Trump indictment leads to huge lead over Desantis in primary polls, no movement in general election

Toussaint

Struggle, challenge, and rise to struggle again
Joined
May 24, 2022
Messages
3,650
Reputation
1,278
Daps
13,639
Reppin
Michigan
Man, I read such a well written article about the bombings. It broke it down by the day and the hour.

They were worried about the Russians like you said. They were damn near on their doorstep.

The Americans were shredding their cities so two bombs being dropped didn't mean much. By the time the Japanese leaders heard about them, it was like "Meh, we have more pressing issues."

I had no idea we were lied to like that for all these years.
You think Japanese leaders responded to two cities being instantly vaporized by a weapon believed to be at the time impossible to assemble with “Meh” :heh:

The Emperor’s Statement to Togo on August 8

On the following morning, August 8, Foreign Minister Togo Shigenori went to the imperial palace for an audience with the emperor. According to Asada, using the American and British broadcasts “to buttress his case,” Togo urged the emperor to agree to end the war as quickly as possible “on condition, of course, that the emperor system be retained.” Hirohito concurred and replied:

Now that such a new weapon has appeared, it has become less and less possible to continue the war. We must not miss a chance to terminate the war by bargaining [with the Allied powers, Asada adds] for more favorable conditions now. Besides, however much we consult about [surrender, Asada adds] terms we desire, we shall not be able to come to an agreement. So my wish is to make such arrangements as will end the war as soon as possible.[15]

From this statement, Asada concludes that “the emperor expressed his conviction that a speedy surrender was the only feasible way to save Japan.” Hirohito urged Togo to “do [his] utmost to bring about a prompt termination of war,” and told the foreign minister to convey his desire to Prime Minister Suzuki Kantaro. “In compliance with the imperial wish, Togo met Suzuki and proposed that, ‘given the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, the Supreme War Council be convened with all dispatch.’”[16] Frank’s interpretation follows Asada’s basic assumption. According to Frank, “Togo called for immediate termination of the war on the basis of the Potsdam Declaration [Proclamation],” but unlike Asada, he asserts that Hirohito “still balked personally at simple acceptance of the Potsdam Declaration [Proclamation].”[17]



The reason we dont know what caused the Japanese to surrender more the Soviet Invasion or the Atomic Bombs is because the Japanese themselves don’t know and if you spent anytime around Japanese people when it’s tough decision time you will know what I mean. :mjlol:
 
Last edited:

gho3st

plata or plomo
Joined
Oct 27, 2012
Messages
33,848
Reputation
2,719
Daps
80,367
Reppin
2016
A new Yahoo News/YouGov poll — one of the first conducted after former President Donald Trump was indicted Thursday for his role in paying hush money to a porn star — shows Trump surging to his largest-ever lead over Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, his likely 2024 GOP primary challenger, as Republican voters rally around the only president in U.S. history to face criminal charges.

In the previous Yahoo News/YouGov survey, which was conducted less than two weeks ago, Trump (47%) led DeSantis (39%) by eight percentage points in a head-to-head matchup among registered voters who are Republicans or Republican-leaning independents. As recently as February, it was DeSantis who was narrowly ahead of Trump, 45% to 41%.

But the new, post-indictment poll suddenly finds Trump lapping DeSantis by 26 percentage points — 57% to 31% — in a one-on-one contest. The former president even attracts majority support (52%, up from 44% previously) when pitted against a wider, 10-candidate field of declared and potential GOP challengers, while DeSantis plummets to 21% (down from 28%).




fukking crazy, this is the straight up mass suicide party.
Democrats fcking over republicans lowkey :heh:
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
49,529
Reputation
19,103
Daps
197,141
Reppin
the ether
You think Japanese leaders responded to two cities being instantly vaporized by a weapon believed to be at the time impossible to assemble with “Meh” :heh:

It wasn't thought to be "impossible to assemble", the science behind the bomb had been public knowledge since the beginning of the war. All the main theory had been published in regular scientific papers, the biggest obstacles were more engineering that "impossible" science. Germans and Japanese both had their own nuclear bomb development programs too, but they didn't get as far because they didn't have the ability to put forth the same resources towards it, partly because they were smaller nations and partly because the Americans had the advantage of not having to defend their own maintain or (by 1942 or so) actively losing the war.

The nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed about the same # of people as the previous firebombing of Tokyo. It didn't chance the war situation at all because wars are fought by militaries, not by civilians, and Japan had made clear long earlier that they didn't care about civilian deaths.



