4 ms·

> Japanese civilians incinerated...AFTER they made overtures to quit That's nonsense. The fascist Japanese government hoped for a cessation of hostilities beca

by cjensen 11y ago

> Japanese civilians incinerated...AFTER they made overtures to quit That's nonsense. The fascist Japanese government hoped for a cessation of hostilities because it was their only chance to stay in power and perhaps to fight again. That's not "stopping" in a permanent sense. They had attacked the US unprovoked[1], and there was no rational basis to believe they wouldn't do so again in the future. The US didn't want to win the war, demobilize, and do it all again in a few more decades; they required a permanent peace. [1] Some will claim the US was provocative in its trade actions, but refusing to sell oil to fuel the continuing rape of China is not a reasonable definition of provocation.

coldtea 11y ago
>That's nonsense. The fascist Japanese government hoped for a cessation of hostilities because it was their only chance to stay in power and perhaps to fight again. If that's what you're taught in US school, maybe invest in some history books. Preferably European ones, so they don't spread patriotic BS.
- cjensen 11y ago
  An ad-homenium attack on me? Wow. Are you seriously going to claim that Wikipedia is "patriotic BS"? "Although the directing powers, and the government as well, are convinced that our war strength still can deliver considerable blows to the enemy, we are unable to feel absolutely secure peace of mind ... Please bear particularly in mind, however, that we are not seeking the Russians' mediation for anything like an unconditional surrender." -- Tōgō 1945 July 17 [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan
  - coldtea 11y ago
    >An ad-homenium attack on me? Wow. No, a lament for the state of historical education in the US. To which I agree with people like Howard Zinn etc. >Wikipedia is "patriotic BS"? Wikipedia is whoever writes it. If you consider Wikipedia a scholarly source, then we don't have much to discuss. Second, It's well known that Japan didn't want an "unconditional surrender". It was a surrender nonetheless, of an exhausted nation, with some provisions mainly to have the emperor save face. Instead the US burn alive 200.000+ men, women and children, in order to test their new toys and send a message to Japan. (Note that even if any kind of surrender was off the table, using a nuclear bomb on a war, and on civilian targets nonetheless, is still Nazi-level war criminality).
- mikeash 11y ago
  Please explain yourself instead of just insulting people's education. What you're doing here is useless if you want to actually inform people.
- x0054 11y ago
  You mean so they spread European BS instead?
  - coldtea 11y ago
    I mean so that they are from an impartial source to the US/Japan sides. (Coming from a greater scholarly tradition when it comes to history wouldn't hurt either).
    - mikeash 11y ago
      Many European countries were involved in that conflict. The UK, France, and Netherlands all had substantial territory conquered by the Japanese. Germany and Italy were allied with the Japanese. The Soviets attacked Japan. Even countries not directly involved with Japan probably still have strong opinions if they were involved with Germany, what with the alliance. So that leaves, what, Sweden, Spain, Portugal, and Ireland for potential sources of impartiality there?
fenomas 11y ago
Things are hardly that simple. There are strong arguments that US officials believed Japan was close to surrender before the bombs, and that the US decision was made as much for its message to the USSR as to guarantee there'd be no need for a ground invasion of Japan. It's been a long time since I looked at it closely but various documentary evidence for such arguments is collected at the museums in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Whether one finds it all conclusive is up for debate but it's not a cut-and-dried matter.

by cjensen 11y ago

coldtea 11y ago

>That's nonsense. The fascist Japanese government hoped for a cessation of hostilities because it was their only chance to stay in power and perhaps to fight again. If that's what you're taught in US school, maybe invest in some history books. Preferably European ones, so they don't spread patriotic BS.

cjensen 11y ago
An ad-homenium attack on me? Wow. Are you seriously going to claim that Wikipedia is "patriotic BS"? "Although the directing powers, and the government as well, are convinced that our war strength still can deliver considerable blows to the enemy, we are unable to feel absolutely secure peace of mind ... Please bear particularly in mind, however, that we are not seeking the Russians' mediation for anything like an unconditional surrender." -- Tōgō 1945 July 17 [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan
- coldtea 11y ago
  >An ad-homenium attack on me? Wow. No, a lament for the state of historical education in the US. To which I agree with people like Howard Zinn etc. >Wikipedia is "patriotic BS"? Wikipedia is whoever writes it. If you consider Wikipedia a scholarly source, then we don't have much to discuss. Second, It's well known that Japan didn't want an "unconditional surrender". It was a surrender nonetheless, of an exhausted nation, with some provisions mainly to have the emperor save face. Instead the US burn alive 200.000+ men, women and children, in order to test their new toys and send a message to Japan. (Note that even if any kind of surrender was off the table, using a nuclear bomb on a war, and on civilian targets nonetheless, is still Nazi-level war criminality).
mikeash 11y ago
Please explain yourself instead of just insulting people's education. What you're doing here is useless if you want to actually inform people.
x0054 11y ago
You mean so they spread European BS instead?
- coldtea 11y ago
  I mean so that they are from an impartial source to the US/Japan sides. (Coming from a greater scholarly tradition when it comes to history wouldn't hurt either).
  - mikeash 11y ago
    Many European countries were involved in that conflict. The UK, France, and Netherlands all had substantial territory conquered by the Japanese. Germany and Italy were allied with the Japanese. The Soviets attacked Japan. Even countries not directly involved with Japan probably still have strong opinions if they were involved with Germany, what with the alliance. So that leaves, what, Sweden, Spain, Portugal, and Ireland for potential sources of impartiality there?

fenomas 11y ago

Things are hardly that simple. There are strong arguments that US officials believed Japan was close to surrender before the bombs, and that the US decision was made as much for its message to the USSR as to guarantee there'd be no need for a ground invasion of Japan. It's been a long time since I looked at it closely but various documentary evidence for such arguments is collected at the museums in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Whether one finds it all conclusive is up for debate but it's not a cut-and-dried matter.