Switch Theme:

In Retrospect... Was Hiroshima a good idea?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
Was it a good idea?
Yes, it was a reasonable conclusion
No, it was a bad idea
Ambivalent.
We dropped bombs on japan?

View results
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Mysterious Techpriest





Emperors Faithful wrote:The Native Americans were killing Colonial (White) Americans. I guess this justifies everything you did to them.

Some of it, yes. Things like uprooting culturally assimilated groups to steal their land was inexcusable, because they were citizens and were acting like any other citizens; it would be like bulldozing Baltimore and marching the residents to Mexico. Annihilating or relocating tribes that were in violent opposition to America, who were squatting on usable land doing no more than low-intensity horticulture or hunting, was justified, as much as any conquest is.

They don’t? You’re so cute. You really are a pie in the sky guy teenager aren’t you. I hear the Obama administration is hiring.

You mean the administration that has both toned down the counter-productive posturing and rhetoric, and presided over an increase in the use of effective methods, like unmanned drones that use bombs to perform targeted assassination of hostiles, instead of risking US lives and equipment in exchange for increased collateral damage? I don't believe they have any use or patience for ineffectual idealism either.

 
   
Made in us
Steady Space Marine Vet Sergeant





Believeland, OH

The America that instituted the holocaust against the American Indians is hardly the same America that fought during WWI or WWII. That America was more a left over product of European colonialism than any separate American Ideology. The American Indians are the only people that I feel deserve any kind of apology for American colonialist ideals in particular and warfare in general.

Emperors Faithful, I'm still waiting for that list of atrocities and war crimes that the US has perpetrated besides the above American Indian Holocaust, that somehow approaches the same levels of Germany or Japan. Where is your "in the know" information?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
dogma wrote:
Andrew1975 wrote:
I'm not sure I agree with 1. Their terms being acceptable.


Sure, but why weren't they acceptable? They were favorable, as I said, but what made command say no?


I've explained they let Japan save face by dictating the terms of their own surrender. I've already explained why I found that irresponsible to let them continue with their honor code intact.

Andrew1975 wrote:
2. That they would have complied with them even if they had surrendered.


Why not? They were their terms, after all.


They were more the Emperor's terms. They military and government did not see eye to eye with the Emperor on this. I believe I've mentioned the coup before. Had they had any honor left, it would not have allowed them to accept a surrender and occupation.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2011/05/26 00:47:10


"I don't have principles, and I consider any comment otherwise to be both threatening and insulting" - Dogma

"No, sorry, synonymous does not mean same".-Dogma

"If I say "I will hug you" I am threatening you" -Dogma 
   
Made in us
Secret Force Behind the Rise of the Tau




USA

Andrew1975 wrote: That America was more a left over product of European colonialism than any separate American Ideology.


Manifest Destiny is an American Ideology. Europeans never had a dedicated plan to force Native Americans off their lands like we did (EDIT: Clarification. The French and the Brits didn't. Can't say I'm well versed in Spanish, Dutch, and Portugese colonial history but then none of them can really be said to have a profound influence on American history for the relevant period).

P.S. Let's not throw the Holocaust around. We treated the natives like crap but we didn't load them into gas chambers and kill them in the millions with the marvels of modern industry. That's two different scales of awful.

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2011/05/26 00:53:13


   
Made in us
Mysterious Techpriest





"Holocaust" simply means "mass destruction, almost always through fire". Which does mean describing American activities against the native tribes as a holocaust is a bit of a misnomer, and ironically "The Holocaust" is also somewhat of a misnomer, as it was carried out with bullets, abuse (starvation and overwork), and poison, with fire only coming into the equation in the form of crematoriums. On the other hand, firebombings of cities could be accurately described as holocausts, as could the two nuclear weapons (at least in a localized sense, in both cases), and indeed perhaps the second most common usage of the term is in the phrase "(thermo)nuclear holocaust".

 
   
Made in us
Secret Force Behind the Rise of the Tau




USA

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:"Holocaust" simply means "mass destruction, almost always through fire". Which does mean describing American activities against the native tribes as a holocaust is a bit of a misnomer, and ironically "The Holocaust" is also somewhat of a misnomer, as it was carried out with bullets, abuse (starvation and overwork), and poison, with fire only coming into the equation in the form of crematoriums. On the other hand, firebombings of cities could be accurately described as holocausts, as could the two nuclear weapons (at least in a localized sense, in both cases), and indeed perhaps the second most common usage of the term is in the phrase "(thermo)nuclear holocaust".


The word Holocaust has a meaning like any other word but the term itself has become inseparably tied to a specific historical event. It is useless for anything else from the historical perspective other than maybe metaphor/comparison but there are few incidents in history comparable to the Holocaust.

Using it for other events or series' of events inevitably leads to false comparisons and bad implications. In this case, comparing the oppression of the Native Americans by the US Government over American history to the Holocaust is just wrong. The two events have very little in common besides "bad stuff happened to this group because this group didn't like them" which is a sentence so general it tells us nothing about what actually happened in either case.

