Revisionism about WWII and USSR

I should add that the 2,000,000 rapes by Soviet soldiers in Germany lie is not backed up with any evidence. They could at
least document these women since their case is a war crime. I doubt Germany was so crushed that it would not do this
out of fear or deference. They could gather the names and details proving the reality of the claimants (if not actual victims)
for later use.

But no such documentation exists. And it turns out that this 2,000,000 figure is some sort of brain dead extrapolation as
admitted by Beevor himself. The sort of estimate that had Serbs raping every female from newborn to deathbed granny
during 1990s in BiH.

NATzO hate propagandists should add dogs and cats to the rape victims estimates.

They could at least document these women since their case is a war crime.

The Red Army severely punished many who were caught doing it.
Regardless how many were raped, most of them wouldn't report it - otherwise, no German man would ever touch them & they would die alone childless. Women forced by the Japanese to serve them in Korea & China were also hiding it.
The accused side can always say that those cases r exaggerated & fabricated, as Japanese revisionists do to this day.

Tsavo Lion wrote:I bet not all of those raped were anti-semites. Don't paint them the same color. Most Germans didn't even know about the killings in concentration camps run by the SS.

They very much knew about it.


You believe in false myths.



And regarding Al-Arabiya, what do these Semites have to say about this:

http://asaland.proboards.com/thread/460/land-zamosc-zamojszczyzna-1942-1944

I wonder, how this "top secret speech" could so soon be smuggled out? Besides, Stalin, being so secretive & authoritarian, wouldn't even need to make such a speech revealing all his cards in the 1st place: https://gordonua.com/publications/my-dolzhny-prinyat-predlozhennyy-germaniey-pakt-i-sposobstvovat-tomu-chtoby-voyna-prodlilas-kak-mozhno-dolshe-chto-skazal-stalin-19-avgusta-1939-goda-1514103.html

Revisionism by Japan and its puppet master USA of the events in the last months of WWII takes the cake for in your face chutzpah.

1) The USSR undertook to open a front against Japan at Yalta for its US and UK allies. The reason for this was that
US war planners estimated that without Soviet assistance they would expend 1.5 million men to beat Japan. So the USSR
was not some aggressor ripping up a neutrality agreement with peaceful Japan. It was contributing to the allied war effort
against both Germany and Japan.

2) Hiroshima and Nagasaki did not stop Japan, but according to the Japanese Prime Minister (in a statement from August 9th, 1945)
the entry of the USSR into the war with Japan put Japan in a no-win situation. Hiroshima and Nagasaki are overrated. Dresden
was just as shocking in terms of 100,000 dead in one night but it did not stop Germany from fighting the war. Japanese front line soldiers
did not know anything about the nuclear bombings and even if they got some sort of underground information, they would not respond
any differently from Germans. In fact, their whole Bushido ethic would have given them more resolve. Maybe if the USA carpet
bombed Japan with nukes then it would have precipitated an instant surrender.

3) The USSR defeated the 1 million man Kwantung army of Japan in Manchuria. This was a substantial defeat for Japan and not
some side show. The aircract carrier war in the Pacific was the real side show.

Today we have the sob story being pimped by Japan and the USA that the USSR "invaded" Japanese ancient territories in southern
Sakahlin and Kuriles. This reminds me of the BS spread about the so-called partition of Poland which was actually the return
of lands occupied by Poland during its 1920 invasion of the USSR. Turn the victimizer into the victim is the essence of this
propaganda.

In the end, they knew it was beyond hopeless they could not fight the United States and they knew it.

they could fight to the bitter end on their own islands, just like the British in case they were invaded by Germans.

They also knew it before the war started their entire plan was based around one critical naval battle that would allow them to dominate but they knew in a sustained war against the US they would lose.

then why they didn't surrender or at least sued for peace after the battle of Midway?

it is true the PM did say when the USSR entered the war, the situation was beyond feasible at that stage but the war was already over for them well beyond that point.

Only in the Pacific & Indochina; not in the NE Asian areas they still occupied.

Trying to say the reason Japan surrendered was due to the USSR is nothing short of propaganda revisionist history.

they would have surrendered w/o the USSR, but only much later, with many more American casualties.

The USSR never would have been able to threaten Japan mainland if the Navy was still intact,..

that wasn't the VMF goal- it was tasked with retaking Sakhalin & Kurils + later perhaps the Hokkaido Island that is mostly wilderness frontier prefecture North of Honshu, the main island. 

We dealt with the bulk of the Imperial Army, the USSR just cleaned up the scraps.

wrong: the bulk of the IJA was dealt with by the Chinese, other Asians, & later the Soviets: 
At the beginning of the Pacific War in 1941, the Imperial Japanese Army contained 51 divisions,^[1] 27 of which were stationed in China. A further 13 divisions defended the Manchurian-Soviet border, due to concerns about a possible attack by the Soviet Union. [that leaves 11 divisions in Japan & the Pacific]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Japanese_Army_during_the_Pacific_War

The Second Sino-Japanese War was the largest Asian war in the 20th century. It accounted for the majority of civilian and military casualties in the Pacific War, with between 10 and 25 million Chinese civilians and over 4 million Chinese and Japanese military personnel missing or dying from war-related violence, famine, and other causes. 

