Talking bollocks thread #4

Podlodka77 wrote:Genocide is what the US did to Hiroshima, Nagasaki.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved Japan from well deserved genocide

Just look up what US Navy wanted to do to them (and should have done)

They got off scot free despite being just as bad in every single way as Nazis

To Papadragon....

The Americans entered WW2 calculatedly.
And I am one of those who think that the US deliberately sacrificed Pearl Harbor and made a show out of everything.
That show was bloody and served to get the US into the war.
The aircraft carriers Hornet, Lexington and Yorktown were not in that port on the day of the attack either, because the Americans knew they would need those aircraft carriers later. They were withdrawn on purpose and thus they were saved from destruction..
I don't trust the Americans absolutely anything.
Did Japan deserve to be crushed militarily in WW2 ?
Yes, but the whole world SWALLOWED two atomic bombs, even though the fact is that the USA had no stomach and probably no army ready for mass casualties in a potential land invasion of Japan.

And this picture posted by brother Hole yesterday....
A tank without a barrel is like a man without a dick.
Leopard-2 A6 "EUNUCH"...

SeigHeil wrote:
But the fact you said we hav started every war for the past 228 years shows me. You don't know wtf you are talking about but are just blowing shit out your ass.

Due to lack of space here is a short list since WWII as a reminder.

Podlodka77 wrote:

The Americans entered WW2 calculatedly.
And I am one of those who think that the US deliberately sacrificed Pearl Harbor and made a show out of everything.
That show was bloody and served to get the US into the war.
The aircraft carriers Hornet, Lexington and Yorktown were not in that port on the day of the attack either, because the Americans knew they would need those aircraft carriers later. They were withdrawn on purpose and thus they were saved from destruction..
I don't trust the Americans absolutely anything.
Did Japan deserve to be crushed militarily in WW2 ?
Yes, but the whole world SWALLOWED two atomic bombs, even though the fact is that the USA had no stomach and probably no army ready for mass casualties in a potential land invasion of Japan.

The US had all the info on an imminent attack on Pearl Harbour. They also knew that the Japs were about to surrender but they dropped the bombs anyway - as a message to Stalin.

Mir wrote:
The US had all the info on an imminent attack on Pearl Harbour. They also knew that the Japs were about to surrender but they dropped the bombs anyway - as a message to Stalin.

Yes, in addition they wanted also to be sure that the Japs would surrender to them and not to the Soviets.

Weird my post double posted

[quote="SeigSoloyvov"]

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:

Mir wrote:
The US had all the info on an imminent attack on Pearl Harbour. They also knew that the Japs were about to surrender but they dropped the bombs anyway - as a message to Stalin.

Yes, in addition they wanted also to be sure that the Japs would surrender to them and not to the Soviets.

.

Complete and utter lie, Which is easily proven to be so because various high ranking Japanese leaders and documents they openly admit, prior to the bombs they weren't going to surrender, it was Considered but only if the Us agreed to Japanese terms

Why you people insist on trying to rewrite history when a mere search proves you dead wrong is beyond me, if ignore is bliss.

Tho you are partly right about one thing, when the soviets attackee that did play into their decision to surrender


Ah yes the myth we knew about Pearl never once had any information came forward to prove this it's just delusional people lie yourself who keep that narrative up and never ever have an ounce of proof to support it

You could argue they where warning signs we ignored due to our own ignorance and that would be fair to say but we had no idea of the attack.

Learn basic history, claims like these are so easily proven false it's ridiculous to mention them but hey gotta use false information to make yourself look right

To Sieg Pyle....

Guten tag..
I'm afraid that everything you read is a lie..
And I see that you don't know what's left and what's right... it's time to learn...

Podlodka77 wrote:To Sieg Pyle....

Guten tag..
I'm afraid that everything you read is a lie..
And I see that you don't know what's left and what's right... it's time to learn...

Please stop the nonsense with unrelated videos! This is not a kindergarten forum.

It would be nice if the opinions were focused on the specifics of the thread. Tired that from time to time it is filled with discussions of other topics.

SeigHeil wrote:
Complete and utter lie, Which is easily proven to be so because various high ranking Japanese leaders and documents they openly admit, prior to the bombs they weren't going to surrender, it was Considered but only if the Us agreed to Japanese terms

Straight from the Los Angeles Times - and there are many other sources that can confirm this.
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-08-05/hiroshima-anniversary-japan-atomic-bombs

However, the overwhelming historical evidence from American and Japanese archives indicates that Japan would have surrendered that August, even if atomic bombs had not been used — and documents prove that President Truman and his closest advisors knew it.