Ethnocide is the most accurate term for what happened to Native Americans (and in some ways is still happening)

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2011/05/26 01:24:36


   
Made in us
Steady Space Marine Vet Sergeant





Believeland, OH

LordofHats wrote:
Andrew1975 wrote: That America was more a left over product of European colonialism than any separate American Ideology.


Manifest Destiny is an American Ideology. Europeans never had a dedicated plan to force Native Americans off their lands like we did (EDIT: Clarification. The French and the Brits didn't. Can't say I'm well versed in Spanish, Dutch, and Portugese colonial history but then none of them can really be said to have a profound influence on American history for the relevant period).


Really? Because I'm pretty sure the first people that started killing American Indians were not Americans! I'm pretty sure the first people that lived in the 13 colonies were for the most part European! Hence the word colonies!

P.S. Let's not throw the Holocaust around. We treated the natives like crap but we didn't load them into gas chambers and kill them in the millions with the marvels of modern industry. That's two different scales of awful.


Yeah we just gave them infected blankets drove them off their land, killed all their livestock and sent them on things like the trail of tears, when we weren't just outright murdering them. We attempted to systematically wipe the indigenous people of America off the face of the planet. It was genocide and I'll continue to call it a Holocaust, thanks! We invented scalping for christ sakes, it's funny that so many think that that was an American Indian thing.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2011/05/26 01:39:53


"I don't have principles, and I consider any comment otherwise to be both threatening and insulting" - Dogma

"No, sorry, synonymous does not mean same".-Dogma

"If I say "I will hug you" I am threatening you" -Dogma 
   
Made in us
Posts with Authority






The only documented case of someone even thinking about the whole smallpox blankets was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffery_Amherst#Legacy - a brit. Other than that it's all anecdotal, and generally dismissed. Accidental exposure was enough to do the damage.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/05/26 01:39:47


 
   
Made in us
Secret Force Behind the Rise of the Tau




USA

Andrew1975 wrote:Yeah we just gave them infected blankets and sent them on things like the trail of tears!


So you agree with me on that it wasn't Europeans? Nice.

The infected blankets thing is a massive historical fiction. It has spread to monstrous proportions based on a British plan to end Pontiac's Rebellion by giving them blankets from a fort infected with smallpox but there is no evidence the plan was ever executed (the only evidence is circumstantial). There are numerous instances of Native American's getting small pox from blankets, but no evidence that any of them were caused by an effort to deliberately infect them. EDIT: In fact, there are numerous instances of settlers and traders warning Natives to stay away from smallpox infected posts (which they often ignored) and a plan in the early 1800's to vaccinate them against smallpox (that went underfunded) No evidence has ever been produced the the United States government had an official or unofficial policy to commit genocide against Native Americans.

The goal of the Trail of Tears was not to massacre the Native American tribes involved. Just to move them. It's an ethnocide, not a genocide. Really, the relationship between the United States government and Native Americans is more one of a lack of carry for their well being than one desiring their extermination. Not to suggest some American's wouldn't have minded exterminating them Jackson *cough* *cough* who seems relevant to this wouldn't have minded but he never enact policy to kill them, just relocate them and generally no give a damn about their well being. Genocide is deliberate. Trail of Tears is not the Holocaust and was not a genocide. It was an Ethnocide.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2011/05/26 01:52:43


   
Made in us
Posts with Authority






See that black blur out the corner of your eye, LordofHats? That was you being ninja'd
   
Made in us
Secret Force Behind the Rise of the Tau




USA

Bromsy wrote:See that black blur out the corner of your eye, LordofHats? That was you being ninja'd


Son of a



EDIT: Seriously though. Small pox infect blankets is up there with the M1 Garand's ping getting GI's killed on the list of most widely believed historical BS.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/05/26 01:58:19


   
Made in us
Battlewagon Driver with Charged Engine






LordofHats wrote:
Andrew1975 wrote:Yeah we just gave them infected blankets and sent them on things like the trail of tears!


So you agree with me on that it wasn't Europeans? Nice.

The infected blankets thing is a massive historical fiction. It has spread to monstrous proportions based on a British plan to end Pontiac's Rebellion by giving them blankets from a fort infected with smallpox but there is no evidence the plan was ever executed (the only evidence is circumstantial). There are numerous instances of Native American's getting small pox from blankets, but no evidence that any of them were caused by an effort to deliberately infect them. EDIT: In fact, there are numerous instances of settlers and traders warning Natives to stay away from smallpox infected posts (which they often ignored) and a plan in the early 1800's to vaccinate them against smallpox (that went underfunded) No evidence has ever been produced the the United States government had an official or unofficial policy to commit genocide against Native Americans.