• Japanese medical data:
  
  
  
  • 455,700^[20]–700,000 military dead^[21]
    
  • 1,934,820 wounded and missing^[22]
    
  • 22,293+ captured^[c]
    
  • Total: 2,500,000+ military casualties (1937 to 1945 excluding Manchuria and Burma campaign)
    Japanese military casualties from 1937-1945 have been estimated at 1,834,000, of which 1,740,000 were killed or missing. Some 388,600 of these were incurred in China, another 210,830 in southeast Asia, and the rest in the Pacific. Of these, some 300,386 were naval fatalities, and some 334 Japanese warships were sunk during the war.
    
  • http://www.pwencycl.kgbudge.com/C/a/Casualties.htm
    
  
  
  

So, 1,740,000-(388,600+210,830)-300,386=840,184 IJA & Marines killed in the Pacific, or 2.07 times less of the total. Pl. correct me if I missed anything, & have a nice day!

Sad your graph is wrong, the Germans did not have over 700 divisions during the war lol.

You do understand that after a division is effectively destroyed its reminents are used to form new units... a destroyed division does not mean every single man killed or captured... otherwise the number of destroyed divisions for the whole war on all sides would be about 6... even the encircled and captured Soviet divisions in 1941 and 1942 were not totally destroyed... we know numbers of them joined the locals as partizans or snuck back through the lines...

Though no one is sure what the actual number is war records like that were pretty much destroyed and the USSR just didn't keep track of that well.

There has never been any question that three quarters of German combat kills... ie soldiers and not old men and old women and children during the strategic bombing, were killed on the eastern front and the eastern front was where all their best soldiers and best generals were sent.

1) The USSR undertook to open a front against Japan at Yalta for its US and UK allies. The reason for this was that
US war planners estimated that without Soviet assistance they would expend 1.5 million men to beat Japan. So the USSR
was not some aggressor ripping up a neutrality agreement with peaceful Japan. It was contributing to the allied war effort
against both Germany and Japan.

At the time the US demanded the Soviets enter the war in the Pacific because they were afraid they might get left holding the back and spend the next 5 years fighting the Japanese. The Americans demanded that Stalin join the war in the pacific six months from the ceasefire in Europe... they were afraid Stalin might do what Britain and the US did in Europe... sit and wait and let each side wear each other down and then come in at the last moment and get as much territory as they can and start to dictate terms on everyone...

Of course Stalin remembered 1905 and there were a few unsettled issues to be dealt with...

Hiroshima and Nagasaki are overrated. Dresden
was just as shocking in terms of 100,000 dead in one night but it did not stop Germany from fighting the war.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were largely left untouched by the US bombing campaign because they had very little military value, which is why they were selected as targets for the nuclear bombs, because the message to Japan was that we will bomb and kill all your people... even the ones that pose no threat to us and are not fighting us. But really the same message was directed at Stalin too... the US hinted at a secret new weapon but Stalin appeared not interested... because he already probably knew more about it than the US politicians did...

The firebombing campaigns in Japan were vastly more devastating than in Germany. Germany had much stronger and more solidly built buildings so they needed HE bombs first to blow them open and expose the furnishings and structure, followed by incendiary bombs to set it alight. For Japan the mainly wood and paper materials used for construction made the HE unnecessary so they just dropped incendiaries. The fire bombing of Japanese cities killed rather more than either nuclear bomb...

In fact, their whole Bushido ethic would have given them more resolve. Maybe if the USA carpet
bombed Japan with nukes then it would have precipitated an instant surrender.

The Japanese already knew they had lost, but they did not want an unconditional surrender which was what the Americans were demanding. They approached the Soviets hoping to negotiate with the Americans through them but they didn't know about their agreement at Yalta to attack Japan... which the Soviets were keen to do to get back the islands and territory they had lost in 1905.

The Japanese Navy was destroyed and their airforce was reduced to nothing, the Japanese thought maybe just maybe if it was just the united states they could hold off long enough to bring the US to the table. In the end, they knew it was beyond hopeless they could not fight the United States and they knew it.

Very true, but the Japanese could not surrender on US terms which was unconditional. Their Emperor was considered to be a god... what if the Americans decided to try and execute him for war crimes... they couldn't tolerate that.

Ironically the Japanese kept their leadership intact, though of course losing all his actual power, he and his family retain their position... which is probably why their children are taught nothing about WWII... especially their actions...

Worse the US actually actively sought out some of their doctors to try to get a hold of their results intact, they offered immunity and jobs in the US with a house... bastards.

Trying to say the reason Japan surrendered was due to the USSR is nothing short of propaganda revisionist history.

If it was the nukes why did they wait so long after the detonations?

The Soviets occupied all of China and Manchuria and had taken back all the islands lost to Japan in 1905, and they got half way down the Korean Penninsula... the next step would be the invasion of Japan.

The US was scared about 1.5 million potential killed American soldiers with an invasion of Japan... do you think Stalin would care about 1.5 million more dead if he could destroy Japan.

Guess who killed around two Japanese soldiers island hopping to take back the areas they occupied, not the USSR it was the US. We dealt with the bulk of the Imperial Army, the USSR just cleaned up the scraps.

Yeah, I remember the US decided to capture the Aluetion islands that they believed the Japanese occupied.... they took a couple of weeks and lost about 100 soldiers, but they took those islands. Not a single Japanese soldier was there or had been there, so losing only 100 soldiers was probably pretty good for unopposed beach landings. Of course to be serious beach landings are difficult and dangerous even when done without enemy fire.

just like the British in case they were invaded by Germans.