The Emperor’s Statement to Togo on August 8

On the following morning, August 8, Foreign Minister Togo Shigenori went to the imperial palace for an audience with the emperor. According to Asada, using the American and British broadcasts “to buttress his case,” Togo urged the emperor to agree to end the war as quickly as possible “on condition, of course, that the emperor system be retained.” Hirohito concurred and replied:

The context you're ignoring is that the Japanese had already been discussing surrender for months. There were constant internal debates regarding when they would surrender and under what conditions, those debates didn't suddenly start on August 8. They had lost all ability to project war by May and were solely defending their islands by that point, and knew they would fall. All they were working for at that point was the best terms possible. If the Americans had told them that they could maintain their homeland without American imperialistic control and the emperor could continue in place without loss of face, they would have surrendered even earlier. But Truman didn't want to play that hand because he wanted to see what the bombs would do first and send a message to the Russians about the new power the Americans held.

Truman had literally circled the date the Russians would enter the war against Japan on his diary and wrote "Japan fini". He did that MONTHS beforehand. He knew Russian entry into the war combined with American blockade of the islands was going to be enough to force a Japanese surrender. There is zero evidence that Truman or anyone else involved in the decision to drop the bombs ever had any information or strategic reasoning that they were necessary to end the war.
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
49,529
Reputation
19,103
Daps
197,141
Reppin
the ether
The crazy thing, @Afro, is that the information is all out there. Very little of it is secret, they just don't talk about it.

The statements of our own military leaders at the time are fukking crazy.


Fleet Admiral William Leahy, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
"It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children."


General Dwight Eisenhower, Supreme Allied Commander Europe
"Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. The Secretary, upon giving me the news of the successful bomb test in New Mexico, and of the plan for using it, asked for my reaction, apparently expecting a vigorous assent."

"During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of 'face'. The Secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude."

"The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing." - Dwight Eisenhower reflecting on the event 18 years later


General Douglas MacArthur, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers Southwest Pacific Area
"When I asked General MacArthur about the decision to drop the bomb, I was surprised to learn he had not even been consulted. What, I asked, would his advice have been? He replied that he saw no military justification for the dropping of the bomb. The war might have ended weeks earlier, he said, if the United States had agreed, as it later did anyway, to the retention of the institution of the emperor." - Norman Cousins, consultant to Douglas MacArthur

"[When he heard] 'the Potsdam declaration in July, demand that Japan surrender unconditionally or face 'prompt and utter destruction.' MacArthur was appalled. He knew that the Japanese would never renounce their emperor, and that without him an orderly transition to peace would be impossible anyhow, because his people would never submit to Allied occupation unless he ordered it. Ironically, when the surrender did come, it was conditional, and the condition was a continuation of the imperial reign. Had the General's advice been followed, the resort to atomic weapons at Hiroshima and Nagasaki might have been unnecessary." - William Manchester, MacArthur's biographer, describing the reaction of General Douglas MacArthur to the Potsdam declaration


Brigadier General Bonner Fellers, in charge of psychological warfare on MacArthur's staff
"Obviously, the atomic bomb neither induced the Emperor's decision to surrender nor had any effect on the ultimate outcome of the war."


Fleet Admiral Ernest J. King, Commander in Chief of U.S. Fleet and Chief of Naval Operations
"I didn't like the atom bomb or any part of it." (King believed a naval blockade would force Japan into surrender)


Fleet Admiral Chester William Nimitz, Commander in Chief of Pacific Forces
"The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace before the atomic age was announced to the world with the destruction of Hiroshima and before the Russian entry into war...The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military standpoint, in the defeat of Japan I felt that it was an unnecessary loss of civilian life. We had them beaten. They hadn't enough food, they couldn't do anything."


Admiral William F. Halsey Jr., Commander of the U.S. Third Fleet
"The first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment. It was a mistake to ever drop it [Tthe scientists] had this toy and they wanted to try it out, so they dropped it. It killed a lot of Japs, but the Japs had put out a lot of peace feelers through Russia long before."


General Hap Arnold, Commanding General of U.S. Army Air Forces
"The Japanese position was hopeless even before the first atomic bomb fell, because the Japanese had lost control of their own air. It always appeared to us that, atomic bomb or no atomic bomb, the Japanese were already on the verge of collapse."


Lieutenant General Ira C. Eaker, deputy to Hap Arnold
"Arnold's view was that it [the dropping of the atomic bomb] was unnecessary. He said that he knew the Japanese wanted peace. There were political implications in the decision and Arnold did not feel it was the military's job to question it."


