This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Dropping "The Bomb" On Hiroshima And Nagasaki Was Never Justified
Submitted by Naji Dahi via TheAntiMedia.org,
August 6th and 9th of 2015 mark the 70th anniversary of the U.S. dropping two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This was the first and only time a state used a nuclear device on cities (or civilians) of another state. Some conservative estimates put the immediate death toll of the two bombs at 200,000 people. This is more than the total number of American soldiers killed in the Pacific front of World War II.
Since the bombs were dropped, the U.S. government, U.S. high school history texts, and the American public have asserted that dropping the bombs was necessary. According to one review of American textbooks by Satoshi Fujita, an assistant professor of U.S. modern history at Meiji University,
“…most of the textbooks published by the early 1980s carried the U.S. government’s official view that the nuclear attacks allowed the U.S. troops to avert the invasion of Japan’s mainland and minimize American casualties, thus contributing to an early conclusion of the war.”
American politicians have continued to espouse this view. Primary among them was Harry S. Truman, the one-term president responsible for making the decision to drop the bombs in August of 1945. In his 1955 memoirs, Truman claimed the bombs saved half a million American lives. Truman insisted he felt no remorse and bragged that “he never lost any sleep over that decision,” while simultaneously referring to the Japanese as “savages, ruthless, merciless, and fanatic.” By 1991, George H.W. Bush claimed dropping the bombs saved millions of American lives. Historian Peter Kuznick sums up the ever-increasing number of American lives saved due to these actions:
“…from the War Department’s 1945 prediction of 46,000 dead to Truman’s 1955 insistence that General George Marshall feared losing a half million American lives to Stimson’s 1947 claim of over 1,000,000 casualties to George H.W. Bush’s 1991 defense of Truman’s ‘tough calculating decision, [which] spared millions of American lives,’[11] to the 1995 estimate of a crew member on Bock’s Car, the plane that bombed Nagasaki, who asserted that the bombing saved six million lives—one million Americans and five million Japanese.”
Twenty years ago (the 50th anniversary of the bombings) when the Smithsonian Museum tried to create a thought-provoking display about Enola Gay (the plane that dropped the first bomb on Hiroshima), the Senate threw a temper tantrum and passed a resolution condemning the move. The resolution stated that
“…the Enola Gay during World War II was momentous in helping to bring World War II to a merciful end, which resulted in saving the lives of Americans and Japanese.”
Of course, none of these figures about saved American lives are true. When President Truman was contemplating dropping the bomb, he consulted a panel of experts on the number of American soldiers that would be killed if the U.S. launched an invasion of the two main Japanese islands. According to historian Christian Appy,
“[Truman] did…ask a panel of military experts to offer an estimate of how many Americans might be killed if the United States launched the two major invasions of the Japanese home islands…Their figure: 40,000 – far below the half-million he would cite after the war. ”[emphasis added]
Americans are socialized to believe that dropping the bombs was necessary to end the war. As recently as January 2015, a Pew poll found that 56% of Americans believed dropping the two atomic devices was justified. Only 34% said it was not justified. This American attitude is understandable given the downplaying of Japanese deaths and the exaggeration of American lives saved in high school history books.
In spite of this public perception, dropping the nuclear bombs was totally unnecessary from a military standpoint. America’s leading generals voiced their concerns before and after the bombs were dropped. General Eisenhower, Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in Western Europe, reacted to the news in a way that contradicts politicians’ narratives:
“During his [Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson] recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives ,” he said. [emphasis added]
General Douglas MacArthur, Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in the Pacific, was not even consulted about the use of the bomb. He was only notified two days before the first bomb was dropped. When he was informed he thought “‘…it was completely unnecessary from a military point of view.’ MacArthur said that the war might ‘end sooner than some think.’ The Japanese were ‘already beaten.’”
Tough, cigar-smoking “hawk,” General Curtis LeMay—who was responsible for the firebombing of Japanese cities—was also disappointed with the decision to drop the bomb. In an exchange with reporters he said,
“The war would have been over in two weeks without the Russians entering and without the atomic bomb. [emphasis added]”
“You mean that, sir? Without the Russians and the atomic bomb?” one journalist asked.
