• Quebec beekeeper accused of Nazi war crimes
    316 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Lankist;35758605] Remember that time when you said all japanese were suicidal and murderous, and then acted like some people who killed themselves when their homes were being FIREBOMBED was proof? Yeah. That part.[/QUOTE] The suicides were very justified. I'd rather kill myself than get sent to a prison camp in either country.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;35757526]wow mod favouritism... just kidding. ok dude[/QUOTE] wrong wording
[QUOTE=Lankist;35758605]Uhm no, according to the people who were IN those prison camps, they were not a fucking picnic. I'm not saying you were fine with them. I'm saying your stupid racist bullshit is why they existed in the first place. [editline]29th April 2012[/editline] Remember that time when you said all japanese were suicidal and murderous, and then acted like some people who killed themselves when their homes were being FIREBOMBED was proof? Yeah. That part.[/QUOTE] Wow you really enjoy making bull shit up do you. I never said they were a picnic. How the fuck am I racist at all? I never said they were all suicidal and murderous. "Some people who killed themselves when their homes were being firebombed" lmfao. Nothing in that building said the people who killed themselves were being firebombed when it happened. I never knew that you could pull things from your ass in such frequency.
[QUOTE=ThePinkPanzer;35756280]Yeah because it is so easy to fucking land troops on a mountainous island with every possible point for landing covered by enough anti tank, ship and infantry positions to wipe out an army. [B]With every civilian perfectly prepared to commit suicide or to attack[/B] you in the event you get past the beaches. So fucking easy![/QUOTE] Every civilian in the entire country is the enemy That's what you said. [editline]29th April 2012[/editline] backpedal backpedal backpedal
[QUOTE=Lankist;35759139]Every civilian in the entire country is the enemy That's what you said. [editline]29th April 2012[/editline] backpedal backpedal backpedal[/QUOTE] Hah what, I said that the civilians would be fighting along side the soldiers. Nearly 30 million civilians were drafted. Oh I forgot you just cherry pick things from the thread sorry.
[QUOTE=crackberry;35758326]I phrased myself wrong. I don't think anyone who was a Nazi is guilty of crimes against humanity, but someone like this man, who gunned down so many, and the ones who spent considerable time killing them, should not be let off just because they are old. They should have to spend the rest of their short lives in misery for the misery they caused for millions of people.[/QUOTE] There still has not been any proof that he did it. What if he did not do it and dies from the stress caused by the trial?
[QUOTE=ThePinkPanzer;35759344]Hah what, I said that the civilians would be fighting along side the soldiers. Nearly 30 million civilians were drafted. Oh I forgot you just cherry pick things from the thread sorry.[/QUOTE] No, you said [I]"With every civilian perfectly prepared to commit suicide or to attack you in the event you get past the beaches. So fucking easy!"[/I] Every civilian. You justified the bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki by saying every single person in the entire country was a combatant. [editline]29th April 2012[/editline] Perhaps, if that isn't what you [I]meant[/I], you should think about things before you fucking say them.
[QUOTE=Lankist;35759696]No, you said [I]"With every civilian perfectly prepared to commit suicide or to attack you in the event you get past the beaches. So fucking easy!"[/I] Every civilian. You justified the bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki by saying every single person in the entire country was a combatant. [editline]29th April 2012[/editline] Perhaps, if that isn't what you [I]meant[/I], you should think about things before you fucking say them.[/QUOTE] Or you could try not to turn everything into "LOLZ U R RACIST!!!!"
[QUOTE=Lankist;35759696]No, you said [I]"With every civilian perfectly prepared to commit suicide or to attack you in the event you get past the beaches. So fucking easy!"[/I] Every civilian. You justified the bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki by saying every single person in the entire country was a combatant. [editline]29th April 2012[/editline] Perhaps, if that isn't what you [I]meant[/I], you should think about things before you fucking say them.[/QUOTE] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_downfall[/url]
And now you're engaging in ad hominem personal attacks rather than addressing the points. Can I assume that means you're done here? If not, feel free to start acting like an adult and formulate an actual response. I laid your words out right in front of you, plain as day, and all you can do is type in 1337 speak as though that changes what you said. If you'd like to retract that statement, feel free. Until then, saying "all japanese are kamakazi killers" is racist. [editline]29th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Craig Willmore;35759781][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_downfall[/url][/QUOTE] Hey, buddy. If you'd like to participate, how's about you actually use your own words rather than posting links to Wikipedia. I'm not going to engage in a discussion with a Wikipedia page.
