Would Trump press the button?

in reality, all of this has been a total load of old bollocks

Well?

Yes
12
71%
No
5
29%
 
Total votes: 17

User avatar
The Modernist
Posts: 8717
Joined: 13 Apr 2014, 20:42

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby The Modernist » 10 Aug 2017, 13:19

Makes sense that the US would want to use their bomb and send out a message, and not want Russian influence or even occupation in Japan.
Cant see that anything Moleskin has posted is especially contentious.

User avatar
The Great Defector
Posts: 15727
Joined: 07 Jan 2012, 18:16

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby The Great Defector » 10 Aug 2017, 13:21

Could have sent them a "warning" cake, maybe.
Loki wrote:You Brit boys are so contentious!

User avatar
Moleskin
Posts: 13966
Joined: 18 Feb 2004, 12:38
Location: We began to notice that we could be free, And we moved together to the West.

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby Moleskin » 10 Aug 2017, 13:22

The Modernist wrote:Makes sense that the US would want to use their bomb and send out a message, and not want Russian influence or even occupation in Japan.
Cant see that anything Moleskin has posted is especially contentious.

It was 'Jimboic' conspiracy theory apparently.
@hewsim
-the artist formerly known as comrade moleskin-
-the unforgettable waldo jeffers-

Jug Band Music
my own music

User avatar
fire and fueryIre
Posts: 8749
Joined: 04 May 2011, 02:57
Location: Accredited BCB Pain in the Arse

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby fire and fueryIre » 10 Aug 2017, 13:27

The Great Defector wrote:Could have sent them a "warning" cake, maybe.



Many a true word spoken in jest, Markus. Doubtless moaning Mingy will be along shortly to attempt to rip strips off me for not being sorry enough for something that happened before I was born.

https://io9.gizmodo.com/5632195/the-gre ... sy-of-1946

The woman watching the two military poobahs cutting the cake seems to have gotten into the spirit of the party by wearing some sort of mushroom-cloud-shaped fascinator on her head
Last edited by fire and fueryIre on 10 Aug 2017, 13:53, edited 2 times in total.
Image

User avatar
Tactful Cactus
Posts: 17922
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 14:21
Location: by your window

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby Tactful Cactus » 10 Aug 2017, 13:45

Moleskin wrote:
The Modernist wrote:Makes sense that the US would want to use their bomb and send out a message, and not want Russian influence or even occupation in Japan.
Cant see that anything Moleskin has posted is especially contentious.

It was 'Jimboic' conspiracy theory apparently.



Ahhh so thats what got your knickers in a twist!
Just for the record I didn't say "conspiracy"...not that you deserve an answer mind :lol:

User avatar
The Modernist
Posts: 8717
Joined: 13 Apr 2014, 20:42

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby The Modernist » 10 Aug 2017, 14:16

.."realms of fantasy" being so much more respectful than conspiracy. ;)

User avatar
Tactful Cactus
Posts: 17922
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 14:21
Location: by your window

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby Tactful Cactus » 10 Aug 2017, 14:29

Exactly, get it right! :D

User avatar
Nick
Posts: 24220
Joined: 23 Jul 2003, 13:31
Location: Up late at night again

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby Nick » 10 Aug 2017, 15:26

The Modernist wrote:Russian influence or even occupation in Japan.


I'm fairly sure the Japanese wouldn't have wanted that either.
Jeff K wrote:Nick's still the man! No one has been as consistent as he has been over such a long period of time.

User avatar
Nick
Posts: 24220
Joined: 23 Jul 2003, 13:31
Location: Up late at night again

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby Nick » 10 Aug 2017, 15:40

Moleskin wrote:Japanese civilians are people too.


One point, and one question.

The Asian civilians living within the areas that Japan occupied were people too. US historian Robert Newman has calculated that they were dying at a rate of between 250,000 to 400,000 per month in the final stages of the war in the Pacific.

Should allied servicemen (Soviet, American, Indian, British, Nigerian, Nepalese etc etc) have died to save the lives of Japanese civilians?

Because that's the kind of question you have to confront when you get into this particular moral maze.
Jeff K wrote:Nick's still the man! No one has been as consistent as he has been over such a long period of time.

User avatar
Goat Boy
Bogarting the joint
Posts: 29775
Joined: 20 Mar 2007, 12:11
Location: In the perfumed garden

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby Goat Boy » 10 Aug 2017, 16:03

The Modernist wrote:Makes sense that the US would want to use their bomb and send out a message, and not want Russian influence or even occupation in Japan.
Cant see that anything Moleskin has posted is especially contentious.