“The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all,” LeMay replied.
Admiral Chester Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet, sent out the following public statement: “The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military standpoint, in the defeat of Japan [emphasis added].”
While Eisenhower, MacArthur, LeMay, and Nimitz believed the dropping of the bombs to be unnecessary, Chief of Staff Admiral William D. Leahy went even further, insisting that even the contemplated invasion of Japan was unnecessary to end the war. He said,
“I was unable to see any justification…for an invasion of an already thoroughly defeated Japan. My conclusion, with which the naval representatives agreed, was that America’s least expensive course of action was to continue to intensify the air and sea blockade…I believe that a completely blockaded Japan would then fall by its own weight. [emphasis added]”
At the conclusion of the war in the Pacific, President Truman appointed a panel of 1000 experts to study the conflict. One third of the experts were civilians and two-thirds were military. The panel issued its report, entitled “United States Strategic Bombing Survey”—a 108 volume publication on the Pacific front. The survey makes the following damning conclusion about the necessity of dropping the the atomic bombs and invading Japan:
“Nevertheless, it seems clear that, even without the atomic bombing attacks, air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion. Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey’s opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945,…Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated. [emphasis added]”
Even the Japanese leaders knew they were defeated. They were even secretly willing to negotiate an unconditional surrender. According to the survey, there was
“…a plan to send Prince Konoye to Moscow as a special emissary with instructions from the cabinet to negotiate for peace on terms less than unconditional surrender, but with private instructions from the Emperor to secure peace at any price.”
If dropping the bombs was not necessary, and if Japan was even willing to contemplate an unconditional surrender, then why were the bombs dropped at all? One reason referenced by several historians was to project American power against the future enemy in the Cold War, the U.S.S.R. As the Christian Science Monitor noted in 1992,
“Gregg Herken…observes…that ‘responsible traditional as well as revisionist accounts of the decision to drop the bomb now recognize that the act had behind…’a possible diplomatic advantage concerning Russia.’ Yale Prof. Gaddis Smith writes: ‘It has been demonstrated that the decision to bomb Japan was centrally connected to Truman’s confrontational approach to the Soviet Union.’”[emphasis added]
Secondly, there was a rather large incentive to use the bomb—to test its effectiveness. On that subject, the most succinct quote comes from Admiral William F. Halsey, Jr., Commander U.S. Third Fleet. He said, “[The scientists] had this toy and they wanted to try it out, so they dropped it. . . . It killed a lot of Japs, but the Japs had put out a lot of peace feelers through Russia long before.”
According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the Manhattan Project (the project to build the bomb) cost the U.S. an estimated $1,889,604,000 (in 1945 dollars) through December 31, 1945. That comes out to $25,051,739,964.00 in today’s dollars. The Center goes on to add:
“Weapons were created to be used. By 1945, the bombing of civilians was already an established practice. In fact, the earlier U.S. firebombing campaign of Japan, which began in 1944, killed an estimated 315,922 Japanese, a greater number than the estimated deaths attributed to the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.”
From a purely numbers perspective, the detonation of the atomic bombs killed fewer people than the firebombing of the 67 Japanese cities with napalm. The sick logic of war is this: having killed close to 316,000 Japanese people by firebombing cities, killing 100,000-200,000 more is just as justifiable.
It is clear from the recitation of some of the evidence that the dropping of the atomic bombs was not necessary to end the war. It was not necessary to obviate the U.S. invasion of Japan (which in and of itself was not necessary) and it was not necessary for an unconditional surrender.
It is time for the United States to stop believing that the infamous nuclear attacks were justified. On that front, there is some hope. Back in 1991, 63% of Americans believed dropping the bombs was justified, compared to 56% today. Clearly, the numbers are heading in the right direction.
The U.S. government could easily nudge public opinion in the appropriate direction by issuing a public apology for the dropping of these weapons of mass destruction on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The U.S. is capable of doing this. In 1988, the U.S. Senate voted to compensate Japanese Americans for interning them during WWII. In 1993, President Bill Clinton signed a formal letter of apology. The U.S. did the right thing by apologizing to Japanese Americans. It is time to extend this apology to the entire Japanese nation.
