...Not only into military archives, but cultural ones as well.

>
>Did they know how many was killed? No. But they did know
>that the cities were in shambles? Yes. Did they know
>people were killed in large numbers? Yes.
>
>>The American lives lost were ALL military lives. None
>>civilian.
>
>SO WHAT? Does that mean they are supposed to be expendible?

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were civilian cities.

>
>You're right; I have no military experience, or any kind in
>which my life was on the line. But I think I'm honest in
>saying that if I were, the last life I would be concerned
>about is the life that's trying to end mine.

So the men, women and children of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were trying to end the lives of Americans. Yeah...okay. And I know you don't think the U.S. was cornered when they dropped those bombs do you? Quite the opposite.

>
>You're right. My family doesn't deserve that. Nor did
>other families in Japan.

This is the point and why the original poster asked the question. Did the people of Hiro. and Naga. deserve that. Was that truly neccessary? No, they didn't and no, it wasn't.

>
>But we aren't talking about who deserves what. We are
>talking about what was done in order to end the war and the
>steps taken in lieu to it by both parties. Cherry-picking
>who shouldn't have died is a waste of time, and it's
>ignoring the simple fact that more people - and particularly
>more Americans, which was, and should be, the main factor -
>would have died had we not dropped that bomb than if we had.

Anata ga totemo chigau dayo. This is also the point. The war could have ended without further loss of American and Japanese lives without the use of the a-bombs. The main factor of any war by a nation claiming to represent "freedom and democracy", should be to win the war with the minimal amount of civilian casualities -or any at all for that matter- as possible.

>What information could possibly that you or anyone else has
>that could possibly change my mind about this? You can
>bring in 3,000 pieces of material saying this or that, but
>the fact is that the basic argument is still the same:
>Japan refused to surrender, we hit Hiroshima, the Soviets
>invaded Manchuria, Japan STILL refused to surrender, we hit
>Nagasaki, and the emperor finally intervened and surrendered
>unconditionally.

This just about sums it up...O'Reilly and 'em would be proud.

>
>Now, unless YOU can find something that challenges the BASIC
>facts of what led to the end of the war, then guess what?

The United States Strategic Bombing Survey (1946)

"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."

All Truman had to do, was say, "Your Emperor would be fine." and the war would've been over, without Russia gettin' in the mix and without the bombs. He didn't because of the reasons i've already stated and a few didn't. And what SHOULD tell anyone -with an ounce of common sense- that it was never about getting "unconditional surrender", is the FACT that after the bombs, they granted the request for the Emperors retention anyway.

N/M

More things for you to disregard, cuz they conflict with your highschool belief system.

http://www.doug-long.com/grew.htm

http://www.doug-long.com/mccloy.htm

http://www.doug-long.com/bard.htm

http://www.doug-long.com/hstimson.htm

*July 1945 - Japan's peace messages

Still, the messages from Togo to Sato, read by the U.S. at the time, clearly indicated that Japan was seeking to end the war:

July 11: "make clear to Russia... We have no intention of annexing or taking possession of the areas which we have been occupying as a result of the war; we hope to terminate the war".

July 12: "it is His Majesty's heart's desire to see the swift termination of the war".

July 13: "I sent Ando, Director of the Bureau of Political Affairs to communicate to the Ambassador that His Majesty desired to dispatch Prince Konoye as special envoy, carrying with him the personal letter of His Majesty stating the Imperial wish to end the war" (for above items, see: U.S. Dept. of State, Potsdam 1, pg. 873-879).

July 18: "Negotiations... necessary... for soliciting Russia's good offices in concluding the war and also in improving the basis for negotiations with England and America." (Magic-Diplomatic Summary, 7/18/45, Records of the National Security Agency, Magic Files, RG 457, Box 18, National Archives).

July 22: "Special Envoy Konoye's mission will be in obedience to the Imperial Will. He will request assistance in bringing about an end to the war through the good offices of the Soviet Government." The July 21st communication from Togo also noted that a conference between the Emperor's emissary, Prince Konoye, and the Soviet Union, was sought, in preparation for contacting the U.S. and Great Britain (Magic-Diplomatic Summary, 7/22/45, Records of the National Security Agency, Magic Files, RG 457, Box 18, National Archives).

July 25: "it is impossible to accept unconditional surrender under any circumstances, but we should like to communicate to the other party through appropriate channels that we have no objection to a peace based on the Atlantic Charter." (U.S. Dept. of State, Potsdam 2, pg. 1260 - 1261).

July 26: Japan's Ambassador to Moscow, Sato, to the Soviet Acting Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Lozovsky: "The aim of the Japanese Government with regard to Prince Konoye's mission is to enlist the good offices of the Soviet Government in order to end the war." (Magic-Diplomatic Summary, 7/26/45, Records of the National Security Agency, Magic Files, RG 457, Box 18, National Archives).

RealTalkInfinite