Mir wrote:

SeigHeil wrote:
Complete and utter lie, Which is easily proven to be so because various high ranking Japanese leaders and documents they openly admit, prior to the bombs they weren't going to surrender, it was Considered but only if the Us agreed to Japanese terms

Straight from the Los Angeles Times - and there are many other sources that can confirm this.
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-08-05/hiroshima-anniversary-japan-atomic-bombs

However, the overwhelming historical evidence from American and Japanese archives indicates that Japan would have surrendered that August, even if atomic bombs had not been used — and documents prove that President Truman and his closest advisors knew it.

LOL Yes Japan would have surrendered IF we agreed to a conditional Surrender, the article you post even says this HOWEVER. Your so clueless about history that you are skipping key details. Everyone and their mom knows, Japan proposed a conditional surrender, their deal was they will pull back from all captured regions and everything goes back to as it was before the war.

Basically, they said "So we will surrender and we leave the land we captured but that's it, The Emperor stays in power and you leave us alone and no one comes after us for all the stuff we did, and everyone just forgets that stuff we did"

ALSO any surrender HAD to be AGREED with the USSR and the USSR made it CLEAR they will only accept UNCONDITIONAL surrender, so even IF the US wanted to accept that deal it COULDN'T because the USSR wanted Japan to surrender unconditionally no one was going to allow Japan to surrender and not suffer any consequence for what it did to them.

Hitlar proposed the very something and was told "Naw **** you" by both the US and USSR. So by your logic we should have accepted Nazi Germany's surrender also and allowed it to carry on. do I have to explain the difference between a condition and UNCONDITIONAL surrender to you?

You only just proved you have no understanding of historical facts and are mis representing history to push your propaganda. Have a good day, and educate yourself properly next time.

Please post me a reliable SOVIET source that the Soviets were CLEAR on UNCONDITIONAL surrender of Japan?
I have stated before that it was conditional surrender and the Soviet Union had willingly agreed to propose a compromise on some territorial islands which had been subject of both claiming it's theirs. The negotiations regarding the conditional surrender were ongoing as Japan was willing to end it and the Soviet Union was looking for a compromise from both sides.

You make claims without any context despite Mir has provided you with your freedom loving 100% truth telling press.

Who is rewriting history here?

Show us the archive!
The Soviet archive is open for most of the stuff regarding WW2 with regard of open and contracts based on territorial disputes.

You can find them in english as they are translated.

I am waiting!

Werewolf wrote:Please post me a reliable SOVIET source that the Soviets were CLEAR on UNCONDITIONAL surrender of Japan?
I have stated before that it was conditional surrender and the Soviet Union had willingly agreed to propose a compromise on some territorial islands which had been subject of both claiming it's theirs. The negotiations regarding the conditional surrender were ongoing as Japan was willing to end it and the Soviet Union was looking for a compromise from both sides.

You make claims without any context despite Mir has provided you with your freedom loving 100% truth telling press.

Who is rewriting history here?

Show us the archive!
The Soviet archive is open for most of the stuff regarding WW2 with regard of open and contracts based on territorial disputes.

You can find them in english as they are translated.

I am waiting!

Yalta Conference where the USSR literally said that they the allies will not accept separate or conditional peace with Japan and that Japan has to surrender unconditionally all the Allies, Additionally the USSRS insisted on strict adherence to the 1943 Cairo Declaration.

Literally USSR archives also show the USSR was only stringing along the Japanease so the Soviets had time complete the transfer of their troops from the Western Front to the Far East, and conquer Manchuria, Inner Mongolia, northern Korea, South Sakhalin, the Kuriles, and Hokkaidō to secure their access to the pacific. Numerous Soviet historians have published how Stalin wanted into the war to secure his guarantees from the Yalta conference and to get these guarantees MEANT unconditional Surrender as they called for the direct annexation of Japanese territory, and if the Soviets went with the conditional surrender they would NOT get it.

So no the USSR wanted unconditional surrender, it purposefully played Japan keeping the war going so it would get what it wanted and that is proven from many soviets sources, which you can find.

You clearly aren't educated on this subject matter one bit and are just using incorrect information to push anti American propaganda.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:
LOL Yes Japan would have surrendered IF we agreed to a conditional Surrender

LOL No. A conditional surrender was what Japan wanted yes (to save the Empire) BUT when the Soviets entered the war against Japan they changed their minds and wanted to surrender UNCONDITIONALLY to the US and not the Soviets. The idea of a Communist ruled Japan did not sit very well with the Japs.

Its all there in the article - just read it.

