https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/na...3-7acc8564eaab

:-(

John Kuthe...

On Thursday, 6 August 2020 07:08:47 UTC-5, John Kuthe wrote:

> https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/na...3-7acc8564eaab
>
> :-(
>
> John Kuthe...


https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/...ver-the-bombs/

Our Annual August Debate over the Bombs

By VICTOR DAVIS HANSON

August 6, 2020 6:30 AM

It was a terrible choice among even worse alternatives.

"This month marks the 75th anniversary of the dropping of two atomic bombs on Japan, at Hiroshima on August 6, and Nagasaki on August 9.

Each year, Americans argue about our supposed moral shortcomings for being the only nation to have used an atomic weapon in war.

Given the current cultural revolution that topples statues, renames institutions, cancels out the supposedly politically incorrect, and wages war on Americas past, we will hear numerous attacks on the decision of Democratic president Harry Truman to use the two terrible weapons.

But what were the alternatives that Truman faced had he not dropped the bombs that precipitated Japans agreement to surrender less than a week after the bombing of Nagasaki and formally on September 2?

One, Truman could have allowed Japans wounded military government to stop the killing and stay in power. But the Japanese had already killed more than 10 million Chinese civilians since 1931, and perhaps another 4 million to 5 million Pacific Islanders, Southeast Asians, and members of the Allied Forces since 1940.

A mere armistice rather than unconditional surrender would have meant the Pacific War had been fought in vain. Japans Fascist government likely would have regrouped in a few years to try it again on more favorable terms.

Two, Truman could have postponed the use of the new bombs and invaded Japan over the ensuing year. The planned assault was scheduled to begin on the island of Kyushu in November 1945, and in early 1946 would have expanded to the main island of Honshu. Yet Japan had millions of soldiers at home with fortifications, planes, and artillery, waiting for the assault.

The fighting in Japan would have made the prior three-month bloodbath at Okinawa, which formally ended just six weeks before Hiroshima, seem like childs play. The disaster at Okinawa cost the U.S. 50,000 casualties and 32 ships €” the worst battle losses the American Navy suffered in the war. More than 250,000 Okinawans and Japanese soldiers were killed as well.

Just the street fighting to recapture Manilla in the Philippines in early 1945 cost a quarter-million Filipino, Allied, and Japanese lives.

Three, the U.S. could have held off on using the bomb, postponed the invasion, and simply kept firebombing Japan with its huge fleet of B-29 bombers. The planes soon would have been reinforced with thousands more American and British bombers freed from the end of World War II in Europe.

The napalming of Tokyo had already taken some 100,000 lives. With huge new Allied bomber fleets of 5,000 or more planes based on nearby Okinawa, the Japanese death toll would have soared to near a million.

Four, the U.S. might have played rope-a-dope, stood down, and let the Soviet Red Army overrun China, Korea, and Japan itself €” in the same fashion that the Russians months earlier had absorbed eastern Germany, the Balkans, and Eastern Europe.

But the Soviet occupation of North Korea alone led only to more war in 1950.. Had the Soviets grabbed more Japanese-occupied territory, more Communist totalitarianism and conflict probably would have ensued, with no chance of a free and democratic post-war Japan.

Five, Truman could have dropped a demonstration bomb or two in Tokyo Bay to warn the Japanese government of their countrys certain destruction if it continued the war.

But there was no guarantee that the novel weapons, especially the untested plutonium bomb, would work. A dud bomb or an unimpressive detonation at sea might have only emboldened the Japanese to continue the war.

There were likely only three bombs ready in August. It was not clear when more would be available. So real worries arose that the Japanese might be unimpressed, ignore the warning, and ride out the future attacks in hopes that there were few additional bombs left.

In the cruel logic of existential war, demonstrating rather than using a new weapon can convey to autocratic belligerents hesitancy seen as weakness to be manipulated, rather than as magnanimity to be reciprocated.

By August 1945, six years after the start of World War II in Europe, some 70 million had died, including some 10 million killed by the Japanese military. Millions more starved throughout Asia and China owing to the destruction and famine unleashed by Japan €” a brutal military empowered by millions of skilled civilian industrial workers.

To Americans and most of the world 75 years ago, each day in early August 1945 that the Japanese war machine continued its work meant that thousands of Asian civilians and Allied soldiers would die.

In the terrible arithmetic of World War II, the idea that such a nightmare might end in a day or two was seen as saving millions of lives rather than gratuitously incinerating tens of thousands.

It was in that bleak context that Harry Truman dropped the two bombs €” opting for a terrible choice among even worse alternatives..."

</>

© 2020 Tribune Content Agency, LLC

John Kuthe wrote:

> https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/na...3-7acc8564eaab
>
> :-(
>
> John Kuthe...


From John's link above:

"...U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres said there is nothing in between.

