Question Who's Online | Find Members | Private Messages
Questions
Quizzes
Articles
My Journal
Forums
Answer Questions | Question Comments | My Questions | Favorites | +Add Question
LATEST
POPULAR PRIORITY RANDOM

All | Games | Funny | Entertainment | Quizzes | Weird | Tech | People | Arts/Lit | News | Science | Sports | Places | Misc

570 hits Rate me! Share Favorite | Flag 17 years ago by KikiPeepers

Do you think the United States would have defeated Japan in World War II, if they hadn`t used atomic weaponry?


Put This Question on Your Page (MySpace, Livejournal, Blog, etc)
[Preview] EMBED CODE:


Prev 1 2 Next (showing 1-25 of 26)

Bottom Last Post

17 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Thursday 3/3/05 - 10:32:34 AM EST (GMT-5)
Japan lost the war on the very 1st day. Japan had to knock out all of the warships at pearl harbor b/c they did not have enough fuel to fight an extended war.
17 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Thursday 3/3/05 - 10:33:43 AM EST (GMT-5)
No because Japan would have used atomic weaponry on America. It was just a case of who would use it first, Japan or America
17 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Thursday 3/3/05 - 10:59:01 AM EST (GMT-5)
^^untrue. Japan was actually seeking to negotiate a conditional surrender, but only an unconditional surrender would do for the allies, so hundreds of thousands of NON-COMBATANT CIVILIANS were murdered to force an unconditional surrender.

Japan was nowhere near producing atomic weapons.

17 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Thursday 3/3/05 - 11:00:01 AM EST (GMT-5)
^I agree.

17 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Thursday 3/3/05 - 11:00:57 AM EST (GMT-5)
Germany was working on atomic weaponry. Japan was working on biological warfare.
But they were already losing, it just would have cost a lot more lives to fight al the way to the japan isle.
17 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Thursday 3/3/05 - 11:01:34 AM EST (GMT-5)
P.S. The United States didn't defeat Japan, the Allies did. I understand the mix up, as almost every Hollywood war movie ever made pretends that the USA did it all by themselves, despite the fact you joined the war three years AFTER it started.
17 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Thursday 3/3/05 - 11:03:38 AM EST (GMT-5)
Absolutely. There's no way Japan could have produced nuclear weapons in any sort of useful time scale...

It's pretty true about history being written by the winners. If the allies had lost a city to a nuke, it'd still be heralded as the worst atrocity of all time. I'm astonished they got away with it.

The Japanese would have lost regardless, but the US wanted to play with their new toys and didn't want the fuss of a messy, drawn out conflict. So they wiped two cities off the map.

17 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Thursday 3/3/05 - 11:05:08 AM EST (GMT-5)
Germany had lost their best people to the USA. Ironically most of the best nuclear physicistas of the day were Jewish. Besides, we had defeated Germany BEFORE the attacks on Hiroshima nad Nagasaki.

I do take the point that lives could have lost fighting all the way to Japan, but they were trying to negotiate a surrender, and if that failed, the majority of the dead would have been COMBATANTS, not CIVILIANS.

17 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Thursday 3/3/05 - 11:05:46 AM EST (GMT-5)
*physicists
17 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Thursday 3/3/05 - 11:15:16 AM EST (GMT-5)
Apparantly the two bombs caused a total of 250 000 deaths.
17 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Friday 3/4/05 - 8:30:25 PM EST (GMT-5)
Japan was broken. They'd begun to lose the war as early as 1942, possibly even earlier. Their grip on China was loosening and their natural resources and food were all but used up. Had the bombs not been used, there would have been more fighting, probably on Japanese soil, but the deaths would have been soldiers, not the entire civilian population of 2 cities.
17 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Friday 3/4/05 - 8:37:30 PM EST (GMT-5)
yeah Brunnen, we joined three years later and had to bail England and France's sorry asses or else you would be speaking German today, you moron.

Kaneda is pretty much right. The citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the sacrifical lambs. My theory is that many lives were saved in the long run by dropping the bombs. I think if Japan had been aware of the success of some of their bombing of the western and central United States, their morale would have been higher, but I still don't think they could have defeated the allies.

17 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Friday 3/4/05 - 8:48:29 PM EST (GMT-5)
Brett: It's true that you did help us, and we may well have lost the war if not for America's help, but what we resent most is the American attitude towards us because of it. America didn't help us out because they wanted a reward, and the soldiers didn't fight and die hoping that Europe would forever be in America's debt. How can we be grateful to a nation who, far too often, try to take all the credit for winning the war, and get indignant when Europeans 60 years later, do not want to be forced to do whatever America tells them?

As for Japan, the more I study about it's involvement in the war, the more I realise how stupid Japan was to get involved in the war. There are a LOT of factors that I can't bring into the debate right now, simply because it'd take too long, but Japan basically got ahead of themselves. They began running out of resources almost as soon as they got involved, and despite the army continuing to follow the orders of the Emperor (Who was a god to them)..