The goal of the Trail of Tears was not to massacre the Native American tribes involved. Just to move them. It's an ethnocide, not a genocide. Really, the relationship between the United States government and Native Americans is more one of a lack of carry for their well being than one desiring their extermination. Not to suggest some American's wouldn't have minded exterminating them Jackson *cough* *cough* who seems relevant to this wouldn't have minded but he never enact policy to kill them, just relocate them and generally no give a damn about their well being. Genocide is deliberate. Trail of Tears is not the Holocaust and was not a genocide. It was an Ethnocide.



The smallpox balnkets were fiction, however disease was used as a weapon against the american natives since the Spanish. They would often deliberately infect south american and killed many ore from disease then warfare. Also look on the spanish treatment of natives (complete dicks). Though we may have caught gonorrhea and other STIs from the natives, so they did have some revenge

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/05/26 02:15:02


H.B.M.C. wrote:
"Balance, playtesting - a casual gamer craves not these things!" - Yoda, a casual gamer.
Three things matter in marksmanship -
location, location, location
MagickalMemories wrote:How about making another fist?
One can be, "Da Fist uv Mork" and the second can be, "Da Uvver Fist uv Mork."
Make a third, and it can be, "Da Uvver Uvver Fist uv Mork"
Eric
 
   
Made in us
Secret Force Behind the Rise of the Tau




USA

youbedead wrote:The smallpox balnkets were faction, however disease was used as a weapon against the american natives since the Spanish. They would often deliberately infect south american and killed many ore from disease then warfare. Also look on the spanish treatment of natives (complete dicks). Though we may have caught gonorrhea and other STIs from the natives, so they did have some revenge


Oh, I'm aware of what happened after the fall of the Aztecs. Pretty crappy living for the natives

After that I get kind of fuzzy on the details cause my class was about US History which the Spanish colonies are less important. Something about Cinco de Mayo and tacos.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/05/26 02:09:40


   
Made in au
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter






Australia (Recently ravaged by the Hive Fleet Ginger Overlord)

Kasrkai wrote:SEPARATE SUBJECT:
I also have to agree with Frazzled a bit. We would all place our people above others. We would all also like to say that we don't. But when it comes down to that point, a few of us or a lot of them, how much do their lives compare to ours?


Not that I agree with you (I would swap 3 law-breaking Australians for 1 good Iranian to live in my neighborhood) but I think he's taking this a little further than that.

Andrew1975 wrote:Emperors Faithful, I'm still waiting for that list of atrocities and war crimes that the US has perpetrated besides the above American Indian Holocaust, that somehow approaches the same levels of Germany or Japan. Where is your "in the know" information?


So after listing the atrocities against the American Indians you come back with "That doesn't count"?

And I would say that the indiscriminate bombing of Japan and the use of Nuclear weapons was in fact a war crime. It's been justified by the winning side, just in the same way that the Holocaust would have been somehow justified if the Germans had won.

Andrew1975 wrote:
Really? Because I'm pretty sure the first people that started killing American Indians were not Americans! I'm pretty sure the first people that lived in the 13 colonies were for the most part European! Hence the word colonies!


Yeah, White Americans certainly weren't the first to go about killing Native Americans. But they were certainly the first to break the peace treaties set up by the French and British in the interests of expansion on the level of something we've never seen before.

EDIT: Historically Britain has always proven to be more concerned with the natives of a particular colony than the actual governing colonists there. (The case of Australia and the Caribbean assets reflect this).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/05/26 02:21:57


Smacks wrote:
After the game, pack up all your miniatures, then slap the guy next to you on the ass and say.

"Good game guys, now lets hit the showers"
 
   
Made in us
Steady Space Marine Vet Sergeant





Believeland, OH

Emperors Faithful, I'm still waiting for that list of atrocities and war crimes that the US has perpetrated besides the above American Indian Holocaust, that somehow approaches the same levels of Germany or Japan. Where is your "in the know" information?


So after listing the atrocities against the American Indians you come back with "That doesn't count"?

And I would say that the indiscriminate bombing of Japan and the use of Nuclear weapons was in fact a war crime. It's been justified by the winning side, just in the same way that the Holocaust would have been somehow justified if the Germans had won.


No you can't use the American Indians, that wasn't America, I've explained that. You also can't use the nuke because that is the topic currently being debated. The Dude said and you seamed to agree that

"Every so called ' evil ' you can show, someone can show you something worse the US has done or another country has done."

I'm just looking for that list. The list of atrocities that shows that America was Evil and did what it did because it has some sort of track record of being the worlds evil country.

I love how people that are defending the Japanese, seam to think that wiping American Indians of the face of the planet was just an inconsiderate accident. "Opps sorry guys, didn't mean to kill you all!" Really was an Indian reservation that different from an interment camp? At least Japanese Americans got a chance to live normally first and were reintegrated afterword. I mean at least Imperial Japan asked for it, the American Indians were just here first!


Yeah, White Americans certainly weren't the first to go about killing Native Americans. But they were certainly the first to break the peace treaties set up by the French and British in the interests of expansion on the level of something we've never seen before.


Really, Americans in name only, I bet most of those people breaking the treaties were born Europeans or at most first generation Americans. Hardly long enough to have formed a separate American identity.