Garry alert

An increasing number of posts here need to be somewhere other than this thread.

Sorry John but for the factual record I decided to post it anyway

Because Sieg Heil is a lier or can't read!

From the same article in the LA Post

While a majority of Americans may not be familiar with this history, the National Museum of the U.S. Navy in Washington, D.C., states unambiguously on a plaque with its atomic bomb exhibit: “The vast destruction wreaked by the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the loss of 135,000 people made little impact on the Japanese military. However, the Soviet invasion of Manchuria … changed their minds.”

No one was more impassioned in his condemnation than Leahy, Truman’s chief of staff. He wrote in his memoir “that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender …. In being the first to use it we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages.”

Mir wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:
LOL Yes Japan would have surrendered IF we agreed to a conditional Surrender

LOL No. A conditional surrender was what Japan wanted yes (to save the Empire) BUT when the Soviets entered the war against Japan they changed their minds and wanted to surrender UNCONDITIONALLY to the US and not the Soviets. The idea of a Communist ruled Japan did not sit very well with the Japs.

Its all there in the article - just read it.

Yes that is when we accepted their surrender when they agreed to an unconditional Surrender Horito announced.

You are quoting a part OF the article that doesn't specify conditionally or unconditionally.

Nowhere in that article does it CLAIM we refused Japans UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER, just a SURRENDER.

Learn the difference, when Japan first agreed to the UNCONDITION surrender on we accepted right away.

" Eisenhower had urged at Potsdam, “the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing.”

Potsdam was July 26th 1945, at this date Japan was only proposing its conditional Surrender.

It wasn't until 15 August 1945 that the then Emperor issued Japan a declaration of Unconditional surrender and then he had to FORCE Japanease hardliners into it. Because they wanted to fight until the very end.

Google the Kyūjō incident, where hard line Japanese army members, tried to coup the Emperor to stop the Unconditional surrender annoucment

You do not know basic history at all, your incorrectly quoting a lazy ass half done article. Because you wanna puke anti American propaganda

So no you no understand AT ALL what you are talking about, sorry buddy I am not a moron, I KNOW THE HISTORY.

@SeigHeil

You should try another way to backtrack bro. The Japanese surrendered UNCONDITIONALLY - that is a fact.
It is clearly stated in the article if you read it properly. Stop wasting forum space.

Mir wrote:Sorry John but for the factual record I decided to post it anyway

Because Sieg Heil is a lier or can't read!

From the same article in the LA Post

While a majority of Americans may not be familiar with this history, the National Museum of the U.S. Navy in Washington, D.C., states unambiguously on a plaque with its atomic bomb exhibit: “The vast destruction wreaked by the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the loss of 135,000 people made little impact on the Japanese military. However, the Soviet invasion of Manchuria … changed their minds.”

No one was more impassioned in his condemnation than Leahy, Truman’s chief of staff. He wrote in his memoir “that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender …. In being the first to use it we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages.”

I can read fine pal, I said a long time ago, the combination of the nukes and Soviet Invasion pretty much forced Japan to a unconditional surrender, infact I said that years ago on this forum.

Your butt-hurt asses just cannot stand the fact, we did not refuse an unconditional surrender but a conditional which no one was going to accept at all. You wanted to claim "the USA refused the unconditionally surrender because it wanted to Nuke Japan" WRONG even before we dropped the dam things we again demanded their unconditional surrender and they told us NO.

But yes I do agree with Leahy, the uses of the weapons was unessecary and I have stated that.

Mir wrote:@SeigHeil

You should try another way to backtrack bro. The Japanese surrendered UNCONDITIONALLY - that is a fact.
It is clearly stated in the article if you read it properly. Stop wasting forum space.

Yes they did Surrender Unconditionally, on August 15th.....and we accepted it,

from he very same article you quote

"The Soviets invaded Japanese-held Manchuria at midnight on Aug. 8 and quickly destroyed the vaunted Kwantung Army. As predicted, the attack traumatized Japan’s leaders. They could not fight a two-front war, and the threat of a communist takeover of Japanese territory was their worst nightmare.

Prime Minister Kantaro Suzuki explained on Aug. 13 that Japan had to surrender quickly because “the Soviet Union will take not only Manchuria, Korea, Karafuto, but also Hokkaido. This would destroy the foundation of Japan. We must end the war when we can deal with the United States.”

You see that date there Aug 13th....we dropped the bombs on the 6th and 9th and the USSR invaded on the 8th, all of these dates are before The Aug 13th date when the PM urged The Emperor to surrender which he DID on the 15TH, YOU CANNOT READ

So you are LITERALLY ignoring the time stamps on your own article....keep making yourself look like an idioit

@SeigHeil

All I said was that the Japanese would have surrenders anyway (the US knew about it already) but they elected to use the two atomic bombs - to send a message to Stalin. Nothing more. End of the conversation.

