FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Nagasaki - 75 years on...
Nagasaki - 75 years on...
Jump to: Newest in thread
Sunday see's the 75th anniversary of the Atomic bombing by the United States of the Japanese city of Nagasaki. The Hiroshima anniversary passed without notice in mainstream media on last Thursday. It seems the 'powers that be'would rather todays young people know little of these gross atrocities committed by 'civilised warring powers'.
If you have younger folk in your family who you would like to know a bit more about the extent of what is being 'covered up ' and re-written, here is a link to an informative documentary on the subject:
https://rtd.rt.com/02qr
It is fairly comprehensive. It only falls short (in my view) in it's failing to stress that Japan (as a country with very few natural resources of it's own - oil,etc.) could easily have been 'bought to book' by blockade i.e. allowing it to 'wither on the vine' as it were - no allied invasion and loss of life then being necessary. Do please share the link with some young folk so they can form a view on the matter. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"Sunday see's the 75th anniversary of the Atomic bombing by the United States of the Japanese city of Nagasaki. The Hiroshima anniversary passed without notice in mainstream media on last Thursday. It seems the 'powers that be'would rather todays young people know little of these gross atrocities committed by 'civilised warring powers'.
If you have younger folk in your family who you would like to know a bit more about the extent of what is being 'covered up ' and re-written, here is a link to an informative documentary on the subject:
https://rtd.rt.com/02qr
It is fairly comprehensive. It only falls short (in my view) in it's failing to stress that Japan (as a country with very few natural resources of it's own - oil,etc.) could easily have been 'bought to book' by blockade i.e. allowing it to 'wither on the vine' as it were - no allied invasion and loss of life then being necessary. Do please share the link with some young folk so they can form a view on the matter."
You know little of Japanese customs,they would all have died for there Emperor and he would never have surrendered.
You make it sound like it would be like a siege in the middle ages.
Did the Germans surrender when we bombed some of there cities in such a way we might as well have nuked them.No they fought till they could fight no more.
To compare it with modern thinking is crazy.
The war was won with pure devastation and destruction.The Germans and Japs would have done the same to us,no rules and no morals on both sides.
If either side had played to rules with any morals they would have lost for certain.
I do not condone or condemn but I do know that the yanks have gloryfied this war far to much.Yes freedom won thank god but the manner of it does not make me proud but I understand why all this happened,ultimately Hitler was to blame.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Japan would never have surrendered, as it is not in there tradition to do so, they would have fought to the last as they did on many of the Pacific Islands during the war. Why did Japan risk it all by attacking pearl harbour in the beginning?? They knew unless they wiped out the US fleet they were fucked once they had done it,the USA did not attack them until they had been attacked. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"Sunday see's the 75th anniversary of the Atomic bombing by the United States of the Japanese city of Nagasaki. The Hiroshima anniversary passed without notice in mainstream media on last Thursday. It seems the 'powers that be'would rather todays young people know little of these gross atrocities committed by 'civilised warring powers'.
If you have younger folk in your family who you would like to know a bit more about the extent of what is being 'covered up ' and re-written, here is a link to an informative documentary on the subject:
https://rtd.rt.com/02qr
It is fairly comprehensive. It only falls short (in my view) in it's failing to stress that Japan (as a country with very few natural resources of it's own - oil,etc.) could easily have been 'bought to book' by blockade i.e. allowing it to 'wither on the vine' as it were - no allied invasion and loss of life then being necessary. Do please share the link with some young folk so they can form a view on the matter."
War is help for all involved. Japan was requested to surrender before the hiroshima bomb and warned if they did not they would be destroyed. They refused. Then after the hiroshima bomb they were asked again to surrender with the warning of more nukes. Again they refused. They knew they were defeated but refused to accept it and were actively preparing to defend an invasion. Only after the second bomb did they surrender when the emperor stepped in. The alternative was invasion with the massive casualties for all |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Been full on coverage on Japanese TV about the Hiroshima and Nagasaki events. Many stories about survivors, victims, and reminders of the devastation and the revival of the cities. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
I do not condone or condemn but I do know that the yanks have gloryfied this war far to much.Yes freedom won thank god but the manner of it does not make me proud but I understand why all this happened,ultimately Hitler was to blame.
