Still don't believe he's a muslim?

When a man tells me to GTFO of the USA and that I dont love it, then no it is not your business and you are way out of your place in doing so. Originally Posted by rioseco

We all have to find some way to get along. Unfortunately I think politics brings out the worst in everyone. The truth of the matter is that the politicians in DC don't give a shit about us anyway. They're fine with us bickering as long as it keeps our eyes averted as they continue to get away with shady shit.

when I was your age, pussy was free
Originally Posted by cptjohnstone

Sorry buddy, your sister doesn't count.

Why don't you guys just secede? You don't like America and you think you can do better so just gtfo Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

Asking a republican to be sensible is like asking a republican to be sensible. It just ain't gonna happen.

When a man tells me to GTFO of the USA and that I dont love it, then no it is not your business and you are way out of your place in doing so. Originally Posted by rioseco

Only one way to find out if you love America, Cornholio.

Do you wear an American flag lapel pin on your ... overalls?

GTFO, you anti-American slime!

Only one way to find out if you love America, Cornholio.

Do you wear an American flag lapel pin on your ... overalls?

GTFO, you anti-American slime!

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

You see there UnderConstruction.....you see what happens when you say shit like that ?
The turd burgler Yssup comes out from under his rock and starts vomiting all over himself.
Please do all a favor. Dont fall for it. Dont be a dick like Yssup. He is just angry because he cant fit in with anyone.

Here's Truman AND Eisenhower both quoted as saying we didn't need to drop them because Japan was already going to surrender.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/...ambitions.html Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

I read the entire article, undercunt. I could find no such quote by Harry ("the buck stops here") Truman, who made the actual decision to drop the bombs. Would you please find the direct quote and point it out for everyone?


Btw, is this quote an example of the "binary thinking" that you keep bitching about?

"Japan surrendered because the Soviet Union began an invasion a few days after the Hiroshima bombing, not because of the atomic bombs themselves, he (Kuznick) says."

It appears your simple-minded historian from American University (Peter Kuznick) believes it has to be 100% one or the other.

There's nothing in your article about President Truman or General Marshall believing the bomb was unnecessary, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion. "Dugout" Doug's post-war relationship with Truman is well documented, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion; hence, his remarks regarding Truman should be taken with a grain of salt. Further, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion, it should be remembered that "Dugout" Doug was the one who wanted to use nuclear weapons against the North Koreans and create a nuclear "no man's land" in CHINA! It also should be remembered how General Curtis LeMay was one those air power advocates seeking to advance his agenda for making the Air Force a separate military branch -- and that he preached that air power alone could have won WWII without the Army, Navy and Marines and that the Normandy invasion was "unnecessary", you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

+1

If you listened to historical illiterates like undercunt and sham-scam, you would think Gen. Douglas McArthur and Gen. Curtis LeMay were anti-nuke peace activists!

.

Will someone tell Uber Cunt (he is on ignore) that the Soviet Union went to war with Japan because they agreed to attack Japan 90 days after the surrender of Germany and not because of the atomic bomb which brings me to another hidden point; the Soviets knew about the bomb because of communist sympathizers working for FDR and later Truman. (Read the Venona Papers)

I would also not be surprised that Truman or Eisenhower (MacArthur?) felt that Japan would surrender but at what cost? That is what they had to answer for themselves. Thousands of American, British, and Aussie POWs, millions of civilians would probably die if surrender was delayed for a long time and Japan was not ready to give up yet. The Imperial Army tried to kidnap the Emperor which failed because more moderate forces realized the war was over but the army didn't. They believe that facing millions of casualties would force the allies to pause and sue for a conditional peace.

I read the entire article, undercunt. I could find no such quote by Harry ("the buck stops here") Truman, who made the actual decision to drop the bombs. Would you please find the direct quote and point it out for everyone?

Btw, is this quote an example of the "binary thinking" that you keep bitching about?

"Japan surrendered because the Soviet Union began an invasion a few days after the Hiroshima bombing, not because of the atomic bombs themselves, he (Kuznick) says."

It appears your simple-minded historian from American University (Peter Kuznick) believes it has to be 100% one or the other.


+1

If you listened to historical illiterates like undercunt and sham-scam, you would think Gen. Douglas McArthur and Gen. Curtis LeMay were anti-nuke peace activists! Originally Posted by lustylad

People like Peter Kuznick curiously always *forget* to mention how Stalin's knowledge of the bomb forged the time table for the Soviet Union plans to invade Manchuria.

Many Americans who consider the use of the atomic bombs a cruel, racist mistake take no account of the Japanese yearning to die magnificently. Many would argue that the military facts proved Japan was defeated without the appalling slaughter at Hiroshima and Nagasaki ― the same facts, to the extent that the Japanese knew them, which increased the appeal of a death that demonstrated denial of self-interest and even community benefit. Belief counted for more than reason, the purity of motive more than the result or the righteousness of cause. The ability to defy rationality and logic was itself a triumph, which was surely why many young pilots felt only disgust and disgrace when they crashed without dying ― and why others were plunged into depression when their missions were cancelled or had to be aborted before they could make their sacrifice. Their feelings went beyond shame; in their own words, they felt deprived of death... [T]his merits surprise if one forgets that rational measurement also made little difference in larger war issues. Japan was defeated not only before Hiroshima but well before L-day on Okinawa yet the carnage there was only beginning.