But they didn't. Those British islands the Germans took were walkovers...

1. Imperial Japan wanted to fight until the bitter end, Toto refused to surrender even tho everyone else knew it was hopeless in the end. The Emperor overruled him and he later killed himself. Japan no longer had the men, resources, equipment, or anything else to fight.

The Japanese refused to surrender unconditionally... the fact that they did surrender proves they weren't prepared to fight until the bitter end.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:There are no records nor proof Japan was ever willing to surrender until the Emperor overruled Tojo, what you are talking about is pure speculation that hasn't been proven at all.

I know the stories the one about how Japan in secret offered the US a deal and the other one about how they tried to use the USSR as a middle man, But both stories do not have any facial evidence behind them.

You are a propaganda parrot with zero facts to back up your drivel. You fob off the destruction of the 1 million man sized Kwantung army as if it was nothing because you are parroting your
beloved masturbatory chauvinist exceptionalist ubermenschen fantasy narratives.

https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/2020/01/07/the-soviet-invasion-of-manchuria-led-to-japans-greatest-defeat/

As if some sunk carriers are anywhere close to this. But yanqui self-declared ubermenschen must always denigrate the achievements of others and pump up their own irrelevant
"triumphs" such as Iwo Jima.

What SS, the drone, fails to acknowledge is that Fat Man and Little Boy were not mass production bombs. It was clear to all the general staffs in August of 1945 that these were
boutique weapons with no real battlefield application.

Don't quote Wikipedia to me as a source that place isn't reliable at all when it comes to numbers.

• 
  
  • Japanese military casualties from 1937-1945 have been estimated at 1,834,000, of which 1,740,000 were killed or missing. Some 388,600 of these were incurred in China , another 210,830 in southeast Asia, and the rest in the Pacific. Of these, some 300,386 were naval fatalities, and some 334 Japanese warships were sunk during the war.
    
  • http://www.pwencycl.kgbudge.com/C/a/Casualties.htm- this isn't  Wikipedia
    
  
  
  

Again, 1,740,000-(388,600+210,830)-300,386=840,184 IJA & Marines killed in the Pacific, or 2.07 times less of the total. 

For example the Chinese only killed about 200k, by 1944 many divisions have been removed from China to combat US operations.

Most IJA divisions were still in Asia; the relevant fact here is that most Japanese Army casualties + surrenders occurred there as well, not in the Pacific. The US Army fought mainly there, & not in Europe, but it doesn't mean that most IJA was there as well: https://www.wearethemighty.com/history/us-army-pacific-theater-wwii?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1

The Japanese dealt with terrible natural disasters for millenia; their military knew that new most powerful bombs been dropped on them, but were not swayed to surrender. The US propaganda causation is wrong.
According to Brigadier General Carter Clarke, the decision was made so the bombs could be tested as an experiment, and had little to do with ending the war. Major General Curtis LeMay concurred in Clarke’s belief that the bomb was unnecessary, stating that the “war would have been over in two weeks without the Russians entering and without the atomic bomb.”There are many, including Henry H. Arnold of the US Army Air Force Pacific Fleet and Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, who pointed to the excessiveness of the bombings, believing that Japan was already on the cusp of surrendering. https://pearlharbor.org/america-hadnt-dropped-bombs/
At Hiroshima the atomic bomb killed about 80,000 people, pulverized about five square miles, and wrecked an additional ten square miles of the city, with decreasing damage out to seven or eight miles from the center. At Nagasaki the fatal casualties were 45,000 and the area wrecked was considerably smaller than at Hiroshima because of the configuration of the city.
Compare this with the results of two B-29 incendiary raids over Tokyo. One of these raids killed about 125,000 people, the other nearly 100,000.
Of the 210 square miles of greater Tokyo, 85 square miles of the densest part was destroyed as completely, for all practical purposes, as were the centers of Hiroshima and Nagasaki; about half the buildings were destroyed in the remaining 125 square miles; the number of people driven homeless out of Tokyo was considerably larger than the population of greater Chicago. These figures are based on information given us in Tokyo and on a detailed study of the air reconnaissance maps. They may be somewhat in error but are certainly of the right order of magnitude.
Was Japan already beaten before the atomic bomb? The answer is certainly "yes" in the sense that the fortunes of war had turned against her. The answer is "no" in the sense that she was still fighting desperately and there was every reason to believe that she would continue to do so; and this is the only answer that has any practical significance.  ..Exactly what role the atomic bomb played will always allow some scope for conjecture. A survey has shown that it did not have much immediate effect on the common people far from the two bombed cities; they knew little or nothing of it. The even more disastrous conventional bombing of Tokyo and other cities had not brought the people into the mood to surrender. The evidence points to a combination of factors. (1) Some of the more informed and intelligent elements in Japanese official circles realized that they were fighting a losing battle and that complete destruction lay ahead if the war continued. These elements, however, were not powerful enough to sway the situation against the dominating Army organization, backed by the profiteering industrialists, the peasants, and the ignorant masses. (2) The atomic bomb introduced a dramatic new element into the situation, which strengthened the hands of those who sought peace and provided a face-saving argument for those who had hitherto advocated continued war. (3) When the second atomic bomb was dropped, it became clear that this was not an isolated weapon, but that there were others to follow. With dread prospect of a deluge of these terrible bombs and no possibility of preventing them, the argument for surrender was made convincing. This I believe to be the true picture of the effect of the atomic bomb in bringing the war to a sudden end, with Japan's unconditional surrender.If the atomic bomb had not been used, evidence like that I have cited points to the practical certainty that there would have been many more months of death and destruction on an enormous scale. Also the early timing of its use was fortunate for a reason which could not have been anticipated. If the invasion plans had proceeded as scheduled, October, 1945, would have seen Okinawa covered with airplanes and its harbors crowded with landing craft poised for the attack. The typhoon which struck Okinawa in that month would have wrecked the invasion plans with a military disaster comparable to Pearl Harbor.These are some of the facts which lead those who know them, and especially those who had to base decisions on them, to feel that there is much delusion and wishful thinking among those after-the-event strategists who now deplore the use of the atomic bomb on the ground that its use was inhuman or that it was unnecessary because Japan was already beaten. And it was not one atomic bomb, or two, which brought surrender; it was the experience of what an atomic bomb will actually do to a community, plus the dread of many more, that was effective. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1946/12/if-the-atomic-bomb-had-not-been-used/376238/


