Russian submarines to hold USS Harry Truman at gunpoint

[Shalcker]

If it saved the life of a single US serviceman, it was worth it. Its what happens when you start a total war and lose.

Surrender was inevitable the moment Soviet Union entered the war and by defeating Kwantung army cut Japan from Manchurian resources.

[Kellhound]

Surrender was inevitable the moment Soviet Union entered the war and by defeating Kwantung army cut Japan from Manchurian resources.

Still doesnt change my point, but preventing the USSR from gaining even more unearned territory was an added bonus.

[Deleted]

Only 20% of provided Allied equipment was of military nature. 80% is quite enough to say that USSR fought with its own equipment.

The USA shipped 2.3 million tons of steel to the USSR during the WWII years. That volume of steel was enough for the production of about 70,000 T-34 tanks.

USSR did also get a large % of its aluminium, copper, aviation fuel and machine tools from US.......

[Independent voter]

The USA shipped 2.3 million tons of steel to the USSR during the WWII years. That volume of steel was enough for the production of about 70,000 T-34 tanks.

USSR did also get a large % of aluminium, copper, aviation fuel and machine tools from the Allied (mostly US) so the helpe USSR did reseve was critical.....

And 2,000 railway locomotives and 11,000 railway cars.

[Elim Garak]

The USA shipped 2.3 million tons of steel to the USSR during the WWII years. That volume of steel was enough for the production of about 70,000 T-34 tanks.

USSR did also get a large % of its aluminium, copper, aviation fuel and machine tools from US.......

So? Did I say that USSR received no help from its Allies or something?

And 2,000 railway locomotives and 11,000 railway cars.

It looks more and more like you have a fixation on locomotives.

[Slant]

Surrender was inevitable the moment Soviet Union entered the war and by defeating Kwantung army cut Japan from Manchurian resources.

The point of dropping those bombs was not to make Japan surrender. Everyone knew Japan would surrender eventually. The point was to make them surrender now instead of a year later with hundreds of thousands more casualties and millions in civilian casualties.

[Shalcker]

The point of dropping those bombs was not to make Japan surrender. Everyone knew Japan would surrender eventually. The point was to make them surrender now instead of a year later with hundreds of thousands more casualties and millions in civilian casualties.

I don't think that there are many indications that Japanese would do that other then Japanese own wartime propaganda (which obviously should be taken with grain of salt).

And as @Kellhound noted above that "now" was driven among other things by attempt to prevent further USSR gains. We could easily had Hokkaido in addition to those "disputed" Kuril islands. Easily could have another "split" nation like Germany.

[bloodmoth13]

We were asked by these countries to Garrison combat units in their territory. We didn't just show up and make a home for ourselves.

Just another ignorant RT troll.

Not ignorant at all, they wouldnt be asking for protection if not for the obscene US propaganda and fear mongering, or if it were up to democratic vote, its just US pushing nato onto Russias doorstep. , but hey you can keep believing in the Russian boogeyman and pretend that threatening them is going to make you more safe

[Elim Garak]

The point of dropping those bombs was not to make Japan surrender. Everyone knew Japan would surrender eventually. The point was to make them surrender now instead of a year later with hundreds of thousands more casualties and millions in civilian casualties.

What casualties? Could've just waited out until Japan came to their sense. It wasn't the "Nukes or Invasion" kind of situation. That's false dichotomy. A simple blockade would've sufficed or let USSR deal with them. Couldn't have let that happen? So nukes were not justified.

[Independent voter]

What casualties? Could've just waited out until Japan came to their sense. It wasn't the "Nukes or Invasion" kind of situation. That's false dichotomy. A simple blockade would've sufficed or let USSR deal with them. Couldn't have let that happen? So nukes were not justified.

All four parties involved had an atom bomb project. The British were actively helping us and we couldn't have nuked Japan without them. The Russians were trying to steal out secrets and nobody knew how far along the Japanese were except for the Japanese. (We captured a German sub headed for Japan with 120 kg of uranium oxide on it)

US, Britain and Stalin sign the Potsdam Declaration which was mostly about Europe but did have an addendum about Japan.

"We call upon the government of Japan to proclaim now the unconditional surrender of all Japanese armed forces, and to provide proper and adequate assurances of their good faith in such action. The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction."

This was leafleted by bomber and broadcast by radio all over Japan. The last bit "prompt and utter destruction" is diplo speak for we have the nuke and we're going to use it.