"If in doubt whether to live or die, it is always better to die" ― A saying repeated to the kamikaze pilots and other Japanese warriors.

(p. 212, Tennozan: The Battle of Okinawa and the Atomic Bomb. George. Fiefer (1992)).

Will someone tell Uber Cunt (he is on ignore) that the Soviet Union went to war with Japan because they agreed to attack Japan 90 days after the surrender of Germany and not because of the atomic bomb which brings me to another hidden point; the Soviets knew about the bomb because of communist sympathizers working for FDR and later Truman. (Read the Venona Papers)

I would also not be surprised that Truman or Eisenhower (MacArthur?) felt that Japan would surrender but at what cost? That is what they had to answer for themselves. Thousands of American, British, and Aussie POWs, millions of civilians would probably die if surrender was delayed for a long time and Japan was not ready to give up yet. The Imperial Army tried to kidnap the Emperor which failed because more moderate forces realized the war was over but the army didn't. They believe that facing millions of casualties would force the allies to pause and sue for a conditional peace. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

And don't forget how Ol' Uncle Joe promised the Poles he was going to help them in their fight against the Nazis in 1939.

Afraid I have to agree with JD on this one. The bomb was almost certainly the cause and Stalin's greed to claim some of the spoils was the effect.

But neither of you are addressing the other big (maybe biggest) reason: the US agreed that the emperor would not be tried for war crimes.

Decisions of that magnitude (surrendering) are almost never single issue decisions.

I read the entire article, undercunt. I could find no such quote by Harry ("the buck stops here") Truman, who made the actual decision to drop the bombs. Would you please find the direct quote and point it out for everyone?


Btw, is this quote an example of the "binary thinking" that you keep bitching about?

"Japan surrendered because the Soviet Union began an invasion a few days after the Hiroshima bombing, not because of the atomic bombs themselves, he (Kuznick) says."

It appears your simple-minded historian from American University (Peter Kuznick) believes it has to be 100% one or the other.





+1

If you listened to historical illiterates like undercunt and sham-scam, you would think Gen. Douglas McArthur and Gen. Curtis LeMay were anti-nuke peace activists!

. Originally Posted by lustylad

Never said they were activists. As for Truman, it's Eisenhower. I misspoke. You know, Eisenhower, commanding general, future president?

Never said they were activists. As for Truman, it's Eisenhower. I misspoke. You know, Eisenhower, commanding general, future president? Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

You mean the presidency wherein "MAD" -- the acronym for "Mutually Assured Destruction" -- became a household word, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion?

There is more than 50 years of history to Pyongyang's attempt to gain a nuclear weapon, triggered in part by threats from Presidents Harry S. Truman and Dwight D. Eisenhower to end the Korean War.

In 1950, when a reporter asked Truman whether he would use atomic bombs at a time when the war was going badly, the president said, "That includes every weapon we have."

Three years later, Eisenhower made a veiled threat, saying he would "remove all restraints in our use of weapons" if the North Korean government did not negotiate in good faith an ending to that bloody war.

In 1957 [Ike's administration], the United States placed nuclear-tipped Matador missiles in South Korea, to be followed in later years, under both Republican and Democratic administrations, by nuclear artillery, most of which was placed within miles of the demilitarized zone.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101401068.html

BTW, Old-THUMPER, it wasn't JD who pointed out that Stalin's time table for invading Manchuria was based on knowing about the bomb. "August Storm" began when it did because of Hiroshima, and the U.S. didn't publicly yield on the emperor until after the Japanese had surrendered, Old-THUMPER.

Afraid I have to agree with JD on this one. The bomb was almost certainly the cause and Stalin's greed to claim some of the spoils was the effect.

But neither of you are addressing the other big (maybe biggest) reason: the US agreed that the emperor would not be tried for war crimes.

Decisions of that magnitude (surrendering) are almost never single issue decisions. Originally Posted by Old-T

Don't be "Afraid" Old-Thunderbird... Your Ozombies friends will always love you.

You mean the presidency wherein "MAD" -- the acronym for "Mutually Assured Destruction" -- became a household word, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion?



BTW, Old-THUMPER, it wasn't JD who pointed out that Stalin's time table for invading Manchuria was based on knowing about the bomb. "August Storm" began when it did because of Hiroshima, and the U.S. didn't publicly yield on the emperor until after the Japanese had surrendered, Old-THUMPER. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

what does korea have to do with ww2?

I read the entire article, undercunt. I could find no such quote by Harry ("the buck stops here") Truman, who made.....
. Originally Posted by lustylad

It's Eisenhower. Like I said before. Harry Truman, defending the actions of Harry Truman does not provide credibility to any argument. You know, kind of like how you guys dont give a shit about anything obama says about his policies. I wouldn't either.

If you listened to historical illiterates like undercunt and sham-scam, you would think Gen. Douglas McArthur and Gen. Curtis LeMay were anti-nuke peace activists!

. Originally Posted by lustylad

They weren't. That's exactly the point. They weren't, yet they were still against the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That should tell you about all you need to know.

Go stick your dick in a light socket, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion, the electroshock therapy might unscramble your Kool Aid sotted, lib-retarded brain. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

That was hilarious!!! (But, you are otherwise kind of repetitive and look just as stupid as the idiot IvaBiggen you go back and forth with on so many useless threads.)