Slashdot Mirror

Yes Japan was willing to surrender, but only if key provisions of the Potsdam Declaration were changed in their favor. In other words, they wanted to keep fighting to try to gain better terms for surrender.

Framed differently - the Japanese were willing to surrender, but the US wanted to keep fighting to their preferred terms for their surrender. (Specifically, the Japanese wanted protections for their Emperor - at the least, an assurance that we weren't going to execute him).

Here's a 1946 report that indicates that Japan was already ready to (and trying to) surrender months before the atomic bombs were dropped: http://www.anesi.com/ussbs01.h...

Here's a (admittedly very biased - skip the filler & just look at the quotes; though I suspect you've heard many of them before) source that quotes many people involved on their opinions on using the bomb: http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16...

To be clear; I condemn any violence committed against civilians. I do not believe, however, that the (well-documented) atrocities committed by the Japanese soldiers excuse or justify the US's fire-bombing and nuking of Japanese civilians. While Japan was not innocent by any stretch of the imagination; the Japanese people largely were.

OK, I took the trouble to read the anesi.com link, and it does not state what you think it does.
The Japanese had begun internal discussions on ending the war, but that does not constitute "trying to surrender".
What the Japanese was doing was trying to get Russia act as an intermediary in negotiating a "cessation of hostilities".
The "protect the Emperor" thing was a red herring from the Japanese War council; they didn't give a shit about him.
They wanted to keep as much as possible their existing military government, and they wanted to try to keep as much conquered territory.
I'm sorry, but no.
Japan's militaristic government could not be allowed to continue, and Japan military leadership must be tried for war crimes.

Yes Japan was willing to surrender, but only if key provisions of the Potsdam Declaration were changed in their favor. In other words, they wanted to keep fighting to try to gain better terms for surrender.

Framed differently - the Japanese were willing to surrender, but the US wanted to keep fighting to their preferred terms for their surrender. (Specifically, the Japanese wanted protections for their Emperor - at the least, an assurance that we weren't going to execute him).

Here's a 1946 report that indicates that Japan was already ready to (and trying to) surrender months before the atomic bombs were dropped: http://www.anesi.com/ussbs01.h...

Here's a (admittedly very biased - skip the filler & just look at the quotes; though I suspect you've heard many of them before) source that quotes many people involved on their opinions on using the bomb: http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16...

To be clear; I condemn any violence committed against civilians. I do not believe, however, that the (well-documented) atrocities committed by the Japanese soldiers excuse or justify the US's fire-bombing and nuking of Japanese civilians. While Japan was not innocent by any stretch of the imagination; the Japanese people largely were.

>So it would seem that the original rules may not, in fact, have had such sexless classes.

Seems to match reality. When it comes to be killed or to fight men always fall first.

During the titanic disaster, the survival rate for women was far higher than for men.

During war, palestine and Irak 11% of victims across all weapons types were Iraqi females and ww II soviet union report of 8.7 million military dead, however according to the(ADK) study total war deaths were 20.1 million males and 6.6 million females, a difference of 13.5 million more males

The NSA has been trusted with the discrete use of sigint since ww2

This has not resulted in any widespread misuse of data or emergence of a fascist state

Snowden's actions on the other hand have made each of us a little less safe

way to go dumbass

Only for a nonstandard definition of "misuse", and perhaps you should look at some properties of fascism.

I am certain he didn't believe in the copyright systems, too. Ever read John Locke's works? Jefferson sure did:
http://www.anesi.com/q0033.htm

"Heck, I am sure China wasn't exporting them food during WW2."

Not much after the US got done with the Jap merchant fleet. Choking Hirohito's Imperial ambitions required choking Japanese logistics, and those mostly moved by sea:

http://www.anesi.com/ussbs01.htm#dotjmf

"UNITED STATES STRATEGIC BOMBING SURVEY
SUMMARY REPORT
(Pacific War)

WASHINGTON, D.C.
1 JULY 1946

DESTRUCTION OF THE JAPANESE MERCHANT FLEET
Japan's merchant shipping fleet, was not only a key link in the logistical support of her armed forces in the field, but also a vital link in her economic structure. It was the sole element of this basic structure which was vulnerable to direct attack throughout a major portion of the war.