I’m sure that would have ended well for the Japanese. I wonder how many lives would have been lost if that happened?

I’m surprised you don’t see anything that contentious here.

Though most Americans are unaware of the fact, increasing numbers of historians now recognize the United States did not need to use the atomic bomb to end the war against Japan in 1945


Headline: The Real Reason America Used Nuclear Weapons Against Japan. It Was Not To End the War Or Save Lives

The problem I have is that it is clearly trying to assert some kind of ‘fact’ or greater truth based on, by its own admission, inconclusive evidence, the opinion of “increasing numbers” of historians (which also means obviously that lots of historians don't agree with this), quotes (some persuasive but some second hand and lacking context) and a lot of conjecture. I would also suggest there is a very definite angle here that conveniently fits into an overarching narrative that is commonplace on the left (hello John PIlger). I find it rather shallow, conspiratorial and unconvincing.

For example, on the wiki page of the United States Strategic Bombing Survey there is a link to this:

http://teachinghistory.org/history-content/beyond-the-textbook/25484

The year after the Japanese surrender, the U.S. government released its own Strategic Bombing Survey, an effort to assess the effectiveness of dropping bombs on civilian populations, including the firebombs used in Europe and the Pacific, and the atomic weapons detonated over Hiroshima and Tokyo (see Primary Source U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey [1946]). Its findings suggested that the bombs were largely superfluous, and that Japan’s surrender was all but guaranteed even without the threat of invasion. “Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts,” the SBS concluded, “and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that . . . 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.” Though firm in its assertions, the SBS received widespread criticism from many quarters for drawing conclusions far beyond the available evidence. (Many critics noted, rightly, that the SBS was itself hardly a disinterested document, since it was produced by an organization with an interest in emphasizing the effectiveness of conventional airpower.)


If you want an insight into the impact of the bomb on Japans leaders and the mentality of the Japanese then Sadao Asada might provide a counterpoint to some of the arguments:

http://www.fairbanksonline.net/Fairbanks_Online/Atomic_Bomb_Trials_Research_files/3641184.pdf

And so on. You could play this game all day of course. Trying to find balance is hard when discussing something as complex as this. This is why historians wrestle with it to this day. Put simply, I don’t think there is an alternative ‘truth’ here, no ‘real reason’ why the decision to drop the bomb was made. If it means anything I suspect that asserting US dominance was part of it, or, at the least lurking in the background because how could it not be but I don’t believe it was the primary goal.
Copehead wrote:I was helping out the victims of virtue signaling in the Ghettos before this was even an issue in the wider world.

User avatar
The Modernist
Posts: 8717
Joined: 13 Apr 2014, 20:42

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby The Modernist » 10 Aug 2017, 16:20

Nick wrote:
The Modernist wrote:Russian influence or even occupation in Japan.


I'm fairly sure the Japanese wouldn't have wanted that either.


As a defeated nation they wouldn't have had much say.

User avatar
The Modernist
Posts: 8717
Joined: 13 Apr 2014, 20:42

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby The Modernist » 10 Aug 2017, 16:33

Goat Boy wrote:
The Modernist wrote:Makes sense that the US would want to use their bomb and send out a message, and not want Russian influence or even occupation in Japan.
Cant see that anything Moleskin has posted is especially contentious.


I’m sure that would have ended well for the Japanese. I wonder how many lives would have been lost if that happened?

I’m surprised you don’t see anything that contentious here.

Though most Americans are unaware of the fact, increasing numbers of historians now recognize the United States did not need to use the atomic bomb to end the war against Japan in 1945


Headline: The Real Reason America Used Nuclear Weapons Against Japan. It Was Not To End the War Or Save Lives

The problem I have is that it is clearly trying to assert some kind of ‘fact’ or greater truth based on, by its own admission, inconclusive evidence, the opinion of “increasing numbers” of historians (which also means obviously that lots of historians don't agree with this), quotes (some persuasive but some second hand and lacking context) and a lot of conjecture. I would also suggest there is a very definite angle here that conveniently fits into an overarching narrative that is commonplace on the left (hello John PIlger). I find it rather shallow, conspiratorial and unconvincing.

