Cardinal O'Brien on Nuclear Weapons
#50
(06-30-2009, 04:45 PM)devotedknuckles Wrote: how id the us defeat japanese imperial forces in wwii? why did japan surrender? why did the Americans not invade the 5 main Japanese islands? are saying the scenario is impossible?
really?
why talk so dismissive of such devastating weapons? yes if America didn't have them what would stop a nation from using them against some cities in non supportive states or against cities as a value only target? there is more then one way to control a nation boots on the ground occupation is far down the list
well maybe i have to brush up on your revisionist history but until i do ill stick with the history i know and no i don't believe the evil Americans nuked japan for kicks or to flex its muscles.

but nukes worked. why give up a good thing while your enemy has them? this makes no sense in this world. and this world is the only one we have.

FYI, Admiral Leahy and Generals MacArthur and Eisenhower all disagreed with Truman on the use of the bomb and condemned it as barbarous and immoral.  MacArthur was not even consulted, although he was the commander of the southwest Pacific theater.  All three also believed that Japan was ready to surrender, and Leahy said the bomb "was of no material assistance" in the war against Japan, especially if we were willing to drop the provision of unconditional surrender which threatened the institution of the emperor.

The use of the bomb was indeed a purely political move employed by one of the worst US presidents in history, Harry Truman, who, by the way, had one of worst approval ratings in history yet is now glorified as one of the greatest presidents by official state historians.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Cardinal O'Brien on Nuclear Weapons - by rbjmartin - 07-02-2009, 01:55 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)