Poll Says That A Majority Of Millenials Believe Dropping A-Bombs Was Wrong

You correct grammar, love fuchsia and quotation marks, you have no knowledge about anything in particular, you offered me counseling on how to get in touch with my feminine side, and you know what my insides are like?. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Still posting? A flaw (there are many) in your conclusions is that you judge others by your own standards .... You are not alone .... because there are several others on here that post shorter, but equally incoherent, rants in an effort to marginalize or minimize others' posts. A problem with the flaw is that your assessments are incorrect and you underestimate those around you.

Customarily people who shout erroneously believe that a louder voice improves communication, because, as you, the speaker is not able to communicate with the person TO WHOM they are attempting to communicate. That probably works for you around weak minded, wimps, but it shows your ignorance and inability to communicate ideas on an equal playing field.

BTW, attacking my grammar doesn't detract from your inherent ignorance, because I reserve bringing up "grammar issues" to loudmouth, know-nothings like you who ridicule others in an attempt to quell their discourse and act as though you are intellectually superior, which you consistently and constantly show you are not.

If you attempted to dialogue in an environment where an independent referee blew a whistle, tossed a flag, and made "foul" calls you would be spending a lot of time "backed up to your starting line." It's DUMB for you to call "your own game"!

There is another explanation for the BIG BLUE LETTERS .... you have not graduated from your Big Chief Tablet days. Which one do you prefer ...

1. Loud mouth, know-thing
2. Big Chief Tablet NonGraduate.

As for your "insides" .... Not being acquainted with your daily food intake the specific chemical content of the hot gas you expel would be difficult to analyze or even speculate as to the "specific content," but suffice it for the moment to say that you are full of hot, stinky gas.

Still posting? Why would I stop? Because a douche-bag with sand in her vagina spent a long time writing down her hopes and dreams as well as what can only be her opinions? A flaw (there are many) So many you can't name any. in your conclusions is that you judge others by your own standards .... You are not alone .... because there are several others on here that post shorter, but equally incoherent, rants in an effort to marginalize or minimize others' posts. If pointing out false facts or someone playing fast and loose with the truth is a flaw then tough shit A problem with the flaw is that your assessments are incorrect and you underestimate those around you. Your assessment of this situation is as good as the facts you used to build it. No facts? Your typical unsupported fictional guess. Plus I could never underestimate your capacity to be wrong or to pout..
Customarily people who shout erroneously believe that a louder voice improves communication, because, as you, the speaker is not able to communicate with the person TO WHOM they are attempting to communicate. That probably works for you around weak minded, wimps, but it shows your ignorance and inability to communicate ideas on an equal playing field.

BTW, attacking my grammar doesn't detract from your inherent ignorance, because I reserve bringing up "grammar issues" to loudmouth, know-nothings like you who ridicule others in an attempt to quell their discourse and act as though you are intellectually superior, which you consistently and constantly show you are not.
Quell their discord? I invite it. But this little "get it off your chest" rant is not discord where you provide evidence of your claims. This is just whining. You're frustrated, constipated and you're angry. That explains you being full of shit. If you can't articulate your thoughts, your Tourette like verbal ejaculations just end up on your chest or upper thorax I should say. Just like all the other types of ejaculate you encounter
If you attempted to dialogue in an environment where an independent referee blew a whistle, tossed a flag, and made "foul" calls you would be spending a lot of time "backed up to your starting line." It's DUMB for you to call "your own game"!

There is another explanation for the BIG BLUE LETTERS .... you have not graduated from your Big Chief Tablet days. Which one do you prefer ...Big blue letters I make by choice. Your big blue balls are your lot in life

1. Loud mouth, know-thing
2. Big Chief Tablet NonGraduate.
Another guy who wants to hold everybody back to his own limits
As for your "insides" .... Not being acquainted with your daily food intake the specific chemical content of the hot gas you expel would be difficult to analyze or even speculate as to the "specific content," but suffice it for the moment to say that you are full of hot, stinky gas Go ahead and suffice anything you want. but I'll be the judge whether or not your sufficing suffices in a discussion. Because people who rely on sufficing instead of actual facts tend to have a very low bar for proof and never come back with the goods. Originally Posted by LexusLover

No point answering point by point. Because once again you have oh so eloquently laid out the same bullshit. With no examples. As usual. Give me examples of me being wrong or point out something I'm ignorant of. I know when, where, and who started the grammar war. Do you? Since you're so smart tell me why you haven't said anything about my grammar or big blue letters before this? Tell me something that makes y'all look less desperate. High standards of grammar and less so for facts. I can and will provide examples if you want. Just say so.
I love the referee idea too.. Because he would listen to you for a while, just to be polite, and then ask what examples of my posts prove your "point"? He would say as long as a period of time as you have been making these unsubstantiated claims, you would think you would have at least a couple of examples by now. I can see where you would feel "less than intellectual" when asked to produce something a 9th grade debater would have before he even considered getting into the fray
The ref would look at you, shake his head, and say, "Is that all you've got?"

If we had invaded Japan there would be fewer millennials. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

no, fewer baby boomers.

[snip]
I hope all your children and grandchildren suffer the brunt of diversity/affirmative action, go broke and come live in your shitty little house and eat your WalMart food while I dine at 3 Forks any fucking time I want to do so, or I send out my maid to pick up something at Eatzi's, you dick chomping liberal asshole.
[snip] Originally Posted by DSK

why do you hate white people?

I thought this thread was about criticizing the A-Bombs dropped on Japan. Originally Posted by LexusLover

yeah, this thread went waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off topic.

definitely, not popcorn time.

i'm not impressed.

why do you hate white people? Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

He don't hate white people. Why would you say that?