For example, on the wiki page of the United States Strategic Bombing Survey there is a link to this:

http://teachinghistory.org/history-content/beyond-the-textbook/25484

The year after the Japanese surrender, the U.S. government released its own Strategic Bombing Survey, an effort to assess the effectiveness of dropping bombs on civilian populations, including the firebombs used in Europe and the Pacific, and the atomic weapons detonated over Hiroshima and Tokyo (see Primary Source U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey [1946]). Its findings suggested that the bombs were largely superfluous, and that Japan’s surrender was all but guaranteed even without the threat of invasion. “Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts,” the SBS concluded, “and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that . . . 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.” Though firm in its assertions, the SBS received widespread criticism from many quarters for drawing conclusions far beyond the available evidence. (Many critics noted, rightly, that the SBS was itself hardly a disinterested document, since it was produced by an organization with an interest in emphasizing the effectiveness of conventional airpower.)


If you want an insight into the impact of the bomb on Japans leaders and the mentality of the Japanese then Sadao Asada might provide a counterpoint to some of the arguments:

http://www.fairbanksonline.net/Fairbanks_Online/Atomic_Bomb_Trials_Research_files/3641184.pdf

And so on. You could play this game all day of course. Trying to find balance is hard when discussing something as complex as this. This is why historians wrestle with it to this day. Put simply, I don’t think there is an alternative ‘truth’ here, no ‘real reason’ why the decision to drop the bomb was made. If it means anything I suspect that asserting US dominance was part of it, or, at the least lurking in the background because how could it not be but I don’t believe it was the primary goal.


I felt the original post was not contentious because it presented a valid viewpoint which some (though certainly not all, and perhaps not the majority) historians hold. Perhaps contentious was the wrong word, but it was being dismissed as a crackpot theory which I felt was unfair. Clearly there are a range of views on this. This site does a good job of presenting them:
http://www.hamptoninstitution.org/hiroshima-historiography.html#.WYx6m5VK3IU

Personally, knowing what we know about post-war American foreign policy and how much was shaped (and helped shape) The Cold War, I find it difficult to believe that the threat of Russian incursions into Japan wouldn't have been something at the forefront of their decision making.

User avatar
Sneelock
Posts: 9789
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby Sneelock » 10 Aug 2017, 16:43

you either think the US was justified unleashing those things into the world or you don't. I don't but I generally keep my mouth shut about it because I don't like getting my ears boxed.

whichever side of the argument you are on, I think you'll probably agree that Truman had a general idea of what he was doing - of what the cost would be, especially Nagasaki. Trump, I think we would all agree can't see beyond whatever screen is in front of him at any given time. I am frequently troubled by the number of people who use "Nuking" as a suggestion for addressing problems in the world. Trump is their guy.

another quick point - I think all these years of "the war on terror" has changed the way people think about weapons of war. everything is discussed as "surgical" and "strategic" even as these things drag on & the socio-political messes mulitply. Eric Schlosser's book "Command & Control" is a sober reminder that these weapons are not surgical & strategic and that the plans to use them are just as beset by problems as other plans.

Hopefully cooler heads than Trump's will be involved in any such decisions. still, the thought of such weapons being, even on some level, subject to the whims of such a man as TRUMP is enough to wake me from a sound sleep.
"You can bet your last money it’s ALL gonna be a stone-gas, honey!"

User avatar
Goat Boy
Bogarting the joint
Posts: 29775
Joined: 20 Mar 2007, 12:11
Location: In the perfumed garden

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby Goat Boy » 10 Aug 2017, 17:53

The Modernist wrote:
Goat Boy wrote:
The Modernist wrote:Makes sense that the US would want to use their bomb and send out a message, and not want Russian influence or even occupation in Japan.
Cant see that anything Moleskin has posted is especially contentious.


I’m sure that would have ended well for the Japanese. I wonder how many lives would have been lost if that happened?

I’m surprised you don’t see anything that contentious here.

Though most Americans are unaware of the fact, increasing numbers of historians now recognize the United States did not need to use the atomic bomb to end the war against Japan in 1945


Headline: The Real Reason America Used Nuclear Weapons Against Japan. It Was Not To End the War Or Save Lives

The problem I have is that it is clearly trying to assert some kind of ‘fact’ or greater truth based on, by its own admission, inconclusive evidence, the opinion of “increasing numbers” of historians (which also means obviously that lots of historians don't agree with this), quotes (some persuasive but some second hand and lacking context) and a lot of conjecture. I would also suggest there is a very definite angle here that conveniently fits into an overarching narrative that is commonplace on the left (hello John PIlger). I find it rather shallow, conspiratorial and unconvincing.

