Just a freindly reminder that, 71 years ago today, we vaporized a city

Plus another 500,000 dead japs. They were handing out grenades and bamboo spears to kids and old folks in case of invasion.

We should've started tojocaust once we started occupying home isles though.

>the Americans did this

This is why they'll always be a top nation in my book no matter how shit they've become.

bullshit. the japanese were already prepared to surrender. the U.S. however wanted an unconditional surrender and destroying two cities still didn't get us that unconditional surrender. they still got the measure protecting the emperor's ceremonial role which was the reason they hadn't already surrendered

IT HAD TO BE THIS WAY

The Japanese were prepared to offer, through the Soviets, a "surrender" that left them with all of Malaya, Indochina, and the Netherlands east indies. The offers were so laughable that the Soviets didn't even past most of them along.

And they did get an unconditional surrender. You seem to fail to grasp the difference between exercised and unexercised power. There's a big difference between

>We can't touch the emperor

and

>We can depose the emperor but we're not going to.

this
keeping the Emperor was just a show of goodwill, they still occupied Japan for years, and still do to a degree.

It goes beyond conditional/unconditional surrender - the attacks demonstrated to everyone in the world how devastating the atom bomb was. Not a single one has been used against another country since. If it hadnt been used on Japan (oh and this'll mean a gigantic land war in Japan with even more deaths) eventually another state (esp. USSR) would've gotten the bomb and the first time we'd see the atom bomb used would likely be replied in kind.

It was useful for future generations that the atom bomb was used when it was.

Reminder that some of us are masturbating to the memory.

What else do you remember from the war?

i'm not american so fuck you i did nothing wrong

>some Japanese in the military were responsible for deaths and freak experiments
>therefore 129,000–246,000+ civilians have to die

>Don't start shit if you don't want to get hit. I'd rather have 100000 dead americans than 500,000 dead japanese.
Congrats, you're way of thinking is no different than that of the Japanese during Pearl Harbor.

>americans forced the Japanese to surprise attack Pearl Harbor
>implying America forced Japan to be the aggressor

Are you an actual retard or just memeing

Those civilians should be grateful we dropped 2 nukes on them. Many more would have died if America went through with their invasion of Japan.

America was going to try to stop Japan from expanding, it was inevitable.

I never implied that. It's simply that, when attacking Pearl Harbor, that's what the Japanese leadership believed. No different from what you and many other Americans believe.

Or, you know, Americans could have entered negotiations.

>"b-but le japs were crazy maymay :D:D"
Pure propaganda. Japanese were even fighting their own government in China. Many Japanese were just trying to survive in Japan, and American firebombs didn't help.

>country surprise attacks another country and then spends 4 years torturing, raping, and murdering everything they can get their hands on
>WHY DIDN'T YOU JUST NEGOTIATE WITH THEM OH MY GOD
>ignore the mass murder that is still going on all across East Asia every day that the Japanese Empire continues to exist

KEK
U
C
K

>country surprise attacks
FDR knew what the Japanese were up to but he didn't do shit.

Your government was trying to get the US into the war. Lend-lease and the favorable position with the Dutch both showed that the US was asking for an excuse to get into the war. It just happens that the Japanese took the bait.

Do you entirely blame the bees for stinging you, or do you blame the asshole who threw the hive at you?

>m-muh mass murder!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II

>FDR knew what the Japanese were up to but he didn't do shit

>he literally has to make shit up to advance his point

>m-muh mass murder!

Oh shit, it's going to be a war crime denial thread.

But yeah, enjoy being a contrarian liberal fag, and being laughed at by strangers on the internet.

...

Yes.

>FDR knew what the Japanese were up to but he didn't do shit

Source? And no, Japanese war crime denial sites don't count. but let's be real, we both know you are talking out of your ass.

I Remember using this video for a science project on nuclear weapons, it sure got the class attention.

I never denied war crimes, and I won't.