Major General Curtis E. LeMay, Commander of the Twenty-First Bomber Command
"The war would have been over in two weeks without the Russians entering and without the atomic bomb. The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all."


General Carl Spaatz, in charge of U.S. Army Air Force Operations in the Pacific
"If they knew or were told that no invasion would take place [and] that bombing would continue until the surrender, why I think the surrender would have taken place just about the same time."

"Both men felt Japan would surrender without use of the bomb, and neither knew why the second bomb was used." - Averell Harriman, former Ambassador to the Soviet Union, describing the opinions of Carl "Tooey" Spaatz, General and Commander of the U.S. Army Strategic Air Force, and General Frederick L. Anderson, Deputty Commanding General at USASTAF


General Claire Chennault, Army Air Forces Commander in China
Russia's entry into the Japanese war was the decisive factor in speeding its end and would have been so even if no atomic bombs had been dropped.


Colonel Charles "Tick" Bonesteel, Chief of the War Department Operations Division Policy Section
"The poor damn Japanese were putting feelers out by the ton so to speak, through Russia."


Brigadier General Carter Clarke, military intelligence officer in charge of preparing intercepted Japanese cables for Truman
"we brought them [the Japanese] down to an abject surrender through the accelerated sinking of their merchant marine and hunger alone, and when we didn't need to do it, and we knew we didn't need to do it, and they knew that we knew we didn't need to do it, we used them as an experiment for two atomic bombs."


For anyone who knows anything about the American military in World War II, that list is fukking crazy. That's like 80% of the major military leaders involved in the war against Japan in the Pacific, and they're ALL saying the bomb wasn't necessary and Japan was ready to surrender soon enough either way. And they're not hiding the thought, they're sharing it openly. But when the USA won WW2, no one wanted to hear that shyt.
 
Last edited:

Toussaint

Struggle, challenge, and rise to struggle again
Joined
May 24, 2022
Messages
3,650
Reputation
1,278
Daps
13,639
Reppin
Michigan
It wasn't thought to be "impossible to assemble", the science behind the bomb had been public knowledge since the beginning of the war. All the main theory had been published in regular scientific papers, the biggest obstacles were more engineering that "impossible" science. Germans and Japanese both had their own nuclear bomb development programs too, but they didn't get as far because they didn't have the ability to put forth the same resources towards it, partly because they were smaller nations and partly because the Americans had the advantage of not having to defend their own maintain or (by 1942 or so) actively losing the war.
The US being able to craft a bomb does not refute that the Japanese and Germans thought it impossible due to the fact of massive amounts of resources being required. The Japanese and Germans were shocked to find such a weapon had been developed and there was no inkling one was being successfully developed.

The context you're ignoring is that the Japanese had already been discussing surrender for months. There were constant internal debates regarding when they would surrender and under what conditions, those debates didn't suddenly start on August 8.

Nobody said that they did. The issue of surrender centered on the preservation of the imperial household and maintaining of Japanese sovereignty with minimal to no occupation. These “negotiations” were being milked by the Soviets because they wanted to capture Manchuria before the Japanese could surrender.

So you are half right, one world power was leading the Japanese on to gobble up more territory and it was not the Americans.


The Psychological Factor

The complicated political calculations of the Japanese leadership were closely intermingled with crucial psychological factors. In particular, there were two different psychological elements at work. The first was the reversal of the degree of hatred attached to two enemies, as described above. The second was a profound sense of betrayal.

Soviet entry into the war had double-crossed the Japanese in two distinct senses. In the first place, the Kremlin had opted for war just when Japan was pinning its last hopes of peace on Soviet mediation. Furthermore, the invasion was a surprise attack. True, Molotov had handed a declaration of war to Sato in Moscow. Sato then asked for Molotov’s permission to transmit the declaration of war to Tokyo by ciphered telegram, but the ambassador’s dispatch never reached Tokyo. In fact, it never left Moscow, most likely having been suppressed by the telegraph office on the orders of the Soviet government. Molotov announced that the declaration of war was also to be handed by Soviet Ambassador Iakov Malik to Togo in Tokyo simultaneously. But the Japanese government learned of the Soviet invasion of Manchuria only from a news agency report at around 4:00 A.M. on August 9.[72]

