Wow, you insult me because of my age and then like to pretend that you are the mature one?

You are telling me that if America tried to invade Japan, Japan would fight back? That is proposterous, we must immediately kill a quarter of a million people in one of the most excruciating ways possible.

Stop treating humans like statistics, I don't give a fuck how much the invasion would cost, or how many trained soldiers would die, I care about the mothers, fathers, children who died from burns, cancer, starvation, radiation poisoning, the people who died instantly were the lucky ones, they didn't have to suffer for days, weeks and months, with flesh hanging off their bodies and their eyes melted out of their sockets.

And I am fully aware about the bombing of Germany, and I don't recall saying that I supported it. For the most part, that bombing was STRATEGICAL, targetting factories and airbases etc. Although the allies focused on bombing populated cities near the end of the war, something I don't agree with, it isn't anywhere near on the same scale as the death, fear, destruction and suffering caused by the atom bombs.

I still don't agree with his decision though, mass murder isn't a way to win a war. If he wanted to win the war, he should take it to the front door of the people who started it, the government and the army.

And I don't really like our MP's, over the past few decades they have just drove our country into the ground. There have been too many stupid decisions, especially when it comes to things like industry and handling taxes. Our country is becoming dilapidated, everbody just wants to do a half-assed job. In Japan, if a train is one minute late that is considered very late, in England, public transport is expected to be 5-15 minutes late, usually overcrowded too.

The only way I can describe it is England is a half-assed country. I don't even want to go into detail about the population, that's the worst part. Although some of these problems can't be pinned on the government and are down to the population, I still think the government played a large part in turning this country into the shit-hole it is today.

I don't know how the world will end, I always thought it would be down to natural causes, but after seeing the amount of idiots we have leading some countries these days I wouldn't be surprised if it was down to nuclear war. Nuclear war wouldn't kill EVERYONE on the planet, but I'm pretty sure the world would end up a lot more like Fallout, maybe us gamers will come out on top in the end because we've had preparation ;)

No and I will explain why. Not many know this but during the Cold War the Russains lamost lauched a nuke. According to their computers the US laucnhed a single nuke. A general made a decision not to launch a nuke of their own as they thought that it was illogical for the US to launch a single nuke and if they did that the US would launch all of their nukes which would destroy both countries. North Korea and Iran are crazy BUT they have enough sense to realize that if they launch nukes at a country, that country would counter-launch nukes which would destroy both nations.
Unless a country WANTS to destroy the entire world it will not happen.

Lol at people thinking Iran would be a likely contender for using nukes. USA and Israel would be 10x more likely to fire nukes if they engage in war. If Israel happens to attack another country (or gets attacked) I wouldn't be surprised if America nukes a few countries off the map (as long as that country isn't Saudi Arabia).

India and Pakistan will never nuke each other. Both countries will cease to exist if this happens.

I don't think nuclear weapons will be used this decade.

I believe Japan tried to negotiate with Roosevelt in later 1944 or early 1945, don't quote me on this though.

The Japanese leaders weren't delusional, they knew they were screwed, the country was on it's knees before the atom bombs were dropped and throughout 1945 the Japanese leaders were seriously doubting whether they could continue fighting.

It was no insult, its to do with your clear lack of knowledge on the subject.  Japan would have been completely destroyed if the bombs were not used.  The US would have continued their bombing and laying mines across all Japanese held ports and shipping regions.  The USSR would have continued their agression to mainland Japan where they would have raped and looted the country.  The Japanese would have fought to the last person, every man, woman and child would have fought the allied forces, before millions would take their lives over what they were told would happen to them.  Totals deaths could have gone as high as 20mil. 

And you talk about wanting to save lives, what about the 20million civilians the Japanese killed.  Japan commited some of the worst war crimes known to man. 

And the allied bombing over Japan and Germany was much worse then that of the atomic bombs.  The Atomic bombs saved more then 10 fold what normal bombing would have.

I'm sorry, but who the hell managed to convince you that the entire population of Japan was involved in some suicidal cult? You say I have a lack of knowledge of the subject and then you claim 20 million Japanese civilians were killed? The number of Japanese civilians killed in WW2 doesn't even touch 1 million, the atom bombs could easily make up between a quarter and a half of the Japanese civilian death toll.

Your logic doesn't even make sense, if they were as delusional as you say they were then they wouldn't have surrendered after the atomic bombs were dropped.

Let me show you a picture.

This is a Japanese soldier...surrendering...crazy isn't it?

And funnily enough, I can't find any evidence of children fighting the Americans to the death.

And try and deny it all you like, but the Japanese were on the brink of collapse, you claim that every citizen would fight to the death, well that's bullshit, they would need supplies for that, and they didn't. The Japanese could have probably held out for another year before they hard to start fighting with fists. The Japanese leaders were considering peace and preparing for negotiation before the bombs were dropped. After doing some digging around on the internet I have found many sources which say that Hirohito contacted Roosevelt in late 1944 to negotiate surrender with similar terms to the Potsdam Decleration, but it was ignored.