The "Soviets"? Originally Posted by LexusLover

better known as Russians.

Somebody said somewhere in this thread that the Russians didn't have a navy. wrong they had a navy but it wasn't like what the Germans, Japan or US had.

there some myth in that article about Japan surrender due to 2 nuke bombs dropped on them.

Japan didn't surrender because of the nuclear bombings.

Japan surrendered because USSR had invaded & conquered 4 northern japanese islands and was threatening the Japanese mainland in the month of August.

There was very good chance that Russia would conquer Japan before the United states could as the U.S. had set the invasion date on november 1945.

He don't hate white people. Why would you say that?

Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

did you read DSK's diatribe based on that quote I snipped from? there was a lot of hate in that post

Its his take on what he considers the sin of white privilege.

Somebody said somewhere in this thread that the Russians didn't have a navy. wrong they had a navy but it wasn't like what the Germans, Japan or US had.

there some myth in that article about Japan surrende due to 2 nuke bombs dropped on them.

Japan didn't surrender because of the nuclear bombings.

Japan surrendered because USSR had invaded & conquered 4 northern japanese islands and was threatening the Japanese mainland in the month of August.

There was very good chance that Russia would conquer Japan before the United states could as the U.S. had set the invasion date on november 1945. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

You are forgetting that Stalin had spies and that he knew about the bomb and it's potential to end the war before he could get in on the spoils in Asia. Hence, Stalin's knowledge of the bomb was itself a driving factor in determining the Soviet time table for entering into the war against Japan.

Glantz, David M., LTC. The Soviet Strategic Offensive in Manchuria, 1945: ‘August Storm’. London: Crown House, 2003. pp. xxvii, 451.

You are forgetting that Stalin had spies and that he knew about the bomb and it's potential to end the war before he could get in on the spoils in Asia. Hence, Stalin's knowledge of the bomb was a factor in determining the Soviet time table for entering into the war against Japan.

Glantz, David M., LTC. The Soviet Strategic Offensive in Manchuria, 1945: ‘August Storm’. London: Crown House, 2003. pp. xxvii, 451.

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

that was prolly part of the factor that went into Stalin's decision making.

however, the initial upside is that the Japanese army could not stop the Russian army once it entered the Manchurian territory. Russian army went thru the japanese army like a hot knife on butter.

theres some thing to be said for Japanese rulers, they were ruthless, but they weren't stupid and they were practical. i think they were more worried about the japanese culture not surviving under communist rule.

that was prolly part of the factor that went into Stalin's decision making.

however, the initial upside is that the Japanese army could not stop the Russian army once it entered the Manchurian territory. Russian army went thru the japanese army like a hot knife on butter.

theres some thing to be said for Japanese rulers, they were ruthless, but they weren't stupid and they were practical. i think they were more worried about the japanese culture not surviving under communist rule. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

But it remains that it was the bomb's mere existence that determined the date for the Soviet invasion of Manchuria, and it was the second A-bomb used against Nagasaki that drove Hirohito to ignore the advice of his advisors and agree to the allied demand for unconditional surrender against the recommendations of his advisors: which precipitated an incipient but failed coup by those who wished to continue to fight.

Somebody said somewhere in this thread that the Russians didn't have a navy. wrong they had a navy but it wasn't like what the Germans, Japan or US had.

there some myth in that article about Japan surrender due to 2 nuke bombs dropped on them.

Japan didn't surrender because of the nuclear bombings.

Japan surrendered because USSR had invaded & conquered 4 northern japanese islands and was threatening the Japanese mainland in the month of August.

There was very good chance that Russia would conquer Japan before the United states could as the U.S. had set the invasion date on november 1945. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

i said that. and they didn't have a true white water navy. those islands were lightly defended. Russia would have found it far harder to invade the main island of Japan. Russians had no real Navy. Stalin had purged most of the Russian admirals in the 1930's. Russia was never a factor in naval power during WWII.

the Japanese navy was a shell of itself in 1945. the US navy had defeated it at every turn. their only decisive victory was Pearl Harbor and that was a sneak attack.

that said, if the US navy had allowed the Japanese Navy to operate freely, they still could have waxed Russia's feeble naval operations.

https://www.quora.com/What-was-the-r...-their-weapons

i said that. and they didn't have a true white water navy. those islands were lightly defended. Russia would have found it far harder to invade the main island of Japan. Russians had no real Navy. Stalin had purged most of the Russian admirals in the 1930's. Russia was never a factor in naval power during WWII. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

nonetheless, Stalin being who he is, a stubborn asshole, would have attempted the invasion had japan not surrendered to U.S.

i said that. and they didn't have a true white water navy. those islands were lightly defended. Russia would have found it far harder to invade the main island of Japan. Russians had no real Navy. Stalin had purged most of the Russian admirals in the 1930's. Russia was never a factor in naval power during WWII.

the Japanese navy was a shell of itself in 1945. the US navy had defeated it at every turn. their only decisive victory was Pearl Harbor and that was a sneak attack.

that said, if the US navy had allowed the Japanese Navy to operate freely, they still could have waxed Russia's feeble naval operations.

https://www.quora.com/What-was-the-r...-their-weapons Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

FDR's Lend-Lease program was prepared to remedy some of that Soviet short fall with 'Project Hula'. A few years ago, I was fortunate to meet one of the WWII navy veterans involved in the project, and it's from him that I learned of the project. He was aboard the U.S.S. Belfast at the time, and he helped train the Soviet crew that took possession of that ship.

nonetheless, Stalin being who he is, a stubborn asshole, would have attempted the invasion had japan not surrendered to U.S. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

Agreed, but he probably would have first let the U.S. and other allies bleed for a while like he let the Poles bleed when they rose up against the Nazis towards the end of the war.