It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Nuclear bombs on Japan? 100% worth it. Without a doubt.
The U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey group, assigned by President Truman to study the air attacks on Japan, produced a report in July of 1946 that concluded (52-56):
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.
General (and later president) Dwight Eisenhower – then Supreme Commander of all Allied Forces, and the officer who created most of America’s WWII military plans for Europe and Japan – said:
The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing.
Newsweek, 11/11/63, Ike on Ike
Eisenhower also noted (pg. 380):
In [July] 1945… Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. …the Secretary, upon giving me the news of the successful bomb test in New Mexico, and of the plan for using it, asked for my reaction, apparently expecting a vigorous assent.
During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of ‘face’. The Secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude….
Admiral William Leahy – the highest ranking member of the U.S. military from 1942 until retiring in 1949, who was the first de facto Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and who was at the center of all major American military decisions in World War II – wrote (pg. 441):
It is my opinion 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 because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons.
The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children.
www.zerohedge.com...
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
Atoms for peace LOL
Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
Quoting Ike when it's convenient but when it was proposed to you about his "Atoms for peace" you scoff.
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
Atoms for peace LOL
Originally posted by beezzer
Oh, how lovely. Now Egypt wants the bomb.
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Originally posted by beezzer
Oh, how lovely. Now Egypt wants the bomb.
You mean .. the Muslim Brotherhood wants the bomb.
Lovely thought. It'll give us all the warm fuzzies thinking about it.
Hard-core .. hell bent on Sharia law ... with a bomb.
Simply wonderful.
The poll of 812 Egyptians, half of them women, was conducted in a series of in-person interviews by the firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner and sponsored by the Israel Project, a pro-Israel advocacy organization with offices in Washington and Jerusalem. According to the poll, Iran is viewed favorably in Egypt, with 65 percent of those surveyed expressing support of the decision to renew Egypt-Iran relations and 61 percent expressing support of the Iranian nuclear project, versus 41 percent in August 2009.
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
No sir, you are completely wrong:
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
Only 812 people were polled, and half of them were women so I'm not sure if that qualifies them as the Muslim Brotherhood, just a hunch on my behalf.
Founding Hassan al-Banna founded the Muslim Brotherhood in the city of Ismailia in March 1928 along with six workers of the Suez Canal Company, as a Pan-Islamic, religious, political, and social movement.
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
Only 812 people were polled, and half of them were women so I'm not sure if that qualifies them as the Muslim Brotherhood, just a hunch on my behalf.
If you read through the thread you will probably come to the conclusion that this is propaganda with an obvious agenda from a pro Israeli group.
Originally posted by masqua
and only a matter of time before those with enough hard cash will get their bloody hands on them.