Soviet tanks in Manchuria 1945

Matsumoto Shun’ichi explained Togo’s rage when he received the news of the Soviet invasion of Manchuria. Togo had gullibly believed assurances about the Soviet commitment to the neutrality pact, and he had pinned his hopes on Soviet mediation to terminate the war. Not only did this turn out to be a mistake, but the Soviet action also revealed that the Japanese government had been consistently and thoroughly deceived. Togo’s determination to end the war by accepting the Potsdam terms was thus motivated by his desire to compensate for his earlier mistake in seeking Moscow’s mediation.[73] Hirohito’s monologue also had a tinge of resentment toward the Soviet Union, which he too had mistakenly relied upon to mediate a termination to the war.[74] Togo and his colleagues were also anxious to deny the Soviet Union any advantage, since it had perpetrated such a betrayal. After the Soviet entry into the war, the USSR and matters related to the military situation in Manchuria suddenly disappeared from the discussions of Japanese policymakers. This does not mean that the Soviet factor had lost importance. In fact, their silence on the Soviet factor in these discussions was proof of both a conscious and unconscious attempt at denial. The greater their sense of betrayal, the more determined Japanese leaders became to deny the importance of Soviet entry into the war. They avoided denouncing Moscow’s perfidy, because they did not want to reveal the colossal error they themselves had committed in seeking Soviet mediation. And now that the fate of the emperor and the imperial house hung in the balance, they wished those issues to be determined by the United States rather than the Soviet Union. These conscious and unconscious manipulations of memory and historical records began simultaneously with events as they unfolded and continued subsequently in order to reconstruct these crucial events.



They had lost all ability to project war by May and were solely defending their islands by that point, and knew they would fall. All they were working for at that point was the best terms possible. If the Americans had told them that they could maintain their homeland without American imperialistic control and the emperor could continue in place without loss of face, they would have surrendered even earlier.
The Potsdam declaration in 1945 declared that the axis must unconditionally surrender. Are you insinuating the US accept a peace from a belligerent nation that killed, raped, tortured and experimented on 20,000,000 people be given less stringent surrender terms than fascist Italy and Romania?

Why?



But Truman didn't want to play that hand because he wanted to see what the bombs would do first and send a message to the Russians about the new power the Americans held.
So Truman who president during the Potsdam declaration in 1945?


Truman had literally circled the date the Russians would enter the war against Japan on his diary and wrote "Japan fini". He did that MONTHS beforehand. He knew Russian entry into the war combined with American blockade of the islands was going to be enough to force a Japanese surrender. There is zero evidence that Truman or anyone else involved in the decision to drop the bombs ever had any information or strategic reasoning that they were necessary to end the war.
So Truman was able to psychically predict that Japan wouldn’t surrender before the dropping of the atomic bombing so that he could test the atomic bombings but also had concrete knowledge of the inner working of the Japanese cabinet to the extent that he knew a mere blockade and Soviet invasion of Manchuria would cause Japan to surrender? Even though the Japanese officials at the time themselves are conflicted on what caused the surrender and consistently mention the atomic bombings in journals, diaries, correspondence and letters as the coup de grace?



Here’s an actual historian from Princeton take on Truman’s decision making process regarding the bomb.


What are your sources for Truman’s a softy by 1940’s standards devious designs to destroy 2 cities full of woman and children?
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
49,529
Reputation
19,103
Daps
197,141
Reppin
the ether
@Toussaint, I already gave you a long list of military sources, so here's some more from the rest of government as well as historians


Former President Herbert Hoover, two months before the bomb was dropped
"I am convinced that if you, as President, will make a shortwave broadcast to the people of Japan - tell them they can have their Emperor if they surrender, that it will not mean unconditional surrender except for the militarists - you'll get a peace in Japan - you'll have both wars over."

"The Japanese were prepared to negotiate all the way from February 1945 up to and before the time the atomic bombs were dropped; if such leads had been followed up, there would have been no occasion to drop the [atomic] bombs. The use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul." - Herbert Hoover, reflecting after the bomb was dropped


Under Secretary of State Joseph Grew, former Ambassador to Japan
"In the light of available evidence I myself and others felt that if such a categorical statement about the [retention of the] dynasty had been issued in May, 1945, the surrender-minded elements in the [Japanese] Government might well have been afforded by such a statement a valid reason and the necessary strength to come to an early clearcut decision. If surrender could have been brought about in May, 1945, or even in June or July, before the entrance of Soviet Russia into the [Pacific] war and the use of the atomic bomb, the world would have been the gainer."


