deemed unacceptable. And that doesn't even go into the daily death toll on our POWs being starved and beaten to death in Japanese prison camps.

 

[Missouri Mule]

Heads-up

Tonight is the next new installment of this series. August 12 through August 18. "Japan surrenderes; General MacArthur becomes Supreme Allied Commander. New." The History Channel has additional information on this series. This should be mandatory viewing by anyone interested in WWII history.

"In Tokyo, the Japanese government at last accepts the inevitable and surrenders to the Allies unconditionally. President Truman, addressing crowds from the portico of the White House, said "this is the day we've been waiting for since Pearl Harbor." The surrender will be formally made to General MacArthur at a later ceremony aboard the US battleship Missouri anchored in Tokyo Bay. Emperor Hirohito makes an emotional broadcast to the Japanese nation saying that they had no choice but to surrender. Otherwise the country would have been destroyed by what he described as "a new and most cruel bomb". General MacArthur is appointed Supreme Allied Commander. VJ Day--Victory over Japan--is declared a national holiday." TVPG V cc


http://www.historychannel.com/

It comes on 7 PM CDT. Runs one hour. It repeats at 11 PM and at 8 AM tomorrow morning on Dish, Channel 120. Be sure to set your DVR if you can't see it live.