My entire point is westerners are hypocritical fucks with double standards, and their treatment of the Japanese serves as proof. There were plenty of anti-Showa movements that the US could have sponsored. There were many chances for negotiation and blockade. The only reason why the US chose the atom bomb was to dick wave to the world and punish people whose only crimes were living in Japan.

>liberal
Just fuck off back to /pol/, you don't even know the definition of that word.

Who fucking cares

the first one was necessary o end the war the second one was a grusome war crime

>warfare
>crimes

Kill yourself tojo enabler.

Japs are not humans, they can't be reasoned with in any other way than threat of total extermination.

Be honest, were you raised by a single mother?

We both know that there's a sublimated need for attention that you're expressing here.

No one forced the Japanese to invade their neighbors. If you honestly think the nukes were used for "dick waving" than its proof you haven't done any research on the subject. The Japaneses offered surrender terms that would have allowed them to keep Malaysia and the Dutch indies. Why would the Americans allow them to keep those territories? An American invasion of Japan was planned in October, which would have killed hundreds of thousands more Than the nukes did. The nukes were the best option that allowed for the least amount of causalities to end the war. The war Japan started no less.

>punish people whose only crimes were living in Japan.
As if the firebombings didn't do that

>nothing to respond
>call him liberal at first
>nothing happens
>second time
>call him a bastard
>I-I hope this works

Fastest rice crispies ever

Seriously though, look at your posts, and tell me they don't scream "didn't get enough attention growing up."

This is an unhealthy way to express your needs.

I just want you to reflect a little on your life is all.

I'm not the guy you called a liberal senpai.

>>/b/

Denial isn't just a river in Africa, my lonely friend.

>The Japaneses offered surrender terms that would have allowed them to keep Malaysia and the Dutch indies.
Do you know how negotiations work? Almost always, both sides bring conflicting deals to the table. In the end, however, a deal is reached that is almost entirely different from the originals.

Pair negotiations with a naval blockade or the threat of allowing the Soviets to take over operations, then Japanese leadership would have surely come to the table.

Speaking of a blockade, that would have caused less deaths than the bombs.

You're pathetic just stop posting.

>Speaking of a blockade, that would have caused less deaths than the bombs

I actually laughed out loud at that.

Thank you.

Whenever you're willing to talk, I'll be ready to listen.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Japanese did not want negotiate on our terms.

>speaking of a blockade, that would have caused less deaths than the bombs.

This is proof right here that you are a retard. Starvation on a massive scale would cause millions of more deaths than strategic bombings. Not too mention that blockades would just prolong the war and continue the suffering for the Japanese people and the civilians of foreign countries that they were occupying.

Anime is only real because of the nukes.
Your waifu is born out of nukes.

>Speaking of a blockade, that would have caused less deaths than the bombs.

The blockade would have led to mass starvation all over Japan. Millions would have died from starvation alone, never mind all the people who would have died in the inevitable uprising against the Japanese government (that sort of thing always seems to happen when the people start to starve). The bombs killed fewer than 300,000.

>using firebombs against civilian centers and vaporizing thousands of people and the cities they live in is okay
>but making them hungry for a short period time is fucking evil how dare you even think of that
Never change, westerners.

As for negotiations, they would have to negotiate if their people are starving and demanding food. If not, anti-showa groups or maybe even the US would become more popular with the citizenry. Or worse, they would have no efficient manpower to combat the US.

>Do you know how negotiations work? Almost always, both sides bring conflicting deals to the table. In the end, however, a deal is reached that is almost entirely different from the originals.

The Japanese wanted to maintain their sovereignty, the structure of their government, the structure of their military, Taiwan, and Korea. And these were their demands in 1945. They had no intention of budging. Even after the first atomic bomb was dropped, it took weeks of arguing among the Emperor's inner circle to agree to a surrender. In the end, the Emperor himself broke the deadlock and threw his support behind the Prime Minister, who supported a surrender.