He omits the other factor: surrender of the Kwantung Army to the Red Army. W/o Manchuria & Korea, Japan would cease to be an empire & could be contained on its original archipelago. I doubt it would be even necessary to invade them there. The USSR wanted to take Hokkaido & N. Honshu to secure the Tsugaru Strait, but since Stalin didn't yet have such weapons, the atomic bombings stopped that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsugaru_Strait


The Navy Museum acknowledges what many historians have long known: It was only with the entry of the Soviet Union’s Red Army into the war two days after the bombing of Hiroshima that the Japanese moved to finally surrender. Japan was used to losing cities to American bombing; what their military leaders feared more was the destruction of the country’s military by an all-out Red Army assault. ..The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender.… In being the first to use it, we…adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children.”The commanding general of the US Army Air Forces, Henry “Hap” Arnold, gave a strong indication of his views in a public statement 11 days after Hiroshima was attacked. Asked on August 17 by a New York Times reporter whether the atomic bomb caused Japan to surrender, Arnold said that “the Japanese position was hopeless even before the first atomic bomb fell, because the Japanese had lost control of their own air.” Fleet Adm. Chester Nimitz, the commander in chief of the Pacific Fleet, stated in a public address at the Washington Monument two months after the bombings that “the atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military standpoint, in the defeat of Japan.” Adm. William “Bull” Halsey Jr., the commander of the US Third Fleet, stated publicly in 1946 that “the first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment…. It was a mistake to ever drop it…. [The scientists] had this toy, and they wanted to try it out, so they dropped it…”Gen. Dwight Eisenhower stated in his memoirs that when notified by Secretary of War Henry Stimson of the decision to use atomic weapons, he “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.” He later publicly declared, “It wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing.” Even the famous hawk Maj. Gen. Curtis LeMay, the head of the Twenty-First Bomber Command, went public the month after the bombing, telling the press that “the atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all.”The record is quite clear: From the perspective of an overwhelming number of key contemporary leaders in the US military, the dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not a matter of military necessity. American intelligence had broken the Japanese codes, knew the Japanese government was trying to negotiate surrender through Moscow, and had long advised that the expected early August Russian declaration of war, along with assurances that Japan’s emperor would be allowed to stay as a figurehead, would bring surrender long before the first step in a November US invasion could begin. ..Given that US intelligence advised the war would likely end if Japan was given assurances regarding the emperor—and given that the US military knew it would have to keep the emperor to help control occupied Japan in any event—something else clearly seems to have been important. We know that some of Truman’s closest advisers viewed the bomb as a diplomatic and not simply a military weapon. Secretary of State James Byrnes, for instance, believed that the use of atomic weapons would help the United States more strongly dominate the postwar era. According to Manhattan Project scientist Leo Szilard, who met with Byrnes on May 28, 1945, “[Byrnes] was concerned about Russia’s postwar behavior…[and thought] that Russia might be more manageable if impressed by American military might, and that a demonstration of the bomb might impress Russia.” History is rarely simple, and confronting it head-on, with critical honesty, is often quite painful. Myths, no matter how oversimplified or blatantly false, are too often far more likely to be embraced than inconvenient and unsettling truths. Even now, for instance, we see how difficult it is for the average US citizen to come to terms with the brutal record of slavery and white supremacy that underlies so much of our national story. Remaking our popular understanding of the “good” war’s climactic act is likely to be just as hard. But if the Confederate battle flag can come down in South Carolina, we can perhaps one day begin to ask ourselves more challenging questions about the nature of America’s global power and what is true and what is false about why we really dropped the atomic bomb on Japan. https://www.thenation.com/article/world/why-the-us-really-bombed-hiroshima/  https://www.jstor.org/stable/4137569


Have a nice day!

SeigSoloyvov wrote:"The enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should we continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization."

