• @SmilingSolaris
        link
        English
        -21 year ago

        Maybe the fact they were already sueing for peace? Maybe the complete distruction of their Navy and Air forces? Maybe the blockaid we had on the island? Maybe the fact they were already sueing for peace?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          81 year ago

          Oh boy, fun! By all means, provide a source that states that Japan would have surrendered irrespective of the atomic bombings. This could be amusing…

          • @SmilingSolaris
            link
            English
            -51 year ago

            Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey’s opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945. Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war. and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated. - The United States Strategic Bombing survey (European war) (Pacific War) https://ia801903.us.archive.org/33/items/unitedstatesstra00cent/unitedstatesstra00cent.pdf

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              41 year ago

              Are you arguing that the strategic bombings were justified to end the war, but the atomic bombings were not? That’s a unique opinion, to be sure.

              • @SmilingSolaris
                link
                English
                -51 year ago

                Now you’re just being argumentative throwing out accusations cause you got sourced. You don’t want to defend your position anymore so your attempting to shift the argument entirely.

                Defend your stance or shut it.

                  • @SmilingSolaris
                    link
                    English
                    -41 year ago

                    Still trying to shift the goal posts. I will not be responding to your 5 second skim of a source you didn’t read because you think you gotta win an argument above all else. You asked for a source that showed the bombings were unnecessary. You got it. Defend the point or shut it. If you want to argue the finer details of the American strategic bombing campaign and it’s effectiveness then get a history degree. Because that is NOT the argument being made here. Neither by me or by you. Attempting to bring that up is irrelevant to the conversation at hand.