Per said:
"Pacific War" is almost as bad a pun as "Iraqi Freedom".
Hiroshima bomber dead
- Thread starter Chertan
- Start date
"Pacific War" is almost as bad a pun as "Iraqi Freedom".
S
Stag
Guest
China: 3.8 million soldiers killed, 15 million civilians killed
China alone, bro. That's fucked up.
China alone, bro. That's fucked up.
Stag said:
Yes, it was necessary. A monstrous display of power. I don't know if i could go on, knowing that i killed 100,000 people.
War is a terrible thing. :/
S
Stag
Guest
15 million people killed, probably raped and tortured as well? I think I would feel ok.
Obviously this wasn't a military target, but...Those people were fucked up.
Obviously this wasn't a military target, but...Those people were fucked up.
Carib FMJ
Nuka-Cola Chaser
IT was war. Hard choices are made. It isn't romantic and it isn't always about beating the bad guys...
What was done had to be done and history told the rest of the story.
What was done had to be done and history told the rest of the story.
S
Stag
Guest
Carib told the rest of the story.
Stag said:
Yeah, 15 million killed among the political mosaic and power struggle between Japanese, Chinese Comminists, Chinese Nationalist, Mongolians, Manchurians, and God knows who else. It's not difficult to up the death toll when everybody is everybody else's enemy.
And no, they were not "fucked up" there. Well, at least not until the bomb dropped.
I recommend further reading about the military seizing power in Japan, the sinking of Panay and the reactions it evoked in Japan itself etc. What is fucked up is that this has some of those shades of grey that have become so wildly popular lately.
EDIT: Also, Stag is banned for 7 seconds for edition his profile in a misleading manner
S
Stag
Guest
I'm not implying anything racist, but sort of adding to what has been said previously; the Japanese government fucked its people up.
Madbringer said:
He probably felt no worse then the aircrews who firebombed other Japanese cities to the ground. I've watched interviews with him and he talked about it like it was any other pilot talking about their bombing missions.
If you want to spit on someone, spit on Churchill for ordering firebombing Dresden. At least the atomic bomb targets had a reason.
Stag said:
Well when you teach every student that their heritage is that of the samurai and that you must all follow the samurai code for about FORTY YEARS yeah they get a little delusional about themselves.
Kinda like Americans in some ways. Kinda like Islamic fascists too. Welcome to this screwed up world where no one is ever totally right but so many believe they are.
S
Stag
Guest
But...I'm Stag....
Anyway, I have to disagree with you strongly, on the subject of American brainwashing. If anything, Americans are brainwashed into hating the government.
Anyway, I have to disagree with you strongly, on the subject of American brainwashing. If anything, Americans are brainwashed into hating the government.
Ah-Teen said:
Oh yeah, because we bombed Dresden for the fun of it. We used to enjoy sending our aircraft (and incidentally US aircraft as well) over enemy territory for purposeless bombing missions. Yeah, no reason at all for bombing Dresden. Pretty spur of the moment thing.
Cricket, foxhunting and napalm carpetbombing are the original British pastimes.
S
Stag
Guest
Churchill was in a wheelchair, asshole.
Quaffing whisky and chewing cigars are the original British pastimes.
The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb
Hiroshima in History and Memory
Hiroshima: Why America Dropped the Atomic Bomb
Etc. and so on.
Of course, there are many cries of "revisionist history," but that's a rather absurd term. History is and should be subject to revision as new evidence comes to light. There's also the point that we're imposing modern-day standards to a historical period, but I never agreed with the argument that there's something somehow "wrong" about that.
Not that every single point of contention brought up by every author is totally valid, but the three main points of 1) a good deal (if not the vast majority) of the military brass believed that an invasion of Japan would not be necessary and were against the use of the bomb, 2) Japan was showing definite signs of wanting to surrender with the sole conditional of preserving the station of the Emperor months before the first bomb was dropped, and 3) the desire to intimidate the Soviet Union was a factor in the decision, are supported by a number of historians.
Hiroshima in History and Memory
Hiroshima: Why America Dropped the Atomic Bomb
Etc. and so on.
Of course, there are many cries of "revisionist history," but that's a rather absurd term. History is and should be subject to revision as new evidence comes to light. There's also the point that we're imposing modern-day standards to a historical period, but I never agreed with the argument that there's something somehow "wrong" about that.
Not that every single point of contention brought up by every author is totally valid, but the three main points of 1) a good deal (if not the vast majority) of the military brass believed that an invasion of Japan would not be necessary and were against the use of the bomb, 2) Japan was showing definite signs of wanting to surrender with the sole conditional of preserving the station of the Emperor months before the first bomb was dropped, and 3) the desire to intimidate the Soviet Union was a factor in the decision, are supported by a number of historians.