On this day 78 years ago, the atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, ending the war

[Dark_Ansem]

Generally speaking though, if one is speaking to the a particular message, they'd reference that, and not someone else's.

I'm not going to chain an entire conversation just because you're stupid and trollish.

I don't know how you think you come off to me. I find this endearing. Not sure if you'd understand why.

You can think whatever you want, your diseased mind, I wouldn't touch. All I know is that you're going on the ignore list.

Get over it. It's possible for two people to be honest and disagree with each other. Learn that quickl

I couldn't care less that you disagree, you're worthless. And in fact I should have simply ignored you, you managed to derail an entire thread with your stupidity.

And you can keep quoting my message, it only shows you're incapable of understanding it, and it's made of what, 5 words? Your illiteracy is serious.

 

[Xzi]

Really sad that it had to come to that, but the Japanese were not going to stop fighting for anything less. And as much as I wish we could write, "that was the end of any and all support for fascism" in the history books, that's obviously not the way things have played out.

 

[Deleted member 194275]

had to point out the atomic bomb was a race it was either us or the Nazi's who would use it first if we didn't DC would've been a nuclear parking lot and we'd all be speeking german by now not to mention all natural born jewish and maybe other non whites would be dead

You missing the dates here. Hitler died in may 1945, the exact day is controversial, but it was either during or slightly before the Soviet Union defeated the nazi Germany in Berlin.

When USA dropped the bombs was august 1945, so there was no nazi Germany anymore, there was no atomic bomb racing against Germans anymore. The Soviet Union was half a decade behind, so there was no race against anyone.

 

[tabzer]

I'm not going to chain an entire conversation just because you're stupid and trollish.

You don't need to. You can just respond freely without quoting anyone, or you can quote a specific, relevent post. If you are using PC for example, you can highlight the text you want to quote, and then a pop-up sub-menu will allow you to add it to the quote "clipboard". After that you can add all the quotes, reorganize the quotes, delete quotes, or whatever through "insert quotes" in the reply area.

I'm sorry that you were misunderstood and that I and @lokomelo thought you were responding to something he said.

You can think whatever you want, your diseased mind, I wouldn't touch. All I know is that you're going on the ignore list.

I consider it a victory. It allows me to make fun of you without you knowing about it.

I couldn't care less that you disagree, you're worthless. And in fact I should have simply ignored you, you managed to derail an entire thread with your stupidity.

No. We did that, partner. In my case, it's ignorance, because I don't know your intention. In your case, it is stupidity, because you know your intention and do not know what to do with it.

And you can keep quoting my message, it only shows you're incapable of understanding it, and it's made of what, 5 words? Your illiteracy is serious.

That's right. After all this discussion, I still don't know your intention. Well played.

Really sad that it had to come to that, but the Japanese were not going to stop fighting for anything less. And as much as I wish we could write, "that was the end of any and all support for fascism" in the history books, that's obviously not the way things have played out.

I agree with what you saying, but I question "it had to come to that". In the end, we can only work with now, though. History is a fickle subject, especially when it gets further away from us.

 

[Jayro]

We definitely taught Japan not to fuck with us.

 

[tabzer]

We definitely taught Japan not to fuck with us.

That's fucking true. But who is "US" these days?

 

[Jayro]

That's fucking true. But who is "US" these days?

The U.S.A. We dropped the bombs.

 

[tabzer]

The U.S.A. We dropped the bombs.

I'm relieved that you are feeling represented.

 

[Jayro]

I'm relieved that you are feeling represented.

Please elaborate...

 

[tabzer]

Please elaborate...

There was a concern that the US was politically divided. I'm relieved that seems to no longer be the issue. Is this a holiday where you bury the hatchet and unite with your brethren?

 

[Dark_Ansem]

Please elaborate...

It is just pointless trolling.

 

[tabzer]

It is just pointless trolling.

Don't be such a nihilist. Maybe you just feel left out?

 

[Xzi]

I agree with what you saying, but I question "it had to come to that". In the end, we can only work with now, though. History is a fickle subject, especially when it gets further away from us.

The fascist propaganda had a strong hold during that era, to the extent that a whole lot of Japanese civilians committed suicide in fear of what the US troops would do to them if their towns became occupied. A land invasion would've resulted in far more deaths on both sides.

 

[tabzer]

The fascist propaganda had a strong hold during that era, to the extent that a whole lot of Japanese civilians committed suicide in fear of what the US troops would do to them if their towns became occupied.

Honestly, I think propaganda was coming from all directions and it was really hard for anyone to discern facts from narrative. It seems like the media was mostly responsible in escalating the war, further exasperating everyone who was a victim of it.

A land invasion would've resulted in far more deaths on both sides.

