PDA

View Full Version : 69 years ago on this date Japan Surrenders



downtownv
08-11-2014, 04:01 AM
Two baby Nukes, by today's standards, was the only thing that brought on their surrender.

Planedude
08-11-2014, 04:47 AM
With our thanks and may God bless this nations "Greatest Generation" as they pass from this earth.

JohnR
08-11-2014, 06:30 AM
...and no armed conflict since then has ended with our enemy surrendering.

Our current foreign enemy needs to be put in a position where they must choose between total surrender of total annihilation. It's really that simple.

marshal kane
08-11-2014, 07:39 AM
War is dirty business, really dirty and thank God our leaders then didn't over-use the "rules of engagement" like being done now. "Rules of engagement" should be reserved for sports events, not war IMHO.

knkali
08-11-2014, 10:39 AM
War is dirty business, really dirty and thank God our leaders then didn't over-use the "rules of engagement" like being done now. "Rules of engagement" should be reserved for sports events, not war IMHO.

There has been a lot of discussion how the U.S didn't need to drop the second A bomb. The first was enough to cause Japan to surrender if we would have waited a little longer for them to comprehend what just happened. Even Oppenheimer said this and many others in the scientific community. We didn't need to vaporize another 100,000 people. Rules of engagement are what civilized societies have but as you said, there is nothing civil about war.

Bawanna
08-11-2014, 10:52 AM
The thing that really sucks about rules of engagement is when one side makes the rules and follows them but the other side doesn't. ???
Or creating geographic lines where if the enemy gets on the other side we won't kill them.

Doesn't help to have a CNC that knows more about a golf club than a rifle neither.

knkali
08-11-2014, 10:59 AM
The thing that really sucks about rules of engagement is when one side makes the rules and follows them but the other side doesn't. ???
Or creating geographic lines where if the enemy gets on the other side we won't kill them.

Doesn't help to have a CNC that knows more about a golf club than a rifle neither.

POINT. ALL presidents should have served in the military....just makes sense to me.

Bawanna
08-11-2014, 11:33 AM
POINT. ALL presidents should have served in the military....just makes sense to me.

Make it all presidents had to have been Marines and you got a deal. But even a Boy Scout would help.

ltxi
08-11-2014, 04:39 PM
There has been a lot of discussion how the U.S didn't need to drop the second A bomb. The first was enough to cause Japan to surrender if we would have waited a little longer for them to comprehend what just happened. Even Oppenheimer said this and many others in the scientific community. We didn't need to vaporize another 100,000 people. Rules of engagement are what civilized societies have but as you said, there is nothing civil about war.

The second was a proper "This be gonna your future, what's left of it, if you don't quit now!" follow up to the first. And it was only another 74K folk down the tubes. Fokkers deserved it. Plus more. Remember the Bataan Death March and all Japan's other POW atrocities? And then there was also Pearl Harbor. Aggressive, arrogant bastards brought it all on themselves. No PC sympathy here/from my generation.

downtownv
08-11-2014, 05:23 PM
They Imperial army was the most heinous, in modern History, until this Calipate Muslims came along.
They will be the involved with the next one to drop and it will be Israel, in a pure survival mode to drop it.... Heads up Iran!

knkali
08-11-2014, 08:43 PM
The second was a proper "This be gonna your future, what's left of it, if you don't quit now!" follow up to the first. And it was only another 74K folk down the tubes. Fokkers deserved it. Plus more. Remember the Bataan Death March and all Japan's other POW atrocities? And then there was also Pearl Harbor. Aggressive, arrogant bastards brought it all on themselves. No PC sympathy here/from my generation.

I understand your position clearly but I offer that the 2nd one was dropped not to put an exclamation point to the first. Instead, it was a different design(packaged differently) to the first and we needed to see how it performed..

jocko
08-12-2014, 05:43 AM
There were more "A" bombs to come had #2 not convinced them. Dutch
Vankirk made that statement . Does anyone think that the naps would. Ot
Have dropped it on us?? And killed thousands of civilians😡. That was awar
We fought to WIN👍

ltxi
08-12-2014, 03:09 PM
I understand your position clearly but I offer that the 2nd one was dropped not to put an exclamation point to the first. Instead, it was a different design(packaged differently) to the first and we needed to see how it performed..

Works for me...