17 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Friday 3/4/05 - 8:49:23 PM EST (GMT-5)
..the people of Japan were exhausted and dying. Had the war continued much longer, there'd have been no Japanese left to enjoy victory or mourn defeat.
17 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Friday 3/4/05 - 8:54:32 PM EST (GMT-5)
WHat we resent is jackasses like Brunnen posting crap like he does.
I personally don't care if England or France help us out in Iraq or anywhere else.
Don't fall in for the stereotype of the Ugly American when it comes to relations with Europe. Just the same as all Frenchmen are not faggots, not all Americans are self centered boors.
17 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Friday 3/4/05 - 8:57:44 PM EST (GMT-5)
I'm quite aware of that. But I think a lot of the crap from our side is a rebellion against the crap from the US. You are a much bigger country, and are able to boss other countries about to an extent. This results in big-headed Americans who think they live on the top of the world, and rebellion from everywhere else.

It's just the way the world works.

17 yrs ago, 1 mos ago - Saturday 3/26/05 - 3:49:40 PM EST (GMT-5)
Brunnen: You are ABSOLUTELY wrong. I know a thing or two about Japanese political history, and they were not trying to work out a conditional surrender.

While you, Brunnen, may be of the insultingly simplistic mindset that countries other than your own only have a single view and are dominated entirely by a single party or opinion, such was not the case with WWII Japan. There were small, relatively weak political groups internal to Japan that were trying to convince the government to surrender, but there was absolutely no way that was going to happen. The "attempt to negotiate a conditional surrender" was never seriously considered by the Japanese government.

As a matter of fact, Japan was more interested in plotting what we would today call a "dirty bombing" of the San Francisco area, with plans to bring it into effect the March after Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed.

Get your facts straight...

17 yrs ago, 1 mos ago - Saturday 3/26/05 - 3:50:03 PM EST (GMT-5)
The bombing was terrible, but they weren't innocently planning a surrender when all of a sudden they were vaporized. This is just a brazen attempt to further demonize the United States. As if you, Brunnen, needed more practice.
16 yrs ago, 11 mos ago - Sunday 6/5/05 - 10:07:23 PM EST (GMT-5)
yes but about 5 years later, the japanese were nowhere near a surrender.
16 yrs ago, 11 mos ago - Sunday 6/5/05 - 10:08:50 PM EST (GMT-5)
How the hell did this question get accepted? It's basic common sense that America would have won.
16 yrs ago, 11 mos ago - Sunday 6/5/05 - 10:10:22 PM EST (GMT-5)
Yes. They would of lost many more lives and the war would of gone on much longer if they were made to invade the Island, But Japan had no hope.
16 yrs ago, 11 mos ago - Sunday 6/5/05 - 10:11:35 PM EST (GMT-5)
On 3/4/2005 8:37:30 PM Brett_Weir wrote:
Kaneda is pretty much right. The citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the sacrifical lambs. My theory is that many lives were saved in the long run by dropping the bombs. I think if Japan had been aware of the success of some of their bombing of the western and central United States, their morale would have been higher, but I still don't think they could have defeated the allies.

Actually, after the bombing of Kyoto, which destroyed half of the city with regular bombs, Japan was ready to surrender; truman made sure they would with the A bomb. But I don't think it was necessary.
16 yrs ago, 11 mos ago - Sunday 6/5/05 - 10:12:44 PM EST (GMT-5)
And by the way, Brett, The Russians did as much to end WWII as the US.
16 yrs ago, 10 mos ago - Saturday 7/9/05 - 4:09:13 AM EST (GMT-5)
On 6/5/2005 10:11:36 PM abzurd wrote:
On 3/4/2005 8:37:30 PM Brett_Weir wrote: Kaneda is pretty much right. The citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the sacrifical lambs. My theory is that many lives were saved in the long run by dropping the bombs. I think if Japan had been aware of the success of some of their bombing of the western and central United States, their morale would have been higher, but I still don't think they could have defeated the allies. Actually, after the bombing of Kyoto, which destroyed half of the city with regular bombs, Japan was ready to surrender; truman made sure they would with the A bomb. But I don't think it was necessary.


Actually the Japanese were unwilling to surrender until after the A bombs, it was necessary so that we would not waste more American lives than needed to make Japan surrender.
16 yrs ago, 10 mos ago - Saturday 7/9/05 - 4:15:23 AM EST (GMT-5)
who says we lost to japan? wait? we lost? huh?

Prev 1 2 Next (showing 1-25 of 26)



You need to be logged in to post a reply

New to YT? Create a Free Account ~ Have an Account? Log In

Top



10 Most Popular Questions Today
1 What does your money do?

2 Do you share your bed with someone else?

3 6รท2(1+2)

4 Men: Would you take Cialis even if it meant having an erection lasting 4 hours or more?

5 Have you ever thought you lost something, only to find it in the trash?

6 Are mass shootings an acceptable by-product of the right to bear arms?

7 Which Oompa Loompas do you prefer?

8 When you borrow something, do you make sure it`s in the same condition upon its return?

9 Do you think aliens exist?

10 Was your high school named after a person?

More Questions
 
Edit