»
- 51395 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Total rubbish. The Japanese Army was undefeated in China and largely self-sufficient in China. The Allies had defeated the Japanese Navy and Naval Landing troops on islands, but not on the Asian mainland and certainly not in Japan. Eden after the two bombs were dropped, the Japanese military attempted a coup against the Emperor.
Besides, it's all irrelevant. Were the dead at Hiroshima and Nagasaki any MORE dead than the Japanese who died from incendiary bombing raids on Japan's paper cities? The whole line of argument is bullshit. It denigrates the dead Japanese civilians who died from every other form of bombing raid. One firebomb raid by B-29's on Tokyo killed at least 100,000 civilians. They were definitely very dead. Cry for them, too, not just the dead by atomic bombs.
Wise up people. War is pure horror. During wars civilians always fare worse than the military forces. That's because the civilians are robbed of everything to provide beans, bullets and bandages to the troops so that they can fight.
Only a moron argues that a dead atomic bombed civilian is in any different or more dead than a dead firebombed civilian.
My father was in VB-105, a US Navy heavy anti-submarine patrol bomber squadron, in Fleet Air Wing 7 (VB-103, 105, -110) flying out of RAF Dunkeswell in extreme southern England. After VE-Day he shipped out for China and served there into 1946. Following VJ-Day, the US military authorities allowed the millions of Japanese Army soldiers in China to retain their arms and used them to maintain control of China. The Japanese Army in China was undefeated. They surrendered because Emperor Hirohito ordered them to surrender.
Lets see, 7000 marines take Iwo Jima...a small lump in the south pacific and Truman Told it would take 40,000 dead to ake the mainland? Pffffft...
And where is the analysis of the thinking of the Japanese high command during is time? Oh, there isn't any, what a surprise.
The japanese, by that I mean the people ho were in place to decide whther or not to keep fighting had ZERO intention to surrender. NONE!
Hirohito overrode the after the Nagasaki bomb to end the war.
An invasion would have been a disaster. Saipan and many other experiences made that clear.
Squid
Japan started peace negotiations in early 1945.
http://www.upa.pdx.edu/IMS/currentprojects/TAHv3/Content/PDFs/Operation_...
So then the duplicitous Japs wanted to secure their “East Asian Co-prosperity Sphere” at the tip of a bayonet and then negotiate a “peace treaty” that would guarantee their bloody conquests. To bad for them the rest of the world wasn’t that stupid.
I’ve been to Japan and you’re still a bunch of arrogant racists. You may grudgingly respect Americas but only because we kicked your asses. Maybe you best worry about all that Fukishima radiation your sucking in with every breath. Or maybe better worry about the rest of the world being pissed about your incompetence poisoning the entire Pacific Ocean. Either way, between the radiation and your low birth rates, just as Bull Halsey predicted, the only place Japanese will be spoken will be in Hell.
The Events of Pearl Harbor and WTC have several things in common. You poke a bear long enough and hard enough and eventually it strikes back, so you let it happen, see how they are animals.
They did have to test those bombs, it was a live test. They always were going to drop both types to compare them regardless of what Japan. Even if they did surrender, the US was just going to poke them again.
Dont forget about unit 731 humen experimentation.
This is a silly, partial and biased argument which cherry-picks quotes but signally FAILS to explain what the writer thinks WOULD have happened.
A few points:
- the writer claims that there was no MILITARY point to dropping the bomb. Quite right. Japan was no longer a direct threat to the US. But it was still at war and not surrendering, and needed to be overcome politically. How was that to be achieved?
- the writer claims that blockade or continuous bombing would have brought Japan to surrender, though it hadn't up until then. Maybe. But later he accepts that this would have resulted in many MORE deaths - perhaps ALL of the Japanese nation. And that would be better?
- the writer claims that the Emperor, in particular, was willing to offer unconditional surrender, and put out peace feelers. But he was not in sole and complete charge. The military were. They were planning for total anihilation.
