You are taking statements from a document that has not been verified, and assuming how another person would have perceived those statements? And your agrument is that since the Ambassador told Saddam that the US had no opinion on Arab-Arab conflicts, that they were giving Saddam a "green light" to invade Kuwait?
yes i saw that too the great thing about reality is that it can be manipulated so thoroughly that you'd never know that yesterdays ally is todays enemy. from a logical perspective it is unlikely that the saddam being such a good friend of the americans and a good buyer of their goods wouldn't have consulted them before invading. knowing this one would conclude that if the americans were told that he was invading they would have immediately told him to stop. how do i know this? because operation desrt storm was mounted on the basis that iraq had illegally invaded sovereign kuwaiti territory. i do remember reading a tiny snippet in the newspaper that iraq had at least 100,000 troops massed on the border with kuwait about 2 WEEKS before the invasion. if the newspaper knew this it is highly likely that the american government knew too. the result of this knowledge freely available to any man in the street? a resounding and thundering silence from the american government who were at the time an ally of iraq. the man who would really know what happened is dead, convenient isn't it?
Let's suppose Ivory Tower time is over. Class dismissed. Now we're both out in the minefield in a struggle to the death. It's you or it's me, bayonet to bayonet. The United States lost 300,000 combat dead in World War II. That is the position Harry Truman was in, in 1945. And if it's you going to survive or me going to survive, and not both, by God it's going to be me.
The bombs were dropped on Japan... 1. To try and encourage a speedy unconditional peace treaty, with the US, before the USSR moved on the island, and they'd have to split it. In the end, the US still allowed the Emperor to stay...the main Japanese condition. 2. As a show of strength, to the USSR, who had just wiped out hundreds of thousands of the Japanese military, in China, in a matter of few weeks. IMO Peace
3DJay hit the nail on the head but the one thing he forgot to mention is that an invasion of Japan would have made D-day look like a church picnic. If we had invaded Japan using conventional weapons only there would have been many more people killed in the process.
I don't think I'd be here if it wasn't for the use of the A-Bombs...Both my grandpa's were already in alot of major battles during WW2,their luck might have run out during the invasion of Japan.
Actually, one of the reasons that the Americans were so lenient on the Japanese after the surrender was because of all the invaluable knowledge of germ warfare, human anatomy and pain thresholds that they stood to gain from them. So the people responsible for the experimentation on the Chinese and Korean people ended up still rich, and working for the Americans. I mean, the USSR was still a natural enemy, and there's no way the Americans could afford to give up such an advantage. God bless America!
The Allies dropped the Bomb on Japan for 2 reasons. 1.) End the war quickly and avoid an invasion of the Japanese mainland. 2.) Scare the hell out of the Soviet Union who did lots of land grabbing while "liberating" Eastern Europe from the Nazis.
NO!! US army was not honoured in Vietnam and Cambodia 20 years ago.There were bad events happening.BUT they were ABSOLUTELY not doing the things Japan did in World War II. Take a glimpse of the book 'Rape of Nanking'---- The japs were sick RAPISTS.( An estimated 20,000 women were raped by the Japanese soldiers during the six weeks of the Nanking Massacre, most were brutally killed afterwards. The Japanese soldiers even raped girls less than ten years old, women over seventy years old, pregnant women, and nuns. Rampant raping took place in the streets or at religious worshiping places during the day. Many women were gang raped. Some Japanese even forced fathers to rape their daughters, sons to rape their mothers, etc. Those who resisted were killed immediately.) http://prion.bchs.uh.edu/%7Ezzhang/1/Nanking_Massacre/gallery6.html They killed civilians as PLAYING GAMES (Two Japanese officers, Toshiaki Mukai and Tsuyoshi Noda competing to see who could kill (with a sword) one hundred people first.) http://prion.bchs.uh.edu/%7Ezzhang/1/Nanking_Massacre/gallery4.html Special Japanese military units conducted experiments on civilians and POWs in China. One of the most infamous was Unit 731. Victims were subjected to vivisection without anesthesia, amputations, and were used to test biological weapons, among other experiments. Anesthesia was not used because it was considered to affect results. In some victims, animal blood was injected into their bodies. http://prion.bchs.uh.edu/%7Ezzhang/1/Nanking_Massacre/gallery3.html http://prion.bchs.uh.edu/%7Ezzhang/1/Nanking_Massacre/history.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes
I felt sick for a long while after reading these documents. this is the darkest page in human history,and sadly it seemed to be forgotten.
if anything, reading through these grim annals of japanese military "victories" should tell you that this widespread abuse gains only retribution in reward
I think flattening entire cities and thus killing all civilians inside (not to mention the lives lost later due to the fallout) is a bit harsh.
I agree. There are proper measures to make the Japanese pay for their mistakes and dropping bombs on 2 major cities isn't one of them.