The Japanese High Command were already considering surrender as starvation and fire bombings took their toll on the Axis populace.
Don't buy into the Globalist propaganda. WWI and II were started by the bankers. Nukes were developed for control purposes and instilling fear. The bankers decided the US would be their Puppet, not Germany.
Hard to digest that most wars are a fixed game to kill off young men and civilians while making gobs of money for the Elite.
My Dad and others in my family fought or died in WWII, the Korean War and Vietnam. Before my father passed away he became convinced the Korean, Vietnam and Middle East wars weren't legit. Don't think he ever had doubts about being in the Pacific Theater during WWII. He and other Americans were fed the line that ALL Japanese would fight to the death and that's why the USA had to bomb Japan and deliberately kill women, children and old folks.
You are correct, Radwoody: There were no honest justifications for dropping nukes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, non-military targets that also had Allied POWs interned. (Of course, the Allies had already incinerated numerous cities both in Japan, including Tokyo, and in Europe, using incendiary bombs, but that's not the point).
Japan was already TRYING to surrender; the only sticking point was that they wanted to retain their Emperor in a ceremonial mode, and we said "no, you have to surrender unconditionally." Then after they surrendered, we let them KEEP their Emperor, which they still have today.
In other words, we could have ended the war EARLIER -- under the SAME TERMS, unconditional but with the ceremonial position of Emperor retained -- but we chose not to.
Japan was fully broken and could NOT have won at that point regardless, and the "500,000 Allied deaths from a necessary invasion" were fantasy.
Those two atomic bombs were dropped on civilian populations TO PROVE WE HAD THEM AND WOULD USE THEM CALLOUSLY. They cemented our status as the unbeatable bully in the schoolyard.
Many of the survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings suffered (and some died) of radiation sickness, but a single ~20k bomb contains a LOT less radioactive material than a nuclear power plant.
Yes, actual atomic bombs were used on those two cities.
Also: If atomic bombs aren't real, why do nuclear power plants work?
Is there any real evidence that nuclear fission isn't real? A LOT of scientific theory AND real-world data, "scientific" and otherwise, support the facts of nuclear fission and of actual, functioning atomic fission bombs.
That is because your exercise in thought theory here is as relevant as wondering if a cow is a horse and horse is a cow because they have 4 legs and stand on them. These examples used to form the basis of questioning are in no way similar in conditions and there fore extent of impact based on the actual conditions of the events.
There were no justifications
^^^THIS!^^^
The Japanese High Command were already considering surrender as starvation and fire bombings took their toll on the Axis populace.
Don't buy into the Globalist propaganda. WWI and II were started by the bankers. Nukes were developed for control purposes and instilling fear. The bankers decided the US would be their Puppet, not Germany.
Hard to digest that most wars are a fixed game to kill off young men and civilians while making gobs of money for the Elite.
My Dad and others in my family fought or died in WWII, the Korean War and Vietnam. Before my father passed away he became convinced the Korean, Vietnam and Middle East wars weren't legit. Don't think he ever had doubts about being in the Pacific Theater during WWII. He and other Americans were fed the line that ALL Japanese would fight to the death and that's why the USA had to bomb Japan and deliberately kill women, children and old folks.
You are correct, Radwoody: There were no honest justifications for dropping nukes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, non-military targets that also had Allied POWs interned. (Of course, the Allies had already incinerated numerous cities both in Japan, including Tokyo, and in Europe, using incendiary bombs, but that's not the point).
Japan was already TRYING to surrender; the only sticking point was that they wanted to retain their Emperor in a ceremonial mode, and we said "no, you have to surrender unconditionally." Then after they surrendered, we let them KEEP their Emperor, which they still have today.
In other words, we could have ended the war EARLIER -- under the SAME TERMS, unconditional but with the ceremonial position of Emperor retained -- but we chose not to.
Japan was fully broken and could NOT have won at that point regardless, and the "500,000 Allied deaths from a necessary invasion" were fantasy.
Those two atomic bombs were dropped on civilian populations TO PROVE WE HAD THEM AND WOULD USE THEM CALLOUSLY. They cemented our status as the unbeatable bully in the schoolyard.
If you like your emperor, you can keep your emperor
Ding. [°~°]
Except that the bombs were fake.
No, they weren't.
Many of the survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings suffered (and some died) of radiation sickness, but a single ~20k bomb contains a LOT less radioactive material than a nuclear power plant.
Yes, actual atomic bombs were used on those two cities.
How do you know? Were you high ranking military at the time? Research and development?
Did you see it with your own eyes?
Or are you believing what you've been told
I could ask you the same thing.
Also: If atomic bombs aren't real, why do nuclear power plants work?
Is there any real evidence that nuclear fission isn't real? A LOT of scientific theory AND real-world data, "scientific" and otherwise, support the facts of nuclear fission and of actual, functioning atomic fission bombs.
That is because your exercise in thought theory here is as relevant as wondering if a cow is a horse and horse is a cow because they have 4 legs and stand on them. These examples used to form the basis of questioning are in no way similar in conditions and there fore extent of impact based on the actual conditions of the events.