Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

North Korea Vows to Nuke U.S.A.

Posted Mar 18, '13 at 5:27pm

Maverick4

Maverick4

3,707 posts

or if they told usa about the talks they had whit japan. but russia didn't want usa to know that because then they wouldn't get the profits that was agreed on in yalta.

Would you mind clarifying your position on the USSR? Because you've said that the USSR:

1) Betrayed Japan
2) Sided with Japan
3) Almost beat Japan
4) Worked with Japan
5) Had nothing to do with Japan.

And contrary to your assertions, I've looked in some other threads and have found that, interestingly enough, you've taken a hard line against anything the US does! How open minded of you!

 

Posted Mar 18, '13 at 5:37pm

partydevil

partydevil

5,094 posts

When have they surrendered unconditionally?

good point.

We can no longer direct the war with any hope of success.The only course left is for Japan's one hundred million people to sacrifice their lives by charging the enemy to make them lose the will to fight.

yea thats (sort of. formed to circumstances)  the code that got propagated for 800 year. but like any other propaganda message does it stop working when it becomes unrealistic and/or the end of everyone's life. and in this case, not just for many out of honor for the country.

btw you know that plan was from befor russia stabbed them in the back right?
they were concerned about an invasion during the summer of 1945.
by the usa/allies. not from russia. they had the non-aggression agreement going on and russia pretended to help japan to divide the allies for a armistice and get peace from out of there.

 

Posted Mar 18, '13 at 5:43pm

partydevil

partydevil

5,094 posts

Would you mind clarifying your position on the USSR? Because you've said that the USSR:

1) Betrayed Japan
2) Sided with Japan
3) Almost beat Japan
4) Worked with Japan
5) Had nothing to do with Japan.

you really can't  follow me can you? xD

and yea i hate the usa, you could also just ask me that.
i'm not a monster because i do so ;)

 

Posted Mar 18, '13 at 6:13pm

Maverick4

Maverick4

3,707 posts

you really can't  follow me can you? xD

In one post you paint the USSR as a back-stabber, than as a body that got used by the Allies, then something in between. Not to mention you keep calling it 'Russia', which hadn't existed for 30 years by this point.

Of course I can't follow you. You can't even follow you.

and yea i hate the usa, you could also just ask me that.

Congratulations! You've just delegitimized everything you have said in the entire thread, and everything you will ever say! Have a good day!

 

Posted Mar 19, '13 at 4:01am

Masterforger

Masterforger

1,633 posts

and yea i hate the usa, you could also just ask me that.
i'm not a monster because i do so ;)

The WWII US and today's US are completely different things, not to mention not all US people are bad people, it's only the government that is actually worth hating, like most governments. But you've already proved how close-minded you are.

 

Posted Mar 19, '13 at 7:09am

partydevil

partydevil

5,094 posts

Not to mention you keep calling it 'Russia', which hadn't existed for 30 years by this point.

your going to be nit picking now... well your at the wrong adres for that. =)

Of course I can't follow you. You can't even follow you.

if you can't follow it then plz. do not reply to it. it will only cause spamm.

Congratulations! You've just delegitimized everything you have said in the entire thread, and everything you will ever say! Have a good day!

and you call me close minded? hahahaha.
only because i hate the usa i'm by definition wrong.... hahahaha. your 1 silly man.

The WWII US and today's US are completely different things,

i dont remember ever denying that.
but it hasn't changed the good way.

not to mention not all US people are bad people

ofcourse not, i have american friends.
and as ive said like a zillion times. there are always exceptions of the general.

btw why you guys are coming whit this stuff now? got nothing to say about the actual topic anymore?
am i that much more interesting then the actual topic?
ow and i stopped replying to you 2 because cause you guys only make me repeat myself all the time.
the only guy i reply to about the topic now is emp. =) he actually is about the topic and leaves me and my ideology behind it.
you guys are not able to just ignore my ideology and talk about the topic. because every single word i say is in your ears extreem anti-usa.
while it isn't, it is your mind that makes this conclusion.

if i really went on a anti-usa rampage then i would be swearing allot more and i probably would already be banned again for that.
but i'm not because this has nothing to do whit my anti-usa ideology. it's the topic.
(not that i expect you 2 to understand this)

 

Posted Mar 19, '13 at 12:01pm

EmperorPalpatine

EmperorPalpatine

4,977 posts

btw you know that plan was from befor russia stabbed them in the back right?
they were concerned about an invasion during the summer of 1945.
by the usa/allies. not from russia.

