I'm banned from reddit so can't add the citation, but the US Strategic Bombing Survey is the source of information on the effects of every bomb dropped in WWII, and states in no uncertain terms that surrender would have come without any further action - no bombing, no land invasion, no nothing.
This is super interesting. And people will find it way more compelling considering its from the US gubermint. It might be rhetorically effective to start with the soviet invasion caused surrender in the short term then pivot to this in a very as a matter of fact type way.
oof and the lone warrior breaking down how the atom bombs did nothing and getting downvoted to hell by ameribrains
I'm banned from reddit so can't add the citation, but the US Strategic Bombing Survey is the source of information on the effects of every bomb dropped in WWII, and states in no uncertain terms that surrender would have come without any further action - no bombing, no land invasion, no nothing.
This is super interesting. And people will find it way more compelling considering its from the US gubermint. It might be rhetorically effective to start with the soviet invasion caused surrender in the short term then pivot to this in a very as a matter of fact type way.
My reaction to this
And where would the allies have been without Russian troops?