Wtf I hate USA now

>making them hungry

It's not just "making them hungry", they would die en masse. This was an unarmed, relatively scattered populace (many people had fled to the countryside to escape the bombings), and the military controlled all the food. The families of soldiers also got preferential treatment when it came to rations, so by keeping the government going Japanese soldiers were looking out for their own families. Millions would die before they collapsed.

>Speaking of a blockade, that would have caused less deaths than the bombs
>blockading a totalitarian state into surrendering would cause less deaths than the atom bombs
>when North Korea took starvation fatalities of 10% of their population and didn't budge an inch
>when Japan wasn't self sufficient in food without shipping, and all the shipping was sunk

We can talk about this.

You don't have to be alone, user.

Hang with me, user.

>The Japanese wanted to maintain their sovereignty
Who doesn't?

And again, sufficient negotiations would have forced the Japanese to budge. Stop with this "le crazy japs maymay".

>they would die en masse
They died en masse with the bombings.

If you're willing to argue that the casualties from the bombs were what made Japan surrender, then logically you must agree that the same amount of casualties from starvation would have also led to surrender.

Not him
Quit shitting up the thread you fucking Mong

>we
I had no part in it you liberal dipshit. Veeky Forums is shit for this very reason. Why bother even having this board when you're literally just reddit.

>If you're willing to argue that the casualties from the bombs were what made Japan surrender

This isn't what anyone is arguing.

They're arguing that it was the prospect of having the entire country exterminated like insects with no way to fight back that caused the Japanese to surrender.

>And again, sufficient negotiations would have forced the Japanese to budge

It's not like the Japanese cabinet needed a unanimous vote to surrender, the Japanese cabinet constitutionally required a representative from the army, and the army refused to surrender.

You don't hold negotiations for an unconditional surrender in the first place.

That's why it's called unconditional.

There are ways to get attention that are positive, you know.

You could try finding interesting pictures and posting them.

This form of human contact is easy to get, but it won't sustain you.

There's a place for us, Joe.

>If you're willing to argue that the casualties from the bombs were what made Japan surrender, then logically you must agree that the same amount of casualties from starvation would have also led to surrender.

No one is denying that starvation wouldn't have made them surrender. Just that it would have killed more people than the bombs did. I know you third worlders are slow, but I find it hilarious you originally complained about Americas unnecessary killing of civilians and now you are arguing for a method that would have killed many more than america ever did.

Christ the only thing I hate more than America are people who will go to this delusional extent to shit on it

Shit would hit the fan in Japan long before thousands of deaths would take place. Starving people will go to extreme lengths, even if that means acting against their government.

>the same amount of casualties from starvation would have also led to surrender.
>Yeah okay but many more would have died
Are you retarded?

This is something that has actually happened multiple times.

Too many times, actually.

Let's see.

>famine in North Korea kills 10% of the population
>result: no change
>famine in China kills 30 million
>result: Mao loses some of his influence, and starts the Cultural Revolution to get it back
>famine in USSR kills ~20 million
>result: no change
>famine in Ethiopia kills ~1 million
>communist government overthrown after Cold War ends
>famine in Ireland kills ~1 million
>British rule lasts for another 80 years
>city of Leningrad surrounded, 1 million die of starvation
>result: city relieved by Red Army after a year, no substantial civil unrest

Is this really the kind of attention you want?

Stop projecting your attention-whoring on me.
Actually, please use a trip so I can filter your dumb ass.

Nice reading comprehension. I said no one doubts that Japan would have eventually surrendered due to starvation. It just would have taken a lot more civilian deaths to get them there.

Right, just like how shit hit the fan in China long before 50 million people starved to death, or how shit hit the fan in the Russian cities that starved during WWII before millions starved to death....it doesn't matter how extreme people are willing to be if:

1. They have no weapons
2. They're unorganized
3. They can barely move because, you know, they haven't eaten in weeks

>start a thread looking for (you)s
>get called on it

No, I'm sure you wanted to discuss the ethical and practical considerations of World War 2 strategic bombing.

Maybe you could volunteer for the SPCA or something.