You left out a key word. Initially. They held off the troops longer than they anticipated.

However, the Battle of Okinawa went on for so long that they concluded the Allies would not be able to launch another operation before the typhoon season...

They had considered both invasions:
Faced with the prospect of an invasion of the Home Islands, starting with Kyūshū, and the prospect of a Soviet invasion of Manchuria"Japan's last source of natural resources"the War Journal of the Imperial Headquarters concluded:...
They didn't really expect it, but they gave their stance on what they'd do if it happened, and it did.

does it stop working when it becomes unrealistic and/or the end of everyone's life.

They had ritual honor slaughters of their own citizens. They had a mindset of using every last resource for the war, including their own people, and that surrender is the most dishonorable thing someone could do, short of siding with the enemy. When has it ever been reasonable or realistic strategy?
And they didn't expect all of their people to die, just a few million. At best, they wanted to make the war too costly for their enemies. At worst, if they ran out of people, they wanted to be known for their sacrifice to the last in defense of their nation.

he actually is about the topic and leaves me and my ideology behind it.

I've been working on being more objective.

 

Posted Mar 19, '13 at 1:47pm

Kasic

Kasic

5,572 posts

Partydevil, I'm just going to end this all right here. Let's review what you've said since page 5. I'll thoroughly review your given reasons for why you're condemning the use of the atomic bombs.

the cost of 2 million lives should be choosen. if we all just drop a huge bomb on every place we dont like because it's more easy then having a war then we all are dead.

You're arguing for over 10x the deaths caused by the bombs, on the assertion that everyone will suddenly start nuking everyone. No nukes have been used in war since Hiroshima/Nagasaki. Thus, your assertion is invalid.

japan was already defeated and they tryed to surrender to russia. who refused because it had agreed whit the usa to get alot of land in east asia after japan and china were gone. these agreements were made in the yalta conference.

You are saying that there was no reason for the bombs because Japan was trying to surrender to Russia.

if the usa really didn't want to kill people why they didn't drop it a few miles of coast to SHOW it. why drop it on a city?

No explanation needed.

sure it would not have made them surrender. (neither are the bombs the reason why they did.) but if they didn't drop it then russia would have invaded japan. so the saving of 2 million man is a straight out lie anyway.

Asserting that Russia would have accepted Japan's surrender, even when it already clearly wasn't. You've previously said multiple times that Japan would have fought to the last man. How is it a lie that less lives were lost through the bomb than the alternatives?

ofcours they had the surrender to the usa now russia betrayed them. russia was no longer a option.

Russia was never an option to begin with, if it were, they would have accepted it before the bombs were ever dropped according to your scenario.

and if we justify these bombs then there sure is a other time and other place where it will again be seen justified. and then it does end the human civilization.

Literal slippery slope fallacy.

tell them to keep the air alarms on for 45 mins.
easy as that.
even in the 40's long distance communication was available.

Thus stands your entire argument self defeated, because apparently it would have been all good to drop the bombs as long as Japan kept their alarms on 15 minutes longer.

it wouldn't come that far. russia had to invade befor that time already. (yalta agreement)
then they knew their option was gone and would have surrendered to usa.

Direct contradiction to earlier statements that Japan would fight because of their honor code.

After reading through everything, you have  reasons.

1) Japan would have surrendered to Russia without the bombs.
2) Japan would not surrender because of their honor code.
3) The bombs did not need to be dropped on populated cities to demonstrate power.
4) It would have been okay to drop the bombs if the sirens had been on for 45 minutes.
5) Fear of escalation in future due to same reasoning.
6) Less lives would have been lost if the bombs had not been used.

Of your reasons, 1 and 2 contradict along with 3 and 4.
Number five has been proven false, because no nuclear bombs have been used on another nation since and it is internationally agreed upon not to use them.
Number six has been proven false because of your previously statements on Japan's honor code along with Russia and the USA's agreement.