I cannot interrupt history or choose my own terms on how to interpret it. You are only using "what if" to justify something but you can as easily use "what if" to not.

It's like people who say... If only I invested in bitcoin, I'd be rich--yeah right. Nobody laments a good choice.

 

[Xzi]

Honestly, I think propaganda was coming from all directions and it was really hard for anyone to discern facts from narrative. It seems like the media was mostly responsible in escalating the war, further exasperating everyone who was a victim of it.

For sure, even with our century's many forms of communication, social media posts have still gotten people killed and/or started whole wars. There will always be select groups susceptible to misinformation and propaganda, but just about everyone was in the 30s and 40s.

I cannot interrupt history or choose my own terms on how to interpret it. You are only using "what if" to justify something but you can as easily use "what if" to not.

I'm not just positing an opinion here, all the history books I've read and documentaries I've watched have more or less stated the same. Every inch on the road to Tokyo would have to be earned with bloodshed, and there would be no guarantee that the Japanese would surrender even after reaching the capital. The war could've continued raging on for years more.

 

[subcon959]

One thing it certainly achieved was to make it so the US could never claim the moral high ground on the international stage ever again. Suddenly, I'm hearing the world police song in my head.. Americaaa, fuck yeah! Oops guess I was wrong.

 

[Foxi4]

Really sad that it had to come to that, but the Japanese were not going to stop fighting for anything less. And as much as I wish we could write, "that was the end of any and all support for fascism" in the history books, that's obviously not the way things have played out.

People don’t often consider the alternative. Japanese cities at the time were still built out of wood more than anything else. Knowing this, the U.S. Chemical Warfare Service developed napalm, in association with Harvard University. Once it was ready for deployment, the U.S. Airforce began a campaign of bombings in 1945, burning their way across Japan and leaving 333K dead and 473K wounded - significantly more than the atomic bombs did. Fire doesn’t care if you’re a combatant or a civilian, and napalm fire doesn’t care if you want to put it out or not, especially when the entire city you live in is one giant tinderbox. It’s not a good way to go. In comparison, the nuclear bombs caused such destruction and inspired so much fear and awe that the war was effectively over there and then. Having the choice between burning (painfully) in hellfire or getting vaporised instantaneously, dying in a flash sounds like an attractive proposition. If you get napalm dropped on you, you’re either going out in agony or getting permanently disfigured. The atomic bombs were actually the more “humane” option out of the two.

 

[tabzer]

I've read and documentaries I've watched have more or less stated the same.

I believe there is a general consensus that unites a people/peoples, but I don't believe people can really choose the future they avoided; only the one that they chose. Nobody can prove what didn't happen. People chase narratives because of such "understandings", yet it doesn't note that knowledge is always increasing. It lends to a cyclic self-fulfilling disposition.

 

[Foxi4]

I believe there is a general consensus that unites a people/peoples, but I don't believe people can really choose the future they avoided; only the one that they chose. Nobody can prove what didn't happen. People chase narratives because of such "understandings", yet it doesn't note that knowledge is always increasing. It lends to a cyclic self-fulfilling disposition.

I think you can extrapolate a likely possible scenario based on the available evidence, Xzi is not wrong in saying that a prolonged war effort would’ve been more destructive. The Japanese were not known for giving up - it’s tradition for them to prefer death over defeat, in the literal sense. Conceding would be a sign of weakness of the Emperor, and laying down arms is generally considered dishonourable in their culture. You can even draw a parallel if you really want to imagine the scenario, there is a war where the U.S. opted for just napalming villages and boots on the ground - Vietnam. Admittedly a bigger landmass, Japan is quite cramped, but the overall attitude towards warfare is not dissimilar.

 

[tabzer]

I think you can extrapolate a likely possible scenario based on the available evidence, Xzi is not wrong in saying that a prolonged war effort would’ve been more destructive. The Japanese were not known for giving up - it’s tradition for them to prefer death over defeat, in the literal sense. Conceding would be a sign of weakness to the Emperor, and laying down arms is generally considered dishonourable in their culture. You can even draw a parallel if you really want to imagine the scenario - there is a war where the U.S. opted for just napalming villages and boots on the ground - Vietnam. Admittedly a bigger landmass, Japan is quite cramped, but the overall attitude towards warfare is not dissimilar.

"Xzi is not wrong..."

I'm not saying he's wrong. I'm saying he can't be "wrong or right" or he is "wrong and right", or maybe he's "right enough, for now". I agree with the sentiment, but it's hard to measure the "butterfly effect" of different actions; but it's right enough for the context of what we know and have experienced up to this point.

"The future will view all history as a crime" - Serj Tankian

Between you and me, we will know what we could have been done, if not now, then in the future.