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

To: MNJohnnie

A few years ago, liberal “comedian/satirist” Jon Stewart said we should have dropped an atomic bomb offshore, to show the Japanese the power of the bomb. And then tell them if they didn’t surrender, then we would use the bomb on them.

Lots of speculation and “what if” there. Would Japan really have surrendered just by us revealing we had that bomb? Would they have thought we were bluffing? Who knows if the Jon Stewart scenario would have played out that way? It’s easy to say with 70 years of hindsight that we should have it next something different.


10 posted on 05/04/2018 9:50:51 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: Dilbert San Diego

Japan did not surrender after the first bomb hit them.

It took a second bomb for them to surrender.

We already have the answer to Stewart’s bluff idea. He is a freaking idiot as well as anyone else who thinks that is what we should have done.

He also ignores the fact we only had two ready to go at that time.


17 posted on 05/04/2018 9:56:01 AM PDT by Secret Agent Man ( Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Dilbert San Diego

We dropped the bomb on cities and it was only the Emperors will, and some quick action by his staff, that prevented the Militarists from stopping the surrender broadcast and continuing the war.

That fact proves the idiocy of Stewart and the rest of the “what if” clown posses fantasies


18 posted on 05/04/2018 9:56:31 AM PDT by MNJohnnie ("The political class is a bureaucracy designed to perpetuate itself" Rush Limbaugh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Dilbert San Diego

Ah...see the linked video...Bill Whittle specifically addresses that dummy...


20 posted on 05/04/2018 9:57:37 AM PDT by rlmorel (Leftists: They believe in the "Invisible Hand" only when it is guided by government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Dilbert San Diego

A demostration was recommended by the scientists in New Mexico. It would not have had the desired effect (Japan’s surrender). Exhibit A: Japan did not surrender after Hiroshima was bombed. Their cabinet was 4-3 against. If 70,000 dead won’t pursuade, making a big temporary splash in the Pacific Ocean would not have either. In fact, it would have been considered a trick.


32 posted on 05/04/2018 10:06:40 AM PDT by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Dilbert San Diego

Dropping the nukes off-shore would have been moronic.

There were no spare weapons; there would be no more nuclear bombs for months, at the very least.


50 posted on 05/04/2018 10:32:48 AM PDT by Little Ray (Freedom Before Security!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Dilbert San Diego
Who knows if the Jon Stewart scenario would have played out that way? It’s easy to say with 70 years of hindsight that we should have it next something different.

There's been a lot of writing and debate about that, actually. Truman and his generals decided

- No one could guarantee it would work. What if it was a dud?

- There were only two bombs available. Another 6-8 would have been available only by the end of the year

- Any element of "surprise" or shock and awe would be lost

- knowing it existed, Japan Govt would have considered countermeasures

- No Japanese citizens would have seen or experienced it. The government simply would not have told them.

- The Soviets were already re-deploying to East Asia. A quick end was needed to keep them out.

57 posted on 05/04/2018 10:49:47 AM PDT by PGR88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | 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