That was from his surrender speech in which he had to make his case among the civilians & military alike. He couldn't just say that the USSR just took NE China, Korea, Sakhalin & Kurils with less casualties than Americans suffered fighting them & was about to attack Hokkaido.
https://regnum.ru/news/polit/3054282.html

He knows this subject:
https://regnum.ru/analytics/author/anatoliy_koshkin.html

Japan kept huge forces on the USSR border & in China till 1945, forcing the USSR to keep there large opposing force of their own: https://regnum.ru/news/polit/3037814.html

The Red Army saved as many, if not more American lives in Europe by killing/capturing Germans than the US military lost in the Pacific. U claimed that the USA did most of the fighting & killing to defeat Japan, but it's not true: Having declared war on militaristic Japan on August 8, 1945, the Soviet Union embarked on widespread offensive operations in Northeast China, Korea, Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands. This deprived the Japanese military-political leadership of the chances of stubborn resistance to delay the capitulation. On August 9, at an emergency meeting of the Supreme Military Council for Leadership of the War, Prime Minister Suzuki said: "The entry of the Soviet Union into the war this morning puts us completely in a desperate situation and makes it impossible to end the war." Contrary to the popular belief that it was the atomic bomb that forced the Japanese to surrender, in reality, the powerful armed forces of the Soviet Union, which defeated Hitler's Germany, had a decisive influence on the Japanese government's decision to lay down arms.
As for President Truman's August 7 warnings on American radio about the readiness of the United States to deliver new atomic strikes against Japan in the event of continued resistance, that Japan “expects such a stream of destruction from the air that the Earth has never known,” they were regarded as "enemy propaganda." And this assessment was not far from the truth. The American president was bluffing. According to the calculations of the American headquarters, at least nine atomic bombs were required to support the landing on the Japanese islands, which were not available.
The Americans had only one more plutonium bomb "Fat Man" at their disposal, which was dropped on August 9, 1945, on the Japanese city of Nagasaki without any military necessity. The Fat Man reset was planned for August 11 and was, according to the official version, postponed two days earlier due to unfavorable weather forecast for the coming days. However, it cannot be ruled out that the American leadership, having learned about the entry of the USSR into the war, hastened to achieve the immediate surrender of the Japanese government with another atomic strike even before the deep advance of Soviet troops in China. At the same time, it was important not to give the laurels of victory to the USSR, to prevent the impression of the decisive role of the Soviet Union in the defeat of Japan. ..
Of course, the main culprits of the atomic holocaust were American politicians and personally US President Harry Truman, who boasted that he “slept like a child” by signing an order to atomic bomb innocent Japanese women, children and old people. But no less blame is on the Japanese generals, who refused to surrender in time and were ready, for the sake of their extravagant plans, to turn the entire Japanese people into kamikaze. https://regnum.ru/news/polit/3029995.html
https://regnum.ru/news/polit/3029406.html

FYI, at least 12 American+9 British & Dutch POWs were also killed in the atomic bombings: https://www.us-japandialogueonpows.org/HoroshimaPOW.htm#:~:text=However%2C%20actually%20twelve%20American%20POWs,active%20in%20the%20Pacific%20War.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Actually you just lied the USSR removed lots of their forces from the border seeing Japan was honoring its peace deal with the, this is well documented in history it wasn't until Germany was defeated they built them back up.- they sent only 3 divisions to fight Germans- see my earlier post: FYI, a far larger force remained there: ..of all the divisions transferred west after August 1941, only three rifle divisions originated with Siberian personnel and only two went into the Western Front defending Moscow. Where are the ‘newly arrived Siberian divisions being encountered all along the front protecting Moscow’? To fulfil this statement there would need to have been 10-20 Siberian divisions in Western Front. The only division which actually earned the reputation bestowed upon the Siberian divisions in 1941 was the 32nd Rifle Division which defended near Borodino in October 1941. Ironically this division was formed in 1922 in the then Volga Military District and only a portion of its personnel came from western Siberian oblasts. ..
Most sources claim the information from Sorge’s spy ring came in October 1941 at the earliest and November 1941 at the latest. Yet it is apparent that the decision to move the vast majority of available divisions west was made well before this time and no new rifle divisions were actually shipped after October.
Whichever way data is analysed, the whole Siberian transfer story is a myth in all respects: including timing, numbers, source of personnel and overall combat performance.
[url=http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/the-siberian-divisions-and-the-battle-for-moscow-in-1941-42/#Red Army Divisions Transferred West from June to July 1941]http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/the-siberian-divisions-and-the-battle-for-moscow-in-1941-42/#Red%20Army%20Divisions%20Transferred%20West%20from%20June%20to%20July%201941[/url]

Even if the few Siberian divisions exhibited a higher than average combat proficiency in the winter of 1941/42, their contribution was almost insignificant compared to the mass of newly mobilised units. There is no doubt that the 1941 Soviet mobilisation programme was simply the largest and fastest wartime mobilisation in history. The multitude of average Soviet soldiers from all over the USSR that made up these units saved the day, and definitely not the existing units transferred west after June 1941, or the mostly non-existent and mythical Siberian divisions.
[url=http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/the-siberian-divisions-and-the-battle-for-moscow-in-1941-42/#Where did the New Red Army Divisions Come From?]http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/the-siberian-divisions-and-the-battle-for-moscow-in-1941-42/#Where%20did%20the%20New%20Red%20Army%20Divisions%20Come%20From?[/url]

The Winter War with Finland had shown that the 1939 rifle division was too large and the 5/41 reorganization cut manpower from 18,800 to 14,400. Then, 3 divisions x14.4K troops=43.2K troops. Gen. Vlasov's ROA had a Corps of 50K(!) troops as of April 1945, mostly comprised of former Soviet POWs & deserters.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrey_Vlasov#Defection