If the bombs had not been used, Japan would have continued to fight in hopes that the cost was deemed too high. EmperorPalpatine's quote on the previous page proves that.

Overall, your biggest reason is that the bombs were unnecessary.

You have been given plenty of links and quotes stating various death totals far exceeding that which the bombs caused from various situations. You have admitted that Russia is the "spider in the web" and thus would not have accepted Japan's surrender, because of their agreement with the USA. You have admitted that the Japanese were trying to keep the emperor on the throne and did not want to surrender if that was not in the cards.

Objectively, the only thing I can see from the situation is this: Japan would have continued to fight Russia and the USA as they invaded, resulting in millions of lives lost pointlessly. The bombs provided a large enough form of intimidation that it made Japan forget the idea of resistance, because they could not do anything to defend against nuclear bombs and the USA had already proven themselves willing to use them on populated cities.

You wonder why we continually assert that your main reason for being against the bombs is that the USA dropped them, so let me show you why. Since the very start of this argument, you've continually included your dislike for the USA, which should be irrelevant to the issue at hand. You are obviously biased in the matter, bringing your personal view of the USA into a debate about the situation in a way that is irrelevant to the argument.

it's also known that the usa is the only country that had used a nuke against innocent people.
i can't trust a nation on this field when they have done such a thing.

i throw out the mud to cover the loving-usa bs that the americans are spreading out over the world.

you killed innocents whit that attack. not people that chooses to die in the war.
you are/were the 9/11 for them. but then a thousand times bigger.

and i really gotta laugh at the way you guys try to justify a nuclear attack.
but when 1 is aimed for you then you cry like a baby.
i justify nk to nuke the usa. it's much easyer for them to just nuke you then to attack you.

reason why i can't trust them.
+ they started the cold war. well done.

this justifies nk to nuke the usa.
but let me guess. your not behind that.

Then, there's this statement which pretty much proves there's a bias.

it might interest me less indeed.

In conclusion, all of your reasons have been either debunked or shown to be contradictory. Your continued assertions that it was wrong/unnecessary have been proven incorrect by various sources and quotes. At this point, you appear to only be fixated on the subject because it was the USA that dropped the bombs. I'm not saying that you are arguing that it's wrong because it was the USA, but that you are unwilling to accept all the provided information because the USA would no longer have committed an unnecessary action that resulted in ~144k deaths. It is your motive (from what I can see) to argue that it was unnecessary because it is the USA which dropped them.

If anyone thinks I'm not being objective after all this, please point out where. I looked through all of the posts in this thread multiple times and spent almost two hours compiling this post, so I'd be interested if anyone had a problem with anything I've said.

 

Posted Mar 19, '13 at 4:48pm

pangtongshu

pangtongshu

8,276 posts

the only guy i reply to about the topic now is emp. =) he actually is about the topic and leaves me and my ideology behind it.

Yes..because I totally brought your ideology into the fray

Honestly..I've just figured that continuing our debate is pointless..for, as Kasic pointed out, you have been contradicting yourself..and you also seem to not be able to grasp the idea of war strategy

If anyone thinks I'm not being objective after all this, please point out where.

Seems pretty solid to me..and **** impressive as well

 

Posted Mar 19, '13 at 4:50pm

Maverick4

Maverick4

3,707 posts

your going to be nit picking now... well your at the wrong adres for that. =)

Forgive me if I try to actually be historically correct.

And what is an adres?

if you can't follow it then plz. do not reply to it. it will only cause spamm.

So then why are you still posting? :)

and you call me close minded? hahahaha.
only because i hate the usa i'm by definition wrong.... hahahaha. your 1 silly man.

I don't know about your neck of the woods, but everywhere else in the civilized world, openly proclaiming a rather profound bias tends to sink your ship before you've even sailed.

It's also rather hard to take you seriously when you insert numbers for actual English. Learn to spell, please.

Yes, you are close-minded: You've confessed twice now to hating a group of people simply because of the country they occupy and not because of anything they've actually done.

You disgust me, sir.

 
Reply to North Korea Vows to Nuke U.S.A.

You must be logged in to post a reply!