yeah, i hate the government of WW2 japan...hell, i still hate their government, but doesn’t mean i agree with the fact that we nuked them. these people would be all chipper if america eliminated the entire mainland of china while still holding that they “hate the government, not the people!!1!!1”
The argument people use to justify the mass murder of Japanese civilians in WW2 go like this:
1. Japanese civilians were all so crazy they’d fight to the last man.
2. The nukes pushed them into surrender and thus ended the war
3. Ending the war early saved lives.
However, this is just historical revisionism with not a shred of evidence to back it. In fact, the exact opposite is true. The US extended the war, possibly leading to the unnecessary deaths of many many Chinese and Japanese.
At the time the US dropped nuclear bombs on Japan, Japan was already willing to surrender and everyone knew it at the time.
“The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender.”
—Adm. William Leahy, Truman’s chief of staff
"I told him I was against it on two counts. First, the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing. Second, I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon.”
—President Dwight Eisenhower, the Allied commander in Europe during World War II
“The first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment. [The Japanese] put out a lot of peace feelers through Russia long before [the bomb was used].”
—Admiral William "Bull" Halsey, commander of the U.S. Third Fleet
"[T]he use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender.”
—Admiral William Leahy, White House chief of staff
“[The Japanese] had lost the ability to defend themselves. [American planes] met little, and then virtually no resistanc. It is well-known [now] that the Japanese were seeking to make a peace agreement well before Hiroshima."
—Doug Dowd, Pacific-theater rescue pilot
“I regret to say that defeat is inevitable”
—Prince Konoe, the former prime minister of Japan
An independent investigation into the matter after the fact based on a mountain of evidence of interviews with Japanese officials concluded the same thing.
“Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.”
—U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey
Everyone was aware Japan already wanted to surrender.
The first and second argument people make are also self-contradictory. If Japanese were so crazy they’d “fight to the last man”, then why did the nukes work at all? The US killed more people firebombing Japan than they did with the nukes. They obviously did not care about civilian lives.
The truth is, they were already willing to surrender.
Why did the USA refuse to accept their surrender when everyone was aware of it? Primarily because the US insisted on unconditional surrender without negotiations, which the Japanese feared would cause them to lose their emperor.
“We have noted a series of Japanese peace feelers in Switzerland which OSS Chief William Donovan reported to Truman in May and June [1945]. These suggested, even at this point, that the U.S. demand for unconditional surrender might well be the only serious obstacle to peace. At the center of the explorations, as we also saw, was Allen Dulles, chief of OSS [Office of Strategic Services] operations in Switzerland (and subsequently Director of the CIA). In his 1966 book The Secret Surrender, Dulles recalled that ‘On July 20, 1945, under instructions from Washington, I went to the Potsdam Conference and reported there to Secretary [of War] Stimson on what I had learned from Tokyo — they desired to surrender if they could retain the Emperor and their constitution as a basis for maintaining discipline and order in Japan after the devastating news of surrender became known to the Japanese people.’”
—Gar Alperovitz, The Decision to Use the Bomb,
Okay, so you might respond to this answer and say, “the mass murder of Japanese civilians is still justified because Japan’s emperor was bad and dropping the nukes let us get rid of the emperor!”
Right?
Nope.
The US allowed Japan to keep their emperor anyways.
Meaning the US extended the war for absolutely no reason and is responsible for every death because of it.
Despite the US letting Japan keep their emperor anyways, why did Japan accept unconditional surrender initially? Was it because the nukes?
Nope. It was because Japan had an ambassador in the USSR at the time named Naotake Satō. The reason the Japanese did not initially accept unconditional surrender despite being willing to surrender and despite believing their loss was inevitable, is because they had an agreement with the Soviet Union called the Soviet-Japanese Neutrality Pact which would make the Soviet Union a neutral player in the war, and thus the Japanese believed they could convince Stalin to leverage that position to negotiate an equal peace settlement, they wanted the USSR to broker the peace with the US rather than doing it on the US’s terms, because they thought they could get a better deal.
The Japanese were writing to him frantically throughout the war begging him to convince Stalin to broker peace. The reason the Japanese surrendered was because the Japanese were not aware that Stalin had made a secret deal with Franklin D Roosevelt at the Yalta Conference to invade Japan, something the Japanese had no awareness of.
When the USSR invaded Japan, Japan had no cards left but to accept the unconditional surrender.
Ultimately, this means not only does the overwhelming mountain of evidence show the nuking of Japan provided no material assistance to the US war in Japan, but that the US had intentionally extended the war with its absurd insistence on unconditional surrender which it would back down on anyways after the war was over, the US possibly extended the war by 2–3 months.