The argument for the bomb has always been that it changed the POLITICAL situation, and enabled the Japanese High Command to accept a surrender without losing so much face, since they were presented with a 'new weapon they had no defence against'. And that this was the ONLY way to save as many lives as possible.
We have the German example to show what would have happened if conventional warfare continued. They fought to the last child, even when they had obviously lost. The death tolls, especially on the Russian side, were horrendous -and that was over a battleground which did not favour guerilla warfare from the defeated nation. Japan was mountainous and heavily wooded - conventional warfare would have never ended.
Several hundred thousand troops in the Pacific in 1945 say fuck you clowns. And as you dumb asses don't notice there has not bee an world war since.
We have been at war almost constantly since WW-2 "ended". You are a tool of government propaganda.
You can't read, You are a moron.
Not only can I read but I can think too. Try it sometime, you might even like it.
Anyone who calls himself a "roadhazard" obviously knows what he is talking about. So, is your real name Bubba or Cooter? Gotta be one or the other and what swamp and/or trailer park exactly did you crawl out of?
So tell us how many WWII vets who fought at Iwo and Okinawa or survived the Battan Death March or took five trips to the beaches at Normandy to bring troops ashore have you learned your history from? Oh that's right it's a big fat ZERO!
Yor learned what you were told was history from some communist history professor who would cry like a baby if he so much as got a bloody nose.
What a spineless troll you are.
We had no business in that war at all. You really want to save American lives and preserve American freedom? Stay home, guard our borders and take care of our own. Let the rest of the world do the same. ALL empires eventually fall, and so will ours. I don't blame our leaders, they are corrupted by power. I blame the ignorance and willingness of those who blindly follow their orders.
It's remarkable and scary to realise that 3 1/2 billion years of evolution has only succeeded in producing a mentality such as yours.
who is this clown? even the Japanese admit that dropping the bombs was a good idea it saved millions of japanese lives
Yeah right. That's just about the dumbest post I've ever seen here.
In war, your job is to kill the enemy. The calculus is not whether it is okay to nuke millions of japanese to save millions of Americans...it is whether it is okay to nuke millions of japanese to save one. Dropping the bombs to save 40,000 Americans was totally justified.
The US military figured the cost would be WAY more than 40K American lives. Try 250K against Jap fanatics.
Actually, no. US government politicians put out those figures as propaganda to justify their use of the bomb. The US military knew a full surrender was imminent and there would be few, if any American lives lost.
Our involvement in that war itself was not justified. The one and only war in which our involvement was justified was our own war for independence from a tyrannical government. If you really want to save American's lives, let them stay home to raise their families and live their lives in peace.
You don't get any smarter by posting more it seems.
Well, I'll admit I'm not very smart but, at least I'm smarter than you.
The US embargo of oil and scrapmetal shipments to Japan was a response to the ongoing Japanese wanton slaughter in China which had been going on since the early '30's. It aided the Chinese and hurt the Japanese without an active commitment of the American Military. The Japs had already sunk the USS Panay in 1937. Attacking neutrals is what the fascists did.
I honor and respect our founding fathers and all veterans of the American revolution. I curse all other American veterans for their disservice to their country and its people.
Then pack your shit and leave for some communist paradise like Zimbabwe. I'll evn help you board the plane.
I love my country regardless of the ignorance of many of its citizens. I'll stay thanks even as we move ever closer to a police state oligarchy thanks in large part to the lock-step military lemmings who seem to feed on government propaganda. In the military, you are not "serving your country", you are serving the political/military/industrial complex, making a few old men rich and/or powerful to the detriment of the rest of us, and yourselves.
"And Barack knows, we're going to have to change our traditions, our history. .." Michelle Obama
Good start by cherry picking pieces of information that support your theory and presenting them, not as a balanced argurment, but as fact. How very progressive of you!
I've seen this, "cherry picking" you speak of before... where was it... oh yes, ZH.
Justified!
Mass murder is never justified.
Black on black violence .... black on white, Korean, Latino, Hindu, Jew, Sihk et al .... murderous tribal fuck tards !