this article is the bee's kn oh wait yeah no fun allowed
[QUOTE=Lankist;35759804] Hey, buddy. If you'd like to participate, how's about you actually use your own words rather than posting links to Wikipedia. I'm not going to engage in a discussion with a Wikipedia page.[/QUOTE] k, I'll quote since you can't open links. [quote]Because the U.S. military planners assumed "that operations in this area will be opposed not only by the available organized military forces of the Empire, but also by a fanatically hostile population",[10] high casualties were thought to be inevitable, but nobody knew with certainty how high. Several people made estimates, but they varied widely in numbers, assumptions, and purposes, which included advocating for and against the invasion. Afterwards, they were reused in the debate over the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Casualty estimates were based on the experience of the preceding campaigns, drawing different lessons: In a letter sent to Gen. Curtis LeMay from Gen. Lauris Norstad, when LeMay assumed command of the B-29 force on Guam, Norstad told LeMay that if an invasion took place, it would cost the US "half a million" dead.[41] In a study done by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in April, the figures of 7.45 casualties/1,000 man-days and 1.78 fatalities/1,000 man-days were developed. This implied that a 90-day Olympic campaign would cost 456,000 casualties, including 109,000 dead or missing. If Coronet took another 90 days, the combined cost would be 1,200,000 casualties, with 267,000 fatalities.[42] A study done by Adm. Nimitz's staff in May estimated 49,000 U.S casualties in the first 30 days, including 5,000 at sea.[43] A study done by General MacArthur's staff in June estimated 23,000 US casualties in the first 30 days and 125,000 after 120 days.[44] When these figures were questioned by General Marshall, MacArthur submitted a revised estimate of 105,000, in part by deducting wounded men able to return to duty.[45] In a conference with President Truman on June 18, Marshall, taking the Battle of Luzon as the best model for Olympic, thought the Americans would suffer 31,000 casualties in the first 30 days (and ultimately 20% of Japanese casualties, which implied a total of 70,000 casualties).[46] Adm. Leahy, more impressed by the Battle of Okinawa, thought the American forces would suffer a 35% casualty rate (implying an ultimate toll of 268,000).[47] Admiral King thought that casualties in the first 30 days would fall between Luzon and Okinawa, i.e., between 31,000 and 41,000.[47] Of these estimates, only Nimitz's included losses of the forces at sea, though kamikazes had inflicted 1.78 fatalities per kamikaze pilot in the Battle of Okinawa,[48] and troop transports off Kyūshū would have been much more exposed. A study done for Secretary of War Henry Stimson's staff by William Shockley estimated that conquering Japan would cost 1.7-4 million American casualties, including 400,000-800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese fatalities. The key assumption was large-scale participation by civilians in the defense of Japan.[1] Outside the government, well-informed civilians were also making guesses. Kyle Palmer, war correspondent for the Los Angeles Times, said half a million to a million Americans would die by the end of the war. Herbert Hoover, in a memorandums submitted to Truman and Stimson, also estimated 500,000 to 1,000,000 fatalities, and those were believed to be conservative estimates; but it is not known if Hoover discussed these specific figures in his meetings with Truman. The chief of the Army Operations division thought them "entirely too high" under "our present plan of campaign."[49] The Battle of Okinawa ran up 72,000 US casualties in 82 days, of whom 12,510 were killed or missing. (This is conservative, because it excludes several thousand US soldiers who died after the battle indirectly, from their wounds.) The entire island of Okinawa is 464 sq mi (1,200 km2). If the US casualty rate during the invasion of Japan had been only 5% as high per unit area as it was at Okinawa, the US would still have lost 297,000 soldiers (killed or missing). [b]Nearly 500,000 Purple Heart medals were manufactured in anticipation of the casualties resulting from the invasion of Japan. To the present date, all the American military casualties of the 60 years following the end of World War II, including the Korean and Vietnam Wars, have not exceeded that number. In 2003, there were still 120,000 of these Purple Heart medals in stock.[50] There are so many in surplus that combat units in Iraq and Afghanistan are able to keep Purple Hearts on-hand for immediate award to soldiers wounded on the field[/b][/quote] More Americans, Japanese Soldiers, and Japanese Civilians would have been killed or wounded in an invasion of mainland Japan then were killed by both Atomic Bombings AND the Firebombing of Tokyo. Read some of the publications about the last few months of war before you attempt engage in debate of the subject please. A combination of the Soviet Declaration of War, Allied Bombings (atomic and otherwise) and allied submarine attacks on shipping among others caused Japan to surrender, not just one. Yeah, hundreds of thousands of civilians died. It's fucked up, but it brought the war to end all wars to an end. Every single major nation in WW2 bombed cities, keep that in mind. Interment camps were not justifiable nor should anyone attempt to justify them. It was fear-mongering.