On Thursday, August 6, 2020 at 10:44:48 AM UTC-4, GM wrote:
> On Thursday, 6 August 2020 07:08:47 UTC-5, John Kuthe wrote:
>
> > https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/na...3-7acc8564eaab
> >
> > :-(
> >
> > John Kuthe...
>
>
> https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/...ver-the-bombs/

I kind of wish you hadn't replied. I was looking forward to Kuthe having
a shit fit when nobody responded.

Ah, well. I'll have to get my sick jollies somewhere else.

Cindy Hamilton

Cindy Hamilton wrote:

> On Thursday, August 6, 2020 at 10:44:48 AM UTC-4, GM wrote:
> > On Thursday, 6 August 2020 07:08:47 UTC-5, John Kuthe wrote:
> >
> > > https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/na...3-7acc8564eaab
> > >
> > > :-(
> > >
> > > John Kuthe...
> >
> >
> > https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/...ver-the-bombs/
>
> I kind of wish you hadn't replied. I was looking forward to Kuthe having
> a shit fit when nobody responded.
>
> Ah, well. I'll have to get my sick jollies somewhere else.


My apologies to you, Cindy... ;-)

I promise I will not respond to his most recent "I spent $40.00 on produce...!!!" post...I will leave that honor to Steve or somebody...

Lol...

--
Best
Greg

On Thursday, August 6, 2020 at 1:24:00 PM UTC-4, GM wrote:
> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, August 6, 2020 at 10:44:48 AM UTC-4, GM wrote:
> > > On Thursday, 6 August 2020 07:08:47 UTC-5, John Kuthe wrote:
> > >
> > > > https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/na...3-7acc8564eaab
> > > >
> > > > :-(
> > > >
> > > > John Kuthe...
> > >
> > >
> > > https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/...ver-the-bombs/
> >
> > I kind of wish you hadn't replied. I was looking forward to Kuthe having
> > a shit fit when nobody responded.
> >
> > Ah, well. I'll have to get my sick jollies somewhere else.
>
>
> My apologies to you, Cindy... ;-)
>
> I promise I will not respond to his most recent "I spent $40.00 on produce...!!!" post...I will leave that honor to Steve or somebody...
>
> Lol...

Heh. Good one.

Cindy

On Thu, 6 Aug 2020 08:19:25 -0700 (PDT), GM
> wrote:

>John Kuthe wrote:
>
>> https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/na...3-7acc8564eaab
>>
>> :-(
>>
>> John Kuthe...
>
>
>From John's link above:
>
>"...U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres said there is nothing in between.
>
>”The only way to totally eliminate nuclear risk is to totally eliminate nuclear weapons,” he said in his video message from New York for the occasion.
>
>“Seventy-five years is far too long not to have learned that the possession of nuclear weapons diminishes, rather than reinforces, security,” he said. "Today, a world without nuclear weapons seems to be slipping further from our grasp...”
>
></>
>
>BTW the only US leader whose goal was to *totally* eliminate nuclear weapons worldwide was Ronald Reagan. He had such an abhorrence of nuclear war (and especially the concept of "MAD aka Mutually Assured Destruction" which he described as "appalling") that in one National Security meeting, he said that he would be very reluctant to retaliate even in the case of a Soviet nuclear first strike on the US - some of his advisors thought he was nuts, basically...
>
>More he
>
>https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/b...y-paul-lettow/
>
>ABOUT RONALD REAGAN AND HIS QUEST TO ABOLISH NUCLEAR WEAPONS
>
>"In Ronald Reagan and His Quest to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, Paul Lettow explores the depth and sophistication of President Ronald Reagan’s commitment to ridding humankind permanently of the threat of nuclear war.
>Lettow’s narrative spans the start of Reagan’s presidency and the 1986 Reykjavík summit between Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, during which America’s Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) was a defining issue. Lettow reveals SDI for what it was: a full-on assault against nuclear weapons waged as much through policy as through ideology. While cabinet members and advisers played significant roles in guiding American defense policy, it was Reagan himself who presided over every element, large and small, of this paradigm shift in U.S. diplomacy.
>
>Lettow conducted interviews with several former Reagan administration officials, and he draws upon the vast body of declassified security documents from the Reagan presidency; much of what he quotes from these documents appears publicly here for the first time. The result is the first major work to apply such evidence to the study of SDI and superpower diplomacy. This is a survey that doesn’t merely add nuance to the existing record, but revises our
>very understanding of the Reagan presidency..."
>
>
>Excerpt:
>
>"...it will be shown that Reagan never abandoned his hatred of nuclear weapons and his desire to eliminate them. Reagan’s “dream”—as he himself described it—was “a world free of nuclear weapons.” “[F]or the eight years I was president,” he wrote in his memoirs, “I never let my dream of a nuclear-free world fade from my mind.”Reagan pursued that dream as a personal religious mission...
>
>Despite overwhelming primary and interview-based evidence, historians and international relations scholars have thus far neglected to investigate the impact of Reagan’s nuclear abolitionism on his presidency. In fact, the impact of that “dream” was direct and significant. For example, Reagan’s nuclear abolitionism contributed greatly to his determination to engage in a U.S. arms buildup that he believed the USSR could neither afford economically nor keep up with technologically; he intended that the Soviets would thus be forced to agree to vast reductions in the two countries’ stockpiles of nuclear arms. It led to SDI, one of the most important and least understood of Reagan’s Cold War policies. To Reagan, SDI served as a catalyst for—the enabler of—his “world free of nuclear weapons.” Reagan’s nuclear abolitionism also pervaded his administration’s approach to arms control, and his interactions with Soviet leaders..."
>
></>