Three and a half BILLION years of "evolution" and what has it come to? "Better" ways to kill one another.
Um... the argument for the bomb is that it was the option which resulted in the least deaths.
If you are faced with a similar problem - do nothing and you'll be forced to kill a million people, or take action and only kill a hundred thousand - do you say " It's bad to take action to kill, so I'll let the million die."?
If so, I suggest that your ethical position needs a rethink...
Actually, no. Japan was on the verge of surrender and the war would have been over, (a war we should never even have been involved in), in a couple of weeks bomb or no bomb. Pearl Harbor was a set-up designed to anger Americans enough to want to enter the war.
As usual, and as always, the American citizen is the patsy who takes it on the chin to benefit the political/military/industrial complex. It's a story as old as history itself.
Japan was on the verge of surrender and the war would have been over, (a war we should never even have been involved in), in a couple of weeks bomb or no bomb..
Now you're just making that up. What about the entire, well fed and equiped army in China? What about the extensive plans the Japanese had made for resistance after invasion? People who claimed that they were just giving up are just pasting their modern prejudices on old history.
So where is your condemnatton of Cylipso Louie calling for an army of 10,000 to slaughter the "white devils"?
And an apology tp the American people for having lied to us for all these many years.
Muslims are a bigger threat than blacks .... just as evil .... and of course .... they are smarter ..... but, who isn't ?
Actually, no. Sadly, Muslims are not very "smart" as a direct result of 1400 years of inbreeding. Nonetheless, we have no need to make enemies of them.
The question isn't surrender but unconditional surrender.
Without the nukes Japan would have surrendered eventually but without invasion it wouldn't have been unconditional and there would have been no occupation.
However the banking mafia needed unconditional surrender and occupation to infect Japan with a central bank.
The military didn't want invasion because of the huge potential casualties (if you extrapolate from the island hopping campiagn).
So the military didn't want to invade but the banking mafia needed occupation so... nukes.
Without the nukes Japan would have surrendered eventually but without invasion it wouldn't have been unconditional and there would have been no occupation.
Er...no. The invasion was planned. So it was going to happen regardless.
Japan was not going to surrender - it was going to fight to the last child. You could have forced an effective surrender by blockade and bombing, which would eventually kill most of the entire nation, making invasion a less dangerous option. Or, once enough people had been killed, you might find that enough warlike ones had been killed for the rest to sue for peace. Though that's unlikely - the warlike ones were most likely to survive to the end.
The point of the bomb was that it strengthened the argument for surrendering now, and thus saved lives.
Don't want to get shot by the police - don't rob that store
Don't want to get a nuke dropped on your ass - don't start a war.
I think we would actually have fewer wars if - when we decided to fight one it was all out - we are going to use every means we have to kill every fucking person in your country - type of thing VS we are going to fuck around playing war games for 10 years -
If you knew when you started a war that it also had the real risk it would mean you are going to get a nuke dropped on you - maybe people would figure out a way to have peace. BTW - I don't just mean USA dropping bombs either - it goes both ways.
The heavily Christian areas were atom bombed. The sadistic firebombing of German civilians was totally unnessary also, the USSA is a sadistic entity, like "big game" hunters. Inflicting pain on the defenseless is a "virtue".
Robt E Lee predicted at the end of the WBTS that the re created "USA: by Lincoln would become an aggessive, intrusive nation - how correct he was.
All wars are banksters' wars.
This is all you need to know about Pearl Harbor, from the NYT 2002:
Japanese Submarine Sunk At Pearl Harbor Is Foundhttp://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/30/us/japanese-submarine-sunk-at-pearl-ha...
"sank the vessel well before the attack"
SO how many times are you going to post this meaningless tripe? What you think they were there sight seeing? The USS Ward was patroling an ao that was a posted exclusionary zone.
World War 1 and 2 were PURELY banksters' wars.
WW1 was the JP Morgan/Carnegie war. In the years leading up to WW1 TOM LAMONT SR. , Morgan's associate, spent several years crisscrossing Europe, buying munitions factories on both sides, meeting with govt. officials, stirring the pot, much the way you see private sector types stirring the pot now on the Ukraine, vis a vis 'russian aggression'.