For example, on the wiki page of the United States Strategic Bombing Survey there is a link to this:

http://teachinghistory.org/history-content/beyond-the-textbook/25484

The year after the Japanese surrender, the U.S. government released its own Strategic Bombing Survey, an effort to assess the effectiveness of dropping bombs on civilian populations, including the firebombs used in Europe and the Pacific, and the atomic weapons detonated over Hiroshima and Tokyo (see Primary Source U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey [1946]). Its findings suggested that the bombs were largely superfluous, and that Japan’s surrender was all but guaranteed even without the threat of invasion. “Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts,” the SBS concluded, “and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that . . . 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.” Though firm in its assertions, the SBS received widespread criticism from many quarters for drawing conclusions far beyond the available evidence. (Many critics noted, rightly, that the SBS was itself hardly a disinterested document, since it was produced by an organization with an interest in emphasizing the effectiveness of conventional airpower.)


If you want an insight into the impact of the bomb on Japans leaders and the mentality of the Japanese then Sadao Asada might provide a counterpoint to some of the arguments:

http://www.fairbanksonline.net/Fairbanks_Online/Atomic_Bomb_Trials_Research_files/3641184.pdf

And so on. You could play this game all day of course. Trying to find balance is hard when discussing something as complex as this. This is why historians wrestle with it to this day. Put simply, I don’t think there is an alternative ‘truth’ here, no ‘real reason’ why the decision to drop the bomb was made. If it means anything I suspect that asserting US dominance was part of it, or, at the least lurking in the background because how could it not be but I don’t believe it was the primary goal.


I felt the original post was not contentious because it presented a valid viewpoint which some (though certainly not all, and perhaps not the majority) historians hold. Perhaps contentious was the wrong word, but it was being dismissed as a crackpot theory which I felt was unfair. Clearly there are a range of views on this. This site does a good job of presenting them:
http://www.hamptoninstitution.org/hiroshima-historiography.html#.WYx6m5VK3IU

Personally, knowing what we know about post-war American foreign policy and how much was shaped (and helped shape) The Cold War, I find it difficult to believe that the threat of Russian incursions into Japan wouldn't have been something at the forefront of their decision making.


I wouldn't dismiss it as "crackpot" but I do find it facile. I think when people are saying stuff like "the real reason the bomb was dropped" and then posit that then they are swimming in shallower waters.

Thanks for posting the link. I'll have a look when I get the chance
Copehead wrote:I was helping out the victims of virtue signaling in the Ghettos before this was even an issue in the wider world.

User avatar
R. Swipe
hounds people off the board
Posts: 13634
Joined: 24 Apr 2007, 23:21
Location: pursued by the enraged queen

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby R. Swipe » 10 Aug 2017, 18:03

The sun was shining when I walked to work this morning. Quite unusual for Sheffield, that.
Bride Of Sea Of Tunes wrote:
The Modernist wrote:
Your essay needs to be in before 5.00 tomorrow Dougie.


:D :D :D

One of the finest replies in BCB's history.

User avatar
The Prof
Composing a revolutionary symphony
Posts: 44853
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:32
Location: A Metropolis of Discontent

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby The Prof » 10 Aug 2017, 18:32

Are you sure it was the sun and not the opening scene from Threads?

User avatar
R. Swipe
hounds people off the board
Posts: 13634
Joined: 24 Apr 2007, 23:21
Location: pursued by the enraged queen

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby R. Swipe » 10 Aug 2017, 19:29

Hm. You could be right.

They'd probably welcome it! With open arms!
Bride Of Sea Of Tunes wrote:
The Modernist wrote:
Your essay needs to be in before 5.00 tomorrow Dougie.


:D :D :D

One of the finest replies in BCB's history.

User avatar
The Prof
Composing a revolutionary symphony
Posts: 44853
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:32
Location: A Metropolis of Discontent

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby The Prof » 10 Aug 2017, 20:46

Image

Not too happy abut this. Right in the middle of 4 thermal radiation radiuses.

User avatar
Sneelock
Posts: 9789
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby Sneelock » 10 Aug 2017, 20:48

:lol: there goes the neighborhood!
"You can bet your last money it’s ALL gonna be a stone-gas, honey!"

User avatar
Still Baron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 41899
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Re: Would Trump press the button?

Postby Still Baron » 10 Aug 2017, 20:49

Whitby it is!
take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.