We lived in Japan immediately following the end of the war and as late
as 1962 when I was home again visiting my parents my mother had a maid
who she allowed to go back to Hiroshima regularly to take care of
relatives who had been on the outskirts of Hiroshima when the bomb
dropped, who had radiation sickness and were then in the process of
dying finally.

We went to Japan by sea from Hong Kong and even as a child used to
seeing bombed buildings in the war years in Plymouth, UK even I could
see the momentous damage done to Hiroshima as we passed in the train
(our ship had docked in Shimonoseki)

Recently I felt quite depressed that in my callow youth I marched for
Ban the Bomb and now here we are, still with the bombs and a nutbar
capable of feeling spiteful and launching one. No progress.

On Thu, 06 Aug 2020 16:20:49 -0300, Lucretia Borgia
> wrote:

>We lived in Japan immediately following the end of the war and as late
>as 1962 when I was home again visiting my parents my mother had a maid
>who she allowed to go back to Hiroshima regularly to take care of
>relatives who had been on the outskirts of Hiroshima when the bomb
>dropped, who had radiation sickness and were then in the process of
>dying finally.
>
>We went to Japan by sea from Hong Kong and even as a child used to
>seeing bombed buildings in the war years in Plymouth, UK even I could
>see the momentous damage done to Hiroshima as we passed in the train
>(our ship had docked in Shimonoseki)
>
>Recently I felt quite depressed that in my callow youth I marched for
>Ban the Bomb and now here we are, still with the bombs and a nutbar
>capable of feeling spiteful and launching one. No progress.

Not having read Greg Sorrow's diarrhea, I don't know if you're
referring to Trump or the Korean f.knuckle.

On Fri, 07 Aug 2020 05:38:13 +1000, Bruce > wrote:

>On Thu, 06 Aug 2020 16:20:49 -0300, Lucretia Borgia
> wrote:
>
>>We lived in Japan immediately following the end of the war and as late
>>as 1962 when I was home again visiting my parents my mother had a maid
>>who she allowed to go back to Hiroshima regularly to take care of
>>relatives who had been on the outskirts of Hiroshima when the bomb
>>dropped, who had radiation sickness and were then in the process of
>>dying finally.
>>
>>We went to Japan by sea from Hong Kong and even as a child used to
>>seeing bombed buildings in the war years in Plymouth, UK even I could
>>see the momentous damage done to Hiroshima as we passed in the train
>>(our ship had docked in Shimonoseki)
>>
>>Recently I felt quite depressed that in my callow youth I marched for
>>Ban the Bomb and now here we are, still with the bombs and a nutbar
>>capable of feeling spiteful and launching one. No progress.
>
>Not having read Greg Sorrow's diarrhea, I don't know if you're
>referring to Trump or the Korean f.knuckle.
Though I was thinking of the one next door, the Korean one is
depressing too.

Bruce wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Aug 2020 16:20:49 -0300, Lucretia Borgia
> > wrote:
>
>> We lived in Japan immediately following the end of the war and as late
>> as 1962 when I was home again visiting my parents my mother had a maid
>> who she allowed to go back to Hiroshima regularly to take care of
>> relatives who had been on the outskirts of Hiroshima when the bomb
>> dropped, who had radiation sickness and were then in the process of
>> dying finally.
>>
>> We went to Japan by sea from Hong Kong and even as a child used to
>> seeing bombed buildings in the war years in Plymouth, UK even I could
>> see the momentous damage done to Hiroshima as we passed in the train
>> (our ship had docked in Shimonoseki)
>>
>> Recently I felt quite depressed that in my callow youth I marched for
>> Ban the Bomb and now here we are, still with the bombs and a nutbar
>> capable of feeling spiteful and launching one. No progress.
>
> Not having read Greg Sorrow's diarrhea, I don't know if you're
> referring to Trump or the Korean f.knuckle.
>

I thought you would love diarrhea. Most sniffers do.