There's a fabulous little bench in Harvard Yard with a plaque dedicated to Mr. Lamont....
Anyhow, the Rockefellers saw what a 'killing' Morgan made on his sweet little war and determined that they could do better. They financed Hitler AND Lenin in their early days. They bought munitions factories on both sides. They set the stage, then put the pieces in motion, thenjust kick back and watch the immense money roll in with the added benefit of population reduction (see, they hate the hoi polloi). A two-fer....
The US should have obliterated Moscow and the filthy Rus the day after V-E day. A race of murderous barbarians since the 9th Century. There is no "people's" history more strewn with blood and bones than that of the Rus. They're in fact responsible for most of the death and misery of the past 100 years. Stalin's pact w/ Hitler guaranteed WWII via the invasion of Poland. Time to call out the PutinPutzes that populate this web site. Most of the revisionist posters regarding this article are PutinHasbraTrinas working for the PunyPutin Gov't.
Orchid-ism describes the typical Russian Man, most of Russia's minimal advancement is from their females, as a Russian man can barely claim said title. Vodka, the courage of the Russian man. Just keepin it real, here, for a change.
It's little wonder that the Slavic females, particularly the Russian female populates so many marriage websites attempting to flee the death spiral Motherland, where a Russian Man has spermatozoa (declining viability), but little else to identify gender.
I think they claim their last great accomplishment was operating their most successful Gulag Archipelago over the span of 60 plus years. A third world nation w/ nuclear weapons has been their claim to the world stage since 1950. Fucking Cabbageheads. That goes for your faggot Belarus couzins that still have their strongman Premier dating back to the USSR's existence. Sochi Olympics, Bwwwaa the toilets couldn't even flush toilet paper. Figures the MotherLand can't even build a toilet for common use, but boy they sure had them some first rate franchise in prison camps.
Whatever helps you sleep overrated retarded murikan.
As you say, “By 1945, the bombing of civilians was already an established practice”. According to Protestant historian Eric Jon Phelps - Vatican Assassins.
The Jesuits, as Black Nobility agents, coordinated WW2 by placing 33rd Deg Freemasons, who they controlled through the Knights of Malta, into top positions in order to secretly kill off non-loyal groups to Rome.
Targeted were jews, US, UK and german protestants, Japanese Buddhists and Russian orthodox heretics. It was part of a 1914-1945 Inquisition or genocide of these heretic groups.
When you consider the completely unnecessary loss of life of both civilian and military personnel as demonstrated by the campaign to bomb civilians in Europe and
Japan and kill POWs after the war, this is not such an outlandish scenario. Why did Stalin genocide vast numbers of his own orthodox Russian POWs returning to Russia after the war in the Siberian gulags?
Why did Eisenhower kill 1.7M German (mostly Protestant) POWS through exposure and starvation in 1945 that was hushed up in the western media. Why were mostly
German Protestant cities like Dresden, Hamburg, Berlin and Buddhist Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki targeted for civilian genocide with no military value. Why were so many German pockets repeatedly annihilated in Russia unnecessarily
including Stalingrad where 250,000 Germans were encircled, 90,000 became POWs and only 3,000 returned to Germany after the war.
Phelps maintains that Stalin, Hitler, Churchill, Hirohito and Mussilini were nearly all 33rd degree freemasons and all worked together through their spy services. They
coordinated this global play called WW2 to kill off heretic groups who were non-loyal to Rome and the Black Nobility that controlled it.
As usual, there were multiple beneficiaries, as war industries and central banks like the Fed profited by driving up government debt and interest payments going to the Black Nobility who control the central banks globally.
At the same time, setting up a new Cold War Communist enemy replacing the Nazis and Japanese to keep the war business going and all the while, reducing the civilian
populations of non-loyal groups that might oppose the NWO agenda, the new UN and ultimately a scheme for global control of the masses.
We are seeing that culmination in the upcoming financial crisis and the western attempt to hang onto power and even expand it globally with their efforts to scare
the world into accepting a new global climate-change police that will allow them a foot in the door as a new global authority.
