You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
These bombs finally convinced a suicidal Japan (that committed heinous war crimes, and was never, ever going to stop) to halt it's attempt at world domination like nothing else could and saved many 1000's of allied lives.
Completely justified. No apologies.
#Nagasaki #NagasakiDaypic.twitter.com/5cfN9TxEfv
There is no evidence that the Nagasaki bombing played any actual role in the decision to surrender, as an aside. Hiroshima — maybe. But most historians agree Nagasaki didn't affect things in any significant way, and was probably unnecessary.
And the "was never going to stop" bit is patently false. The Japanese high command was searching for ways to end the war. I don't want to underrepresent the complexity of that. But you've got totally wrong ideas floating around your head. If you want a reading list, just ask.
Lastly: I'm not sure who you're addressing with the "no apologies," but that's not my aim here. My aim is for people to understand what it was, beyond the myths. The Nagasaki run was a mishap-filled slaughter of non-combatants, and not part of any coordinate strategy.
This is true whether you think it was ultimately justified or not, which is a separate question entirely, and informed people can come to different conclusions on that. But you've got to get the facts straight first, or else you're just repeating someone's propaganda.
How can you possibly believe the combination of 2 atomic bombs, but specifically the bomb dropped on #Nagasaki (Aug. 09. 1945) had no "actual role in the decision to surrender", when that decision was announced on August 15, less than a week later?
What I'm picking up from these exchanges is, you haven't actually read anything about Japan's surrender. I would be happy to tell you (and others) about it. But I first want to make sure that your goal here is to become less ignorant. Is that fair? Or are you just trolling?
I'm not trolling. I just got done with 5 days of research. Your claim "There is no evidence that the #Nagasaki bombing played any actual role in the decision to surrender" demands that I try to prove a negative.
It is you that needs to prove they didn't play a role.
Quick aside: 5 days of research is a good start! But just for context, I have a PhD in the history of science, and my job is as a historian of nuclear weapons. I'm not appealing to expertise here, but just giving some context to my answers. I'll come back to Nagasaki in a moment.
I didn't say 5 days was all I'd achieved over the last few decades. But okay Dr., as I said, I'm willing to look at your evidence that the Japanese high command was willing to surrender before Hiroshima as you claimed. Please send that.
But US high command knew this at 7, 8 or 9 of August 45?
The US high command didn't receive the declaration of surrender from Japan until August 15th, 1945 (more than a week after the second bomb...).
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
