...But he read it on the internet!

Russ, a few things that I think are being taken out of proportion:

1. Whether he is a Holocaust denier or not is immaterial to the facts of Hiroshima. If the facts are there, you must go by that. If not, so be it. I could not find the Trohan article itself, and this article was not the only time I've heard of it. If you've read it then I will take your word for it. If you can provide a link to the article somewhere, even better. But his opinions on other events do not matter for this one.

2. Whether or not the Japanese offer was "serious" is immaterial, as well. The point is that there was SOME movement on Japan's part toward peace. The author of the article I linked calls them "overtures". That completely contradicts what Sassafras said, and what I responded to.

3. The Chicago Tribune's own abstract and title seem to imply that the attempt was more serious than you are indicating.

whether or not the offer was serious?
...are YOU serious? If the offer was not serious then it was a non-offer, nothing to be considered, because somebody, a person who had no authority thought it might be a good idea makes it credible? No, keep trying pal...

This is like saying "Bob" in Peoria thought the war in Afghanistan should end...

Tom, I negotiate for a living. For one party to deem an offer "serious" is not to say that the other party wasn't serious in their mind--and I'm just negotiating over money. Unconditional surrender is a much bigger issue.

This is the point:

I originally posted the link in response to what Sass claimed. I can't see it to quote directly, but he was indicating that Japan was not budging, and never would (and that justified the nukes). That's just completely innacurate. Whether they wanted to surrender is immaterial. We're talking about national leaders--the most prideful beings on this planet.

There were many signs that Japan was coming to the realization that their war was ending, and that is historical fact. Even Suzuki's Prime Minster(ship?) is considered evidence of that. Wartime censorship of this is another fact (see chicago's own site). If it was completely baseless, then censorship would not have been necessary, and the administration would have denounced it. They didn't.

It seems that you took Minx's bait in trying to discredit the facts by an attack on the person. This is called ad-hominem.

Neal Anderth wrote:Here's the article

Pig,

I saw that but deemed it not good enough because someone links to...

...

...

...
...................IHR

Neal Anderth wrote:Here's the article

Nice place you go for your info. I wandered around. A cesspool.

I'd really like for everyone reading this to go visit "The Phora" and pull up one or two random discussion threads. It should take you less than twenty seconds to determine what kind of people frequent that place.

It should be beneath us to associate with Guapo and Pig-Neal even through the medium of electrons. To actually discuss history with them is so distasteful that as soon as I post this I'm going to wash my hands six times and disinfect my keyboard. If I were running Redscape I'd ban these two without a second thought - not on the basis of the last page or two alone, but on a long history of this sort of thing. Unfortunately - and PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong - these two actually run this site (in that they own the server and thus have complete control over everything). Am I correct in that poorly-informed guess?

Like I said,
1. They read it on the internet so it MUST be true
and
2. "Bob" in Peoria claims it's true so it must be true

ummmm, WHO in Japan was offering possible surrender? If it was not the Emperor, then it was "Bob in Peoria" same damned thing.

oh, excuse me,
"Ad Hominem" in Peoria...
(same thing)

Post deleted.

I've decided on a new standard for my posts. I think people, safely behind their keyboards, post things that they would neve actually say in real life. I'm going to start using the real life test...if I wouldn't say it to your face I won't say it on the internet.

I apologize to MX or anyone else who read my post. It was out of line.

Minister X wrote:

Neal Anderth wrote:Here's the article

Nice place you go for your info. I wandered around. A cesspool.

I'd really like for everyone reading this to go visit "The Phora" and pull up one or two random discussion threads. It should take you less than twenty seconds to determine what kind of people frequent that place.

It should be beneath us to associate with Guapo and Pig-Neal even through the medium of electrons. To actually discuss history with them is so distasteful that as soon as I post this I'm going to wash my hands six times and disinfect my keyboard. If I were running Redscape I'd ban these two without a second thought - not on the basis of the last page or two alone, but on a long history of this sort of thing. Unfortunately - and PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong - these two actually run this site (in that they own the server and thus have complete control over everything). Am I correct in that poorly-informed guess?

?

Wow, an OBL thread turns into a pissing contest about the Japanese?

Japan got what they deserved..... and so did OBL.

my 2¢

Min X - As far as I'm aware, Neal and bbauska offered to host Redscape, but Chad has done all this new stuff without transferring things over. Guapo was not involved in that offer. I am very pleased to correct you on this aspect.

Now, I don't know that Neal and Guapo are quite as bad as you suggest. I just think that they have a bit of a blind-spot, and are perhaps unaware of the lengths that the apologists for the Nazis will go to distort history. But certainly citing Weber as proof of what was going on is dubious at best.

During WWII there were various 'approaches' by people on all sides to other nations, but very few of them were serious and had a prospect of being backed by their governments. It doesn't sound like the Trohan article is describing an official offer.

But the description of Pearl Harbor is also quite worrying. Sure, when it comes to the event itself, the Japanese had only attacked the US Navy and some civilians were caught up in it. But that was not all that the Japanese were doing, was it? By 1941 the Japanese controlled much of Northern and Eastern China and were engaged in a brutal war of oppression. The extension of their empire-building in Asia to war with the Western Powers. The same day that Pearl Harbor was attacked, Japan hit Guam and Wake Island. The next day, they attacked Hong Kong (where civilian casualties were higher than military ones), Thailand and Malaya. The attack on the Philippines (a US protectorate) also started on 8th Dec 1941. Pearl Harbor was not a skirmish out of the blue, it was a part of the overall plan to dominate the Pacific. That domination was not built on anything other than brutality and power. I suppose some people can argue that to sit by and watch that was the best thing for the US to do, but I'm not sure it's a sound position.

WW2 was Total War.

A term that many not having lived through it can truly appreciate (myself included). Id like to think i understand the mentality behind it all but the truth is until it is experienced i can only understand it through the voices of those who have experienced it and of whom i have been lucky enough to discuss at length some of the things of those times.

What alot of people have trouble coming to grips with these days is the term "Never Again". So they have a little cry every time the government uses brute force. Booohoo, im safe and warm in my home booohoo.

What should be being discussed is why the Pakistan Government has done nothing for the last 5-10years knowing exactly where OBL was. Instead Allied forces had to take great risks to do what the Pakistan government didn't have the courage, respect or the balls to do. Not to mention loss of allied soldiers over the past 5yrs whilst this POS was sitting around with his Pakistan mates having a laugh at our expense.

As for the website 'PHORA', looks like a tin foil hat circle jerk club.


** One other thing in regards to the Jap surrender. If i can quote Machiavelli
"Wars begin where you will but they do not end where you please"

If they wanted a surrender before getting nuked then they should have though of that before leaving a bloody trail of carnage, destruction and ruined lives all across the Pacific.