Mir wrote:@SeigHeil

All I said was that the Japanese would have surrenders anyway (the US knew about it already) but they elected to use the two atomic bombs - to send a message to Stalin. Nothing more. End of the conversation.

NOPE that is not what you claimed, you implied they wanted to UNCONDITONALLY surrender prior to the 15th WHICH isn't true and claim we said no because we wanted to drop the nukes, they did agree to surrender prior to that YES but it was a conditional one on terms they SET.

But sure we can end the conversation. Have a good day

То AZI....

Did I ask for your opinion ?
Look at it this way, you and I haven't been on good terms for months since the day you whined like a little girl.
In addition to many other posts I've made you nailed that one.
SIEG PYLE has idiotic views and I decided to respond in my own way….
If it bothers you that I also sent a video with some of my posts, then OK - no apologies for that because I didn't even threaten anyone..

SeigSoloyvov wrote:
Yes they did Surrender Unconditionally, on August 15th.....and we accepted it,

from he very same article you quote

"The Soviets invaded Japanese-held Manchuria at midnight on Aug. 8 and quickly destroyed the vaunted Kwantung Army. As predicted, the attack traumatized Japan’s leaders. They could not fight a two-front war, and the threat of a communist takeover of Japanese territory was their worst nightmare.

Prime Minister Kantaro Suzuki explained on Aug. 13 that Japan had to surrender quickly because “the Soviet Union will take not only Manchuria, Korea, Karafuto, but also Hokkaido. This would destroy the foundation of Japan. We must end the war when we can deal with the United States.”

You see that date there Aug 13th....we dropped the bombs on the 6th and 9th and the USSR invaded on the 8th, all of these dates are before The Aug 13th date when the PM urged The Emperor to surrender which he DID on the 15TH, YOU CANNOT READ

So you are LITERALLY ignoring the time stamps on your own article....keep making yourself look like an idioit

The official document from the Soviet archive on the 11th, February in 1945 proofs full agreement and one-sided obligations by the in future defeated Japan in terms of territorial hand-overs of Sakhalin and other islands, the acceptance of Chinese-Russo military alliance as a protection against Japan and other terms like the status quo of Mongolian Republic. The officially declassified document from the official Soviet archive, which Great Britain and USA has full knowledge and agreement with to fulfill all terms of the surrender of Japan to the Soviet Union.
Japan was already aware of the red lines for China and the Soviet Union and despite the prior attempts of negotiations Japan did indeed overstep the red line and got involved in Manchuria.
https://www.mid.ru/ru/press_service/photo/k-75-letiu-pobedy/1439772/




The de facto surrender negotiations in early of August in 1945 were held because Japan did not hear the finalized threats of the Soviet Union to aid the Chinese government if Japan did not oblige to point 1 & 2 of the first proposed conditional surrender to prevent Japans total loss of more territory it has gained.

The three sided demands to Japan for full capitulation on 26h of July, 1945 was declined by Japan and the prior agreement initiated by the US to rely on the help of Soviet Union in military unification against Japan after the capitulation of Nazi Germany was not shining moment for the US.
The negotiations for the full surrender of Japan were initiated on 5th of August in documential form to prior communication and initialization via ambassador Hatako Sato with Molotov.

Due to this negotiations between the Soviet Union and Japan the US decided to completely discard all prior made agreements of the Soviet Union's benefits which the Big three have agreed upon on 11th February in 1945. This was one of the big alluring points to get Soviet Union to do the dirty work against Japan. The US has broken that treaty and double crossed the Soviet Union with the Potsdamer Declaration without the participation of the Soviet Union forced Japan to surrender by nuclear genocide and at the same time declared itself as a super power against the Soviet Union.
https://www.mid.ru/ru/press_service/photo/k-75-letiu-pobedy/1439772/
https://sakhalin-war.livejournal.com/50339.html


Due to this treason the Soviet Union forms a peace treaty with Japan on 10th August in 1956.
https://www.mid.ru/upload/medialibrary/24b/Совместная%20Декларация%20СССР%20и%20Японии%20от%2019%20октября%201956%20г.pdf

Can you tell us why was the US forcing Japan to surrender with the Potsdamer Declaration despite it's obligations to respect and fulfill the obligations of the treaty signed by the Big Three?

PS: This image link function is totally broken for certain links.
Images of the official document in the first link.