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Liberation_Army

By August, Soviet strength in the Far East had doubled, from the former 40 divisions to 80 divisions with strong supporting forces. 
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/meet-operation-august-storm-when-russia-crushed-japan-manchuria-112701?page=0%2C1

After the 3 divisions were transferred to the Western USSR in 1941, those remaining 40 divisions (x14.4K=576K troops) + Ks partisans being prepared to operate on occupied territory were just enough to defend against any Japanese invasion until 1945. But to invade Manchuria+Korea & defeat the Kwantung Army there needed 2x of that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Manchuria#Soviets

The # of troops sent to fight the Wehrmacht from the FE was only ~7.32% of the total personnel stationed there.
The bottom line is that during WWII China lost up to 20M people, 2nd only to the Soviet Union:
The scale of China’s involvement in the war was massive. Chiang, for example, fielded four million troops at the Nationalist’s height, while China as a whole lost an estimated 14 million in the war. Had China folded, Japan’s capacity to fight the U.S. or even the Soviets would have been vastly amplified. ..Had Chiang fallen and had China become pro-Japanese, then Japan would have had a perfect launch pad to attack the Soviet Union in the late 1930s, early 1940s. And he was much more worried about that. So it was a very practical, non-altruistic reason for Stalin to essentially give assistance to the Chinese nationalists during that period.
But the fact is that it was very helpful during the early campaign from battles including central China, in the Yangtze delta around Shanghai, and so forth. Although it was not able to prevent the Nationalists from having to withdraw to the interior of China, Soviet air force support and military assistance and material was important in making sure that the Nationalists at least managed to stand up against the Japanese.
https://psmag.com/news/china-lost-14-million-people-world-war-ii-forgotten-66482

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War

https://www.britannica.com/event/Second-Sino-Japanese-War/Stalemate

If China had surrendered in 1938, Japan would have controlled China for a generation or more. Japan's forces might have turned toward the USSR, Southeast Asia, or even British India.
https://www.cnn.com/2015/08/31/opinions/china-wwii-forgotten-ally-rana-mitter/index.html

Despite the prolonged onslaught of Japan’s modern military machine for eight long years, a divided China, mostly on its own, put up a heroic fight against steep odds, pinning down 600,000-800,000 [NYT] of its troops and playing a crucial role in weakening Japan by inflicting heavy casualties on forces that were better armed, supplied and trained. The official death toll for Japanese soldiers killed in China between 1937 and 1945 is 480,000.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/culture/2013/08/24/books/book-reviews/chinas-contribution-to-japans-defeat/#.XkrXqShKiyI

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/18/opinion/the-worlds-wartime-debt-to-china.html

He said simply put, with the USSR in the war it was beyond hopeless and they must surrender but he had already wanted to surrender along with most of their leader well before then.- yes, he took a stand, & it highlights the fact that most of his generals & admirals wanted to keep fighting.

The PM also said btw..
“The atomic bomb provided an additional reason for surrender as well as an extremely favorable opportunity to commence peace talks.”
Asada also is quoted and records back this up as saying
"“the emperor expressed his conviction that a speedy surrender was the only feasible way to save Japan.” Hirohito urged Togo to “do [his] utmost to bring about a prompt termination of war,”
"Now that things have come to this impasse, we must bow to the inevitable. No matter what happens to my safety, we should lose no time in ending the war so as not to have another tragedy like this.”
This was before the Soviets attacked. -on what date? pl. post ur sources. Historical records show once they knew it was an atomic bomb, the war cabinet wanted to surrender on favorable terms. Tojo however refused to do this.-so, they were split & didn't agree among themselves. Atomic bombings didn't convince all to surrender- u proved my point. 

I am getting tired of you ignoring historical facts. You clearly do not know the history and are posting links with inaccurate information attempting to justify your view. - the same can be said about ur posts. Japanese records show without a shadow of a doubt, it was the bombs that made Japan surrender the soviets coming into the war merely made certain Togo could not have his way.- again, that proves my point: the IJA defeat by the Red Army in China & Korea tipped the scale in favor of surrender!

Lieutenant-General Ikeda Sumihisa, director of the General Planning Agency, testified that “upon hearing of the Soviet entry into the war, I felt that our chances were gone.” Having served in the Kwantung Army, he knew its condition well. The Kwantung Army was no more than a hollow shell, largely because it had been transferring its troops, equipment, and munitions to the home islands since the latter part of 1944 in anticipation of the homeland defense.- the arms they dropped were given to Maoists who later used them to defeat the KMT & push the UN troops, mostly American, below the 38th parallel in Korea. 
The Emperor’s decision to surrender had been contested by many of his advisors, including the Imperial General Headquarters hierarchy and many junior officers who threatened violence against leading government officials if the war was not continued. Even the second atomic bomb had not dissuaded them from continuing the war. But when reports from the Kwantung Army began to arrive, reporting significant Soviet penetration in Manchuria and the situation as “obscure,” objections to surrender were far less convincing. ..
The Soviets’ Manchurian Campaign, August Storm, destroyed the last vestige of Japanese military power outside Japan, and put the final nail in the coffin of those Japanese militarists who, even after suffering two atomic attacks, intended to continue the war to the death. 
https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/2020/01/07/the-soviet-invasion-of-manchuria-led-to-japans-greatest-defeat/

