| mai said: I called them "groundless" for a reason. You very easily estimate death rates in scenarios you proposed while despite how vague they're I don't see these estimations as obvious as you seem to imply.
Did I say that? O_o You've probably misunderstood me, I war referring to our conversation on FDR's New Deal. Well, there're freaks and traitors in every nation. Pardon my French, but it doesn't mean shit. |
So in otherwords... arguement conceeded.
Afterall, your arguement is now "The people who wanted to surrender were freaks and traitors."
Which A, isn't a real arguement and B if anything, further drives home the point that the nuclear bombs ended the war. Afterall, if the side of the government that wanted peace BEFORE the nuclear bombs dropped were all freaks and traitors... why would "Non freaks and traitors" go along with them, why wouldn't they stay loyal to the government... and the emperor. (Who was apparently a freak and a traitor according to you.)
I mean, your whole arguement has boiled down to labeling the Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of the entire cabinent, aides of the empeorer and everyone else... as "freaks and traitors" who apparently were lying about the nuclear bombs being instrumental in forcing the surrender... without a shread of proof, evidence or even a suggestion on why that might be.
As the saying goes, you are free to have your own opinion... but not your own facts. Feel free to keep you're opinion, but you should note that it is contrary to the facts.