>implying I'm OP
Retard.

youtube.com/watch?v=iTFdNhN_bFc

Japs might have done a lot of despicable shit during WW2 but at least they never nuked civilians

>nukes are magically different from other methods of killing because they make you more deader

You're right, I guess slaughtering innocent Asian people by the tens of millions and performing chemical weapons experiments on those they captured is morally superior to killing 250,000 people with two bombs.

The three great powers made a solemn oath to not accept anything but an unconditional surrender. Accepting a conditional surrender would be seen as a betrayal to Stalin who still wanted to snatch up Corean and Chinese clay

>innocent Asian people

Were these countries on the brink of defeat?

The USSR certainly was on the ropes in 1941.

They never considered revolting, because lol police state.

Incidentally, guess what system of government Japan had.

This is a better version of the song you posted, play on full volume for best effect
youtube.com/watch?v=OI12BGneREY

they deserved it, and they should have gotten worse

>Leningrad

This is actually a great comparison for 1945 Japan as a whole, because the people had a similar mentality. The Soviets believed (rightfully so) that if they surrendered they would be murdered and sent to work camps. The Japanese (incorrectly, thanks to propaganda) believed the exact same thing, which is why we have those famous stories of Japanese soldiers and civilians committing suicide when capture was imminent. So they're just as unlikely to surrender, because in their minds they're dead either way and nobody except the Emperor himself can convince them otherwise.

>was the Soviet Union on the brink of defeat in 1941

It certainly looked that way to pretty much everyone alive at the time. And the cities were under siege, so yes, the soldiers holding those cities were obviously on the brink of defeat.

>incorrectly

The Allies eventually would have won, but if a city rebelled, you bet your ass the IJA would have just shut down food supplies to the entire city.

If anyone fucked up on a smaller scale, they'd just get their calorie privileges taken away and the problem would go away pretty quickly.

>they still won

Unlike USSR, there was no hope for Japan.

You're right, the Japanese could read CNN and get updated on world affairs.

>oh wait

Well, you know that totalitarian states like, say, Nazi Germany, or 19th century Paraguay are infamous for folding like an umbrella when it looks like they've lost the war.

>oh wait

SINGLE MOTHER
I
N
G
L
E

M
O
T
H
E
R

I meant murdered and sent to work camps by the Germans. Although I guess the Soviets would possibly do the same thing, I forgot about that.

There was no hope for Leningrad either.

>there was no hope for Japan.

The Japanese didn't know that. Their only source of news was the Japanese government. We see this happen time and time again with authoritarian governments. Look at the Germans in 1918, who were so stunned by the surrender that it led to the stab-in-the-back myth, or the Russians in 1905, who were so surprised that the news of their defeat nearly caused a revolution.

>There was no hope for Leningrad either.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

>mfw this is why Pakistan is so butthurt at India
>mfw the Pakistani news reported that they were winning right until the point where they reported "oh by the way that half of our country is gone now"

Wait, the Siege of Leningrad ended? You mean Nazis aren't shooting out the windows of the Winter Palace right now? No way!

oh lol

>Japs invade multiple countries
>rape and pillage the city of Nanking, killing 300,000 civilians
>systemically rape hundreds of thousands of women
>induce famines, utilize chemical and biological weapons, or otherwise torture to death MILLIONS of civilians
>force thousands of American and Filipino soldiers to undergo a walk of death
>force tens of thousands of British and Commonwealth soldiers to work as slaves
>Unit 731

>cry because Americans drop a bomb on a city being used in the Japanese war effort that was already warned they were going to be bombed

Fuckers had it coming.

lol they bombed our ships and we turned two of their industrial centers into parking lots.
talk shit get hit nippon

>Western Bias.jpg
You do realize Japan invaded China in 1937.

Sure, let's just ignore the tens of millions of Chinese civilians they murdered along the way.

>Making them hungry for a short period of time
Fuck off of my board.

The West invaded China even earlier. Unequal Treaties? Ever heard of them?
Japan was liberating east Asia from Western imperialism.

awww nigga now THIS HAS to be bait