Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Salvavida
The US showed an amazing amount of grace by not dropping one on Tokyo to take out then entire C2.

As I said in a previous post, this is an annual discussion held by people who don't know the background of the bombings...

Look up "Operation Meetinghouse" to see what LeMay's pilots and aircrews had already done to Tokyo, and you'll understand why it couldn't have been a target for an atomic bomb.

Here's a hint...


We didn’t target a population center. We targeted the military targets, giving advanced notice so that the Japanese people would leave. That is a FACT.

This is a map of Tokyo that was used by the Army Air Force during WWII.

No, it's not marking military targets, which would be necessary for your argument to be correct. And no, it's not marking hospitals, which would be required if the intended raid was to be in line with the Geneva Convention. It's marking areas by their inflammability, which goes to my argument that the raids against Japan were designed to simply burn cities to the ground, and that the raids against Hiroshima and Nagasaki were simply the next logical step in such a campaign.

If military targets were really the intended aiming points, what could be the point of determining the best means of burning houses to the ground? (Why build a village to perfect a means of burning homes to the ground, if you didn't actually intend to burn homes to the ground?)

It was all part of the plan (and there's nothing "hypothetical" about it; the words of the men at the time give it away).

"A small number of long-range bombers carrying incendiary bombs could quickly reduce Japan's paper-and-matchwood cities to heaps of smoking ashes." (Claire Chennault)codoh.com

“If war with the Japanese does come, we’ll fight mercilessly,” General George C. Marshall told news reporters in an off-the-record briefing on November 15, 1941, three weeks before Pearl Harbor. “Flying Fortresses will be dispatched immediately to set the paper cities of Japan on fire. There won’t be any hesitation about bombing civilians—it will be all-out.www.smithsonianmag.com


Japan's vulnerability with regard to its inflammable cities and the will of the Americans to use that vulnerability against the Japanese with little or no regard for innocent life was well-known, even to the Japanese.

"This is even in the event that war should break out and Tokyo should be in flames by the action of the United States Air Forces. If huge fires break out in Tokyo and Tokyo is completely destroyed by fire three or four times, and if I must witness it while waiting for a strategically opportune time, I cannot remain still." - Admiral Yamamoto, 11/12/1940. "At Dawn We Slept", Gordon Prange. catdir.loc.gov


(Not to worry. I have great confidence that after the last American serviceman who served in that war has gone to his grave, we'll be able to discuss the subject like adults.)

159 posted on 08/09/2022 3:11:03 PM PDT by Captain Walker ("Evil people always support each other; that is their chief strength." - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies ]


To: Captain Walker; Salvavida; Stingray51; firebrand; GrandJediMasterYoda; where's_the_Outrage?; ...

“I’m just not sold on the argument that “they were barbaric so we had to burn them to death”.” [Captain Walker, post 157]

“...(Why build a village to perfect a means of burning homes to the ground, if you didn’t actually intend to burn homes to the ground?)...” [Captain Walker, post 159]

The Imperial Japanese attacked the Allies. They made themselves into an enemy. Compared to that, the particulars of their motivation for doing so do not matter. And the details of how & where are secondary - by a very long stretch.

It might seem to amateurs that the construction of Japanese and Germans structures on weapons test ranges was something profound and sinister, but the real answer is no more than a detail: the armed forces were required to determine effects of weapons before deploying them in action. It had to be done in compliance with public law back then, and it’s still a requirement. Building structures that resembled potential targets, then hitting them with various munitions and measuring the results, was one way to do that.

In a similar vein, the existence of plans to strike targets in the territory of a potential adversary riles folks who have minimal experience concerning the military establishment. It all might seem alarming, but in reality, pre-planning is essential if anything is to be accomplished, when sudden realignments occur. All major commands keep staffs on hand. They spend lots of time and effort planning for contingencies, likely and unlikely. Commanders would be unwise not to require it.


160 posted on 08/10/2022 2:10:53 PM PDT by schurmann
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson