We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Friday, April 22. 2016
Got a ride last night in a pal's new Tesla. After two whiskeys, even he was startled by the acceleration. Everything loose in the car flew to the back. Rocket Man. Then he had to demonstrate its no-hands driving. Sheesh.
NY real estate: Regulatory Arbitrage, Rent-Seeking and the Deal of the Year
New Land, Expansionism, and Affordability - A Sketch-Theory of Why Suburbia and Exurbia Are So Resilient
How the Hillsong Cool Factor Changed Worship for Good and for Ill
Vinerism strikes the snowmobiling industry
Oh dear. Fewer fossil fuel burning, carbon-spewing loud machines racing thru the woods
Duh. I want a free Maserati.
Transgender Hate Hoax at University of North Carolina
Without fake hate, there would be darn little hate
U of Wisconsin is a hotbed of racism
UC Berkeley Touts $15 Minimum Wage Law, Then Fires Hundreds Of Workers After It Passes
The Primaries Aren’t Democratic? They’re Not Supposed to Be Democratic.
Transgender Hate Hoax at University of North Carolina - See more at: http://moonbattery.com/?p=71223#sthash.ux5nnfMJ.dpuf
Sheriff Clarke Blasts Clinton for Pandering, Dehumanizing Blacks
THOUSANDS Line Highway to Get a Glimpse of Donald Trump in Maryland
Trump's Policies Will Have Trumpkins 'Mad as Hell'
Says the woman who is surrounded by men with guns 24/7
Colorado school district to arm security officers with semiautomatic rifles
Clinton Insider Says He 'Wouldn't Be Surprised' If Hillary's Server Was Hacked
Hillary Clinton Is Too Big to Fail
Hillary Clinton Is Too Big to Fail
Z-man on women in combat:
When the West appeases Islam
...they just go back for more
5 ‘big ideas’ to guide us in the Long War against Islamic extremism
Arbitrage, Rent-Seeking and the Deal of the Year - See more at:
Arbitrage, Rent-Seeking and the Deal of the Year - See more at:
Tracked: Apr 24, 09:20
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Chopping Down Old Hickory ... Jackson’s bold and fiery persona is just too damn American to be replaced by some frumpy broad.
While the point about Jacksonian Democracy is valid, ending with a sexist and racist jibe at an American hero undermines whatever point the author was trying to make.
Sheriff Clarke Blasts Clinton for Pandering, Dehumanizing Blacks ... Well, I'm surprised she didn't say watermelon, just go all the way. You know, this stuff is dehumanizing, it's embarrassing, it's disgusting.
Hillary’s hot sauce long con: If Clinton is pandering with this latest food revelation, it’s the most impressive suck-up ever
“I eat a lot of hot peppers,” Clinton told CBS News anchor Katie Couric, who had asked her how she maintains her stamina on the campaign trail. “I for some reason started doing that in 1992, and I swear by it. I think it keeps my metabolism revved up and keeps me healthy.”
5 ‘big ideas’ to guide us in the Long War against Islamic extremism
Excellent perspective by Petraeus.
The 'big idea' missing from the original invasion plan was how to structure the new Iraqi society. This, along with a multitude of strategic and tactical mistakes, created instability and civil war. Even after the surge returned minimal stability, the lack of a vision for the future led to Shiite majoritarian democracy, and a refracturing of the country.
The biggest mistake was in spending any time and effort to rebuild and help them. We should have installed a strongman leader and demanded that he do what we wanted and then let them rebuild themselves, or not.
"Jackson’s bold and fiery persona is just too damn American to be replaced by some frumpy broad."
That piece was clearly written before they announced the name of the "frumpy broad" who would replace Jackson: Harriet Tubman.
I wonder whether Tubman's "bold and fiery persona is just too damn American" for James E. Miller?
Women in combat:
Start mandatory signing up for the draft for all women on the day they turn 18. The only reason the left can get away with trying to destroy our military this way is 99% of the women don't take it seriously and have zero pressure on them to ever have to live up to the demands. If women are just as good as men than lets have all women combat brigades and send them into battle. Every women gets to go, children not an excuse, headaches = malingering. If we are going to do this lets not chip away at the margins lets show some damn confidence in our beliefs. Lower the standards as low as we need to just to make sure once they are drafted they cannot fail to get through basic. Who knows, maybe the left is right about this.
RE VDH: The horrors of Hiroshima in context
VDH gets the some of the critical facts wrong, which is not good, considering that little barry will continue his world tour apologizing for the US, this time in Japan, where he will grovel and abase himself for the fact that other, better, people won the Pacific war.
if you don't understand the atomic bombings in their actual context you won't be able to deal with barry's hand wringing supporters in the press or on the internet.
one of the best primary sources is the United States Strategic Bombing Survey, undertaken in 1946 at the request of President Truman.
The Survey secured the principal surviving Japanese records and interrogated top Army and Navy officers, Government officials, industrialists, political leaders, and many hundreds of their subordinates throughout Japan.
