Missouri Mule
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2005
- Messages
- 1,406
- Reaction score
- 48
- Location
- Hot Springs, Arkansas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
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.Missouri Mule said: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.
rudy0908 said: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.
OK, thanks.cnredd said: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 said:OK, thanks.
gordontravels said:
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.
Stinger said: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 said: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 said: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 said: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 said: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 said: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 said: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 said: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."
Missouri Mule said: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 said: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.
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.Missouri Mule said: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.
rudy0908 said: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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?