"
Hitler and Germany were in no way responsible for events in the Far East. Japan had invaded and been at war with Nationalist (Fascist) China since the early/mid 1930's. Hitler only became German Chancellor in 1933.
Japan was actively suing for a 'peace with honour' at the time of the atomic attacks on two largely undefended, civilian filled cities. U.S. President Truman knew this and still authorised the attacks in any case. There was NO need for an invasion even - as Japan was devoid of fuel oil. The 'Yamato' (the most powerful battleship of the war, a vessel with 18in guns, sallied out on a suicide mission using the very last of the Japanese navies fuel reserves. The Captain and crew did this so that they might make some account of themselves before their vessel was inevitably destroyed in dock by Allied air power. It can therefore be deduced that to all intents and purposes Japan was finished and only needed to be allowed to 'wither on the vine' without the need for invasion. The spiteful and self-serving Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks where an unnecessary disgrace and an affront to decent minded people the world over. An unpunished war crime par excellence. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"
I do not condone or condemn but I do know that the yanks have gloryfied this war far to much.Yes freedom won thank god but the manner of it does not make me proud but I understand why all this happened,ultimately Hitler was to blame.
Hitler and Germany were in no way responsible for events in the Far East. Japan had invaded and been at war with Nationalist (Fascist) China since the early/mid 1930's. Hitler only became German Chancellor in 1933.
Japan was actively suing for a 'peace with honour' at the time of the atomic attacks on two largely undefended, civilian filled cities. U.S. President Truman knew this and still authorised the attacks in any case. There was NO need for an invasion even - as Japan was devoid of fuel oil. The 'Yamato' (the most powerful battleship of the war, a vessel with 18in guns, sallied out on a suicide mission using the very last of the Japanese navies fuel reserves. The Captain and crew did this so that they might make some account of themselves before their vessel was inevitably destroyed in dock by Allied air power. It can therefore be deduced that to all intents and purposes Japan was finished and only needed to be allowed to 'wither on the vine' without the need for invasion. The spiteful and self-serving Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks where an unnecessary disgrace and an affront to decent minded people the world over. An unpunished war crime par excellence."
Japan was in contact with the Russians but it was a trick as Russia was finalising its own plans to attack japan. There was never any chance of the talks producing peace. Japan was requested to surrender before the first bomb and again before the second bomb. Both times they refused |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
I do not condone or condemn but I do know that the yanks have gloryfied this war far to much.Yes freedom won thank god but the manner of it does not make me proud but I understand why all this happened,ultimately Hitler was to blame.
Hitler and Germany were in no way responsible for events in the Far East. Japan had invaded and been at war with Nationalist (Fascist) China since the early/mid 1930's. Hitler only became German Chancellor in 1933.
Japan was actively suing for a 'peace with honour' at the time of the atomic attacks on two largely undefended, civilian filled cities. U.S. President Truman knew this and still authorised the attacks in any case. There was NO need for an invasion even - as Japan was devoid of fuel oil. The 'Yamato' (the most powerful battleship of the war, a vessel with 18in guns, sallied out on a suicide mission using the very last of the Japanese navies fuel reserves. The Captain and crew did this so that they might make some account of themselves before their vessel was inevitably destroyed in dock by Allied air power. It can therefore be deduced that to all intents and purposes Japan was finished and only needed to be allowed to 'wither on the vine' without the need for invasion. The spiteful and self-serving Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks where an unnecessary disgrace and an affront to decent minded people the world over. An unpunished war crime par excellence.
Japan was in contact with the Russians but it was a trick as Russia was finalising its own plans to attack japan. There was never any chance of the talks producing peace. Japan was requested to surrender before the first bomb and again before the second bomb. Both times they refused"
You simply dont know there was never any chance of peace talks. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"
I do not condone or condemn but I do know that the yanks have gloryfied this war far to much.Yes freedom won thank god but the manner of it does not make me proud but I understand why all this happened,ultimately Hitler was to blame.