Many Japanese leaders also testified to this, so the idea Japan was strong in China is a myth that has long been debunked. Japans General staff both confirmed it and war records show that to be the case.- they had their own ax to grind, to explain their quick defeat. The IJA had to fight KMT + the Communists & other guerillas in big areas they occupied. The US used B-29s to bomb them there as well.
Now who should I believe war records? and the men who were in charge of the Imperial Army at that time or some guy online who doesn't know what he is talking about and is posting inaccurate information via random articles.- don't believe the defeated generals who have their own agenda & excuses; the articles I post r not random, & they have references u can access.
When news of the Japanese surrender reached the world, Americans automatically and naturally assumed it was due to the detonation of the atomic bombs. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen who were making preparations for an invasion believed that the atomic bomb had spared their lives. Because they were not privy to the information available at the highest levels of government, they had no idea that the Japanese had attempted to convey their wishes to surrender several months before the detonation of the bomb. In contrast, many U.S. leaders, particularly those closest to the fight against Japan, believed the use of the atomic bomb was unnecessary, that Japan was on the verge of surrender without it. Immediately after the cessation of hostilities, members of the United States Strategic Bombing Survey entered Japan and began a systematic survey of the Japanese cities that had been the targets. The survey concluded that even without the two bombs “air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion, probably by November 1, certainly by the end of December 1945.” https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/2016/08/04/was-it-right-to-drop-the-atomic-bomb-on-hiroshima-nagasaki/

The quality of troops had fallen drastically, as all the best men and materiel were siphoned off for use in other theaters. These forces were replaced by militia, draft levies, reservists, and cannibalized smaller units, all equipped with woefully outdated equipment.[6] The Kwantung Army had also bacteriological weapons, prepared for use against Soviet troops (see Unit 731). The bulk of military equipment (artillery, tanks, aircraft) was developed in the 1930s, and very few of the soldiers had sufficient training or any real experience."- that's not relevant; Japan didn't surrender before that Army in Manchuria & Korea wasn't forced to surrender. Have a nice day & good night!

There are no records nor proof Japan was ever willing to surrender until the Emperor overruled Tojo, what you are talking about is pure speculation that hasn't been proven at all.

There is no proof of anything really... published documents could just be that... a paper trail to hide the real truth... that we may never know...

You say they were prepared to fight to the death... what changed?

I know the stories the one about how Japan in secret offered the US a deal and the other one about how they tried to use the USSR as a middle man, But both stories do not have any facial evidence behind them.

Yeah, I have heard stories the US are the good guys and actually really nice people when you get to know them, but the evidence before me about their choices and how they interact with other countries and people around the world show the opposite really...

Read the boy who cried wolf... if WWII started at Pearl Harbour and the war in europe was won on D Day then of course the Soviets won by entering Berlin and would have entered Tokyo had the Americans not rushed to accept Japans surrender...

The bombs forced Japan to its knees, the USSR was just extra.

The Japs were already on their knees, the bombs were irrelevant slaughter of civilians... the Soviet liberation of China, Manchuria and of course return of islands taken by the Japanese in 1905 was the sword blade through the neck...

Ditto. “The atomic bomb provided an additional reason for surrender as well as an extremely favorable opportunity to commence peace talks.” August 7th
these r the underlined semantics u quote, proving my point! 
Meanwhile in the afternoon of August 8, before the entry of the Soviet Union into the war or the bombing of Nagasaki, the emperor met with Foreign Minister Shigenori Togo. Shortly after the war, Togo affirmed that the emperor stated the war must end at this meeting. New evidence now confirms Togo’s account that it was the atomic bomb that moved the emperor to decide to end the war. But this did not mean the war assuredly would end because it remained very uncertain that Japan’s armed forces would comply even with the emperor’s order. 
https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/japans-surrender-part-i


The Red Army helped the IJA & other patriots/fanatics to comply with Hirohito order to surrender: https://apjjf.org/-tsuyoshi-hasegawa/2501/article.html