Assistant Secretary of War John McCloy
"I have always felt that if, in our ultimatum to the Japanese government issued from Potsdam [in July 1945], we had referred to the retention of the emperor as a constitutional monarch and had made some reference to the reasonable accessibility of raw materials to the future Japanese government, it would have been accepted. Indeed, I believe that even in the form it was delivered, there was some disposition on the part of the Japanese to give it favorable consideration. When the war was over I arrived at this conclusion after talking with a number of Japanese officials who had been closely associated with the decision of the then Japanese government, to reject the ultimatum, as it was presented. I believe we missed the opportunity of effecting a Japanese surrender, completely satisfactory to us, without the necessity of dropping the bombs."


Under Secretary of the Navy Ralph Bard
"I think that the Japanese were ready for peace, and they already had approached the Russians and, I think, the Swiss. And that suggestion of [giving] a warning [of the atomic bomb] was a face-saving proposition for them, and one that they could have readily accepted." He continued, "In my opinion, the Japanese war was really won before we ever used the atom bomb. Thus, it wouldn't have been necessary for us to disclose our nuclear position and stimulate the Russians to develop the same thing much more rapidly than they would have if we had not dropped the bomb."


Special Assistant to the Secretary of the Navy Lewis Strauss
"It seemed to me that such a weapon was not necessary to bring the war to a successful conclusion, that once used it would find its way into the armaments of the world."


Deputy Director of the Office of Naval Intelligence Ellis Zacharias
"What prevented them from suing for peace or from bringing their plot into the open was their uncertainty on two scores. First, they wanted to know the meaning of unconditional surrender and the fate we planned for Japan after defeat. Second, they tried to obtain from us assurances that the Emperor could remain on the throne after surrender. The Potsdam Declaration, in short, wrecked everything we had been working for to prevent further bloodshed. Just when the Japanese were ready to capitulate, we went ahead and introduced to the world the most devastating weapon it had ever seen and, in effect, gave the go-ahead to Russia to swarm over Eastern Asia.

"Washington decided that Japan had been given its chance and now it was time to use the A-bomb. I submit that it was the wrong decision. It was wrong on strategic grounds. And it was wrong on humanitarian grounds."


Secretary of the Navy Paul Nitze, Vice-Chairman of the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey Group
"While I was working on the new plan of air attack, I concluded that even without the atomic bomb, Japan was likely to surrender in a matter of months. My own view was that Japan would capitulate by November 1945."

"Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945 and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated." - Paul Nitze, reporting the Survey's conclusions.


J. Samuel Walker, chief historian of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
"Careful scholarly treatment of the records and manuscripts opened over the past few years has greatly enhanced our understanding of why the Truman administration used atomic weapons against Japan.... The consensus among scholars is that the bomb was not needed to avoid an invasion of Japan and to end the war within a relatively short time. It is clear that alternatives to the bomb existed and that Truman and his advisers knew it.... The hoary claim that the bomb prevented 500,000 American combat deaths is unsupportable."


Historians Gar Alperovitz and Kai Bird
“First, intelligence and other advice to President Truman, in significant part based on intercepted and secretly decoded Japanese cable traffic, indicated that from at least May 1945 on, Japan wished to end the war and seemed likely to do so if assurances were given that the emperor would not be eliminated. Second, similar advice to the president suggested that the shock of Soviet entry into the war (expected in early August) would likely tip the balance, almost certainly if combined with assurances concerning the emperor. Third, Truman was advised by Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson, Assistant Secretary of War John J. McCloy, Admiral Leahy, the acting Secretary of State Joseph E. Grew, and others to let Japan know that the emperor would not be eliminated; contrary to the claims of some historians, Truman made clear that he had no serious objection to offering such assurances.”


Albert Einstein
"Prof. Albert Einstein... said that he was sure that President Roosevelt would have forbidden the atomic bombing of Hiroshima had he been alive and that it was probably carried out to end the Pacific war before Russia could participate."



The average American doesn't want to be told that they killed hundreds of thousands of women and children needlessly. They don't want to know that we committed horrendous atrocities. When the war ended there was a huge wave of elation across America, and President Truman and others openly attached that surrender to the bombings because it was a good propaganda tool (and because he wanted to scare the Russians, and because he didn't want history to consider him a war criminal). Emperor Hirohito even connected the bombings to Japan's surrender, because a leader always prefers to say, "I surrendered to preserve my people against an impossible superweapon" rather than say, "I didn't really give a shyt about civilian casualties, but had to surrender at that point because my military had utterly failed and we trusted the Americans to let us keep our homeland more than we trusted the Russians to."