This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2011/05/26 02:53:03


"I don't have principles, and I consider any comment otherwise to be both threatening and insulting" - Dogma

"No, sorry, synonymous does not mean same".-Dogma

"If I say "I will hug you" I am threatening you" -Dogma 
   
Made in us
Mysterious Techpriest





LordofHats wrote:The goal of the Trail of Tears was not to massacre the Native American tribes involved. Just to move them. It's an ethnocide, not a genocide. Really, the relationship between the United States government and Native Americans is more one of a lack of carry for their well being than one desiring their extermination. Not to suggest some American's wouldn't have minded exterminating them Jackson *cough* *cough* who seems relevant to this wouldn't have minded but he never enact policy to kill them, just relocate them and generally no give a damn about their well being. Genocide is deliberate. Trail of Tears is not the Holocaust and was not a genocide. It was an Ethnocide.

As I recall, the specific atrocity of the Trail of Tears was that it was committed on culturally assimilated natives, who could no longer justly be called native tribesmen. They weren't primitive horticulturalists and nomads who were wasting usable land and posing a threat as a separate sovereign entity, but semi-affluent landowners who considered themselves part of America, and who lived exactly as any other Americans did. It would be like evicting everyone in Louisiana and marching them off to Mexico so their possessions could be given to wealthy Texans or something.

But, trying to lay blame on a more recent America for these things is fallacious. Sort of like if one were to blame the modern french for Napoleon's imperialism, or modern Russia for Stalin's purges. A not-insignificant percentage of Americans by WWII were descended from people who had yet to immigrate when all this was going on, meaning there's an even greater disparity between them than there is in the European examples. Likewise, one cannot blame modern Japan for things like the Rape of Nanking, mostly because we personally destroyed everyone responsible, which we could do because they unconditionally surrendered, which they did out of existential terror in the face of a weapon that could completely annihilate their entire nation without risk to our troops, and which we proved willing enough to use on them.

 
   
Made in au
Legendary Dogfighter




Australia

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:
LordofHats wrote:The goal of the Trail of Tears was not to massacre the Native American tribes involved. Just to move them. It's an ethnocide, not a genocide. Really, the relationship between the United States government and Native Americans is more one of a lack of carry for their well being than one desiring their extermination. Not to suggest some American's wouldn't have minded exterminating them Jackson *cough* *cough* who seems relevant to this wouldn't have minded but he never enact policy to kill them, just relocate them and generally no give a damn about their well being. Genocide is deliberate. Trail of Tears is not the Holocaust and was not a genocide. It was an Ethnocide.

As I recall, the specific atrocity of the Trail of Tears was that it was committed on culturally assimilated natives, who could no longer justly be called native tribesmen. They weren't primitive horticulturalists and nomads who were wasting usable land and posing a threat as a separate sovereign entity, but semi-affluent landowners who considered themselves part of America, and who lived exactly as any other Americans did. It would be like evicting everyone in Louisiana and marching them off to Mexico so their possessions could be given to wealthy Texans or something.

But, trying to lay blame on a more recent America for these things is fallacious. Sort of like if one were to blame the modern french for Napoleon's imperialism, or modern Russia for Stalin's purges. A not-insignificant percentage of Americans by WWII were descended from people who had yet to immigrate when all this was going on, meaning there's an even greater disparity between them than there is in the European examples. Likewise, one cannot blame modern Japan for things like the Rape of Nanking, mostly because we personally destroyed everyone responsible, which we could do because they unconditionally surrendered, which they did out of existential terror in the face of a weapon that could completely annihilate their entire nation without risk to our troops, and which we proved willing enough to use on them.


But thing is they might have not surrendered if the Soviets didn't declare war on them and prepared to invade Japan after defeating thier forces on mainland Asia .

The Bombs may have helped end the war but what most US media leaves out is that the Japanese surrendered 6 days after the bombs were dropped because the Soviet Union was about to Invade with roughly 1,500,000 Troops.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/05/26 03:21:50


Elysian Drop Troops 1500pts

Renegades & Heretics 2056pts

 
   
Made in us
Steady Space Marine Vet Sergeant





Believeland, OH

Yak9UT wrote:
Sir Pseudonymous wrote:
LordofHats wrote:The goal of the Trail of Tears was not to massacre the Native American tribes involved. Just to move them. It's an ethnocide, not a genocide. Really, the relationship between the United States government and Native Americans is more one of a lack of carry for their well being than one desiring their extermination. Not to suggest some American's wouldn't have minded exterminating them Jackson *cough* *cough* who seems relevant to this wouldn't have minded but he never enact policy to kill them, just relocate them and generally no give a damn about their well being. Genocide is deliberate. Trail of Tears is not the Holocaust and was not a genocide. It was an Ethnocide.