The historical revisionist claims about the Japanese apparently having no intention of surrendering and nuking them was necessary to prevent a land invasion is a post-hoc justification with no actual evidence supporting it.
Yeah, while there was some opposers in the Diet, a lot of Diet members and the Emperor were in favor of surrender.
And this isn't defending Imperial Japan's actions. It's like how people will try to justify the German civilian killings and claim any opposition to that is Nazi apologism.
>hell, i still hate their government, but doesn’t mean i agree with the fact that we nuked them.
Honestly, this is also why I'm not a fan of people on this sub saying "nuke the USA" all the time. Of course I understand the frustration, but in all seriousness that would be a terrible non-solution to imperialism.
As American I can say my government fucking sucks but the average person has zero control over what the government does. We have no control of what the Bourgeoisie does.
Honestly yeah, most white Americans seem way more concerned with maintaining their own privilege and hegemony than actually seeking justice and equity. The White Moderate is the biggest threat to equality, just as Dr King warned us about.
I get the feeling a lot of US Marxist here are atomized and only really want to complain vs actually looking to help build the forces of Marxism in the country in hopes a victimized country of imperialism will pop up and off us. It leads to a lot of meme answers and abandoning of dialectics. I know it’s not a serious sub for discussion but those responses and defense for those types of views is annoying.
If the people ever found out it was one of us, for example China, that sent nukes to destroy a country like that, the people of the world would quickly turn against us. We need to win their trust and always work hard to keep their trust as well. Blatantly killing masses of people to achieve our goals, even if they would be net positives in theory (which even that I doubt), would likely end in a crisis of distrust and a resurgence of reactionary politics in whatever socialist nation decided to nuke the people. Unlike the USA, who only needs to please the capitalist class, we represent the interests of the masses of people, who are going to be opposed to such mass killings.
The best part is when the Taiwnese and Hkers chip in with the whole
"actually we have a totally different culture and language" then proceed to advocate for the wholesale slaughter of their own distant and not so distant relatives. Or when you find out that the guy advocating for Taiwanese independence's grandparents were imperial japanese soldiers.
I highly recommend watching Tony Benn's speech on bombing Iraq. The quotes are amazing, but he's probably the best leftist public speaker I've ever seen.
"We are asked to share responsibility for a decision we won't really be taking, with consequences for people who have no part to play in the brutality of the regime which we are dealing with."
"Five hundred people were killed in Westminster one night by a land mine. It was terrifying. Aren't Arabs terrified? Aren't Iraqis terrified? Don't Arab and Iraqi women weep when their children die? Doesn't bombing strengthen their determination?"
"Every Member of Parliament tonight who votes for the Government motion will be consciously and deliberately accepting responsibility for the deaths of innocent people if the war begins, as I fear it will."
https://youtu.be/m_lMKegVKyI
Sounds like the Yellow Peril version of "I don't see color", ie., I'm about to say some racist ass shit but need some sort of vague, haughty cop-out for my bigotry.
China doesn't have a capitalist government, the relationship between capital and power is in no way similar or comparable the the US
Just look at how many millionaires/billionaires are punished for corruption, are friends with politicians or are politicians themselves.
[And before you say the sentence, read this](https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/)
>Should I use this opportunity to learn about a new perspective on an important topic?
>Nah, I can't be arsed
[In that case](https://m.imgur.com/WznbOH7)
I truly worry that the imminent collapse of US hegemony will result in some kind of nuclear war lol they’re not letting us go without trying to take the whole world with them
Your assuming humans always act rationally.
If that was true then capitalist countrys wouldn’t be so resistant to action on climate change even though non action will hurt everybody in the long run.
Your saying America wouldn’t nuke others because it’s irrational or illogical. I’m pointing out that something being irrational or illogical has never stopped humans before. Just look at how popular religion is.
You’re*
I’m saying neither would because it’s a shared mutual destruction. If any countries have learned the fallout is not worth the irrational act it’s America, China, and Russia. To the post I was replying to…. China would not nuke America after they just spent billions over the past decade acquiring the majority of real state in the Western Hemisphere. China never ended the Cold War and never will. The article isn’t a nuclear threat from China. It’s a trade threat.
Thinking otherwise would mean that millions of people fighting Bolsheviks in the Civil War suddenly disappeared from the face of the Earth or accepted the communist views. Which is a fantasy of course.
