Iran

Never claimed that I was virtuous. I honestly don't want to discuss anything with you. You're quite a prick.

You want me to address a coup that never happened.....uh. Alright then. The unsuccessful coup that never happened definitely proves your point we should've dropped a second nuke. You got me bro. Argument won. Im thrilled for you 😁

An unsuccessful coup obviously happened. But why did it happen? Because after two nuclear bombs, many of the Japanese leaders still fully opposed surrender.

A point you’re going out of your way to ignore.

How can you know this and still boldly claim you believe they would have surrendered without either bomb being dropped?
 
I lived in Okinawa for a little over a year. From 8 months to 1.5 years. From Westover to Okinawa back to Westover. Dad retired a couple of years later and we came South to Arnold, where he worked as a civilian helping to develop the ICBMs in the late 1960s
I read a soldier’s story called “With the Old Breed” that detailed the experiences of a Marine in the island battles, especially Okinawa. Amazing what people can endure.
 
An unsuccessful coup obviously happened. But why did it happen? Because after two nuclear bombs, many of the Japanese leaders still fully opposed surrender.

A point you’re going out of your way to ignore.

How can you know this and still boldly claim you believe they would has surrendered without either bomb being dropped?
Just because they opposed a full surrender doesn't mean they were inherently hostile or still willing to fight. Their culture was based on honor. Soldiers in WW2 were still committing seppuku. To surrender was the ultimate embarrassment to them. They were defeated already and very little time to even register what happened before we hit them a second time. Fwiw I stated I don't like the first bomb but the second was completely unnecessary.

Take it up with Eisenhower "I was against it on two counts. First, the Japanese were ready to surrender, and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing. Second, I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon."

"Japan was at that very moment seeking some way to surrender with minimum loss of face, and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing."

So in the middle of it the top general in our Army disagreed. This isn't some insane take like you act like it is.

Imo it was a show of force for the beginning of the Cold War against the Soviets. And retaliation for Pearl Harbor. We were never invading Japan, because there was no need to. They would've surrendered either way with a much smaller show of force or even a hint at a land invasion.

Now I'm done discussing. Have a good one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
Because right after our initial strikes, they offered help and Donald said, "we don't need you now". Plus, they were never consulted before our preemptive strikes. You don't undertake a massive strike on Iran without consulting your closest allies. Trump's team on the initial strikes were a bunch of know nothing amateurs. Sorry, but that's a fact
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
Just because they opposed a full surrender doesn't mean they were inherently hostile or still willing to fight. Their culture was based on honor.

So we agree they were opposed to surrender. As far as honor, they committed worse atrocities than the Germans.
Soldiers in WW2 were still committing seppuku. To surrender was the ultimate embarrassment to them.

Thanks for making my argument.

They were defeated already and very little time to even register what happened before we hit them a second time.

They were defeated on multiple battle fields too and still fought to the last man. Like you said, their culture fully opposed surrender and saw it as an open embarrassment.
Fwiw I stated I don't like the first bomb but the second was completely unnecessary.

No you didn’t.

Agreed, and I'm of the opinion at least Nagasaki was unwarranted. Personally I think both were. But that enrages people for some reason.

You stated both were unnecessary.

Take it up with Eisenhower "I was against it on two counts. First, the Japanese were ready to surrender, and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing. Second, I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon."

Good him. That doesn’t mean he was right.
"Japan was at that very moment seeking some way to surrender with minimum loss of face, and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing."

So in the middle of it the top general in our Army disagreed. This isn't some insane take like you act like it is.

To be clear you went even further than him and opposed both.

Imo it was a show of force for the beginning of the Cold War against the Soviets. And retaliation for Pearl Harbor. We were never invading Japan, because there was no need to. They would've surrendered either way with a much smaller show of force or even a hint at a land invasion.

Weird because you just spent a lot of time telling me how much they opposed surrender and like I’ve pointed out even after two bombs when their leadership found out they were surrendering, they opposed it so fiercely they attempted a coup.
Now I'm done discussing. Have a good one.

It took you long enough to finally discuss it. Next time spare us all the fake virtue routine.
 
Or negotiating a deal without inheriting hundreds of miilions of dollars...
Or negotiating a deal without inheriting hundreds of miilions of dollars...
While true in his case, that has nothing to do with understanding the difference between negotiating in a manner with only two possible outcomes(distributive) and negotiating with more than two possible outcomes (integrated)
 
Because right after our initial strikes, they offered help and Donald said, "we don't need you now". Plus, they were never consulted before our preemptive strikes. You don't undertake a massive strike on Iran without consulting your closest allies. Trump's team on the initial strikes were a bunch of know nothing amateurs. Sorry, but that's a fact
Ah, the old “take the ball and go home” approach. That is helpful.

Do you think we should be spending our money so the British can have cheaper petrol?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RavinDave

Advertisement



Back
Top