First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
WW2 Bombings.
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 6/22/10

Allhailodin wrote:


Yei wrote:

?????

Are you familiar with WW2?

Pearl Harbor was the beginning of the US's involvement in the war. Japan tried to surrender before the nuclear bombs were dropped, which was the end of the war.


No I'm talking about when Japan initiated the attack by surprise bombing the harbor, they attacked pearl harbor first, the bombs were dropped later, at least that's how it was taught to me. Fat Man and Little Boy were dropped on Japan after japan attacked Pearl Harbor, the US took advantage of the Japanese surprise attack as opportunity to test out the usefulness of nuclear weapons as a war tool.

But I didn't know japan wanted to surrender before the nukes were dropped. I was taught that they surrendered because the nukes were dropped.


Okay, for some you said "Then if Japan was trying to surrender, then why did they attack Pearl Harbor ?", no one was saying Japan tried to surrender before Pearl Harbor, that doesn't make sense.

Pearl Harbor was a surprise attack by Japan, and after years of war, the US decided to test out its nukes and kick off the Cold War. Japan tried to surrender multiple times before, but the US was more interested in starting the Cold War than ending WW2.
10513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 6/22/10

Yei wrote:

Okay, for some you said "Then if Japan was trying to surrender, then why did they attack Pearl Harbor ?", no one was saying Japan tried to surrender before Pearl Harbor, that doesn't make sense.


Ok, cause that's what I thought you said, which wouldn't make any sense.


Pearl Harbor was a surprise attack by Japan, and after years of war, the US decided to test out its nukes and kick off the Cold War. Japan tried to surrender multiple times before, but the US was more interested in starting the Cold War than ending WW2.


Really, i though japan was just staying silent and off the map up until they attacked pearl harbor, I was taught that they though the US looked weak so they decided to attack because of that.
65911 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
54 / F / Atlanta GA
Offline
Posted 6/22/10
They tried to conditional surrender not a unconditional. that was the only way USA would have accepted it. Big difference between the two
75432 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
49 / F / Center of the Uni...
Offline
Posted 6/23/10

Allhailodin wrote:

Really, i though japan was just staying silent and off the map up until they attacked pearl harbor, I was taught that they though the US looked weak so they decided to attack because of that.


Are you kidding?

Ever since Oliver Perry, Japan had been trying to out-european the europeans and get recognised as a 'great power'. Starting around the 1930's they began kicking everyone's butt on the chinese mainland. except for the Russian. The POS Japanese tanks were great against people who didn't have any. But against even second rate t-70s they had no chance, nor did their WWI field guns. (and I won't even mention their machine guns making the top 5 of world's worst machine guns ever. ) Anyhow the Russians steamrolled the Japanese in 1936.

The lesson learned? The army fell out of favour at court. Spending emphasized naval research, development and production. An island expansion was determined to be the course to empire. This meant kicking out The European colonial powers and the US. -- Meanwhile their ground forces technology remained so bad that the US could use Stewart light tanks too fragile anymore for the European front as super heavy tanks. -- oops.


75432 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
49 / F / Center of the Uni...
Offline
Posted 6/23/10

Yei wrote:


Pearl Harbor was a surprise attack by Japan, and after years of war, the US decided to test out its nukes and kick off the Cold War. Japan tried to surrender multiple times before, but the US was more interested in starting the Cold War than ending WW2.


Yes cause planning thirty years of hostilities without resolution was the FOREMOST thing on US military planners minds during WWII
[/sarcasm]

75432 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
49 / F / Center of the Uni...
Offline
Posted 6/23/10 , edited 6/23/10

Yei wrote:





I said by US standards it was. Pearl Harbor was a very active military site near Japan, and there was lots of economic and diplomatic factors in the background. The US uses the excuse of preemptive strikes all the time, like the attack on Iraq.

It's a fact that Japan had been trying to surrender for months before the bombs were dropped. That's common knowledge to anyone who isn't ignorant about WW2, but the US education and propaganda would probably leave that little fact out.


Now, if you had said Rawanda, where the first we heard of intervention was when the navy SEALS ran ashore... I'd buy your argument.
but you said Iraq. There was no doubt or there should have been no doubt that Iraq knew this was coming. I have my own issues with the Iraq war but comparing it to Pearl Harbour makes me laugh.

There's a difference between surrender and unconditional surrender. Frankly if you must go to war, if you don't to have another one, you make sure the other side says 'uncle'. If you don't some corporal from the previous war might get into power by claiming the army was never defeated, only betrayed. The Allies were facing a densely populated island with a psychology that made it a warrior's duty to fly like a suicide bomber. Whose propoganda made the allies out as bloodthirsty rapists and murderers. When Japan told me they put their weapons down for good, I'd want to be sure they meant it too.

oh and for the record, I'm not US educated.

(edit: fixed a misplaced quote/spoiler)



93 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M
Offline
Posted 6/24/10
US population in 1940 125 million people. 1941 3100 people were killed in Pearl Harbor. Japs and Krauts lost their nations
290 million people in 2000, 3600 people did in world trade building attack. Sand Niggys and Primitive White Devils lost their nations.