The Survey details how about 60 Japanese cities had already been burned out by nighttime massed B-29 attacks using incendiaries and high explosives. (High level daylight attempts at more precise bombing proved costly and ineffective, partly because of the then-unknown jet stream). the attacks on Nag. and Hir. were on the upper end of the level of destruction, but were within the range of what a 200 plane raid could accomplish with conventional bombs. VDH minimizes this, "Over the next three months, American attacks leveled huge swaths of urban Japan. U.S. planes dropped about 60 million leaflets on Japanese cities, telling citizens to evacuate and to call upon their leaders to cease the war", but bombing civilian areas is a serious moral issue and should be addressed directly because it was the conventional bombing that brought Japan to its knees.
Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.
My further analysis:
1. neither of the planned invasions would have been necessary so the projected casualties among the Allies and Japanese should not be figured into the necessity of the bombings, (except as a moral justification, the use of the bombs).
2. the nuclear attacks ended the war about two months before Japan would have surrendered without them. During those two months:
-- Hiroshima and Nagasaki would have been firebombed, with, say, about 80% of the casualty rates actually suffered.
-- the war in China would have continued, during this war, China was losing about 200,000 killed per months. the math is simple.
-- another five or six Japanese cities would have been raided, with increasingly higher levels of destruction as defenses degraded and the number of planes increased.
-- Allied POWs would still be murdered by the Japanese.
So when little barry does embarrass himself, at least we can put his shame in context.
"We should have installed a strongman leader and demanded that he do what we wanted and then let them rebuild themselves, or not."
Gosh, maybe that strongman leader should have been a Northern European white too!
That's because "Northern European whites are in general more intelligent and have a better work ethic than do blacks and others of color".
I think its a cool idea to honor someone with bigger stones than most men and certainly bigger than all supporters of the abomination that was the ante-bellum-South-gone with the wind bullshit.
I don't know.. you think Col. Klink would have been wasted on the Eastern Front? should Gen. Burkhalter have sent him to Iraq?
RE Z-man on women in combat:
as for combat, Harriet Tubman is a better man than Z.
JJM: That piece was clearly written before they announced the name of the "frumpy broad" who would replace Jackson: Harriet Tubman.
It was published April 21, the day after Tubman was announced to be replacing Jackson. Even if it were written previous to the announcement, it is still sexist. Notice that an old white man is "bold and fiery", while a woman, even if unnamed, is a "frumpy broad".
JJM: I wonder whether Tubman's "bold and fiery persona is just too damn American" for James E. Miller?
GoneWithTheWind: The biggest mistake was in spending any time and effort to rebuild and help them. We should have installed a strongman leader and demanded that he do what we wanted and then let them rebuild themselves, or not.
Or just not invaded at all. Bush didn't even know the difference between Shiite and Sunni, and they really thought the democracy would just spring up unbidden from the chaos.
However, quite apart from the perceived pros and cons of the attack on Iraq, if you do invade and occupy a country, you are in fact obliged to spend "time and effort to rebuild and help them".
Presumably GoneWithTheWind has forgotten all about postwar Germany and Japan.
Or perhaps President Truman and Generals Marshall and MacArthur were just softies and not up to his high standards for "Northern European whites"?
I like a few snowmobiles around. I hike in unmarked woods, and their tracks keep me from getting lost.
Hillary and guns is a culture war statement. When she says "too many guns in our homes" she lets the mask slip a bit. We have too many of the type of people who like having guns in their homes. I doubt she or her audience is much aware of that, but it's what they mean.
It's ridiculous that women don't have to sign up at 18 - when I was in high school 30 years ago, my male friends who all had to sign up were like, "This is stupid. The girls should have to register, too." And us girls agreed!
That being said, the real problem with the military today is the fact that a single bad performance review can ruin your career. So nobody is willing to risk getting dinged by speaking truth to the politicians (0-7's and up) who run the place.
This nonsense about lowered standards for women in combat (yeah, that really should end well) is just a symptom of the pusillanimous personality type that gets promoted within the current military system. You fill an institution with yes-men and politicians and this is what you get.
"I like a few snowmobiles around. I hike in unmarked woods, and their tracks keep me from getting lost."
I live out in a forested part of the Ottawa Valley countryside (Canada).
In winter, I share a symbiotic relationship with snowmobilers even though I don't own a machine myself.
The trails groomed and maintained by the local snowmobile club are perfect for cross-country skiing.
JJM: you are in fact obliged to spend "time and effort to rebuild and help them".
That would be the WWII model. The WWI model is to punish the loser (that didn't work out well), and previous to that, the empire model was to take take it over and annex it in which case, you are obliged to at least rebuild and either help or make them help you.
I have actually been to Hiroshima, visited the museum and Peace Park. I was a high school student. At first, you walk through the museum and you are bombarded with horrible images and sad tales of people who died/suffered b/c of the bombing. Then, you exit the museum and walk through "Peace Park" and get an even bigger guilt trip. Stop at the Children's Peace Monument and feel even worse. Thousands of paper cranes all piled up and made by little Japanese kids.
I walked away from that feeling badly for being American.