As I recall, the specific atrocity of the Trail of Tears was that it was committed on culturally assimilated natives, who could no longer justly be called native tribesmen. They weren't primitive horticulturalists and nomads who were wasting usable land and posing a threat as a separate sovereign entity, but semi-affluent landowners who considered themselves part of America, and who lived exactly as any other Americans did. It would be like evicting everyone in Louisiana and marching them off to Mexico so their possessions could be given to wealthy Texans or something.

But, trying to lay blame on a more recent America for these things is fallacious. Sort of like if one were to blame the modern french for Napoleon's imperialism, or modern Russia for Stalin's purges. A not-insignificant percentage of Americans by WWII were descended from people who had yet to immigrate when all this was going on, meaning there's an even greater disparity between them than there is in the European examples. Likewise, one cannot blame modern Japan for things like the Rape of Nanking, mostly because we personally destroyed everyone responsible, which we could do because they unconditionally surrendered, which they did out of existential terror in the face of a weapon that could completely annihilate their entire nation without risk to our troops, and which we proved willing enough to use on them.


But thing is they might have not surrendered if the Soviets didn't declare war on them and prepared to invade Japan after defeating thier forces on mainland Asia .

The Bombs may have helped end the war but what most US media leaves out is that the Japanese surrendered 6 days after the bombs were dropped because the Soviet Union was about to Invade with roughly 1,500,000 Troops.


The emperor surrendered because of the bombs, his cabinet would have loved for Russia to invade. Like I said they were looking for a glorious death and the ability to inflict so much damage that they could force the allies to accept their conditions of surrender. The Japanese should be grateful it never came to that.

I was also using the infected blankets and trail of tears as examples that most people know about. I also listed other nasty actions. Much of the damage was done originally by filthy European plague bearers. The English being famous for bathing twice in a lifetime once at birth and once at death, and the french being famous for bathing in perfume!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/05/26 03:31:04


"I don't have principles, and I consider any comment otherwise to be both threatening and insulting" - Dogma

"No, sorry, synonymous does not mean same".-Dogma

"If I say "I will hug you" I am threatening you" -Dogma 
   
Made in au
Legendary Dogfighter




Australia

Andrew1975 wrote:
Yak9UT wrote:
Sir Pseudonymous wrote:
LordofHats wrote:The goal of the Trail of Tears was not to massacre the Native American tribes involved. Just to move them. It's an ethnocide, not a genocide. Really, the relationship between the United States government and Native Americans is more one of a lack of carry for their well being than one desiring their extermination. Not to suggest some American's wouldn't have minded exterminating them Jackson *cough* *cough* who seems relevant to this wouldn't have minded but he never enact policy to kill them, just relocate them and generally no give a damn about their well being. Genocide is deliberate. Trail of Tears is not the Holocaust and was not a genocide. It was an Ethnocide.

As I recall, the specific atrocity of the Trail of Tears was that it was committed on culturally assimilated natives, who could no longer justly be called native tribesmen. They weren't primitive horticulturalists and nomads who were wasting usable land and posing a threat as a separate sovereign entity, but semi-affluent landowners who considered themselves part of America, and who lived exactly as any other Americans did. It would be like evicting everyone in Louisiana and marching them off to Mexico so their possessions could be given to wealthy Texans or something.

But, trying to lay blame on a more recent America for these things is fallacious. Sort of like if one were to blame the modern french for Napoleon's imperialism, or modern Russia for Stalin's purges. A not-insignificant percentage of Americans by WWII were descended from people who had yet to immigrate when all this was going on, meaning there's an even greater disparity between them than there is in the European examples. Likewise, one cannot blame modern Japan for things like the Rape of Nanking, mostly because we personally destroyed everyone responsible, which we could do because they unconditionally surrendered, which they did out of existential terror in the face of a weapon that could completely annihilate their entire nation without risk to our troops, and which we proved willing enough to use on them.


But thing is they might have not surrendered if the Soviets didn't declare war on them and prepared to invade Japan after defeating thier forces on mainland Asia .

The Bombs may have helped end the war but what most US media leaves out is that the Japanese surrendered 6 days after the bombs were dropped because the Soviet Union was about to Invade with roughly 1,500,000 Troops.


The emperor surrendered because of the bombs, his cabinet would have loved for Russia to invade. Like I said they were looking for a glorious death and the ability to inflict so much damage that they could force the allies to accept their conditions of surrender. The Japanese should be grateful it never came to that.


Thats not intirely true they knew that the Soviets would destroy the Japanese way of life completly the Soviets had already defeated them in China and Mongolia.

The Japnese knew they could hve a better chance surrendering to the Allies then the Soviets.

Elysian Drop Troops 1500pts

Renegades & Heretics 2056pts

 
   
Made in us
Steady Space Marine Vet Sergeant





Believeland, OH

My point is that many of them were looking for a glorious death in battle. One that the US was not going to give them. It would be oblivion by atomic bombs. Many looked forward to a clash of arms with any of the allies at that point to honorably end their suffering.

"I don't have principles, and I consider any comment otherwise to be both threatening and insulting" - Dogma

"No, sorry, synonymous does not mean same".-Dogma

"If I say "I will hug you" I am threatening you" -Dogma 
   
Made in au
Legendary Dogfighter




Australia

The US Goverment as bad as they can be wouldn't wipe out a entire race of people even if they are the enemy.