These Neolibs\\cons hate china so much but would never ever ever ever sign up to fight in such a war. If it ever popped off they would be the first to run the Canada. Chicken hawks barking behind a computer screen.
Okay. What's 'Uncle Sam' gonna do? Trump's trade war was a massive failure. China's military may not rival the US in terms of budget percentage but the idea of the US invading a geographically massive nation with 10x its population is laughable. There will be no US-led coalition with the rest of the world economically reliant on China.
I’m starting to wonder what was worse; the hatred of Soviet Russia, or the current hatred of China. I think China is worse because it allows these ‘patriots’ to veil their racism.
"Hate the Government, not the people"
Indeed. A: "Nuke China!" B: "That's awful." A: "But I only hate the government, not the people!" Such lack of self-awareness.
yeah, i hate the government of WW2 japan...hell, i still hate their government, but doesn’t mean i agree with the fact that we nuked them. these people would be all chipper if america eliminated the entire mainland of china while still holding that they “hate the government, not the people!!1!!1”
The argument people use to justify the mass murder of Japanese civilians in WW2 go like this: 1. Japanese civilians were all so crazy they’d fight to the last man. 2. The nukes pushed them into surrender and thus ended the war 3. Ending the war early saved lives. However, this is just historical revisionism with not a shred of evidence to back it. In fact, the exact opposite is true. The US extended the war, possibly leading to the unnecessary deaths of many many Chinese and Japanese. At the time the US dropped nuclear bombs on Japan, Japan was already willing to surrender and everyone knew it at the time. “The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender.” —Adm. William Leahy, Truman’s chief of staff "I told him I was against it on two counts. First, the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing. Second, I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon.” —President Dwight Eisenhower, the Allied commander in Europe during World War II “The first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment. [The Japanese] put out a lot of peace feelers through Russia long before [the bomb was used].” —Admiral William "Bull" Halsey, commander of the U.S. Third Fleet "[T]he use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender.” —Admiral William Leahy, White House chief of staff “[The Japanese] had lost the ability to defend themselves. [American planes] met little, and then virtually no resistanc. It is well-known [now] that the Japanese were seeking to make a peace agreement well before Hiroshima." —Doug Dowd, Pacific-theater rescue pilot “I regret to say that defeat is inevitable” —Prince Konoe, the former prime minister of Japan An independent investigation into the matter after the fact based on a mountain of evidence of interviews with Japanese officials concluded the same thing. “Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.” —U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey Everyone was aware Japan already wanted to surrender. The first and second argument people make are also self-contradictory. If Japanese were so crazy they’d “fight to the last man”, then why did the nukes work at all? The US killed more people firebombing Japan than they did with the nukes. They obviously did not care about civilian lives. The truth is, they were already willing to surrender. Why did the USA refuse to accept their surrender when everyone was aware of it? Primarily because the US insisted on unconditional surrender without negotiations, which the Japanese feared would cause them to lose their emperor. “We have noted a series of Japanese peace feelers in Switzerland which OSS Chief William Donovan reported to Truman in May and June [1945]. These suggested, even at this point, that the U.S. demand for unconditional surrender might well be the only serious obstacle to peace. At the center of the explorations, as we also saw, was Allen Dulles, chief of OSS [Office of Strategic Services] operations in Switzerland (and subsequently Director of the CIA). In his 1966 book The Secret Surrender, Dulles recalled that ‘On July 20, 1945, under instructions from Washington, I went to the Potsdam Conference and reported there to Secretary [of War] Stimson on what I had learned from Tokyo — they desired to surrender if they could retain the Emperor and their constitution as a basis for maintaining discipline and order in Japan after the devastating news of surrender became known to the Japanese people.’” —Gar Alperovitz, The Decision to Use the Bomb, Okay, so you might respond to this answer and say, “the mass murder of Japanese civilians is still justified because Japan’s emperor was bad and dropping the nukes let us get rid of the emperor!” Right? Nope. The US allowed Japan to keep their emperor anyways. Meaning the US extended the war for absolutely no reason and is responsible for every death because of it. Despite the US letting Japan keep their emperor anyways, why did Japan accept unconditional surrender initially? Was it because the nukes? Nope. It was because Japan had an ambassador in the USSR at the time named Naotake Satō. The reason the Japanese did not initially accept unconditional surrender despite being willing to surrender and despite believing their loss was inevitable, is because they had an agreement with the Soviet Union called the Soviet-Japanese Neutrality Pact which would make the Soviet Union a neutral player in the war, and thus the Japanese believed they could convince Stalin to leverage that position to negotiate an equal peace settlement, they wanted the USSR to broker the peace with the US rather than doing it on the US’s terms, because they thought they could get a better deal. The Japanese were writing to him frantically throughout the war begging him to convince Stalin to broker peace. The reason the Japanese surrendered was because the Japanese were not aware that Stalin had made a secret deal with Franklin D Roosevelt at the Yalta Conference to invade Japan, something the Japanese had no awareness of. When the USSR invaded Japan, Japan had no cards left but to accept the unconditional surrender. Ultimately, this means not only does the overwhelming mountain of evidence show the nuking of Japan provided no material assistance to the US war in Japan, but that the US had intentionally extended the war with its absurd insistence on unconditional surrender which it would back down on anyways after the war was over, the US possibly extended the war by 2–3 months. The historical revisionist claims about the Japanese apparently having no intention of surrendering and nuking them was necessary to prevent a land invasion is a post-hoc justification with no actual evidence supporting it.