“True defeat and surrender are two different things,” Hasegawa said in a phone interview with Stars and Stripes. “Surrender is a political decision, requiring political will.”The atomic bombs’ impact can’t be discounted when discussing Japan’s reasons for surrender, Hasegawa said.However, the Soviet Union’s entry into the war, and the realization that Japanese forces would have to fight the Soviets in the north and the U.S. in the south, constituted “the greater shock,” Hasegawa said.There were two broad camps among Japan’s war leadership in August 1945, according to Hasegawa’s research.The war camp maintained that Japan must inflict tremendous damage on the Americans in order to win better terms than the “unconditional surrender” offered by President Franklin Roosevelt at the Yalta Conference in 1945.The peace camp contended that ending the war as soon as possible was the best way to achieve both camps’ overriding goal: retaining the emperor system.In 1945, the emperor’s fate remained an open question for U.S. policymakers. Senior officials like Joseph Grew, former U.S. ambassador to Japan, and War Secretary Henry Stimson argued for retention of the emperor in some capacity. High-ranking officials like Dean Acheson and Archibald MacLeish said the emperor must go, according to declassified U.S. government documents. Japan’s war camp believed that the Soviet Union would eventually help broker a peace deal. Even after Stalin ended a neutrality pact with Japan in April 1945 and began massing troops toward Japanese-held territory, Japanese leaders held fast to this fantasy, Hasegawa said.“From the Soviet Union’s point of view, it was important to postpone [Japan’s] surrender until they were ready to enter the war,” Hasegawa said.On Aug. 6, 1945, the B-29 Enola Gay delivered its payload and destroyed Hiroshima.By that time, Japan had few remaining cities with a population of more than 100,000 that hadn’t been severely damaged. Gen. Curtis LeMay burned much of Tokyo with incendiary bombs months earlier, a move he later admitted would have been considered a war crime if the U.S. had lost.Hiroshima was the latest bombing victim, albeit with a terrifying new weapon. However, Japanese forces still retained several divisions in Kyushu that prepared for an American invasion.“The highest decision-making body was not even convened after Hiroshima,” Hasegawa said. “The cabinet was divided. The atomic bomb was effective enough that for the first time, cabinet decision-makers decided to really terminate the war. But on what conditions, they were totally divided.”Japan’s leadership quickly sent a telegram to their ambassador in Moscow, hoping to appeal to Stalin for help.Instead of offering aid, on Aug. 8, Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov read to Japan’s ambassador a declaration of war.The Soviets invaded Japan-held Manchuria on Aug. 9. The same day, the United States dropped an atomic bomb on Nagasaki. Even after the bombs and the Soviet invasion, some of Japan’s hawks weren’t ready to stop fighting, according to some historians.Gen. Korechika Anami, Japan’s minister of war, called for conditions that the world wouldn’t have recognized as surrender.Anami wanted retention of the emperor, self-disarmament, no foreign occupation, and trial of any Japanese war criminals by Japan itself, according to “The Rising Sun,” John Toland’s 1971 Pulitzer Prize-winning history of Japan’s war empire.Emperor Hirohito, who had thus far stayed above the fray, put the debate over prolonging the war to an end when he called for a surrender.For a few days, Japan continued asking American for conditions, unsuccessfully.Diehard Japanese hawks attempted a palace coup to save the emperor’s “right to rule,” but the military quashed it. The emperor had spoken and the military would obey.Hasegawa contends that Hirohito’s decision to surrender was entirely pragmatic.“He didn’t do that because he was really concerned about the fate of the Japanese people,” Hasegawa said. “He didn’t surrender after the firebombing [of Tokyo]. The crucial point was that he just wanted to preserve the emperor system as head of the Shinto religion.”The Soviets continued fighting in the north through September, capturing territories and islands at Japan’s fringes. But the United States closed in quickly and occupied Japan’s main islands. There would be no German-style partition.Historians would later argue that this had been America’s goal all along. However, declassified archives show a great deal of disagreement among U.S. officials over Soviet involvement in Japan. Michael Kort, professor of social science at Boston University, contends U.S. President Harry S. Truman simply wanted the war over and viewed Soviet involvement as another way to achieve that.“The documentary evidence is overwhelming that Truman wanted the Soviets to enter the war and that on Aug. 8, he was very pleased to learn that they had done so,” Kort said.As for the use of atomic bombs, opinion remains divided. A Pew Research Center poll released in April showed that 56 percent of Americans believe it was justified. Among Japanese, 79 percent said it was not.Hasegawa lays the blame for the tragic atomic bombing and the Soviet invasion at the feet of Japan’s wartime government. However, his research ultimately changed his thinking on some aspects.The bomb played a part in Japan’s surrender, but it may not have been necessary, he said. https://www.stripes.com/news/special-reports/world-war-ii-the-final-chapter/wwii-victory-in-japan/would-japan-have-surrendered-without-the-atomic-bombings-1.360300

The bombs could not be an additional reason to the soviet invasion since the bombs came before the invasion..

FYI, the United States detonated two nuclear weapons over the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9, 1945; 
On August 8, 1945, the Soviet Union officially declares war on Japan, pouring more than 1 million Soviet soldiers into Japanese-occupied Manchuria, northeastern China, to take on the 700,000-strong Japanese army. 
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/soviets-declare-war-on-japan-invade-manchuria


It's not a coincidence that the 2nd bomb was dropped on the day after the USSR invasion. 
The surrender came after the invasion & the 2nd bombing; who is to say that they would've surrendered w/o the Soviet invasion & because of/after only the 2nd atomic bombing? If u haven't already, read the whole article.
 As mentioned, Japan been bombed before & lost more in the fire bombings than in the atomic bombings. Many German cities were also flattened, but Hitler didn't sue for peace. Hirohito was no better. Besides, the Japanese lost in the Halkin Gol & near the lake Hasan in 1938- they knew that as soon as the USSR entered the war against them the writing was on the wall. But they weren't going to tell their people & the World that they feared the Russians who just 3 months before defeated Germany were going to do they same to them- so the new American bombs were a convenient excuse & a way to flatter the US, while saving their own skins, so the Emperor would keep his throne & the gold he looted in Asia for later reconstruction, besides helping to signal Stalin that if he invades Japan, she could be nuked again with his troops there. 

The Yamato Dynasty: The Secret History of 

Japan's Imperial Family 

The bombs could not be an additional reason to the soviet invasion since the bombs came before the invasion...its SHOCKING, I had to explain this.

The bombs were an efficient way of doing something they were already doing.

Whether it took one B-29 to drop one nuke or 500 B-29s to drop incendiaries.... either way that city burned to the ground...

The Soviet invasion was something they were obliged to do via agreements with the US at Yalta, and it was the closing of the option of suing for peace via the Soviets that clearly led to the Japanese to realise unconditional was as good as they were going to get... and was better than they deserved.

Compared with how the Allies treated the Germans the Japs got off almost scot free.... another reason to dislike the Americans...