testtest

WWII - Bomb's Didn’t Beat Japan … Stalin Did

He has a specific point of view going in, as evidenced by his prior works, and has rather skillfully weaved the narrative around it. One would have to spend a lot of time to evaluate his narrative to find out how accurate it, and the conclusions he draws from it all is.

I think in some ways, it is yet again, an attempt to blacken America by implying we used atomic weapons needlessly.

The interesting thing for his purpose is that to some segment of the population his theory will now become "fact" simply by the virtue of it being in "print". It is a unique phenomenon we have encountered a lot in recent years. But it is hardly new. Hundreds of Kennedy assassination books and thing like water bottles and cancer show how things become fact in some populations, Simply by merit of repetition.
 
Last edited:
Sld1959 said:
He has a specific point of view going in, as evidenced by his prior works, and has rather skillfully weaved the narrative around it. One would have to spend a lot of time to evaluate his narrative to find out how accurate it, and the conclusions he draws from it all is.

I think in some ways, it is yet again, an attempt to blacken America by implying we used atomic weapons needlessly.

The interesting thing for his purpose is that to some segment of the population his theory will now become "fact" simply by the virtue of it being in "print". It is a unique phenomenon we have encountered a lot in recent years. But it is hardly new. Hundreds of Kennedy assassination books and thing like water bottles and cancer show how things become fact in some populations, Simply by merit of repetition.
Click to expand...
Sld: kudos and a big Thanks for a very well written response (I esp like your first paragraph!).

Yes, the fall of Japan - and indeed the whole Pacific conflict - broke the mold of warfare. It is rarely understood, especially juxtaposed with the European theater.
Japan was also at war longer than any other major player ( starting with their 1937 invasion of China, which they never did conquer).
That was a very weird war…
 
Such a twisted, convoluted path of reasoning that fails to consider the consequences of the savagery of the Japanese Empire everywhere their forces went, before and after Pearl Harbor. America and her allies were not just fighting a war, the U.S. was bringing The Reckoning to an evil empire.

The Japanese leadership knew full well the atrocities they had committed. They had given no quarter and could expect none in return.

The courage and commitment of American fighting men, and the industrial capability behind them, were sorely underestimated by the Japanese leadership. The fighting in the Pacific demonstrated a relentlessness and ferocity of American fighting forces the Japanese had not imagined. America was willing and able to use maximum violence. They had to come to grips with the fact that They were coming, and it scared the **** out of them.

Gen Curtis LeMay's incendiary bombing campaign beginning in March 1945 had burned more than 60 Japanese cities to the ground and killed hundreds of thousands of Japanese citizens on their homeland. Their air forces and navy were crippled, their army was starving, and their industrial capability was in shambles. American military planners expected a million American casualties from a ground invasion of Japan, but they were going to do it.

The nuclear weapons deployment against Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not THE EVENT that brought them to the surrender table-from their point of view, it was a mere demonstration of what was to come. The ferocity of LeMay's bombing campaign to that point convinced them that, with such a powerful weapon at his disposal, the Americans would bomb them into extinction. Likely a correct assessment, given LeMay's "nation killing" air power ethos. The Russians might have been a secondary consideration, but the American juggernaut was just hitting full stride in 1945. They had no choice but to salvage what they could to preserve their culture and national identity.
 
Let's see, Soviets and the Japanese had a non-aggression treaty in place from 1941 to 1945, the first atomic bomb was used on Aug 6, the second was on the 9th. The Japanese surrender was announced on August 15.

The Soviets started occupying the Kuril islands on the 18th of August, 1945 -- three days after the surrender announcement.

So, how did the Soviets defeat Japan since they started their occupation only after Japan had surrendered to the US?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top