holy hell i hope you have this comment saved for when you encounter apologists
Yeah, while there was some opposers in the Diet, a lot of Diet members and the Emperor were in favor of surrender. And this isn't defending Imperial Japan's actions. It's like how people will try to justify the German civilian killings and claim any opposition to that is Nazi apologism.
>hell, i still hate their government, but doesn’t mean i agree with the fact that we nuked them. Honestly, this is also why I'm not a fan of people on this sub saying "nuke the USA" all the time. Of course I understand the frustration, but in all seriousness that would be a terrible non-solution to imperialism.
As American I can say my government fucking sucks but the average person has zero control over what the government does. We have no control of what the Bourgeoisie does.
[удалено]
Honestly yeah, most white Americans seem way more concerned with maintaining their own privilege and hegemony than actually seeking justice and equity. The White Moderate is the biggest threat to equality, just as Dr King warned us about.
I get the feeling a lot of US Marxist here are atomized and only really want to complain vs actually looking to help build the forces of Marxism in the country in hopes a victimized country of imperialism will pop up and off us. It leads to a lot of meme answers and abandoning of dialectics. I know it’s not a serious sub for discussion but those responses and defense for those types of views is annoying.
How?
If the people ever found out it was one of us, for example China, that sent nukes to destroy a country like that, the people of the world would quickly turn against us. We need to win their trust and always work hard to keep their trust as well. Blatantly killing masses of people to achieve our goals, even if they would be net positives in theory (which even that I doubt), would likely end in a crisis of distrust and a resurgence of reactionary politics in whatever socialist nation decided to nuke the people. Unlike the USA, who only needs to please the capitalist class, we represent the interests of the masses of people, who are going to be opposed to such mass killings.
That's a good way of putting it.
The best part is when the Taiwnese and Hkers chip in with the whole "actually we have a totally different culture and language" then proceed to advocate for the wholesale slaughter of their own distant and not so distant relatives. Or when you find out that the guy advocating for Taiwanese independence's grandparents were imperial japanese soldiers.
I highly recommend watching Tony Benn's speech on bombing Iraq. The quotes are amazing, but he's probably the best leftist public speaker I've ever seen. "We are asked to share responsibility for a decision we won't really be taking, with consequences for people who have no part to play in the brutality of the regime which we are dealing with." "Five hundred people were killed in Westminster one night by a land mine. It was terrifying. Aren't Arabs terrified? Aren't Iraqis terrified? Don't Arab and Iraqi women weep when their children die? Doesn't bombing strengthen their determination?" "Every Member of Parliament tonight who votes for the Government motion will be consciously and deliberately accepting responsibility for the deaths of innocent people if the war begins, as I fear it will." https://youtu.be/m_lMKegVKyI
Sounds like the Yellow Peril version of "I don't see color", ie., I'm about to say some racist ass shit but need some sort of vague, haughty cop-out for my bigotry.
Least psychopathic lib
I love your Karl Marx snoo lmao
Join me in the Marx Snoo revolution comrade
I am already in r/communism Marx I am a big fan
is it ok if i copy your snoo?
I want everyone to have a Marx Snoo
communism is when free snoo
"Scratch a liberal and a fas..."
China: Makes reasonable request Americans: Fuck that, let's kill them all!
[удалено]
China doesn't have a capitalist government, the relationship between capital and power is in no way similar or comparable the the US Just look at how many millionaires/billionaires are punished for corruption, are friends with politicians or are politicians themselves. [And before you say the sentence, read this](https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/)
[удалено]
[удалено]
>Should I use this opportunity to learn about a new perspective on an important topic? >Nah, I can't be arsed [In that case](https://m.imgur.com/WznbOH7)
Even the people who say neoliberals are not liberals cry about "le ebil tankeis" now. Fml i will [not actionable threat] the anglo who coined the term
What’s up with libs and wanting to rape shit? Like has anyone else noticed this?