Even today, nearly 80 years later, the average American doesn't want to hear it. Too much of their American identity and patriotism is built around shyt like, "We fought the Revolutionary War to bring freedom to all" and "We fought the Civil War to free the slaves" and "We defeated Germany to save the Jews from the Holocaust" and "We had to drop the bombs on Japan in order to end the war ASAP and save lives in the end," even though NONE of those claims are fully accurate to describe our real motivations at the time. But we love being the heroes of the story.

General Eisenhower, General MacArthur, Fleet Admiral Nimitz, Fleet Admiral Leahy, Fleet Admiral King, Admiral Halsey, General Spaatz, General Arnold, General Chennault, General Anderson, Major General LeMay, Lieutenant General Eaker, Brigadier General Fellers, Brigadier General Clarke, Colonel Bonesteel, Ambassador Grew, Deputy Director Zacharias, Special Assistant Strauss, Assistant Secretary McCloy, Under Secretary Bard, Secretary Nitze, Dr. Walker, Dr. Alperovitz, Dr. Bird, Dr. Einstein, and President Hoover were brave as fukk to say that the bomb wasn't necessary and we did it for other reasons.
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
49,529
Reputation
19,103
Daps
197,141
Reppin
the ether
Are you insinuating the US accept a peace from a belligerent nation that killed, raped, tortured and experimented on 20,000,000 people be given less stringent surrender terms than fascist Italy and Romania?

The point of surrender conditions is to end war ASAP, not to play God coming down to inflict righteous justice. Don't feed me that bullshyt as if the USA gave a rat's ass what the Japanese did to civilians or other Asians. We gave all those torturing/experimenting Japanese scientists a PARDON so we could get the results of their experiments.



Amazing that you're okay with wiping out 200,000 civilians at the drop of a hat, then turn around and blame the Japanese scientists and leaders for our slowness to negotiate surrender.....when in real life we let those scientists and leaders off scot-free.



By your self-righteous reasoning, why did we negotiate peace with the Soviets and let them have all of Eastern Europe? They killed more people than the Japanese did, shouldn't we have fought them all the way back to Russia?




So Truman who president during the Potsdam declaration in 1945?

Yes, Truman who was president during the Potsdam declaration of 1945. Looks like you edited this after the fact cause you don't actually know what Potsdam was.



So Truman was able to psychically predict that Japan wouldn’t surrender before the dropping of the atomic bombing

He didn't have to "predict" anything. Japan couldn't surrender without negotiation and the USA neither offered that negotiation nor indicated they would be willing to offer acceptable terms. With the Potsdam Declaration, they made clear that they weren't in the mood to negotiate, and since it was just a waiting game at that point the Japanese didn't have any major motivation to stop waiting (and hope American resolve back home waned), until the Russians started taking their territory.

I'm not even sure what you're trying to imply here.



What are your sources for Truman’s a softy by 1940’s standards devious designs to destroy 2 cities full of woman and children?

Well, I just quoted 20 military and government leaders for you who were there at the time.



Let's look at the summaries from those three historians again. They state clearly that the CONSENSUS among scholars is that the bomb wasn't necessary and Truman knew it. You can always find guys here and there willing to cape for the USA or muddy the waters, but the main direction of the evidence is clear.



J. Samuel Walker, chief historian of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

"Careful scholarly treatment of the records and manuscripts opened over the past few years has greatly enhanced our understanding of why the Truman administration used atomic weapons against Japan. The consensus among scholars is that the bomb was not needed to avoid an invasion of Japan and to end the war within a relatively short time. It is clear that alternatives to the bomb existed and that Truman and his advisers knew it.... The hoary claim that the bomb prevented 500,000 American combat deaths is unsupportable."


Historians Gar Alperovitz and Kai Bird

“First, intelligence and other advice to President Truman, in significant part based on intercepted and secretly decoded Japanese cable traffic, indicated that from at least May 1945 on, Japan wished to end the war and seemed likely to do so if assurances were given that the emperor would not be eliminated. Second, similar advice to the president suggested that the shock of Soviet entry into the war (expected in early August) would likely tip the balance, almost certainly if combined with assurances concerning the emperor. Third, Truman was advised by Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson, Assistant Secretary of War John J. McCloy, Admiral Leahy, the acting Secretary of State Joseph E. Grew, and others to let Japan know that the emperor would not be eliminated; contrary to the claims of some historians, Truman made clear that he had no serious objection to offering such assurances.”