We've already talked about that. Pure conjecture, what might have happened does not dismiss what did happen. Operation Downfall's estimates also did not account for massive and rapid Soviet advances into Japanese territory (which scared Japan a hell of a lot more than the nukes did).
[QUOTE=Lankist;35759939](which scared Japan a hell of a lot more than the nukes did).[/QUOTE] [citation needed] [quote]These "twin shocks"—the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and the Soviet entry—had immediate profound effects on Prime Minister Suzuki and Foreign Minister Tōgō Shigenori, who concurred that the government must end the war at once.[82] However, the senior leadership of the Japanese Army took the news in stride, grossly underestimating the scale of the attack. With the support of Minister of War Anami, they did start preparing to impose martial law on the nation, to stop anyone attempting to make peace.[83] Hirohito told Kido to "quickly control the situation" because "the Soviet Union has declared war and today began hostilities against us."[84] The Supreme Council met at 10:30. Suzuki, who had just come from a meeting with the emperor, said it was impossible to continue the war. Tōgō Shigenori said that they could accept the terms of the Potsdam Declaration but needed a guarantee of the emperor's position. Navy Minister Yonai said that they had to make some diplomatic proposal—they could no longer afford to wait for better circumstances. In the middle of the meeting, shortly after 11:00, news arrived that Nagasaki, on the west coast of Kyūshū, had been hit by a second atomic bomb (called "Fat Man" by the United States). By the time the meeting ended, the Big Six had split 3–3. Suzuki, Tōgō, and Admiral Yonai favored Tōgō's one additional condition to Potsdam, while Generals Anami, Umezu, and Admiral Toyoda insisted on three further terms that modified Potsdam: that Japan handle their own disarmament, that Japan deal with any Japanese war criminals, and that there be no occupation of Japan.[85][/quote]
[QUOTE=Lankist;35759804]And now you're engaging in ad hominem personal attacks rather than addressing the points. Can I assume that means you're done here? If not, feel free to start acting like an adult and formulate an actual response. I laid your words out right in front of you, plain as day, and all you can do is type in 1337 speak as though that changes what you said. If you'd like to retract that statement, feel free. Until then, saying "all japanese are kamakazi killers" is racist. [editline]29th April 2012[/editline] Hey, buddy. If you'd like to participate, how's about you actually use your own words rather than posting links to Wikipedia. I'm not going to engage in a discussion with a Wikipedia page.[/QUOTE] We have given you tons of sources and facts, tell me when YOU want to act like an adult and not just run around screaming racist at everything.
[QUOTE=Craig Willmore;35760080][citation needed][/QUOTE] I am not Wikipedia. I've already explained why I'm not reading Wikipedia sources. As for evidence to that effect, Thisispain posted a link to a much more academic thesis on Japan's imminent surrender following the first blast and the misinterpretation of their request for time as they deliberate as being "fuck you, Truman." If you'd like to read the thread, feel free. Otherwise, I am not going to repeat verbatim a conversation we have already had.
[QUOTE=Lankist;35760652]I am not Wikipedia. I've already explained why I'm not reading Wikipedia sources. [/QUOTE] Because you are a lazy fuck who can not bother to scroll down and see the sources himself?