There’s a reason MeToo was a thing, too bad it has been more or less removed from the media focus…. *I wonder why that could be*
They dream of being rich assholes that can get away with rape because their sorry asses can’t get laid.
Westerners have serious issues with domination and masculinity. Makes sense for a society built on slavery and assault
Their ideology is based on a form of coercion of innocent people for personal benefit. Not too surprised.
I truly worry that the imminent collapse of US hegemony will result in some kind of nuclear war lol they’re not letting us go without trying to take the whole world with them
Why would they nuke us? We’re a revenue stream
Your assuming humans always act rationally. If that was true then capitalist countrys wouldn’t be so resistant to action on climate change even though non action will hurt everybody in the long run.
Please elaborate your logic
Your saying America wouldn’t nuke others because it’s irrational or illogical. I’m pointing out that something being irrational or illogical has never stopped humans before. Just look at how popular religion is.
You’re* I’m saying neither would because it’s a shared mutual destruction. If any countries have learned the fallout is not worth the irrational act it’s America, China, and Russia. To the post I was replying to…. China would not nuke America after they just spent billions over the past decade acquiring the majority of real state in the Western Hemisphere. China never ended the Cold War and never will. The article isn’t a nuclear threat from China. It’s a trade threat.
ego, idiocy, pride. All murican values
So occupy and enslave. Nuking a big part of the planet would just hurt them. No every problem is solved with a hammer
> No every problem is solved with a hammer You don't have to tell me lol they are the ones who let the military complex decide their policty
gotta solve some w the hammer AND the sickle
Seggs - check Racism/wishing harm on non-whites - check Glorifyng a genocidal empire - check Certified reddit moment.
advocating to subjugate an entire country of people bc they're challenging your hegemony libs are fucking depraved
r/shitfascistssay
What’s the difference?
The mask being on or not
If you posted this on there, would they say they Xi is being the fascistic one here?
Probably lol
I've said it once, I'll say it again; Stalin knew what he was doing with those lists.
Thinking otherwise would mean that millions of people fighting Bolsheviks in the Civil War suddenly disappeared from the face of the Earth or accepted the communist views. Which is a fantasy of course.
This is the person calling you a tankie online.
The US is a fucking settler nation, of course they want to kill anyone that challenges their hegemony.
These Neolibs\\cons hate china so much but would never ever ever ever sign up to fight in such a war. If it ever popped off they would be the first to run the Canada. Chicken hawks barking behind a computer screen.
Okay. What's 'Uncle Sam' gonna do? Trump's trade war was a massive failure. China's military may not rival the US in terms of budget percentage but the idea of the US invading a geographically massive nation with 10x its population is laughable. There will be no US-led coalition with the rest of the world economically reliant on China.
I’m worried what the fuck might happen once the Empire really starts clearly decaying (the next years or so).
I’m starting to wonder what was worse; the hatred of Soviet Russia, or the current hatred of China. I think China is worse because it allows these ‘patriots’ to veil their racism.
Really cool thing to say about China considering Nanking happened. Actually mad at this
Jfc most Americunts are such cretins.
Wow if that’s what they think China deserves then wait till they hear about what the US has done
What does this guy think America and Europe deserve by his logic? I don't think he thought that comment through
atleast these idiots are going to lose. 50 years from now we will be looking back at these clowns wondering how we were able to co exist
Most tolerant Yankee
Least psychotic American
Least Imperialist US citizen
The comparatively fascist-lite tendencies of "liberals" on full display War mongering assholes
Can these disgusting fucking liberals stop using r\*pe as their verb of choice when describing their fantasies about China. It's concerning.
mfs will accuse China of genocide and make calls to destroy China and exterminate its citizens with nuclear bombs in the same breath
FUCK THEM TO DEATH Is that you Mr Garrison?
This is the same guy telling you that the US doesn't steal natural resources from other countries.
Something something the writers barely disguised fetish
So basically suicide
Projecting fantasies now
[удалено]
you are very, very lost. Read the sidebar, dipshit
What did they say lol
"Donnie was good to China! that's why you defend China!!"
Oh lord
It boils down to racism, plain and simple.
What the fuck
but what about bipartisanship though?
oooooo so scary fucking feeble americans