Would you have used the atom bomb on Japan in WWII if you were Prez?

So the civilian, elected and military leaders supporting dropping the atom bomb were 100% correct that doing so would end the war, thus ending the mass killings, mass firebombings, millions more Japanese killed, more American killed by the Japanese, save American POWs, and the end slaughtering of civilians by the Japanese. At least you agree they were 100% correct in their analysis.

 

The same proof you have used. Every time we used them the enemy surrendered.

 

Ok then you have NO experts to cite. Just a bunch of politicians that knew nothing of the military situation. Even worse.

 

Who the USA betrayed was Eastern Europe.

Actually, it would have been better for everyone if Russia had not gotten into the war. We still would have gotten the atom bomb so still would have defeated Germany - and the Warsaw Pact would never have existed.

 

You got that right! Too bad we didn't have the atom bomb in 1941.

 

All we had to do is wait a few weeks. Well at least according to the greatest military minds this country has ever known. Oh wait some pansy politician has an opinion. LOL

 

No, that's not what they said and they were proven wrong anyway. They said we would win without the atom bombs. All it would take is doing what they do - killing millions and millions of Japanese at a ratio of about 10-1 for every American casualty. Of course, they would not be in harms way themselves, just reading their being praised in the newspapers for how many Japanese they were killing every week - themselves at a safe distance from any of the fighting. Killing civilians was the real expertise of most your experts.

 

The question becomes should we drop an atom bomb on a beaten enemy that is going to give up in two weeks anyway. Only if you want to commit an atrocity

 

Did you learn how to use emoji's in debate club? LOL I accept your defeat from lack of argument

 

Hmm; this is pure supposition on your part. Aside from the ludicrous suggestion that Russia would have just stood by and let the Nazis in, unopposed, tell me, how would you have defeated the entirety of Nazi-occupied continental Europe, Africa and Russia, without killing millions in the process?

 

Millions did die, what's your point? For my message, the same way we got Japan to surrender. A couple of atom bombs on smaller war industry German cities - stating "surrender now or face utter destruction." That would have saved millions of lives. Being the only country with atom bombs was checkmate.

 

There were no 'industrial cities' left capable of producing much of anything. The bombing campaign saw to that. And you only had one atomic bomb left; it was 1946 before America produced any more.

 

One of the least reported footnote of WWII is that but for Hitler's death camps, we would not have gotten the atom bomb. Einstein was a German Jew, but also a strict pacifist. FDR was not convinced of the atom bomb project.

However, Einstein's sister, also a German Jew, did not escape - and Jews did know what Hitler was doing - why so many Jewish scientists fled Germany, while those trapped dragged their feet in work for Hitler. For this, Einstein wrote his famous letter that convinced FDR to do two things: 1.) a raid to destroy the German's sole heavy water production location and 2.) do the Manhattan Project.

Had Hitler NOT engaged in atrocities and the holocaust, he would have had the scientists, Einstein would not have convinced FDR, and Hitler would have gotten the atom bomb to go in his V2 missiles. Checkmate, Germany won the war and conquered the world.

They don't teach the payback against Germany for the holocaust - or the reward for the USA having taken in so many Jews - though could have taken in more I suppose. Prior to WW2, Poland has the largest Jewish population in the world. However, it became NYC. An argument could be made that in an ironic way, the Jewish God did reward those who protected his people and so terribly punished those who harmed them. Just a comment anyway.

 

Your 'what might have been' is again pure invention, and a red-herring. And then America used Nazi scientists and Nazi technology to produce rockets.

 

The Emperor had been convinced we had hundreds. A third bomb on Berlin, if necessary, would have convinced Germany we had more too. The atom bombs were getting more powerful. I think the rate at which we could have produced them at that time was around 2 a month. Hard to win in WW2 if the other side is dropping 2 atom bombs on your country per month - and you don't even have a way to drop leaflets on that other country. It doesn't take a lot of atom bombs to wipe out an entire army - 1 to be exact.

 

No it is not. Yeah, of course we used Nazi scientists. So what? Not every NAZI was involved in the holocaust, just like every American soldier in Vietnam was not involved in Mai Lai.

 

Germany was already losing the war the moment Hitler invaded the USSR in 1941, opening a second front. Eventual defeat from that point was inevitable, as military experts will tell you. You don't win wars fighting on two fronts.

 

You act like you knew exactly what the emperor was thinking. You are just making up stuff on the fly. It is hilarious

 

Of course it's invention. What if Hitler had been a pacifist and altruistic benefactor? The war wouldn't have happened then either. That's some more invention, so how about focussing on what did happen?

 

Well, since you apparently deny that Einstein ever wrote to FDR, that his sister was not killed in the holocaust, and the holocaust never even happened, there isn't much for us to debate, is there?

 

There never was

 

No, that's you. The Emperor said EXACTLY what he was thinking when he radio broadcast his surrender. There was 1 reason - the atom bomb. He stated they meant the "extinction" of the Japanese unless the Japanese surrendered.

YOU claim you know that REALLY he wasn't thinking about that at all. Really, you claim he was just waiting for a few more weeks for his birthday before surrendering, which he had been planning to do for months anyway because that is what military leaders who wanted to keep mass killing the Japanese in glorious battles with a million American casualties said.

 

Without the USA as we were the untouchable great arms and materials provider.Russia and Britain would have both been defeated. It would not have been a 2 front war either. First Britain and all Western Europe would have gone down, then Russia. Regardless, We would have gotten the atom bomb whether or not Russia was in the war and with it the war would have ended. Germany had no way to significantly attack the USA, nor did Japan. Unlike Russia, we had oceans protecting us and thus time said we inevitably would win by the bomb.

I'm not discounting in the slightest that Russia did a great deal of the defeating of Germany, none whatsoever. It would not have happened without us supplying Russia, just like the UK would not have held on without us.

 

You said he thought we had 100 bombs. Prove it. Let me see the exact quote

 

Russia would not have fallen to Germany. What nonsense.