Japan entered the war with some 6,000,000 tons of merchant shipping of over 500 tons gross weight. During the war an additional 4,100,000 tons were constructed, captured or requisitioned. Sufficient information was secured by the Survey in Japan concerning this 10,100,000 tons to tabulate ship by ship, (a) the name end tonnage, (b>) the date, location; and agent of sinking or damage, and (c) the present condition and location of such ships as survived. The sources from which evidence was obtained were in some respects conflicting. Where possible these conflicts have been resolved. The Joint Army and Navy Assessment Committee has tentatively arrived at similar results and is continuing its efforts further to refine the evidence. The Survey believes that the figures included in the following breakdown will not differ significantly from the final evaluation of the Joint Army and Navy Assessment Committee.

Eight million nine hundred thousand tons of this shipping were sunk or so seriously damaged as to be out of action at the end of the war. Fifty-four and seven-tenths percent of this total was attributable to submarines, 16.3 percent to carrier based planes, 10.2 percent to Army land-based planes and 4.3 percent to Navy and Marine land-based planes, 9.3 percent to mines (largely dropped by B-29s), less than 1 percent to surface gunfire, and the balance of 4 percent to marine accidents. "

I've traveled in China several times, and as a "rich white guy" you won't have serious problems even if you make loud political statements that the party disagrees with. (E.g. here is a short list of forbidden words).

What you should be careful about is discussing politics with the locals. At worst you'll be asked to leave the country, but they can be thrown in jail or "disappeared" if they say, criticize party leaders.

In other words, using a ssh proxy is fine. There is probably even no law against it, except for the general "don't do things not in the interest of the Party".

"Of course, it always helps when you completely rebuild your infrastructure after it being decimated after a war."

Decimation is the loss of ten percent. It is tolerable casualties for a military unit, let alone infrastructure.
Japan was far more devastated, giving it nearly a blank slate on which to rebuild.

http://www.anesi.com/ussbs01.htm#eeoaaatj

Talk about living in Fantasy Land - I provided links! I provided links to the Undersecretary of the Navy stating that Japan was about to surrender. I provided links to Truman's own diary, and a transcript of his speech right after the bombing (what do you need to prove the point - audio?).

Truman directly wrote in his diary "use it so that military objectives and soldiers and sailors are the target and not women and children". He further wrote "The target will be a purely military one and we will issue a warning statement". Immediately after the bombing, he referred to Hiroshima as "a military base". Either he was lying to *himself*, to his private diary that wasn't released for decades, or he truly thought that we were going to bomb a, to use his words, "purely military target". Do you think he was lying to himself? Honestly?

Then you claim that Japan was in no way preparing to surrender. Obviously you know more than the bloody Undersecretary of the Navy at the time. Clearly you know more than the immediate postwar Strategic Bombing Survey, which came to the same conclusion post-facto as well.

Do I feel proud of what the US did in WWII (followed by your comments about reconstruction)

That's not what I asked, or discussed. Of course there is reason to be proud of how the US treated the defeated, and little reason to have expected such treatment from many of the other parties should situations have been reversed. The question was about whether we should be proud of inflicting agonizing deaths on half a million civilians when the war was almost over (firebombing the nearly unarmed refugee city Dresden, using firebombings on Tokyo specifically with the goal of killing as many civilians as possible, and wiping two cities off the map without warning and contrary to what Truman himself wrote he wanted in his diary).

Call things "fantasy" all you want, but if you can't face up to what was written and said, the only one living in a fantasy world is you. Truman wrote what he wrote. He said what he said. Bard wrote what he wrote. The SBS came to the same conclusion. These are facts; deny them all you want.

As an outsider (from Scotland - the orignal home of the brave and land of the free), it's kind of scary watching you guys implode like this.

We're all going to pay a hefty price for your lack of interest in your own freedoms, but hey, you're not the first republic to become and empire, and then eat your own children and die. It happens to them all...

Why not take the http://www.anesi.com/fscale.htmF-Test, with your nation in mind, rather than yourself and see what the results are... You may be surprised, but most of the rest of the planet has seen it for years (5 years since the coup...)

Good Luck - or as Douglas Adams fans might say - so long, and thanks for all the pish...