At least you got something right, yes the Soviets were bastards, and yes they did rape and loot areas they invaded. But the dropping of the atom bombs didn't stop them from invading, the Soviets invaded Manchuria THE DAY the atomic bombs were dropped for christs sake.

Yes the Japanese did inexusable things to the Chinese, but like I said before, it doesn't justify the murders of a quarter of a million people.

The allied bombings of Japan and Germany did have a greater death toll, but they weren't "much worse" than Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The stategic bombings were prolonged, it happened over years, death was pretty much instant for the vast majority of people who were caught up in the bombings. Like I said before, I am still disgusted at how many civilians were killed in the allied bombings on Germany, in no way do I support it.

But it isn't even on the same scale as the atom bombs, it's one bomb, which was dropped without warning and it levelled an entire city. Like I said in my other post, the people who were instantly killed were lucky, the people who survived the bombs suffered the most, it is probably the most inhumane way you can die.

You poke fun at my age, you disrespect me and accuse me of not having any knowledge of the subject, and then you claim that the Japanese murdered 20 million of their own citizen's and that the majority of the population of Japan were delusional and suicidal cult members?

I'll make this easy for you, don't reply.

I hope the hell not lol.

Horhito contacted Roosevelt... and was ignored because what he wasn't offering was unconditional surrender. Which was what was required by the allied chiefs of the axis powers.

Japan was willing to surrender, so long as they got to keep some of the lands they conquered.  I

Additionally, when he eventually DID surrender, he was almost ambushed via a military rebellion.

Your right about the supplies... but wrong about the casualties.

Such large numbers were predicted, not so much because the soldiers and families would fight tooth and nail.  Though there was a decent amount of that... some japanese soldiers did surrender, but it was MUCH rarer for them to do so, and in generally culture was MUCH more looked down opon.  Hell the use of Kamikaze's and the fact that people were still taking part in ritual suicides back it up.

Consider http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Decisive#Operation_Ketsug.C5.8D

Most intersting to his point....

In addition, the Japanese had organized the Patriotic Citizens Fighting Corps—which included all healthy men aged 15–60 and women 17–40, numbering 28 million—to perform combat support, and ultimately combat jobs. Weapons, training, and uniforms were generally lacking: some men were armed with nothing better than muzzle-loading muskets, longbows, or bamboo spears; nevertheless, they were expected to make do with what they had.^[25]

One mobilized high school girl, Yukiko Kasai, found herself issued an awl and told, "Even killing one American soldier will do. … You must aim for the abdomen." 

Many millions of people were saved only because Japan was forced to surrender and the US came in quick and set up food distribution networks ASAP.  `10 million people were seen likely to starve to death before the surrender.

Many people still did starve with as bad as agirculture and food production was in Japan... even US support wasn't helpful.

A long protracted isolation campaign waiting for the elites to be touched by the blockade would of been catastrophic and starved tons of people, 20 million not being outlandish when you consider Japanese food supplies were centralized and largely relied on the same methods of transportation that were used for military materials, aka places that would of been bombed.

He's wrong on some of the facts, but right on the actual conclusion, that of the three options avaliable... the Atomic bomb was by far the one that cost the least amount of civilian deaths, and ended with japan in the best shape post war.

A continuation of the blockade would of caused 10 million + to starve.

An invasion... would of killed hundreds of thousands of soldiers... and caused many more millions to starve.

Haha, thanks for the reasonable reply.

I still don't buy that the atom bomb was the best way out though, the only positive impact it had was intimidation.

Further negotiation could have led to Japan's surrender without the bombs, I am not sure what different terms there were between the treaty Hirohito offered Roosevelt and the one that was agreed on after the bombings, I heard they were very similar. If Roosevelt had just accepted the treaty the first time round then it probably would have been the best case scenario. As long as the land they wanted to keep wasn't on mainland China then Roosevelt should have accepted and that would have saved many more lives.

I can understand that the atomic bombs ended the war quickly, but what makes me feel disgusted is people SUPPORT the bombings and they like to think it was the only way out, it wasn't.

Hirohito's word was final, and he had already considered surrendering when his country was better off just 6 months ago, this is the proof that the atomic bombs were not necessary.

Truman opted out of hard negotion and opted in on mass murder, when he dropped the atomic bombs, he forced Japan into surrendering and at the same time won the biggest dick-waving contest of all time, intimidating other countries. The fact that the US dropped the bombs so recklessly must have left the Soviets feeling pretty paranoid, we are lucky nothing came of the Cold War.

It isn't so much the death tolls that bother me, but it's how these people were killed, and how recklessly they were targetted.