The Allies really were going for a bluff the whole time.

They knew if they could get the Japanese to Surrender before the Soviets invaded they could insure that Japan would not become a state of the Soviet Union and threaten the US.

The Japanese Military knew they had no chance fighting the Russian's and would mean absolute defeat and destruction of the nation While they knew they could surrender to the Allies and insure they still had a country.

Elysian Drop Troops 1500pts

Renegades & Heretics 2056pts

 
   
Made in us
Steady Space Marine Vet Sergeant





Believeland, OH

Yak9UT wrote:The US Goverment as bad as they can be wouldn't wipe out a entire race of people even if they are the enemy.

The Allies really were going for a bluff the whole time.

They knew if they could get the Japanese to Surrender before the Soviets invaded they could insure that Japan would not become a state of the Soviet Union and threaten the US.

The Japanese Military knew they had no chance fighting the Russian's and would mean absolute defeat and destruction of the nation While they knew they could surrender to the Allies and insure they still had a country.


If you look that up, it was only a concern of the emperor and a few of the higher ups, most of his aids however wanted the blaze of glory. The US knew the Russians would have walked over Japan with little concern for the Japanese or their own casualties. This was not an option the US was going to allow. The bomb was a blessing.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/05/26 03:58:34


"I don't have principles, and I consider any comment otherwise to be both threatening and insulting" - Dogma

"No, sorry, synonymous does not mean same".-Dogma

"If I say "I will hug you" I am threatening you" -Dogma 
   
Made in au
Legendary Dogfighter




Australia

Andrew1975 wrote:
Yak9UT wrote:The US Goverment as bad as they can be wouldn't wipe out a entire race of people even if they are the enemy.

The Allies really were going for a bluff the whole time.

They knew if they could get the Japanese to Surrender before the Soviets invaded they could insure that Japan would not become a state of the Soviet Union and threaten the US.

The Japanese Military knew they had no chance fighting the Russian's and would mean absolute defeat and destruction of the nation While they knew they could surrender to the Allies and insure they still had a country.


If you look that up, it was only a concern of the emperor and a few of the higher ups, most of his aids however wanted the blaze of glory. The US knew the Russians would have walked over Japan with little concern for the Japanese or their own casualties. This was not an option the US was going to allow. The bomb was a blessing.


I'm sure some Japanese Officials would have fought to the death but the fact is the Japanese surrended 6 days after the bombs fell after they found out about the planned soviet invasion of Japan.

Had the Soviets not planned to invade as they did Japan may have never surrended to the Allies and perhaps The Allies would Bomb Japan but they would not destroy an entire race of people and America would have no choose but to invade Japan.

Elysian Drop Troops 1500pts

Renegades & Heretics 2056pts

 
   
Made in us
Steady Space Marine Vet Sergeant





Believeland, OH

I like to think we wouldn't have, no. We also didn't have many more bombs ready for a while. Could have gone back to fire bombing I suppose, which was actually far worse. If the choice was then US invasion or let the Russians have them, I think I have to go with let the Russians have them.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2011/05/26 04:18:15


"I don't have principles, and I consider any comment otherwise to be both threatening and insulting" - Dogma

"No, sorry, synonymous does not mean same".-Dogma

"If I say "I will hug you" I am threatening you" -Dogma 
   
Made in au
Legendary Dogfighter




Australia

Andrew1975 wrote:I like to think we wouldn't have, no. We also didn't have many more bombs ready for a while. If the choice was then US invasion or let the Russians have them, I think I have to go with let the Russians have them.


The Allie command felt it would be unaceptable to allow the Soviets control Japan.

Although they had an alliance with the Soviets they disliked comminisn and hated stalin. they felt if the Soviets gained control to Japan they could potentialnally invade/attack the US and also have stronghold in Asia were they could spread thier regime.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/05/26 04:32:54


Elysian Drop Troops 1500pts

Renegades & Heretics 2056pts

 
   
Made in au
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter






Australia (Recently ravaged by the Hive Fleet Ginger Overlord)

Andrew1975 wrote:
Emperors Faithful, I'm still waiting for that list of atrocities and war crimes that the US has perpetrated besides the above American Indian Holocaust, that somehow approaches the same levels of Germany or Japan. Where is your "in the know" information?


So after listing the atrocities against the American Indians you come back with "That doesn't count"?

And I would say that the indiscriminate bombing of Japan and the use of Nuclear weapons was in fact a war crime. It's been justified by the winning side, just in the same way that the Holocaust would have been somehow justified if the Germans had won.


No you can't use the American Indians, that wasn't America, I've explained that. You also can't use the nuke because that is the topic currently being debated. The Dude said and you seamed to agree that

"Every so called ' evil ' you can show, someone can show you something worse the US has done or another country has done."


I personally don't agree with this statement. The Holocaust conducted by Nazi Germany overshadows anything the Allies or Japan had done, or have done since.

You should also note that Japan didn't actively encourage or order the Rape of Nanking, just as the US did not actively encourage (though there is evidence it was ordered) the massacre of My Lai.
But just as I see no moral superiority in Japan over the Allies in their conduct, nor do I see why the US should claim any sort of moral high ground here.

I'm just looking for that list. The list of atrocities that shows that America was Evil and did what it did because it has some sort of track record of being the worlds evil country.

I love how people that are defending the Japanese, seam to think that wiping American Indians of the face of the planet was just an inconsiderate accident. "Opps sorry guys, didn't mean to kill you all!" Really was an Indian reservation that different from an interment camp? At least Japanese Americans got a chance to live normally first and were reintegrated afterword. I mean at least Imperial Japan asked for it, the American Indians were just here first!


What are you talking about? I hardly think the rounding up and destruction of the Native American's as a people was an accident.


Yeah, White Americans certainly weren't the first to go about killing Native Americans. But they were certainly the first to break the peace treaties set up by the French and British in the interests of expansion on the level of something we've never seen before.


Really, Americans in name only, I bet most of those people breaking the treaties were born Europeans or at most first generation Americans. Hardly long enough to have formed a separate American identity.


This occured after the War of Independance. And the continued persecution continued long after that.

Don't get me wrong, the Australian treatment of Aboriginals mirrors the US treatment of Native Americans darkly. True, the Aboriginals were less populous given the nature of their territories, and the Lost Generation may have even been conducted with the best of intentions (firm in the belief that the Indigenous parents could not manage children properly), but that's a pale excuse. And even though the worst of this persecution occured before Australia became independant, I would never claim it was not Australia's crime.

Smacks wrote:
After the game, pack up all your miniatures, then slap the guy next to you on the ass and say.

"Good game guys, now lets hit the showers"
 
   
Made in us
Steady Space Marine Vet Sergeant





Believeland, OH

Neither the US or it's allies were part of the holocaust though. The Germans killed many many people, it would be hard I think to say who killed more between the two. Japan may not have officially sanctioned Nanking, but when you look at the number of atrocities that the Japanese committed it can be assumed that the sanction was implicit if not complicit. If people are gonna hold the US responsible every time a bomb accidentally hits a hut in Afghanistan or Iraq, then certainly the Japanese are guilty of letting their soldiers run amok. Your soldiers don't just kill hundreds of thousands of people on a whim!

As allied mass murderers go I think Uncle Joe wins, but he was a needed ally and those were technically his own people (filthy Georgian) so we let him get away with it. Hell we owe Poland an apology before I feel sorry for the Japanese!

As armies go few if any can compete with the full scale destruction, slaughter and rape that accompanied the Japanese!

People keep bringing up us war records and atrocities, I just don't see it. My lai (500) is like a footnote compared to nanking, (100's of K) even nanking is a footnote to the wholesale slaughter of the Chinese (millions) that the Japanese were doing. The comparison is silly

What are you talking about? I hardly think the rounding up and destruction of the Native American's as a people was an accident.

Read the thread, others equated it to a case of callous indifference or neglect. It's not all about you ya know!

This occured after the War of Independance. And the continued persecution continued long after that.


Sure it did, but that doesn't change that most of these people were still at most first generation if not foreign born.

This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2011/05/26 05:11:40


"I don't have principles, and I consider any comment otherwise to be both threatening and insulting" - Dogma

"No, sorry, synonymous does not mean same".-Dogma

"If I say "I will hug you" I am threatening you" -Dogma 
   
Made in au
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter






Australia (Recently ravaged by the Hive Fleet Ginger Overlord)

Andrew1975 wrote:Neither the US or it's allies were part of the holocaust though. The Germans killed many many people, it would be hard I think to say who killed more between the two.


I never suggested in the slightest that they were. Where did you pick that up in my post?

Japan may not have officially sanctioned Nanking, but when you look at the number of atrocities that the Japanese committed it can be assumed that the sanction was implicit if not complicit. As mass murderers go I think Uncle Joe wins, but he was an ally and those were technically his own people (filthy Georgian) so we let him get away with it.

As armies go few if any can compete with the full scale destruction, slaughter and rape that accompanied the Japanese!


Hardly, the US beats Japan in destruction and slaughter with the bombing of Japan.

People keep bringing up us war records and atrocities, I just don't see it. My lai (500)is like a footnote compares to nanking, (100's of K)even nanking is a footnote to the wholesale slaughter of the Chinese that the Japanese were doing. The comparison is silly


I didn't compare My Lai to Nanking as a competition, merely examples. If I really wanted to compare Nanking to something the Allies did I would talk about occupied Japan and the encouragement (and in some cases co-ercion) of prostitution.

What are you talking about? I hardly think the rounding up and destruction of the Native American's as a people was an accident.

Read the thread, others equated it to a case of callous indifference or neglect. It's not all about you ya know!


