7,000 Americans died in the fight for Iwo Jima. Should we have stopped the war against Japan?

Answer 1

We should have sued for peace after the fall of Corregidor. But bloodthirsty warmonger FDR would not be stopped from continuing, with the death and casualties of 100's of thousands of Americans, and the bombing deaths of millions in Japan and Germany. And all that killing that made his friends rich did not bring peace to the world. What an evil man!

[Sorry, I must have fallen into idiot anti-Bush type thinking. Ick!]

Answer 2

I'm a 1st generation American and a Veteran. I'm having difficulty following you with republicans and all? Wilson, FDR, Truman, Johnson...these were all democrats. Refreshing you a little: That was WWI. WWII, Korea and Vietnam. It think it was Republicans who got us out of them. Though Truman ended WWII. Regarding the rest of it. I trained and fought with some of the best men I ever knew and ever will know. Many did not get to be as old as I am now. Our cause was noble. Bad things happen in war. It's not like TV at all. To save my family and to save any one of those wonderful men that I served with; I must confess that I would do most anything. If water boarding was chapter 1; I'd crack the book at around chapter 20. That's how I feel. Our enemies are not bound by any code or any scruples at all. Our enemies don't use books...they're naturals. They're not measuring us by some higher standard that's in the imagination of most desk jocks or arm chair politicians. (in recent generations, you'll look pretty hard before you'll find a democrat who actually served in the military) I disagreed with one of my contemporaries...John McCain when he ran on the platform. Was he tortured? Yes. Did North Vietnam sign the Geneva Convention? Also yes... This lofty platitude playing field may only exist in the minds of those that have never been on a real battlefield.

Answer 3

Of course not. Japan, Germany and Italy declared war on us and we did not have any choice but to fight them. The fight included taking key pieces of ground and accepting the casualties necessary to take that ground.

No doubt you are trying to compare the war in Iraq to WWII. That comparison is really quite moronic. WWII was a classic example of a conflict based upon (mostly) uniformed services supported by national economies. The war ended upon the collapse of the German & Italian militaries and the capitulation of the Japanese gov't. That was the end of that. (There was a very small insurgency in all three nations, but my guess is that most of the trouble was caused by communist sympathizers, not holdouts from the war.)

Iraq is not that. We conquered Iraq 3.5 years ago - but the war will continue because we are now fighting an insurgency wrapped into a civil war. Taking casualties in Iraq does not really do us or the Iraqis very much good. And Bush's crap about the Iraqi democracy is just that: crap. Democracy does not truly exist where people who cast a ballot at 9:00 in the a.m. then go out and plant an IED at 9:00 in the p.m.

Strictly speaking, democracy and Islam do not mix. Islam is not just a religion - it is also a plan for political governance. You know that bit in Christianity about "Rendering to Caesar, what is Caesar's, and rendering unto God, what is God's." That concept does not exist in Islam. It only works in Turkey and Indonesia because the vast majority of their populations have chosen to submerge their religion to accomodate democratic principles.

Answer 4

No because AT THAT TIME it was the case of GOOD VS EVIL
Japan has slaughtered many innocent civilians throughout the world.
1) Pearl Harbor
2) 1.5 million died building railroad in cambodia/ burma under forced labor by the Japs.
3) Slaughter in Singapore, Indonesia, and China = Nanking massacre and other places there roughly 300, 000 or more civilians raped and killed.
4) Our troops being burned alive in Philiphines.

The war in Iraq is not a necessity but the GREED OF 1 MAN.

Answer 5

The guy who said we were winning that war hasn't a clue does he. We had no idea how much longer the war would take as a matter of fact we were planning on invading Japan and estimates think there would have been one MILLION casualties, now that's a lot of body bags. We were more courageous then, the press was behind us then, and we had commanders in the field that weren't afraid to take the attack to the enemy unlike what is going on now.

Answer 6

Apples and oranges. World War II and Iraq are not comparable. For starters, Japan attacked us first at Pearl Harbor. We attacked Iraq first for dubious reasons. Now we are refereeing a religious sectarian civil war in Iraq.

Answer 7

That's not anywhere close to a good question. We were winning that war and we weren't lied to in order to justify that war. The Iraq war is a whole different animal. The gov repeatedly lies about why we are there and we can't win. Call me whatever you want but their is no way we can win.

Answer 8

to the guy who thinks there was an end in sight... it was believed that they would lose even more people taking mainland Japan... read books, they contain all kinds of information.

As far as Iraq, no, Saddam didn't attack us. Go talk to some Iraqis whose families were buried in mass graves. They're kind of happy the US showed up.

Answer 9

Let's not compare apples to oranges. Japan was the country that attacked us in Pearl Harbor 12/7/1941. We took the fight to them and won.

Iraq DID NOT attack us or have anything to do with the attack on us on 9/11/2001. The country that provided aid and comfort to those people was Afghanistan.

Answer 10

Imagine how many more would have died if we didn't go to war. Remember, we cannot have gone to war against Germany but not Japan. They were allied, we attempt to stop the holocaust, we're at war with Japan and therefore need to stop invasion from our west.