Hitler and Germany were in no way responsible for events in the Far East. Japan had invaded and been at war with Nationalist (Fascist) China since the early/mid 1930's. Hitler only became German Chancellor in 1933.
Japan was actively suing for a 'peace with honour' at the time of the atomic attacks on two largely undefended, civilian filled cities. U.S. President Truman knew this and still authorised the attacks in any case. There was NO need for an invasion even - as Japan was devoid of fuel oil. The 'Yamato' (the most powerful battleship of the war, a vessel with 18in guns, sallied out on a suicide mission using the very last of the Japanese navies fuel reserves. The Captain and crew did this so that they might make some account of themselves before their vessel was inevitably destroyed in dock by Allied air power. It can therefore be deduced that to all intents and purposes Japan was finished and only needed to be allowed to 'wither on the vine' without the need for invasion. The spiteful and self-serving Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks where an unnecessary disgrace and an affront to decent minded people the world over. An unpunished war crime par excellence.
Japan was in contact with the Russians but it was a trick as Russia was finalising its own plans to attack japan. There was never any chance of the talks producing peace. Japan was requested to surrender before the first bomb and again before the second bomb. Both times they refused
You simply dont know there was never any chance of peace talks."
Yes we do know there was no chance of peace from those talks as it was a cover for the Russians to prepare their own attacks which they have confirmed themselves. As said Japan was given several opportunities to surrender but refused. Russia carried out their attack as planned |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
I do not condone or condemn but I do know that the yanks have gloryfied this war far to much.Yes freedom won thank god but the manner of it does not make me proud but I understand why all this happened,ultimately Hitler was to blame.
Hitler and Germany were in no way responsible for events in the Far East. Japan had invaded and been at war with Nationalist (Fascist) China since the early/mid 1930's. Hitler only became German Chancellor in 1933.
Japan was actively suing for a 'peace with honour' at the time of the atomic attacks on two largely undefended, civilian filled cities. U.S. President Truman knew this and still authorised the attacks in any case. There was NO need for an invasion even - as Japan was devoid of fuel oil. The 'Yamato' (the most powerful battleship of the war, a vessel with 18in guns, sallied out on a suicide mission using the very last of the Japanese navies fuel reserves. The Captain and crew did this so that they might make some account of themselves before their vessel was inevitably destroyed in dock by Allied air power. It can therefore be deduced that to all intents and purposes Japan was finished and only needed to be allowed to 'wither on the vine' without the need for invasion. The spiteful and self-serving Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks where an unnecessary disgrace and an affront to decent minded people the world over. An unpunished war crime par excellence.
Japan was in contact with the Russians but it was a trick as Russia was finalising its own plans to attack japan. There was never any chance of the talks producing peace. Japan was requested to surrender before the first bomb and again before the second bomb. Both times they refused
You simply dont know there was never any chance of peace talks.
Yes we do know there was no chance of peace from those talks as it was a cover for the Russians to prepare their own attacks which they have confirmed themselves. As said Japan was given several opportunities to surrender but refused. Russia carried out their attack as planned"
Well that debate that's been going on for the last 80 years between historians can be put to bed because you know for a fact there was no chance for peace. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"
I do not condone or condemn but I do know that the yanks have gloryfied this war far to much.Yes freedom won thank god but the manner of it does not make me proud but I understand why all this happened,ultimately Hitler was to blame.
Hitler and Germany were in no way responsible for events in the Far East. Japan had invaded and been at war with Nationalist (Fascist) China since the early/mid 1930's. Hitler only became German Chancellor in 1933.
Japan was actively suing for a 'peace with honour' at the time of the atomic attacks on two largely undefended, civilian filled cities. U.S. President Truman knew this and still authorised the attacks in any case. There was NO need for an invasion even - as Japan was devoid of fuel oil. The 'Yamato' (the most powerful battleship of the war, a vessel with 18in guns, sallied out on a suicide mission using the very last of the Japanese navies fuel reserves. The Captain and crew did this so that they might make some account of themselves before their vessel was inevitably destroyed in dock by Allied air power. It can therefore be deduced that to all intents and purposes Japan was finished and only needed to be allowed to 'wither on the vine' without the need for invasion. The spiteful and self-serving Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks where an unnecessary disgrace and an affront to decent minded people the world over. An unpunished war crime par excellence.
