• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why we had to drop the A bombs on Japan

The American powers that were wanted to test the bomb on a large civilian population versus the small populations they'd already tested them on. The projection of power displayed through their willingness to drop atomic bombs on civilians was a big side benefit. The American warrior government sucks. Some year, people will look back on US and ask 'How could humans not know that is immoral behavior?," just as some of us say when we look back at slavery. **** US militarism.
 
vegas giants said:
Uh....so? Where is the quotes about the bomb???


I'm waiting
Click to expand...

What about the bomb? That it didn't change the mind of the military, or that it was why Hirohito surrendered?

If the latter, he said it himself: "Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should we continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization. "
 
You two: Get a room.
 
Jredbaron96 said:
What about the bomb? That it didn't change the mind of the military, or that it was why Hirohito surrendered?

If the latter, he said it himself: "Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should we continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization. "
Click to expand...
Wait what happened to the meeting? Lol

Now there is some letter? Lol
 
vegas giants said:
Wait what happened to the meeting? Lol

Now there is some letter? Lol
Click to expand...

I see now you are just dodging everything.

Unfortunately reality disagrees with you; here is verbatim from the meeting

snipppy.webp
 
vegas giants said:
No one. In fact the consensus was neither was necessary
Click to expand...

Then name anyone (on the US side), who said (at the time) that neither the A-Bomb OR an invasion was necessary...and that Japan was about to surrender anyway

Granted, victory could have been won by slowly starving Japan out, but that would take time and probably result in more Japanese deaths/suffering, that in the original timeline


The USA had the bomb, using it was the only sensible option.
 
Felis Leo said:
The Japanese Empire had it coming, and Hiroshima and Nagasaki were valid military targets. Whatever it took to end the war as soon as possible was acceptable.

Nazi Germany had it coming a bit more, but, sadly, we did not complete the bombs soon enough so they surrendered before we could reduce the Reich and as many Nazis as possible to radioactive ash.
Click to expand...
You really believe that? I agree with what we did to save American lives and probably Japanese as well. But suppose it took more than 2? 10? 15? Be interesting to know what the plan was if the first 2 didn't work.
 
Jredbaron96 said:
I see now you are just dodging everything.

Unfortunately reality disagrees with you; here is verbatim from the meeting

View attachment 67307592
Click to expand...
Is this from the meeting? He is saying not to surrender at all. He is definitely NOT saying surrender because of the bomb.


Dude you are all over the place
 
Rich2018 said:
Then name anyone (on the US side), who said (at the time) that neither the A-Bomb OR an invasion was necessary...and that Japan was about to surrender anyway

Granted, victory could have been won by slowly starving Japan out, but that would take time and probably result in more Japanese deaths/suffering, that in the original timeline


The USA had the bomb, using it was the only sensible option.
Click to expand...
I did. I quoted 7 out of 8 flag officers. Direct quotes
 
vegas giants said:
Is this from the meeting? He is saying not to surrender at all. He is definitely NOT saying surrender because of the bomb.
Click to expand...

You are now deliberately lying about your position and my own.

I have said, many times now, that the bombing did not change the mind of the military. YOU claimed that the Soviet entry into the war changed their minds, and I just showed this to be untrue.
 
Jredbaron96 said:
You are now deliberately lying about your position and my own.

I have said, many times now, that the bombing did not change the mind of the military. YOU claimed that the Soviet entry into the war changed their minds, and I just showed this to be untrue.
Click to expand...
Changed the emperors mind. Only he can surrender
 
Rich2018 said:
How about you give me your evidence ?

I'm not going to do your homework for you.
Click to expand...
I did. Pretend I didnt. I dont care. No one following the thread will deny I provided the quotes
 
Jredbaron96 said:
What on earth do you think "such technological power" is referring to? Proximity fuses?
Click to expand...
I know how to spell bomb. They wanted to save face. They did not surrender until Russia entered the war. Why not surrender after the first bomb?
 
vegas giants said:
Do you see a reference to the bomb? Lol
Click to expand...


Where you erroneously tried to claim that atomic bombs are somehow not nuclear weapons ?


Now don't be the pansy and wait until the end of a long thread and claim your evidence is buried somewhere along it

Name those flag officers who publicly said, at the time, that Japan was about to surrender and neither invasion nor atomic bombing was necessary. I do not say that there were no officers who believed it, but it was not the consensus of opinion of senior commanders.

You're parroting modern day revisionism.
 
Rich2018 said:
Where you erroneously tried to claim that atomic bombs are somehow not nuclear weapons ?


Now don't be the pansy and wait until the end of a long thread and claim your evidence is buried somewhere along it

Name those flag officers who publicly said, at the time, that Japan was about to surrender and neither invasion nor atomic bombing was necessary. I do not say that there were no officers who believed it, but it was not the consensus of opinion of senior commanders.

You're parroting modern day revisionism.
Click to expand...
Did you just call me a pansy?
 
vegas giants said:
They wanted to save face.
Click to expand...

You still have not explained why they needed or even wanted to.

They did not surrender until Russia entered the war.
Click to expand...

It clearly didn't trouble them that much.


snipppy.webp

Why not surrender after the first bomb?
Click to expand...

The claim from Anami was that the Allies only had one bomb. Nagasaki showed that to be false.
 
Jredbaron96 said:
You still have not explained why they needed or even wanted to.



It clearly didn't trouble them that much.


View attachment 67307595



The claim from Anami was that the Allies only had one bomb. Nagasaki showed that to be false.
Click to expand...
Why did they not surrender after the first bomb but waited until Russia entered the war?

Prove your claim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom