T Nation

The Bomb Sends a Message to the World - Untold History

My God. Who knew there were so many pacifists in the U.S. military?

http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=767&Itemid=74&jumival=9892

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
My God. Who knew there were so many pacifists in the U.S. military?

“Peter Kuznick (co-author with Oliver Stone (LOL!) of The Untold History of the Unites States): The atomic bomb did not end the war with Japan, it was a threat to the Soviet Union that the US would dominate the post-war world -”

Hmmm, maybe it performed both functions? This post is pointless. Anyone who has taken a survey level history course should know this.

“So one of the themes you take up in this series is the issue of was the nuclear attack on Japan necessary, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And the thesis of the book essentially is that it wasn’t. And it seems to me it’s such a critical question, because if you can accept that using weapons of mass destruction is legitimate and was acceptable then, then why can’t you accept anything after that?”

The casualty predictions for Operation Downfall (the proposed amphibious invasion of Japan) ran into the millions for Allied casualties and several times that number for total Japanese casualties. The atomic bomb saved far more lives than those it took in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Your independent news source is a fucking joke.

So are you saying that the “bought and paid for” news sources like Fox and CNN are NOT
‘fucking jokes’ compared to the indies, or are they ALL full of shit?

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

[quote]Legionary wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
My God. Who knew there were so many pacifists in the U.S. military?

“Peter Kuznick (co-author with Oliver Stone (LOL!) of The Untold History of the Unites States): The atomic bomb did not end the war with Japan, it was a threat to the Soviet Union that the US would dominate the post-war world -”

Hmmm, maybe it performed both functions? This post is pointless. Anyone who has taken a survey level history course should know this.

“So one of the themes you take up in this series is the issue of was the nuclear attack on Japan necessary, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And the thesis of the book essentially is that it wasn’t. And it seems to me it’s such a critical question, because if you can accept that using weapons of mass destruction is legitimate and was acceptable then, then why can’t you accept anything after that?”

The casualty predictions for Operation Downfall (the proposed amphibious invasion of Japan) ran into the millions for Allied casualties and several times that number for total Japanese casualties. The atomic bomb saved far more lives than those it took in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Your independent news source is a fucking joke.[/quote]

Basically this.

You have to remember that Roosevlet may have wanted this, I believe him to have wanted it a lot, but he did NOT start it.

As a nation state you may get to start a war whenever you feel like it, but you do not get a say in how and when it ends if you dont end it yourself.

The US was under no obligation to risk the lifes of American soldiers ti save Japanese civilians and if that bomb sent a message we might have it to thank for that the SU never tried to test NATO for realz.

What if goes both ways.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Legionary wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
My God. Who knew there were so many pacifists in the U.S. military?

“Peter Kuznick (co-author with Oliver Stone (LOL!) of The Untold History of the Unites States): The atomic bomb did not end the war with Japan, it was a threat to the Soviet Union that the US would dominate the post-war world -”

Hmmm, maybe it performed both functions? This post is pointless. Anyone who has taken a survey level history course should know this.

“So one of the themes you take up in this series is the issue of was the nuclear attack on Japan necessary, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And the thesis of the book essentially is that it wasn’t. And it seems to me it’s such a critical question, because if you can accept that using weapons of mass destruction is legitimate and was acceptable then, then why can’t you accept anything after that?”

The casualty predictions for Operation Downfall (the proposed amphibious invasion of Japan) ran into the millions for Allied casualties and several times that number for total Japanese casualties. The atomic bomb saved far more lives than those it took in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Your independent news source is a fucking joke.[/quote]

Basically this.

As a nation state you may get to start a war whenever you feel like it, but you do not get a say in how and when it ends if you dont end it yourself.

The US was under no obligation to risk the lifes of American soldiers to save Japanese civilians.

What if goes both ways. [/quote]

Totally.

Why should 1 million U.S. soldiers die to end a war they did not start?

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Legionary wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
My God. Who knew there were so many pacifists in the U.S. military?

“Peter Kuznick (co-author with Oliver Stone (LOL!) of The Untold History of the Unites States): The atomic bomb did not end the war with Japan, it was a threat to the Soviet Union that the US would dominate the post-war world -”

Hmmm, maybe it performed both functions? This post is pointless. Anyone who has taken a survey level history course should know this.

“So one of the themes you take up in this series is the issue of was the nuclear attack on Japan necessary, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And the thesis of the book essentially is that it wasn’t. And it seems to me it’s such a critical question, because if you can accept that using weapons of mass destruction is legitimate and was acceptable then, then why can’t you accept anything after that?”

The casualty predictions for Operation Downfall (the proposed amphibious invasion of Japan) ran into the millions for Allied casualties and several times that number for total Japanese casualties. The atomic bomb saved far more lives than those it took in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Your independent news source is a fucking joke.[/quote]

Basically this.

As a nation state you may get to start a war whenever you feel like it, but you do not get a say in how and when it ends if you dont end it yourself.

The US was under no obligation to risk the lifes of American soldiers to save Japanese civilians.

What if goes both ways. [/quote]

Totally.