Japan was in contact with the Russians but it was a trick as Russia was finalising its own plans to attack japan. There was never any chance of the talks producing peace. Japan was requested to surrender before the first bomb and again before the second bomb. Both times they refused
You simply dont know there was never any chance of peace talks.
Yes we do know there was no chance of peace from those talks as it was a cover for the Russians to prepare their own attacks which they have confirmed themselves. As said Japan was given several opportunities to surrender but refused. Russia carried out their attack as planned
Well that debate that's been going on for the last 80 years between historians can be put to bed because you know for a fact there was no chance for peace."
The Russians fulfilled there plans to attack by attacking a few hours before the second bomb. The talks were a covert operation by the Russians. The Japanese had several opportunities to surrender both before the first bomb and second bomb. They refused both |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Yes we do know there was no chance of peace from those talks as it was a cover for the Russians to prepare their own attacks which they have confirmed themselves. As said Japan was given several opportunities to surrender but refused. Russia carried out their attack as planned"
But you hoist yourself by your own petard. If the Japanese side only was in EARNEST in the talks, which they were, that means they were seeking peace and therefore the killing of 200,000 non-combatants was NOT warranted. The U.S.S.R. was behaving very honourably at this stage in the war (some posts have come across as though they were scheming and pursuing their own ends). Soviet forces were already engaged against the Japanese Army in Manchuria in mainland China. Churchill, a consumate politician (and reluctant admirer of Stalin) had managed to obtain an undertaking from 'Uncle Joe' that, once the fighting in Europe were over, the Red Army would turn east and help in the defeat of Japan. This, despite a colossal 27 million dead in the West, they did, thereby honouring Stalin's promise.
Japan was finished. There was NO need for the A Bomb attacks. They were conducted to cow and overawe a staunch ally that had more than 'done his bit' in the conflict as a whole. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"
I do not condone or condemn but I do know that the yanks have gloryfied this war far to much.Yes freedom won thank god but the manner of it does not make me proud but I understand why all this happened,ultimately Hitler was to blame.
Hitler and Germany were in no way responsible for events in the Far East. Japan had invaded and been at war with Nationalist (Fascist) China since the early/mid 1930's. Hitler only became German Chancellor in 1933.
Japan was actively suing for a 'peace with honour' at the time of the atomic attacks on two largely undefended, civilian filled cities. U.S. President Truman knew this and still authorised the attacks in any case. There was NO need for an invasion even - as Japan was devoid of fuel oil. The 'Yamato' (the most powerful battleship of the war, a vessel with 18in guns, sallied out on a suicide mission using the very last of the Japanese navies fuel reserves. The Captain and crew did this so that they might make some account of themselves before their vessel was inevitably destroyed in dock by Allied air power. It can therefore be deduced that to all intents and purposes Japan was finished and only needed to be allowed to 'wither on the vine' without the need for invasion. The spiteful and self-serving Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks where an unnecessary disgrace and an affront to decent minded people the world over. An unpunished war crime par excellence.
Japan was in contact with the Russians but it was a trick as Russia was finalising its own plans to attack japan. There was never any chance of the talks producing peace. Japan was requested to surrender before the first bomb and again before the second bomb. Both times they refused
You simply dont know there was never any chance of peace talks."
Not true,aftr first bomb asked to surrender they said no |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"
Yes we do know there was no chance of peace from those talks as it was a cover for the Russians to prepare their own attacks which they have confirmed themselves. As said Japan was given several opportunities to surrender but refused. Russia carried out their attack as planned
But you hoist yourself by your own petard. If the Japanese side only was in EARNEST in the talks, which they were, that means they were seeking peace and therefore the killing of 200,000 non-combatants was NOT warranted. The U.S.S.R. was behaving very honourably at this stage in the war (some posts have come across as though they were scheming and pursuing their own ends). Soviet forces were already engaged against the Japanese Army in Manchuria in mainland China. Churchill, a consumate politician (and reluctant admirer of Stalin) had managed to obtain an undertaking from 'Uncle Joe' that, once the fighting in Europe were over, the Red Army would turn east and help in the defeat of Japan. This, despite a colossal 27 million dead in the West, they did, thereby honouring Stalin's promise.