If we would've blockaded Japan we'd still be at war with Japan, the military junta would still be in charge. Don't underestimate the Japanese.

[Elim Garak]

If we would've blockaded Japan we'd still be at war with Japan, the military junta would still be in charge. Don't underestimate the Japanese.

The horror. But at least less casualties.

[KeirAdish]

The horror. But at least less casualties.

Hindsight is 20/20.
Were they 100% necessary? Probably not.
Did they likely seem 100% necessary at the time? Probably so.

You are in an all out WORLD WAR, You tell your enemy to surrender or face utter destruction(With the UK backing), they don't.
11 days later you drop a bomb destroying Hiroshima(little boy)
16 hours later you call for their surrender again, still no.
3 days after that another bomb falls, this time on Nagasaki(fat boy)
total deaths approximately 129,000, likely about half of which died 3 days after the first bomb fell.
6 days later on August 15th Japan announced their surrender to the US and allies.
18 days after that, the surrender was officially signed.

but yes, lets all believe they were about to lay down their arms and surrender, but for some magical reason decided NOT to after having a city blown off the map, and still took their sweet time after a second one was.

The Nuclear engagement with Japan lasted 20 days from start to finish.
I highly doubt they were actually on the verge of surrender.

Also don't forget, we were firebombing their cities and killing their civilians already, We just found a much more effective method for destroying the enemy than was commonly accepted.

Approximate firebombing casualties: 333,000 dead, 473,000 wounded.
Approximate Nuke casualties: 129,000 dead

You tell me which is actually worse.

Side note: The Japanese KNEW that an atomic bomb had been used, and knew that only 1-2 more could be readied, so they decided to continue the war.(just did a little more reading and found that one.)
so apparently nuking Hiroshima wasn't enough to stop a war, so yeah on second thought, I guess the nukes were needed.

[Ulmita]

I do understand discussing ww2 stuff especially when it comes nuking civilians in two different cities. USA could have easily detonated a couple outside their cities, on the sea etc just to demonstrate what would happen if they didn't surrender but instead they chose to kill civilians.

The thing is though, and what everyone is here missing, is what USA is doing after WW2. They are basically invading other nations non stop, toppling governments and defending a unipolar world until the end.

I have no issues with unipolarity if its elected democratically, but what is happening atm (see Russia and China for example) is the exact opposite. People need to wake up and start voting people that value peace.

[Crispin]

I suggest you look at the USSR territory before and after ww2, before you pass judgement on the americans, atleast you never saw american tanks killing civilians in capitals of their allies.

Obviosly youre the one missing something, neither "side" is the cowboy with the white hat, we protect our interests as do the Russians.

[Ulmita]

I suggest you look at the USSR territory before and after ww2, before you pass judgement on the americans, atleast you never saw american tanks killing civilians in capitals of their allies.

Obviosly youre the one missing something, neither "side" is the cowboy with the white hat, we protect our interests as do the Russians.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, nothing comes even remotely close to what the Americans have done to this planet. The amount of war they have done is just incredible.

[Independent voter]

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, nothing comes even remotely close to what the Americans have done to this planet. The amount of war they have done is just incredible.

100,000 Poles were sent to the Gulag and that's not counting Germans, Hungarians, Bulgarians, etc.

Communism can't exist unless you lock up hundreds of thousands of people, or kill them.

[Ausr]

100,000 Poles were sent to the Gulag and that's not counting Germans, Hungarians, Bulgarians, etc.

Communism can't exist unless you lock up hundreds of thousands of people, or kill them.

You know, he keeps saying this shit over and over again, always changing it from pre-WW2 Russia to post-collapse USSR compared to what the US has done and never cites anything when called on his shit.

[Crispin]

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, nothing comes even remotely close to what the Americans have done to this planet. The amount of war they have done is just incredible.

No doubt that the americans started several wars which were utter stupid (every nation has), but at the same time youre defending someone who arent any better, which makes your opinion sound rather hollow "usa bad, ussr peaceful!' Rubbish.

It would be easier if you just said "I hate americans, because!"

[Ulmita]

You know, he keeps saying this shit over and over again, always changing it from pre-WW2 Russia to post-collapse USSR compared to what the US has done and never cites anything when called on his shit.

cause
a) there is no SU anymore and
b) Russia is not SU

[Ausr]

cause
a) there is no SU anymore and
b) Russia is not SU

Yes, don't discuss what was said. Cite irrelevant bullshit like usual.