Historical "facts" and popular representations of histrical figures that are wrong

[Chunga the Great]

What I said in the first place:

"Japan tried to negotiate a peace that would have allowed them to keep pretty much all of the land they had conquered before the outbreak of the war. The Allies refused (since they wanted unconditional surrender) and used the bombs as leverage. A captured American pilot, Marcus McDilda, also told his interrogators that the U.S was mass-producing atomic bombs and that Kyoto and Tokyo were the next targets. The Japanese government decided to surrender unconditionally instead of risk annihilation."

What you think I said:

"The bombs were necessary to get Japan to surrender"

They DID try to negotiate a peace. I am in NO WAY denying that. They were willing to surrender, but not on terms that the Allies would have deemed acceptable. I have absolutely no idea why you are trying to "use" it against me. (And editing your post to make yourself look better is bad, mkay?)

...
Yeah, Japan would have eventually surrendered unconditionally. AFTER Japan's infrastructure had been completely annihilated. AFTER there was even worse starvation than there was by the end of the war. AFTER tens, if not hundreds, of thousands had died from either the bombs themselves or the starvation. It would have taken far, far longer to repair Japan, both economically and socially, after its surrender if the U.S had just bombed it to oblivion. You don't stop starvation by showing up one day with a truck full of twinkies.

So even you agree that the problem was the "unconditionally". You yourself said Japan was ready to end the war and accept defeat. But the Americans refused and prolonged the war!!!! Leading to how many dead people? All the "consequences" you mention above would have happened because of Americas refusal NOT because of Japan's unwillingness so surrender and accept defeat. Your claim of "hundreds, of thousands had died from either the bombs themselves" is rebuked below by Gar Alperovitz.

Yes they would have happened because of the Allies refusal of surrender terms that they had deemed unacceptable; (Japan surrendering and keeping the territories they had conquered before the outbreak of war with the U.S). You completely misinterpret what I'm saying; there was no chance of swaying the Allies to accept anything other than unconditional surrender. It's not a question of whether or not the Japanese would have surrendered, it's a question of the least-costliest way to bring an end to the war that would have been acceptable to the Allies. Letting Japan keep their conquered territory would have been viewed as unacceptable.

Historian and former Naval officer Martin Sherwin has summarized the situation, stating, "The choice in the summer of 1945 was not between a conventional invasion or a nuclear war. It was a choice between various forms of diplomacy and warfare." (Sherwin, pg. xxiv).

That in no way refutes my claim that there would have been even greater casualties without the atomic bombs.

(I should clarify that when I said "AFTER tens, if not hundreds, of thousands had died from either the bombs themselves or the starvation." I was referring to conventional bombs, NOT the atomic bombs. My mistake for being vague.)

 

[Nikolaz72]

If you take offense to someone saying which political figure they feel could have made the best leader of a country under different circumstances, you're far too sensitive.

In my English class a couple of years ago, we had a German exhange student. Unfortunatly, the day she started we were in the process of watching "The Pianist", which, in case you haven't seen it, is about a Jew hiding from the Germans during WW2. She ended up crying and running from the classroom because this movie affected her so much.

Basically, Germans hate Hitler and what he did and I happen to agree because he did terrible things. No matter how much of a great leader he was, and what his policies were, he did terrible, terrible things and you can't just ignore that. That is why he will never ever be Germany's greatest leader.

You pretend to say that like it's a fact. Last I checked, our measure of greatness is subjective.

That's just it, the measure you're judging him by is provably incorrect. His economic strategies were -terrible-. This isn't a matter of opinion, they are provably terrible.

What don't you understand? You're arguing like I'm yet to come across some piece of information. I know the man. I know the Nazi Party. I know the history. I like some aspects of the most former and think he could have been great.

And we are saying you're completely wrong, every fact disproves everything you're trying to say. It's like saying the Earth is Flat; frankly it's not a fucking debate, your opinion doesn't hold up with actual fact.

Unless you suddenly came across a way to disprove opinion, you're doing a lot of barking and no biting. Notice where I said I like some aspects of the most former? That means there's things about the man and his leadership that I like. You can disagree with them, you can dislike them and you can oppose that opinion, but you cannot say it is a fact that my liking of him is any more wrong or incorrect than my liking of the colour pink.

For whatever shortcomings and errors you see the man having and making, I like parts of him and support a portion of his ideals. You're going to have to live with that.

Well, you said that he was a brilliant leader politically, but as he appealed to the lowest demeanor that was disproven. You said that he was a brilliant leader economically, but that was disproven by the fact that the economic boost was build on borrowed money that he never intended to pay back.

And even if the arguement wasnt made, he also failed utterly in the military department.

So failing as a leader in every, way, possible. How was he a great leader?... No, no theres no explanation. Theres no fact, what you have is an opinion. And a factually wrong one at that.

Your arguement has, till now ammounted to.

Hitler was a great leader if you just disregard everything he did, ever.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

Theres an opinion. And a factually wrong one at that.