Japan was finished. There was NO need for the A Bomb attacks. They were conducted to cow and overawe a staunch ally that had more than 'done his bit' in the conflict as a whole."
The talks were a trick used by the Russians to cover there own attack. At the time Russia and japan had a neutrality pact and so we're NOT engaged in conflict (at that time). The U.S. had requested Japan to surrender before the first bomb. They refused. They could have agreed and avoided the attack but they chose to refuse. After the first attack japan was again asked to surrender and told more nukes would be used if the did not. Again they refused even though they now knew what the nukes could do. They could have surrendered and avoided the second bomb but chose not to. A few hours before the second bomb Russia attacked (the same Russia that was carrying out the fake peace talks). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sunday see's the 75th anniversary of the Atomic bombing by the United States of the Japanese city of Nagasaki. The Hiroshima anniversary passed without notice in mainstream media on last Thursday. It seems the 'powers that be'would rather todays young people know little of these gross atrocities committed by 'civilised warring powers'.
If you have younger folk in your family who you would like to know a bit more about the extent of what is being 'covered up ' and re-written, here is a link to an informative documentary on the subject:
https://rtd.rt.com/02qr
It is fairly comprehensive. It only falls short (in my view) in it's failing to stress that Japan (as a country with very few natural resources of it's own - oil,etc.) could easily have been 'bought to book' by blockade i.e. allowing it to 'wither on the vine' as it were - no allied invasion and loss of life then being necessary. Do please share the link with some young folk so they can form a view on the matter."
Well the BBC did finally run an article on it... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-53648572
The speed the USA moved it's scientists in to study the effects, much faster than any aid, demonstrates that it was being used as a live firing exercise on a live target. Targets that had been previously ignored so that the effects of the bombs could be more accurately surveyed.
Japan was very much near collapse, a blockade would have worked, how long would the Japanese have held out for is another question all together, how many deaths from malnutrition would they have tolerated before total surrender? There was still some soldier hiding out in a Filipino jungle until 1974, Would it have been more acceptable to have a similar number starve to death, including POWs.
All we can hope is they're never used again, the world doesn't seem to be getting any safer at the moment.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sunday see's the 75th anniversary of the Atomic bombing by the United States of the Japanese city of Nagasaki. The Hiroshima anniversary passed without notice in mainstream media on last Thursday. It seems the 'powers that be'would rather todays young people know little of these gross atrocities committed by 'civilised warring powers'.
If you have younger folk in your family who you would like to know a bit more about the extent of what is being 'covered up ' and re-written, here is a link to an informative documentary on the subject:
https://rtd.rt.com/02qr
It is fairly comprehensive. It only falls short (in my view) in it's failing to stress that Japan (as a country with very few natural resources of it's own - oil,etc.) could easily have been 'bought to book' by blockade i.e. allowing it to 'wither on the vine' as it were - no allied invasion and loss of life then being necessary. Do please share the link with some young folk so they can form a view on the matter.
Well the BBC did finally run an article on it... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-53648572
The speed the USA moved it's scientists in to study the effects, much faster than any aid, demonstrates that it was being used as a live firing exercise on a live target. Targets that had been previously ignored so that the effects of the bombs could be more accurately surveyed.
Japan was very much near collapse, a blockade would have worked, how long would the Japanese have held out for is another question all together, how many deaths from malnutrition would they have tolerated before total surrender? There was still some soldier hiding out in a Filipino jungle until 1974, Would it have been more acceptable to have a similar number starve to death, including POWs.
All we can hope is they're never used again, the world doesn't seem to be getting any safer at the moment.
"
That's the problem with a blockade it would basically starve the population to death. The military would be the last to go hungry. All the time the war would go on with all its horrors especially for those still under Japanese control. As you say we can only hope we are never in that situation |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