So what's your excuse for Truman now? Americans have tried to justify the bombs for 80 years for obvious reasons. But our military and government leaders were honest at the time, and the historians have finally caught up. You don't believe any of them?
 
Last edited:

tay1

All Star
Joined
Mar 11, 2022
Messages
691
Reputation
40
Daps
2,520
This is good. We do not want Desantis to win by any means. He's nothing but a smarter racist than Trump.
 

Tribal Outkast

Veteran
Joined
Nov 22, 2016
Messages
28,055
Reputation
3,413
Daps
85,989
I wouldn’t trust this honestly. It sounds like one of them “please let people vote for him” moments. What would be the point of putting Trump back in now? They got all they needed from him when he was in there. They want Desantis.
 

Toussaint

Struggle, challenge, and rise to struggle again
Joined
May 24, 2022
Messages
3,650
Reputation
1,278
Daps
13,639
Reppin
Michigan
@Toussaint, I already gave you a long list of military sources, so here's some more from the rest of government as well as historians

The fact that you are quoting Douglas MacArthur who had to be dragged kicking and screaming from Korea by Truman so that he would cause nuclear Armageddon shows the facetiousness of your argument.


What does Eisenhower have to do with Japan? What does Curtis “Bombs away” Lemay have to do with the final surrender decision of Japan? What does Chester Nimitz have to do with the final surrender decision of Japan? Both men killed more Japanese, women and children than both bombs COMBINED.


You realize that a blockade of the main islands of Japan would killed 10,000,000 people minimum? That the US was stockpiling chemical agents to destroy Japanese crop yields? That we were going to turn Japan into a wasteland?


Because it was still in progress, Americans had not yet learned that Japan’s 1945 rice crop was collapsing. About half the population of Japan lived in a dire food deficit area south and west of Tokyo on Honshu. The coastal shipping that normally provided the backbone of Japanese internal transportation had been destroyed. The only alternative to movement of large quantities of rice from surplus to deficit areas was by the limited rail system. If the US knocked out the rail system, Japan would be locked on a course for famine involving about half the 72 million population.

The Japanese rail system was, by US or European standards, both weak and extremely vulnerable. Combining the rail bombing, blockade and the failure of the 1945 rice crop promised to threaten death by starvation to a large swath of the Japanese population. Even though the war ended before the rail system was devastated, the extremely diminished rice supply available for the period through to November 1946, generated a massive depopulation of Japan’s urban centers.

Tokyo’s inhabitants, for example, plunged from about 4.5 million at the end of 1944 to 2.5 million in mid-1946. Famine in 1946 was only forestalled by the infusion of massive amounts of US food that fed 18 million Japanese city dwellers in July, 20 million in August and 15 million in September 1946. Occupation authorities estimated this food saved 11 million Japanese lives.








The average American doesn't want to be told that they killed hundreds of thousands of women and children needlessly.

Ahh so Americans killed womens and children needlessly


Who did this then?









Nanking_bodies_1937.jpg




images




images





images





images






 
Last edited:

Toussaint

Struggle, challenge, and rise to struggle again
Joined
May 24, 2022
Messages
3,650
Reputation
1,278
Daps
13,639
Reppin
Michigan

Dark Stories of Japanese Cannibalism in World War Two​

Records found how the Japs ate comrades, civilians, and POWs across Asia​

1*Ge_od0J3M5f7W3FU8Q-iCA.jpeg

Japanese War Crimes in World War II | Image: Pacific Atrocities Education Organization
Many horror stories occurred during World War Two. In Europe the Axis forces led by the Nazis committed many crimes against humanity. Their counterpart in the Pacific Theatre — Imperial Japan was no different. Under Emperor Hirohito’s control, some experts believed that the Japanese were much worse than Hitler’s Nazis.
In an interview with The Guardian in 2015, Toshio Tono, a Japanese medical doctor, could no longer bear the nightmare he witnessed that made him ashamed of wearing the coveted medical white coat. Tono’s dream was to become a gynecologist. Still, when he was in his first year as a student at Kyushu Imperial University’s medical school in southern Japan, Tono became an unwilling witness to atrocities.
He reckoned that when the U.S. B-29 crashed on the island of Kyushu, the remaining surviving American airmen were captured and brought to their school — blindfolded and injured.
“One day two blindfolded prisoners were brought to the school in a truck and taken to the pathology lab… Two soldiers stood guard outside the room. I did wonder if something unpleasant was going to happen to them, but I had no idea it was going to be that awful.” — Toshio Tono
These Allied soldiers became specimens for a series of horrific experiments. Some organs were removed from their body, while others were injected with seawater to see if it worked as a substitute for sterile saline solution.
In another experiment, doctors drilled through the skull of a live prisoner. Apparently, to determine if removing some part of the brain could treat epilepsy.
“The experiments had absolutely no medical merit… They were being used to inflict as cruel a death as possible on the prisoners… I was in a state of panic, but I couldn’t say anything to the other doctors. We kept being reminded of the misery US bombing raids had caused in Japan. But looking back it was a terrible thing to have happened.” — Toshio Tono
However, Tono’s stories about medical experimentation against the Allied soldiers were not the worst of it all. As he claimed, Japanese officers mandated that some organs be removed from the victims’ bodies to be cooked and served. And the soldiers then had a feast.