Aside from the horrible grammar, think about that statement you just made. Well, if we're going to go out on a limb and start considering our opinions to be facts, I'm sure [insert video game that you like] is also factually a pile of garbage. No? Oh, funny how it only works when you want it to.

You fail to understand that I like some of his decisions and I like some of his actions. I don't care what you think of them or what you want to call them.

While that is nice, you are still wrong. He was a terrible leader, regardless of what you think.

 

[Nikolaz72]

Theres an opinion. And a factually wrong one at that.

Aside from the horrible grammar, think about that statement you just made. Well, if we're going to go out on a limb and start considering our opinions to be facts, I'm sure [insert video game that you like] is also factually a pile of garbage. No? Oh, funny how it only works when you want it to.

You fail to understand that I like some of his decisions and I like some of his actions. I don't care what you think of them or what you want to call them.

Well, its nice that you consider him a good leader. Doesnt change the fact that he was completely and utterly terrible at pretty much everything he did.

 

[LetalisK]

For whatever shortcomings and errors you see the man having and making, I like parts of him and support a portion of his ideals. You're going to have to live with that.

No, I'm pretty he doesn't. I'm pretty sure he's going to go about his merry way, living a happy and normal life, secure in the knowledge that he's right and you're just ridiculously obstinate.

 

[Dwarfman]

I think Hitler was a great leader. He did a few things during the 30's that he shouldn't have (like dissolving the SA with a knife and locking up the socialists) but underneath the mess there was a fantastic leader. He gets misrepresented and demonized much more than he might deserve.

If he hadn't come into power during the depression, if the upper class had been slightly more varied in ethnic makeup, if the socialists didn't cave to public pressure and open the door for him... Under different circumstances, Hitler may have been the greatest leader Germany had ever known.

This is very interesting I remember someone saying that if Hitler had have died in 1937 he would have been remembered as the greatest statesman of the previous century. I reserve the call for greatest leader though. Ultimately Hitler sucked as a leader, his Megalomania, his desire for the 'perfect being' and his Paranoia of the Jewish people ultimately led him to ruin. But indeed without his reforms during the 30s Germany would have remained a ruined shell of its' former glory.

 

[NoeL]

Christopher Columbus did not discover North America. He rediscovered it several hundred years after the Vikings.

And the Vikings "discovered" it several thousand years after people crossed over the land bridge from Asia. Everyone always forgets the natives...

I think that's sort of implied, since I don't know a single person that went to school and doesn't know how the Native Americans got to, you know, America.

Quit trying to down-play the red man's continent discovery skillz! You Norsemen are all alike...

 

[Samus Aran but a man]

Many of the Northern politicians during the Civil War-era were not fighting for the sake of the black slaves, but for the sake of their religious integrity.

Tesla > Edison

Hitler was a terrible military strategist. His General's did most of the work. Same with Stalin.

Any Pro-Palestinian who says the Jews are completely bad, and any Pro-Israel who says the Palestinians are completely bad, is WRONG.

 

[Saulkar]

Hitler may not have only had one testicle. Only 1 person during WWI stated he did but none of his medical records after then made any reference to it whatsoever. Even his private physician never mentioned it. Although it can't be proven to be false, it can't be proven to be true either

Spoiler: Unequivocal Evidence!

HA! With long and arduous research, not only have I proven it true but I have also proved that Iron Sky will be historically accurate and made you laugh at the same time.

*Sigh*

I am awesome.

Spoiler: And for everyone else

This is a joke

 

[Dwarfman]

Winston Churchill was depressed for the majority of his time in power & an alcoholic throughout

I thought this was common knowledge. Churchill often referred to 'The Black Dog' which is how he described his depression, which I understand he had for his entire life. His alcoholism was famously documented when apparently in Parliament politician Bessie Braddock claimed that the "Prime Minister was drunk!" Churchill's reply "Madam I am drunk. And you are ugly. But tomorrow I will be sober"

 

[DugMachine]

Oh yes, throw a tantrum and call me stubborn because I refuse to change my ideals and opinions. Exceedingly mature of you.

Oh my gosh did I seriously just read this coming from you?

 

[DugMachine]

Oh yes, throw a tantrum and call me stubborn because I refuse to change my ideals and opinions. Exceedingly mature of you.

Oh my gosh did I seriously just read this coming from you?

Because an internet meme is in any way intelligent debate or discussion? Nice try.

Coming from the person that frequently uses

>
>
>

to nit pick posts and totally deflect questions. I feel it's appropriate. Either way, back to bed, deuces!

edit: I made a typo oh lurd

 

[DugMachine]

Sorry, are you going to make any sort of genuine contribution any time soon? I do believe the point of the forum is discussion on the topic, not internet memes and smart alec remarks repeated from the schoolyard. If you want to faff about and quote for the sake of rhetoric, I suggest 4chan.

Oh my goodness the irony in your posts is so rich. Anyways nah I'm pretty much done, I quoted you to get a lulzworthy response and you went above and beyond. Thank you.