The US cares to much about low population death.
75432 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
49 / F / Center of the Uni...
Offline
Posted 6/24/10

DarnellA wrote:

US population in 1940 125 million people. 1941 3100 people were killed in Pearl Harbor. Japs and Krauts lost their nations
290 million people in 2000, 3600 people did in world trade building attack. Sand Niggys and Primitive White Devils lost their nations.

The US cares to much about low population death.


So that's all that matters. the score once the dust settles? Not who attacked first? Not the ideals expressed and/or lived up to?
Or for that matter what else was going on in the world. do the 10 million of their own people the Nazi's killed factor into your 'score'?


93 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M
Offline
Posted 6/25/10

papagolfwhiskey wrote:


DarnellA wrote:

US population in 1940 125 million people. 1941 3100 people were killed in Pearl Harbor. Japs and Krauts lost their nations
290 million people in 2000, 3600 people did in world trade building attack. Sand Niggys and Primitive White Devils lost their nations.

The US cares to much about low population death.


So that's all that matters. the score once the dust settles? Not who attacked first? Not the ideals expressed and/or lived up to?
Or for that matter what else was going on in the world. do the 10 million of their own people the Nazi's killed factor into your 'score'?




All I said about America, I did not factor what the Nazis did to the Jews and others.
75432 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
49 / F / Center of the Uni...
Offline
Posted 6/25/10

DarnellA wrote:


papagolfwhiskey wrote:


DarnellA wrote:

US population in 1940 125 million people. 1941 3100 people were killed in Pearl Harbor. Japs and Krauts lost their nations
290 million people in 2000, 3600 people did in world trade building attack. Sand Niggys and Primitive White Devils lost their nations.

The US cares to much about low population death.


So that's all that matters. the score once the dust settles? Not who attacked first? Not the ideals expressed and/or lived up to?
Or for that matter what else was going on in the world. do the 10 million of their own people the Nazi's killed factor into your 'score'?




All I said about America, I did not factor what the Nazis did to the Jews and others.


(emphasis mine)


Let me rephrase.

So... the only reason to care about being attacked is the number or percentage of your own citizens who die? Sticking up for an ally doesn't count? Stopping genocidal madman doesn't count? Why and how they died doesn't count? Does Battle count more than surprise attack? do civilian deaths count more than deaths of those in uniform?

While you're comparing. have you done similar comparisons to other countries and their reasons for war?

your statement (the one I emboldened) is an absurd over simplification of history sir.


93 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M
Offline
Posted 6/25/10

papagolfwhiskey wrote:


DarnellA wrote:


papagolfwhiskey wrote:


DarnellA wrote:

US population in 1940 125 million people. 1941 3100 people were killed in Pearl Harbor. Japs and Krauts lost their nations
290 million people in 2000, 3600 people did in world trade building attack. Sand Niggys and Primitive White Devils lost their nations.

The US cares to much about low population death.


So that's all that matters. the score once the dust settles? Not who attacked first? Not the ideals expressed and/or lived up to?
Or for that matter what else was going on in the world. do the 10 million of their own people the Nazi's killed factor into your 'score'?




All I said about America, I did not factor what the Nazis did to the Jews and others.


(emphasis mine)


Let me rephrase.

So... the only reason to care about being attacked is the number or percentage of your own citizens who die? Sticking up for an ally doesn't count? Stopping genocidal madman doesn't count? Why and how they died doesn't count? Does Battle count more than surprise attack? do civilian deaths count more than deaths of those in uniform?

While you're comparing. have you done similar comparisons to other countries and their reasons for war?

your statement (the one I emboldened) is an absurd over simplification of history sir.



The US (us) did not care about the Holocaust, sticking up for an ally does count but we did not go in to the war to save them, the Japs hit us, Hitler was stupid in declaring war against us.
Civilian deaths are more important than military deaths because the military has to fight or be treasonous.
I like my simple view of History..
65911 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
54 / F / Atlanta GA
Offline
Posted 6/25/10
I may be mistaken but Japan had already made an alliance with Germany and Italy prior to their attack on Pearl Harbor. Keeping views simple is one thing but being simple minded another thing. People in the country should be, held accountable for their countries action such as war. Maybe if people keep this in mind wars would happen far less often. I do believe in total war fair to cripple the attacking countries industries, farmland, cities, etc. There no such thing as noncombatants and every time a group of nut job hide in a church or music or whatever temple it should be blown to hell. We did not even understand just what the Germans where doing with people Jewish and a lot of others. The Japanese where no better in ant one that surrender was scum in their eyes, In addition, killed many just for the sake of killing. War is an awful thing, you got out and rip your enemy apart because if do not they will. The term police action with solider is stupid it is a war or it is not that keeps it simple. A lot of young men die do to politicians riding along the fence line. The young men and women, of today’s armed services have far better training and gear. However, the rules of engagement are so bazaar it sickens me to know we lost some solders because of these rules.
Posted 8/1/10
im not even going there
65911 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
54 / F / Atlanta GA
Offline
Posted 8/1/10
They started it we end it so what. the big deal. Fire bombing city was far more inhuman when you come down to it.
First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.