Hiroshima and nagasaki bombing

The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in the defeat of Japan." Fleet Admiral Chester W. The Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz quote. Well, that was public statement quoted in The New York Times (6 October 1945) and in The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb (1996) by Gar Alperovitz.As you can see, I have a WORKING source. Your Maddox website "does not exist".I cant see it. Is it me?Again your quotes are not legit, nor are your sources. You are cutting and pasting from Doug Long who I have already called into question as a dubious source.Thats a bold claim. Dong Long had the sauce. You didnt rebut them.MacArthur never said anything about not dropping the bombs, and Eisenhower never voiced this oppinion to the President: "...in [July] 1945... Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. ...the Secretary, upon giving me the news of the successful bomb test in New Mexico, and of the plan for using it, asked for my reaction, apparently expecting a vigorous assent. "During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of 'face'. The Secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude..." - Dwight Eisenhower, Mandate For Change, pg. 380 In a Newsweek interview, Eisenhower again recalled the meeting with Stimson: "...the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing." - Ike on Ike, Newsweek, 11/11/63And before you say it,http://utopianstates.org...http://www.opednews.com... "...the Potsdam declaration in July, demand[ed] that Japan surrender unconditionally or face 'prompt and utter destruction.' MacArthur was appalled. He knew that the Japanese would never renounce their emperor, and that without him an orderly transition to peace would be impossible anyhow, because his people would never submit to Allied occupation unless he ordered it. Ironically, when the surrender did come, it was conditional, and the condition was a continuation of the imperial reign. Had the General's advice been followed, the resort to atomic weapons at Hiroshima and Nagasaki might have been unnecessary." PRO-I'm not sure how this addresses my objection to the primary thrust of your argument being based on the inner workings of the Japanese military and political machine. It's a nonsequitor to my contention that your argument is irrelevant to the resolution. ...William Manchester, American Caesar: Douglas MacArthur 1880-1964, pg. 512. ..."When I asked General MacArthur about the decision to drop the bomb, I was surprised to learn he had not even been consulted. What, I asked, would his advice have been? He replied that he saw no military justification for the dropping of the bomb. The war might have ended weeks earlier, he said, if the United States had agreed, as it later did anyway, to the retention of the institution of the emperor."Norman Cousins, The Pathology of Power, pg. 65, 70-71. In fact you forgot about my "Nuke a Small island" bit.