Why should 1 million U.S. soldiers die to end a war they did not start?[/quote]

I agree.

But there are many very respected historians–I don’t count Stone and his Sovietophile buddy among them, mind you–who believe that the choice was not Manichean.

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Legionary wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
My God. Who knew there were so many pacifists in the U.S. military?

“Peter Kuznick (co-author with Oliver Stone (LOL!) of The Untold History of the Unites States): The atomic bomb did not end the war with Japan, it was a threat to the Soviet Union that the US would dominate the post-war world -”

Hmmm, maybe it performed both functions? This post is pointless. Anyone who has taken a survey level history course should know this.

“So one of the themes you take up in this series is the issue of was the nuclear attack on Japan necessary, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And the thesis of the book essentially is that it wasn’t. And it seems to me it’s such a critical question, because if you can accept that using weapons of mass destruction is legitimate and was acceptable then, then why can’t you accept anything after that?”

The casualty predictions for Operation Downfall (the proposed amphibious invasion of Japan) ran into the millions for Allied casualties and several times that number for total Japanese casualties. The atomic bomb saved far more lives than those it took in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Your independent news source is a fucking joke.[/quote]

Basically this.

As a nation state you may get to start a war whenever you feel like it, but you do not get a say in how and when it ends if you dont end it yourself.

The US was under no obligation to risk the lifes of American soldiers to save Japanese civilians.

What if goes both ways. [/quote]

Totally.

Why should 1 million U.S. soldiers die to end a war they did not start?[/quote]

I agree.

But there are many very respected historians–I don’t count Stone and his Sovietophile buddy among them, mind you–who believe that the choice was not Manichean. [/quote]

So they believe that the war ending was a side effect of giving the Russians the finger?

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

So they believe that the war ending was a side effect of giving the Russians the finger?[/quote]

No, what I mean is that it is generally believed that neither the bomb nor an American invasion were necessary to bring about the end of the war.

Dropped it twice for good measure I always thought.

Kinda a little “Hey SU you wanna fuck with us, well look what we can do”

[quote]Karado wrote:
So are you saying that the “bought and paid for” news sources like Fox and CNN are NOT
‘fucking jokes’ compared to the indies, or are they ALL full of shit?[/quote]

Shit like this site that are funded by Ford & McCarther, and other various Soros monkey money are far from independant.

[quote]Karado wrote:
So are you saying that the “bought and paid for” news sources like Fox and CNN are NOT
‘fucking jokes’ compared to the indies, or are they ALL full of shit?[/quote]
Yes basically. The major news sources are nothing but corporations who are concerned with their bottom line above all else. Like Biotest they saw a need to make or report something real.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Karado wrote:
So are you saying that the “bought and paid for” news sources like Fox and CNN are NOT
‘fucking jokes’ compared to the indies, or are they ALL full of shit?[/quote]

Shit like this site that are funded by Ford & McCarther, and other various Soros monkey money are far from independant.[/quote]

Really, so where is the proof that these funders are skewing this news organizations?

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
My God. Who knew there were so many pacifists in the U.S. military?

My God. Who knew there were still people around foolish enough to believe this kind of rubbish.[/quote]

My God the only fools here are people who think like you.

[quote]Legionary wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
My God. Who knew there were so many pacifists in the U.S. military?

“Peter Kuznick (co-author with Oliver Stone (LOL!) of The Untold History of the Unites States): The atomic bomb did not end the war with Japan, it was a threat to the Soviet Union that the US would dominate the post-war world -”

Hmmm, maybe it performed both functions? This post is pointless. Anyone who has taken a survey level history course should know this.

“So one of the themes you take up in this series is the issue of was the nuclear attack on Japan necessary, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And the thesis of the book essentially is that it wasn’t. And it seems to me it’s such a critical question, because if you can accept that using weapons of mass destruction is legitimate and was acceptable then, then why can’t you accept anything after that?”

The casualty predictions for Operation Downfall (the proposed amphibious invasion of Japan) ran into the millions for Allied casualties and several times that number for total Japanese casualties. The atomic bomb saved far more lives than those it took in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Your independent news source is a fucking joke.[/quote]

Too bad a number of generals and Admirals didn’t agree with you,

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Karado wrote:
So are you saying that the “bought and paid for” news sources like Fox and CNN are NOT
‘fucking jokes’ compared to the indies, or are they ALL full of shit?[/quote]

Shit like this site that are funded by Ford & McCarther, and other various Soros monkey money are far from independant.[/quote]

Really, so where is the proof that these funders are skewing this news organizations?[/quote]

lol.

just lol.

Zep you just need to stop. You are more full of crap than your avatars butt. You have 0 credibility on this site for any topic. Why everyone keeps talking about your threads is beyond me.

[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Zep you just need to stop. You are more full of crap than your avatars butt. You have 0 credibility on this site for any topic. Why everyone keeps talking about your threads is beyond me.[/quote]

Close minded people like you are unwelcome anywhere.

By the way Zep you should take a bow. You are the very first person I have put on Ignore. You lack of intellect is mind boggling.