General Discussion

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)

38. "Can you imagine what it would have been like invading Tokyo?"

Sat May 9, 2015, 12:50 AM

May 2015

Wholly unnecessary, as the Japanese had already made numerous overtures of surrender - we wanted first, a totally unconditional surrender, and second, we wanted to throw two huge bombs to scare the shit out of the Soviets. Mind, we had already fucking devastated Tokyo already by that point too.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

87 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Rachel is pointing out that the Soviets did defeat the Nazis [View all] malaise May 2015 OP

There was a huge loss of life in Soviet Union in WW2. HooptieWagon May 2015 #1

More than 20 million Soviets died PSPS May 2015 #2

Yes, they lost that many Hekate May 2015 #26

Not all of those casualties were "Soviets" Art_from_Ark May 2015 #77

And they've all been redefined as "Russia." Igel May 2015 #50

Karelians (NW RF) were tremendously sentimental re their Great Patriotic War HereSince1628 May 2015 #3

We let them take Berlin... Archae May 2015 #4

They loss 225ooo men taking Berlin.... Historic NY May 2015 #28

"Can you imagine what it would have been like invading Tokyo?" Scootaloo May 2015 #38

"Wholly unnecessary"? - Well, one objective in war is is seek the KingCharlemagne May 2015 #45

Not quite that cut-n-dried jeff47 May 2015 #76

The Japanese never had made overtures of surrender Kaleva May 2015 #83

Glad to hear she's bringing it up tech3149 May 2015 #5

Actually there were several ceremonies in Europe abd Britain today malaise May 2015 #7

And now Russia has invaded their neighbor on ethnonationalist grounds NuclearDem May 2015 #9

Yes, we're generally well-aware of the role the USSR played in WWII. NuclearDem May 2015 #6

I'm sure you're right regarding DU. DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #10

We are special. Igel May 2015 #51

Well, it comes down to carnage, who's willing to put it forward. n/t UTUSN May 2015 #8

They took the brunt of it but we helped a lot through lend lease. One thing that I've noticed brewens May 2015 #11

Maybe you can answer this for me. GGJohn May 2015 #12

I have no reason to believe you are lying. I'm sure it is true that you have been told that. :) brewens May 2015 #13

No, not lying, genuinely curious as to whether or not this was true. GGJohn May 2015 #14

From what I have read, I doubt it. I'm surprised it's not written up somewhere that he claimed it brewens May 2015 #15

Thanks. GGJohn May 2015 #16

He pretty much had to. What he wrote and spoke about in the 20s and 30s pretty MillennialDem May 2015 #31

Agreed. GGJohn May 2015 #32

I disagree - if Hitler didn't invade the Soviet Union, Germany probably would MillennialDem May 2015 #34

I bow to your much better knowledge of those events. GGJohn May 2015 #35

wasn't Hitler delayed like 6 weeks invading the Balkans? krispos42 May 2015 #47

That might have helped, but maybe not. The rasputitsa (mud) is a huge problem in MillennialDem May 2015 #52

Klotzen, nicht kleckern malthaussen May 2015 #56

Well, technically speaking, Hitler's biggest blunder was bailing Mussolini's ass out KingCharlemagne May 2015 #46

Difficult to define Hitler's "biggest blunder," malthaussen May 2015 #67

If you read Mein Kampf (in summary is good enough for non-professionals) cemaphonic May 2015 #81

As a kid, I learned a lot about the part the USA [layed before I even had a clue what brewens May 2015 #18

I think Hitler appreciated the tactical results of Pearl Harbor exboyfil May 2015 #43

Shhh, you're not allowed to point that out. malthaussen May 2015 #58

Per John Toland's biography, Hitler was thrilled by the Japanese attack hatrack May 2015 #84

Germany's relation with Japan seem one sided. . . Springslips May 2015 #86

I doubt it. HooptieWagon May 2015 #19

I agree, I think there was more coordination between Italy and Germany than between either of davidpdx May 2015 #21

Well, the coordination between Germany and Italy... HooptieWagon May 2015 #24

No, he did not. oneshooter May 2015 #22

Thanks for that info. GGJohn May 2015 #30

Which allowed the US to formalize its "Germany First" strategy Ex Lurker May 2015 #36

I think it was potential industrial capacity at that time. The big automakers went into overdrive freshwest May 2015 #41

What I have often wondered... malthaussen May 2015 #60

I think that is a good way of putting it davidpdx May 2015 #23

The U.S. provided much equipment to USSR HooptieWagon May 2015 #25

the russians practically had unlimited manpower, even if they had shortage of arms at times. they dionysus May 2015 #40

What battles are you referencing? At the decisive Battle of Stalingrad, Zhukov encircled an KingCharlemagne May 2015 #48

It was a meatgrinder. Igel May 2015 #53

Ah, I got you. But it was no one-sided meat grinder, as the Wehrmacht fed almost KingCharlemagne May 2015 #54

I disagree with your assessment of MacArthur. malthaussen May 2015 #61

Ah well, I'm no Clausewitz myself, so am relying on others' assessments. But I believe KingCharlemagne May 2015 #70

Considered brilliant, yes... malthaussen May 2015 #71

Understood. It's an interesting point you raise about Mac-hype. I'm KingCharlemagne May 2015 #72

Thanks! Should be interesting. malthaussen May 2015 #87

I find the opposite is often true. I bet if you polled people on the street at random most people MillennialDem May 2015 #29

There are always going to be people that are ignorant of history davidpdx May 2015 #37

It's not as though the US did nothing (also, please don't ignore the UK's efforts, which were MillennialDem May 2015 #39

The U.S., UK and western allies were dinking around down in North AFrica while the KingCharlemagne May 2015 #49

The numbers are disputed. Igel May 2015 #55

I apologize for my verbal sloppiness, as the figure of 26 million Soviet casualties refers to KingCharlemagne May 2015 #59

The importance of lend-lease lay less in tanks and guns than less glamorous equipment. malthaussen May 2015 #63

I know what lend lease did... but it's more of an issue of this MillennialDem May 2015 #66

Well, that's an easy one. malthaussen May 2015 #68

During Napoleon's time, Moscow was not the capital of Russia, St Petersburg was which he failed to MillennialDem May 2015 #69

I must have misstyped... malthaussen May 2015 #73

Apologies on the Napoleon thing - like I said I see it written enough that I do MillennialDem May 2015 #74

They came in from one side while we came in from the other. They made it to Berlin before we did. jwirr May 2015 #17

Sides? Who cares about what side one came through..... they faced 2/3 or more of the German army at MillennialDem May 2015 #27

Sides = sides of Berlin. jwirr May 2015 #44

Twice you've given the wrong date for Pearl Harbor Jim Lane May 2015 #80

Uh no. December 5th, 1941 is the day Operation Typhoon stopped. I was not referencing Pearl Harbor. MillennialDem May 2015 #82

Ah, thanks for the clarification. (n/t) Jim Lane May 2015 #85

Considering they gave them a kick start.... HEyHEY May 2015 #20

And for the poor people of Eastern Europe, one brutal occupation was replaced by another. tritsofme May 2015 #33

Lets not forget that the Soviets participated exboyfil May 2015 #42

One thing I have always found funny... malthaussen May 2015 #57

Westerners do that with everyone malaise May 2015 #62

the trouble with history is that it is defined by the objectives of those who write it dembotoz May 2015 #64

Unmasking the Politics of Commemoration Reclaiming WW2 polly7 May 2015 #65

Same here malaise May 2015 #75

The winners always write that they were the ones. Rex May 2015 #78

World War II lasted long after its over JonLP24 May 2015 #79