[QUOTE=ThePinkPanzer;35760896]Because you are a lazy fuck who can not bother to scroll down and see the sources himself?[/QUOTE] No because you're a lazy fuck who didn't verify the information yourself and then reference the information directly. Again: You went on Wikipedia and read someone else's interpretation of information. You didn't click any of those links. You didn't verify any of those sources. It isn't my job to vet your shit for you. [editline]29th April 2012[/editline] And then, to top it all off, when contrary evidence is posted of a much more reputable nature than wiki-fucking-pedia, you dismiss it offhand and ignore it completely. Here's where we were before you got sand all up in your vagina about Lankist being a doodie-head if you'd like to resume the discussion: [quote]No, you said "With every civilian perfectly prepared to commit suicide or to attack you in the event you get past the beaches. So fucking easy!" Every civilian. You justified the bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki by saying every single person in the entire country was a combatant.[/quote] This is false given how Thisispain already demonstrated that the Japanese were on the verge of surrender following the Soviet invasion.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;35761202]Lmao I like how you're calling people lazy fucks when you have yet to post a single source, no one gives a fuck if you read this shit in a book, provide evidence for your argument everyone can see. I mean for fucks sake even Wikipedia is a more valid source than some "books" you read that you have yet to name, who made them? When were they made? Are you sure they're accurate?[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.greenwych.ca/hiro2bmb.htm[/url] Repeating Thisispain: The Japanese were incredibly close to surrender BEFORE the first bomb. [I]Already the Japanese were looking for terms of surrender, but these approaches for peace from Japan, not made public, even to members of the Manhattan Project, were ignored. The U.S. wanted no terms, no conditions; not even the safety of the Emperor could be guaranteed (although that request was granted, after the two atom bombs were dropped). Japan had to surrender immediately and unconditionally - the U.S. knowing full well that Japan could never go for that. (Add'l evidence, in square brackets, added 1999): [That there really were surrender overtures by the Japanese was confirmed by a man who ought to know, CIA chief Allen Dulles. In an interview with Clifford Evans (1/19/63 (NY) WOR-TV), Dulles said: "I had been in touch with certain Japanese.... They...were ready to surrender provided the Emperor could be saved so as to have unity in Japan. I took that word to Secretary (of State) Stimson at Potsdam July 20, 1945...." [Just weeks later, August 6 and August 9, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed.] [/I] They were not going to fight down to the last man, woman and child. The war was winding down and Japan was accepting its loss prior to the first bomb, with the only condition being that the Emperor remain in power in order to reunify the broken state. [editline]29th April 2012[/editline] Furthermore I don't know how you guys expected a broken military leadership in 1945 to assess just how much damage had been dealt and then surrender unconditionally in three days. Truman was not a stupid man. He did not expect them to surrender between the two. His demands were designed to justify a second bombing.
[QUOTE=Lankist;35761260][url]http://www.greenwych.ca/hiro2bmb.htm[/url] Repeating Thisispain: The Japanese were incredibly close to surrender BEFORE the first bomb. [I]Already the Japanese were looking for terms of surrender, but these approaches for peace from Japan, not made public, even to members of the Manhattan Project, were ignored. The U.S. wanted no terms, no conditions; not even the safety of the Emperor could be guaranteed (although that request was granted, after the two atom bombs were dropped). Japan had to surrender immediately and unconditionally - the U.S. knowing full well that Japan could never go for that. (Add'l evidence, in square brackets, added 1999): [That there really were surrender overtures by the Japanese was confirmed by a man who ought to know, CIA chief Allen Dulles. In an interview with Clifford Evans (1/19/63 (NY) WOR-TV), Dulles said: "I had been in touch with certain Japanese.... They...were ready to surrender provided the Emperor could be saved so as to have unity in Japan. I took that word to Secretary (of State) Stimson at Potsdam July 20, 1945...." [Just weeks later, August 6 and August 9, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed.] [/I] They were not going to fight down to the last man, woman and child. The war was winding down and Japan was accepting its loss prior to the first bomb, with the only condition being that the Emperor remain in power in order to reunify the broken state. [editline]29th April 2012[/editline] Furthermore I don't know how you guys expected a broken military leadership in 1945 to assess just how much damage had been dealt and then surrender unconditionally in three days. Truman was not a stupid man. He did not expect them to surrender between the two. His demands were designed to justify a second bombing.[/QUOTE] If the bomb was unnecessary, then Soviet intervention was unnecessary considering the invasion took place after the first bomb was dropped (hint, both were necessary, japan had a multitude of chances to surrender and they still didn't even surrender for weeks after the invasion and atomic bombings) [url]http://www.ndl.go.jp/constitution/e/etc/c06.html[/url]
[QUOTE=Craig Willmore;35761391]If the bomb was unnecessary, then Soviet intervention was unnecessary considering the invasion took place after the first bomb was dropped (hint, both were necessary, japan had a multitude of chances to surrender and they still didn't even surrender for weeks after the invasion and atomic bombings) [url]http://www.ndl.go.jp/constitution/e/etc/c06.html[/url][/QUOTE] The point is that they could have been pushed to surrender conventionally, and they were actively ASKING to surrender while their pleas were being ignored in favor of making and using a new atomic toy. Did you fucking read the link I posted, Captain Citation? Former CIA Chief Allen Dulles, acting during WWII: [I]"I had been in touch with certain Japanese.... They...were ready to surrender provided the Emperor could be saved so as to have unity in Japan. I took that word to Secretary (of State) Stimson at Potsdam July 20, 1945...."[/I] The Japanese were ASKING to surrender. They were fucking ASKING. The terms of surrender demanded by the United States were DESIGNED to be unacceptable to the Japanese solely because we WANTED to nuke them. They asked for one thing: let the Emperor stay in charge. They did not refuse surrender. We refused to let them surrender. Was that one man worth over 200.000 lives to you? Do NOT play the fucking "necessary" card with me again.