My mistake, but please make it clear who you are addressing, as that statement seemed to lump me in with it.

This occured after the War of Independance. And the continued persecution continued long after that.


Sure it did, but that doesn't change that most of these people were still at most first generation if not foreign born.


The ones who initially broke the treaty? Or the ones who did far more as the generations rolled by?

And did you even read the rest of my post?

Smacks wrote:
After the game, pack up all your miniatures, then slap the guy next to you on the ass and say.

"Good game guys, now lets hit the showers"
 
   
Made in us
Steady Space Marine Vet Sergeant





Believeland, OH

I never suggested in the slightest that they were. Where did you pick that up in my post?


"Every so called ' evil ' you can show, someone can show you something worse the US has done or another country has done."
With a statement like that what else was I supposed to think except to imply by comparison that the allies were no angels.? I know it's not your quote, it's the dud's, but you were using it in the tread.

Hardly, the US beats Japan in destruction and slaughter with the bombing of Japan.


What? The Japanes killed more in the rape of Nanking than the US did with both bombs and that is one of thousands of examples of Japanese atrocity!

I didn't compare My Lai to Nanking as a competition, merely examples. If I really wanted to compare Nanking to something the Allies did I would talk about occupied Japan and the encouragement (and in some cases co-ercion) of prostitution.


Yeah, you lost all credibility here. You compare prostitution to rape and murder. You know the Japanese raped over 80k women and children in Nanking alone!


The ones who initially broke the treaty? Or the ones who did far more as the generations rolled by?

And did you even read the rest of my post?


Yeah I read it. Do you know how long it took for America to really have it's own separate Identity instead of a combination of European ideas and mentalities! There were whole regiments of Irish immigrants on both sides of the Civil War. It would be an interesting study to see when America was actually made up mostly of people that had been here for more than two generations much less three or four, hell I'm still only third generation on my dads side. My wife is foreign born!

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2011/05/26 05:42:08


"I don't have principles, and I consider any comment otherwise to be both threatening and insulting" - Dogma

"No, sorry, synonymous does not mean same".-Dogma

"If I say "I will hug you" I am threatening you" -Dogma 
   
Made in au
Legendary Dogfighter




Australia

Emperors Faithful
Hardly, the US beats Japan in destruction and slaughter with the bombing of Japan.


Japan killed many people in China and parts of east Asia estimated at 6,000,000 murdered as well as the POW camps set up that for force labour and for killing many enemy soldiers and civilans.

Much more then what US did to the Japanese with the nukes.


This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/05/26 05:44:21


Elysian Drop Troops 1500pts

Renegades & Heretics 2056pts

 
   
Made in au
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter






Australia (Recently ravaged by the Hive Fleet Ginger Overlord)

Andrew1975 wrote:
I never suggested in the slightest that they were. Where did you pick that up in my post?


"Every so called ' evil ' you can show, someone can show you something worse the US has done or another country has done."
With a statement like that what else was I supposed to think? I know it's not your quote, it's the dud's, but you were using it in the tread.


Yeah, we've been over this. That wasn't me. And you simply assumed that I completely agreed with him.

Hardly, the US beats Japan in destruction and slaughter with the bombing of Japan.


What? The Japanes killed more in the rape of Nanking than the US did with both bombs and that is one of thousands of examples of Japanese atrocity!


Wiki, not the most reliable source, shows a scattering of estimates on civilian casualties. Anywhere between 300,000 (from air attacks) to 3.6 million in total.
The military casualties are really horrendous, with some estimates approaching 20 million. A great part of this may have been due to the widespread conscription in China.

I didn't compare My Lai to Nanking as a competition, merely examples. If I really wanted to compare Nanking to something the Allies did I would talk about occupied Japan and the encouragement (and in some cases co-ercion) of prostitution.


Yeah, you lost all credibility here. You compare prostitution to rape and murder. You know the Japanese raped over 80k women and children in Nanking alone!


80K? That's a fair bit bigger than the other numbers I've heard.

But we need to get this straight, you do know that prostitution is part of sex trafficking, right? And that some/a lot of those women really didn't want to be trafficked? And wouldn't have if the US didn't occupy Japan.


The ones who initially broke the treaty? Or the ones who did far more as the generations rolled by?

And did you even read the rest of my post?


Yeah I read it. Do you know how long it took for America to really have it's own separate Identity instead of a combination of European ideas and mentalities! There were whole regiments of Irish immigrants on both sides of the Civil War. It would be an interesting study to see when America was actually made up mostly of people that had been here for more than two generations much less three or four, hell I'm still only third generation on my dads side.


So you blame Europe for the poor treatment of the Native Americans, even though France and Britain treated them with far more humanity than the US ever did? After all, Britain, not the US, abolished slavery. Was it the American Identity that decided to keep on going with slavery? Or this wierd European mentality that you keep blaming?

Smacks wrote:
After the game, pack up all your miniatures, then slap the guy next to you on the ass and say.

"Good game guys, now lets hit the showers"
 
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: