I'm handing out some free red pills on this "infamous" 80th anniversary:
-FDR was informed about the attack on Pearl Harbor well in advance but just let it happen because he was in bed with Stalin, and he'd let his whole state apparatus get infested with hordes of commie roaches. Conveniently, all the most important assets like aircraft carriers were off on a training exercise that day. He repeatedly snubbed requests from Japanese diplomats for a meeting in the preceding days.
-Japan definitely overplayed their hand, it must be said. Who knows what political landscape we'd be living in if they'd simply declared an end to their imperial ambitions and settled for the territories they held at the time.
-The atomic bombs had basically nothing to do with Japan's surrender years later. The US had already razed 58 large cities with plain old fire over the summer of '45. What difference would razing 2 more cities with special fire that also causes cancer make in that situation? Japan surrendered because Stalin declared war and threatened their western border while they were entirely deployed in the south and east. All they were hoping for was something better than an unconditional surrender. Good thing they sided with US.
-WWII was nothing like the comfy morality tale they sell normies in high school.
-At least we got anime, which is now one of the last remaining beacons of western civilization.
Edit: I'm glad this generated some friction. My mind isn't changed, but my thanks to everyone who brought differing opinions.
Haha, OP read Howard Zinn and thought it contained 'red pills'.
Historical ignorance, and its retarded cousin 'knowing stuff that's wrong', is the plague of our time.
It gets on my nerves ever time this comes around that people still push that long debunked conspiracy. And while its true that Roosevelt and a lot of the high command had been told there was a strong possibility that AN attack would come somewhere (the US Navy knew that Kido Butai was gone pretty much the moment it left Yokohama), but almost all intel said that the most likely target would be the Philippines.
After all, who would be dumb enough to try and sail all the way across the Pacific, hit a target, and then sail all the way back across, and do it without getting caught on the way in and back out?
And worse, there is absolutely no excuse to be that way other than willful ignorance and/or politically or ideologically charged retardation.
We have the collective knowledge of humanity at our finger tips, and access to information from alternative points of view with dozens of experts or self-taught historians talking about the matter. And yet some people chose to be the way of OP. sigh
Also, on the note of OP:
How about the fact that one plane with one bomb wiped out an entire city? Every other city they destroyed took hundreds of planes dropping thousands of bombs. You can see an air fleet like that coming. You can HEAR it coming. One plane can easily slip past every defense you have. And now that one plane can destroy EVERYTHING by itself. Which was the moment that finally snapped a lot of the Japanese high command out of their zeal and showed them just what kind of power they had fucked with, and now it wanted them to die. And even then, you STILL had a not insignificant amount of the Japanese military screaming "Death before dishonor!"
"It wanted them to die" is a bit strong. Based on what I've read, they would have very much preferred for Japan to surrender. The war department even considered demonstrating the bomb to intimidate Japan, but ultimately decided the risk of US POWs being moved to the test site was too high.
True, but like another thread in this topic said, there is an issue of perception vs. reality. The reality was that the War Department was hesitant to actually nuke Japan. But as far as the Japanese were concerned, one moment Hiroshima was there, and the next it was gone, and it took them hours to even figure out what the hell happened. And as far as the Japanese were concerned, the US had just Thanos-Snapped an entire city with literally no warning. What conclusion are they supposed to draw other than "If we dont surrender, they will kill every last one of us!"
They knew there was an attack coming . They were goading for it. https://imgbb.com/BwwJ6M6
Seems legit
You get an A+. Good boy. Be sure to support the "Green New Deal" in homage to your hero.
Good response that makes it obvious that you really know what you're talking about... when repeating the myths of the suspected communist party member Howard Zinn.
SUSPECTED? He clearly was a commie shit.
Very subtle put down here.
I would have tried harder if there was any substantive refutation. All I see is "nuh-uh. You stupid."
Even many leftists agree that the "bomb scary" story was merely the least embarrassing for both parties. It's a simple Google search away. And even I will concede that it might have been necessary at the time.
I believe there's a rather pessimistic adage regarding invading Russia in the winter that goes back at least a few years before WWII, so I'm uninclined to believe that was what compelled Franky in his heart of hearts to once again violate the Monroe doctrine.
You must have missed my first comment, because I pointed out quite a few things that you conveniently left out.
The irony is that I don't even disagree with you that much. You want to create moral ambiguity by saying that the Allies were also bad. I don't believe World War II was fought for 'morality', but for reasons of security. It just so happens that the less bad side won. But you're just plain wrong on the facts.
Are you really doing the "GOOGLE IT YOURSELF, SHITLORD"?
22 June is literally the start of summer, not winter. And by all accounts, everyone from Halder to Stalin to Roosevelt thought that the collapse of the USSR was imminent. Stalin even later admitted that the USSR would not have survived without American aid.
What do you think the Monroe doctrine is?
Counterfactuals are always hard to answer, and even harder to decide if they are reasonable. The US was demanding that Japan withdraw from China - failure to do which was what led to the oil embargo on Japan. Just stopping further conquests would not have cut it. In retrospect, it would have been quite smart (even after the war with the US started), because the war in China was tying up a lot of resources and manpower, but hindsight is 20/20.
I have wondered what would have happened if Japan had only attacked the European empires and not the US.
Quite unlikely. The only reasonable prospect was an intervention by Japan to attack the USSR in the east. But because of its losses in earlier skirmishes with the USSR, it never dared, and made a treaty with the USSR - which freed up vital Siberian legions which stopped the German onslaught.