[QUOTE=Lankist;35761463]The point is that they could have been pushed to surrender conventionally, and they were actively ASKING to surrender while their pleas were being ignored in favor of making and using a new atomic toy. Did you fucking read the link I posted, Captain Citation? Former CIA Chief Allen Dulles, acting during WWII: [I]"I had been in touch with certain Japanese.... They...were ready to surrender provided the Emperor could be saved so as to have unity in Japan. I took that word to Secretary (of State) Stimson at Potsdam July 20, 1945...."[/I] The Japanese were ASKING to surrender. They were fucking ASKING. The terms of surrender demanded by the United States were DESIGNED to be unacceptable to the Japanese solely because we WANTED to nuke them. They asked for one thing: let the Emperor stay in charge. They did not refuse surrender. We refused to let them surrender. Was that one man worth over 200.000 lives to you? Do NOT play the fucking "necessary" card with me again.[/QUOTE] lol ad hominem [quote]The terms of surrender demanded by the United States were DESIGNED to be unacceptable to the Japanese solely because we WANTED to nuke them.[/quote] Read the Potsdam Declaration, considering that Japan STARTED the fucking war, it's a very acceptable peace accord. [quote]Ultimately, Japan accepted all of the demands contained in the Potsdam Declaration - however, the Japanese were able to secure critical assurances regarding the safety and position of the Emperor prior to the surrender.[/quote] They still accepted EVERYTHING in the Potsdam declaration, they delayed the inevitable. "you guys attacked us but we'll accept your surrender (how nice of us) and give you numerous concessions if you just surrender" "no fuck off" Japan declares war. Japan refuses to surrender numerous times. Japan is told they will be destroyed if they delay. Japan delays for a month. Japan gets nuked and invaded. Japan delays for a few more days. Japan gets nuked again. Japan surrenders End of. Seems like you are a USSR-apologist since you continually attempt to defend their invasion (after the nuke) but continually attack the use of nuclear weapons either both were wrong or both were right, there is no middle-ground
oh hey look who's ignoring evidence now [editline]29th April 2012[/editline] does this mean i can call you a lazy prick and rate every one of your posts dumb [editline]29th April 2012[/editline] ill start with rainbow
[QUOTE=LunchboxOfDoom;35756852] The whole "We only built and used the atomic bombs on Japan to intimidate the Soviet Union and establish ourselves in the world forever as a major nuclear superpower" claim originally came from a... "colorful" gentlemen, to say the least, by the name of Gar Alperovitz[/QUOTE] noooo it came from the actual documents from the Interim Committee
also they accepted everything in the accord because we fucking NUKED THEM, you git.
i'm confused dude, why do you completely ignore the part about japan wanting to surrender prior to the bombing?
[QUOTE=Lankist;35761655]also they accepted everything in the accord because we fucking NUKED THEM, you git.[/QUOTE] [quote]Seems like you are a USSR-apologist since you continually attempt to defend their invasion (after the nuke) but continually attack the use of nuclear weapons either both were wrong or both were right, there is no middle-ground[/QUOTE] answer please
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;35761656]i'm confused dude, why do you completely ignore the part about japan wanting to surrender prior to the bombing?[/QUOTE] They had one stipulation, and we ADDED the stipulation to Potsdam when they asked us about it, knowing that it would force their hand. We didn't give a fuck about the emperor. We wanted to impress the russians.
let me repeat this again: [b] the reason the Japanese did not accept the Potsdam Decleration is because it didn't involve the Soviets and their invasion of Japan, in which they swiftly destroyed Japanese military forces[/b]
[QUOTE=Craig Willmore;35761675]answer please[/QUOTE] what are you joseph fucking mccarthy no, sod off. I'll answer your questions when you stop ignoring my evidence.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.