Human Flesh for Survival​

Tono’s account about Japanese soldiers’ cannibalism in Kyushu was not the only account concerning such inhumane crime the Imperial forces perpetrated.
In the Pacific Theatre, accounts from different parts of Asia attest that cannibalism indeed occurred. And the victims were not only Prisoners of War (POWs) but also innocent civilians.
1*D5OCWgX81xhsBVudHx_edw.jpeg

Japanese soldiers marched in the Philippines | Image: www.hitorynet.com
In the remote province of Bukidnon in the southern part of the Philippines, incidents of cannibalism committed by the Japanese soldiers were also recorded. Based on the research paper authored by Rolando Estaban, he examined why Japanese soldiers became cannibals in this region amid the war.
The Japanese occupied the Philippine archipelago 10-hours after they bombed Pearl Harbor. At that time, the country was a commonwealth of the United States. The Japanese defeated the joint forces of Filipinos and Americans, which led to the nation’s submission to the Nipponese for four years.
Estaban cited Yamamoto, one of the witnesses of Japanese cannibalism in the Philippines. But not against any POWs nor civilians but among the Imperial soldiers.
“A former lieutenant, Yamamoto, caused the death of the Philippine civilians under his command through in inadvertent abuse, cut off the limb of a dead comrade with a sword, and witness cannibalism among Japanese troops.”
Estaban also examined Radao Tanaka’s 1996 book, The Hidden Horrors: Japanese War Crime in World War II; the book documented the crimes that the Japanese soldiers executed in the Philippines, such as rape, murder, prostitution, Death March, and cannibalism.
Tanaka said during the war; hunger compelled the Japanese soldiers to eat the flesh of their comrades, enemies, and civilians. Even before these soldiers deployed on the battlefield, cannibalism had already been part of their doctrine during training.
“The Imperial Army command had prepared the soldiers to accept cannibalism as an eventuality. Prior to their deployment to the war fronts, part of the indoctrination of soldiers involved making them believe that their enemies were pigs. American and Australian POWs were white pigs and Indians and Pakistanis were black pigs.” — Tanaka
1*htgPN2WqIMURautCnWkVqA.jpeg

Japanese cadet training | Image: www.histlo.com

The “Black Pigs” of New Guinea​

In 1944, the Japanese Eighteenth Army found itself stranded in New Guinea after the Allies crushed their counterstrike in the Battle of the Driniumor River.
When these soldiers thought it was over, the Australians took over and cleaned the remaining Japanese in the area. The Japanese forces’ strength significantly weakened as the Allied troops destroyed their naval supply lines. From 20,000 troops, their number reduced to around 1,000.
Later on, these soldiers surrendered to the Allies, which was considered an enormous humiliation in Japanese culture. The Imperial men believed in the Bushido warrior code, which states that “one must die rather than surrender” for Emperor Hirohito.
However, those soldiers who experienced severe circumstances in New Guinea chose to betray their code to survive. They, too, practiced cannibalism while in hiding. And when they submitted themselves to the Australian armies, they looked much healthier and orderly contrary to popular belief of what people who faced distress should look like.
The locals accused the surrendered Japanese soldiers of eating a villager.
The Australian forces conducted an investigation and interrogated them. These Japs confessed to cannibalism; however, the soldier who directed the gruesome banquet passed on at that time. Therefore, the Allied stopped the investigation.
Starving Japanese soldiers not only ate the flesh of the POWs and slave laborers during World War II, sometimes they were stripping the meat from live men, according to documents unearthed in Australia, reported by the Kyodo News Service in 1992.
Kyodo described the documents as “the first official proof that the former Imperial Japanese Army elements engaged in cannibalism.”
 
Top