In fact globalist agent Pope Francis is already announcing that we need this protection and is arriving at the UN in Sept. to push this agenda through while they
prepare the next reserve currency that’s going to replace the spent dollar known as the SDR. If accepted, it will be counterfeited and maxed out like a burned out credit card just like the dollar is currently undergoing.
see Eric Jon Phelps - Vatican Assassins, Jesuit Order, Knights of Malta
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_F31TmQ9GwU
The reality - had Truman not dropped the bomb, every one of the families of the likely many tens of thousands of soldiers, sailors, and airmen killed from the point the bombs were available for use would want his ass on a platter.
I wonder if the author of this article if in line to be eventually placed in a landing craft to encounter murderous gunfire on a Japanese held beach during WWII would say, "Nah, don't use that bomb."
Doubt it.
Bull Fucking Shit. I didn't even read the article because I know it total fucking bullshit. I'll tell you the real travesty is that we sent out boy's to die on Saipan and other shit holes when we knew we had a working bomb. Fuck those slant eyed savage bastards.
Two Bombs Weren't enough.
Should of listened to Patton and dropped a few on the Russians while we were at it.
Apnd your little retarded patton didnt know russians had AD systems already working in moscow they woild have smoked your relic planes carrying binbs already. Suck it up muritard . Your empire of Chaos is next.
This is just revisionist dreck.
More than enough war criminals to go around for everybody {including the USA}, that is why war should be avoided if at all possible. The war criminals I have the most hate for, are the cowards who committed their crimes from high in the sky. Never had to look into the face those they murdered. Men like "Bomber Harris", "Bombs Away Lemay" and even everybody's hero; Chuck Yeager, who used to strafe German civilian refugees clogging the roads, slowing down the ground forces advance. The SOB should be tried for crimes against humanity. All favorable references to him in school books should be corrected. The SOB murdered children same as Luftwaffe pilots did on the eastern front. And he was just one man. How many more "were just following orders". More recently, who could for get the My Lai massacre in Vietnam back in 1968 when US Army soldiers murdered over 500 unarmed women, children, old and sick. Everyone of those guys today are walking around free men {the one's who haven't committed suicide, because they couldn't live with themselves after what they did}. There is no glory in war. The recent glorification of all things military makes me sick. And just so no one gets the wrong impression, I'm a veteran, although I forgo the bumper stickers, hats, and free meals on Veterans Day.
Fucking blood thirsty troglydites posting here on Zerohedge don't know shit how the reptiles run the world. Wallow in your ignorance and prejudices, You are as guilty.
Just another Soros sponsored article. What does Soros pay the trolls?
Read: "How the Far East Was Lost" by Kubek. It is well researched and documented. Japan was well beaten and wanted to surrender LONG BEFORE Hiroshima and Nagasaki. General MacArthur notified FDR of this fact BEFORE the Yalta conference. Japan would not accept unconditional surrender, but they never did. They only wanted to keep their emperor, and that is what happened in end. Japan couldn't surrender to the US, so they tried to go through the Pope; then they tried to go through the King of Sweeden.
I believe that the commies in the state department were putting off the surrender until the USSR could "help fight the Japanese." So we gave the USSR another million tons of arms (in addition to the millions we gave them for the fight against Germany). The USSR entered the war on the 9th, and Japan surrendered on the 15th. Then the USSR used the weapons we gave them to arm the communists in China and Korea.
Are we flippin retards, or what?
And my grandpa was in the Normandy invasion, and he marched all the way to Germany. And when that was over, he was told they would be going to Japan. And then they weren't because that war ended. So I used to think that the bombing saved my grandpa, and countless others. But now I know that this country has been ruled by evil, lying sacks of crap, and has been for some time. Apparently reality is not like the John Wayne movies present it to be.
Oh, and I think Nukes are fake anyway. http://heiwaco.tripod.com/bomb.htm
Quick
Developing countries aka BRICS should form a world court
which should put america and its allies on trial for these
crimes on humanity since last 70 years
Russia , China are you listening
Hello anybody home