It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: CalibratedZeus
So German and Japanese civilians were the only ones targeted? Never in WW2 did either of those two countries kill civilians of other nations?
What history lesson is this you intend to impart upon us? Millions of civilians were murdered by both Germany and Japan, look at what the Japanese did to China alone. Do not try to impart the moral standards of today upon decisions made almost 80 years ago, the world was a MUCH different place and a MUCH different respect of life was still present around the world.
A long story short, WW2 was a terrible global loss of life, civilian and combatant alike. And one can only hope to never see anything on the same scale again.
originally posted by: xuenchen
originally posted by: introvert
Japanese? No.
Germans? Yes, but that issue is much more complex. The US supported and funded Germany through it's Justice department and many corporations because it was fighting against the communist Soviet Union.
When the Soviet Union proved to be too much to handle for the Germans and the Allied nations, America allied with the Soviets and decided to ride their coat tails to victory.
Hmmm.
US deliveries to the USSR
originally posted by: introvert
Japanese? No.
Germans? Yes, but that issue is much more complex. The US supported and funded Germany through it's Justice department and many corporations because it was fighting against the communist Soviet Union.
When the Soviet Union proved to be too much to handle for the Germans and the Allied nations, America allied with the Soviets and decided to ride their coat tails to victory.
originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass
originally posted by: muSSang
It's a hard call, Japan would not surrender unconditionally, so a invasion plan was drawn up, this would of cost the allies more lives than the WMD's had taken.
I think the nukes were justified, remember if it wasn't nukes it was going to be bats armed with insidinary timered bombs. So in hindsight the WMD's actually saved lives.
I think you are on to something. The unwillingness to surrender is, in a sense, submitting to annihilation. It should be no surprise.
Uhhh. The Germans were doing just fine until the US joined the war and made it a viable 2 front war.
originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass
If you are American, this is a call to action. It's more than a game...
If you possess (at least) rudimentary knowledge of history, please be heard.
Defend your countries history program. You might recall what you learned in school? That's the program.
Give it your best shot.
Careful, you might incriminate yourself.
Call in the thinkers... operatives and the evildoers... State your case.
Did German and Japanese civilians deserve to be intentionally targeted in WW2?
The American "containment policy" towards communism only began after the war. It didn't factor into American involvement at all. The sale of arms to Germany was just capitalism at work.
originally posted by: Q33323
a reply to: InverseLookingGlass
Of course not. Incidents, such as the incineration of Dresden, were barbaric.
But once the blood starts flowing, it isn't easy to stop.
originally posted by: skunkape23
If I had been in Truman's shoes, I would have dropped the first nuke on an unpopulated area.
Let them see what we've got and give them a chance to surrender.
Dropping the atomic bomb on a densely populated area was an unnecessary and barbaric act in my opinion.
originally posted by: muSSang
It's a hard call, Japan would not surrender unconditionally, so a invasion plan was drawn up, this would of cost the allies more lives than the WMD's had taken.
I think the nukes were justified, remember if it wasn't nukes it was going to be bats armed with insidinary timered bombs. So in hindsight the WMD's actually saved lives.
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Gothmog
Uhhh. The Germans were doing just fine until the US joined the war and made it a viable 2 front war.
Not really. Even when the US entered the war and invaded Normandy, most of the German resources were directed to the Eastern Front to combat the Soviet forces that were pounding Germany with amazing force.
If it weren't for the Eastern Front, D-Day would have been a black mark on US history as a monumental fail.
originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
originally posted by: Q33323
a reply to: InverseLookingGlass
Of course not. Incidents, such as the incineration of Dresden, were barbaric.
But once the blood starts flowing, it isn't easy to stop.
Yet somehow the West manages to escape the label of "rogue regimes" or "terrorists." At least they do to they and their allies. I know some countries and people consider them so.
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Talorc
The American "containment policy" towards communism only began after the war. It didn't factor into American involvement at all. The sale of arms to Germany was just capitalism at work.
Correct. "After the war".
But we helped Germany after all.
Glad you agree.
originally posted by: CalibratedZeus
So German and Japanese civilians were the only ones targeted? Never in WW2 did either of those two countries kill civilians of other nations?
What history lesson is this you intend to impart upon us? Millions of civilians were murdered by both Germany and Japan, look at what the Japanese did to China alone. Do not try to impart the moral standards of today upon decisions made almost 80 years ago, the world was a MUCH different place and a MUCH different respect of life was still present around the world.
A long story short, WW2 was a terrible global loss of life, civilian and combatant alike. And one can only hope to never see anything on the same scale again.