See what you're doing?

You're playing 2 wrongs make a right.

I don't play that game and I refuse to go along with a narrative of history that reads like a Star Wars movie.

bombings
 

It does. Death toll among civilians after V-1 and V-2 hits wasn't so huge by comparison to carpet bombings of Dresden and Hamburg by allied forces.

I must interject here by saying that the future of this thread is not good. I think what needed to be said was said a while ago....

London and many other UK cities were also carpet bombed during what was known as The Blitz. They lost up around 50,000 people from this bombing campaign. The Germans resorted to V-1 & 2's after losing air superiority in the Battle of Britain.

Ronin's point of two wrongs don't make a right is completely valid. There is rarely clearly defined right and wrong in war but what is completely clear is that it was Germany and Japan that were the aggressors. They were the ones who left their home countries completely unprovoked and decided to invade many other countries which ultimately led to the deaths of 10's of millions of people. So I believe ultimately they have themselves to blame for what occured. Dropping something like an atomic bomb is an horrendous act but in context of the multitudes of horrendous acts that had already been committed during that war I don't see the dropping of the bombs as any worse. I still believe that if not used then the war would have continued much longer and the death toll ultimately would have ended much higher.

Even that is spin.

It's not like Japan and Germany were unprompted. Both countries were forced into economic hardship following WW1 that made going to war an option in a time where empire expansion was the norm.

Japan at the time saw itself doing what the Europeans were and had been doing for centuries and actually feared being colonized in the same way much of East Asia had. Since the Meiji period Japan sought to emulate the West via rapid industrialization. The annexation of Korea and Hokkaido was a strategic move to stop Russian and European expansion into East Asia. If Japan hadn't done that then Hokkaido now would be part of Russia and Korea would likely have been yet another European colony.

The confidence gained by Japan during the Russo-Japanese war when the Japanese defeated Russia made the West take notice.

In a time when white superiority was considered a scientific fact, Japan was dismissed by League of Nations when it proposed a bill which recognised the equality of races.

For Germany it was a bit different but the completely unfair treaty of Versailles humiliated and severely crippled Germany for WW1 was a huge factor in the resentment that lead to the rise of the Nazi party.

Bottom line.. I don't think Japan and Germany started World War 2, they just fired the first shots.

Does that mean I blame the West for it? Of course not. This is not a story of blame but a story of conflicting interests and power and not about good versus evil or whatever.

I believe this narrative is not only more objective but more can be learned from such a perspective.

I don't believe they were seeking avenues to surrender from 1943 at all. They may well have sought avenues to seek a cessation of hostilities between themselves and the US (because they were losing) but I don't believe it had anything to do with surrender.

Maybe at first.. but from about 1944 onwards and definitely towards the end they were seeking to negotiate surrender.

The problem was that the allies wanted an unconditional one and refused to even enter into talks despite US intelligence reports which recommended them.

After what the Japanese had done in Asia I believe they lost any right to expect anything other than unconditional surrender. They held out too long and paid the price. I blame the Japanese leadership of the time far more than I blame the US for the bombs being used. They had their chances but wanted to hold onto power.

Ah yes... back to the 2 wrongs make a right mentality.

How do you know all this?