Then, after a few hours of reflection, I realized it was all manufactured guilt to make Japan seem like the victim. I started to think about WHY we dropped the bomb on Hiroshima, and then I got angry that the Japanese people would manipulate me (and their own people) in that way. Instead of presenting what the Japanese government did to bring this upon themselves, they point the finger of blame at the U.S. and use Hiroshima as an example of why atomic weaponry is evil.
I am sure easily-deluded Obama will not go through the thought process I did as a 17-year-old kid. Because he's just not that smart.
"Says the woman who is surrounded by men with guns 24/7 "
Maybe Hillary forces the Secret Service to leave their guns outside when they enter her home. Like Shirley MacLaine's ex-First Lady character in Guarding Tess did?
One other thing: Adm. Dan Gallery (his ship captured the U-505)
wrote a number of books after the war. In one of them he said we did not need to A-bomb Japan, that instead would could have blockaded and starved them out. Think on that. Women and children dying first, in large numbers. Slowly.
""Felt" religion predominates"
Are the kids really leaving Christianity or are they leaving the old control institutions we call churches behind?
The deal that the Japanese Foreign Ministry seems to have been ready to propose would have likely consisted of Japanese withdrawal from the Philippines, Singapore, and the Malay Peninsula; US withdrawal from the "Home islands", including Okinawa, Saipan, and Iwo Jima; recognition of Japan's occupation of Manchuria, at least Southern Korea and Formosa; and a non-aggression pact with the allies. A reformed version of the current government would stay in place and no international war crimes tribunal would be convened. Basically they wanted a return to the status quo of November, 1941.
To state that they would or even could go from that position to the unconditional surrender the Allies were demanding in less than six months without triggering the coup that nearly happened to prevent the issuance of the surrender decree is speculation if not specious.
that is the basis of the convenient myth that the Japanese government was ready to surrender in August of '45.
the Allies wouldn't have accepted that offer under the Potsdam Agreement.
the Foreign Office initiative didn't have the approval of military cabal running the Japanese government which wouldn't have accepted the terms.
the months-long area bombing of civilians that culminated with the nuke attacks is a serious moral issue and was seen as such during the bombings. revenge is not a moral justification.
Japanese war planners dispersed manufacturing as much as possible throughout civilian areas to preserve its ability to continue the fight. Allied bombing of those areas was morally justified because it served the greater goal of ending the war as quickly and with as few total casualties as possible. even then, each raid had a specific military target, and I believe the Hiroshima target was an army headquarters.
if revenge were actually the goal of the bombings, then dialing them back and allowing the Japanese to suffer longer would have resulted in many more Japanese deaths. along with American, British, Australian, New Zealand, Canadian and Chinese deaths.
you're a Christian, right?
I bet you people don't usually read this part of Psalm 137 (vs 7-9, Orange Catholic Bible):
Remember, O Lord, the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem;
who said, Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof.
O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed;
happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us.
Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.
"...revenge is not a moral justification."
Hmm, yes. Some random thoughts:
It's noteworthy that both the Nazis and the Japanese themselves were big on "revenge" and "reprisals" in the areas they occupied. The V in the V-1 and V-2 designations of these Nazi weapons stood for "Vergeltungswaffe" or "Retaliation Weapon". But then, the Nazis were also "Northern European whites" so perhaps I've missed something there.
OK, sure, we want that Japanese soldier to pay for killing our guys. But what exactly did a small Japanese child vapourized at Hiroshima do to deserve retribution?
I read the article, but what does "vinerism" mean?
and why is someone who believes that man is changing the climate complaining that snowmobilers will stop snowmobiling, which burns fuel because there's less snow?
Sounds like they need more trail groomers.
Or another solution (which wasn't proposed) in search of a problem (what the problem is, isn't clear to me either). We have cycles. It's called weather.
We were just talking about this today, if you have a payment on a snowmobile, and your area doesn't get snow, you then DRIVE to somewhere that does. That's why they make snowmobile trailers. Or sell your snowmobile.
Nothing to get your panties in a twist about.
You take that as a literal, contemporary instruction, D"BJ"D? Because if you do, heh.
And if you don't, maybe you'd kindly reconsider with the projection.
My response was based on what the Japanese were trying to accomplish at the Hiroshima site: guilt trip and no information about how Japan was involved in anything that would be considered harsh or cruel. It was all about the horror of the bomb and how bad the Americans were for using it.
Sure, I can feel terrible that women and children died in such an awful way. But I refuse to be made to feel guilty for being an American and for America doing what needed to be done at the time to end the war with Japan. More lives would've been lost if we continued as we had been.
Visit the place yourself and let me know what you get out of it.
Re: Trump's Policies Will Have Trumpkins 'Mad as Hell'
No they won't. Even when he changes his policies 540 degrees.
It's useless to argue using logic or reason or any normal type of persuasion with somebody who has no shame nor principles nor particular goal in mind and therefore doesn't feel the normal need to defend or explain or justify whatever he's said. It means nothing to claim he's lying, inconsistent, irrational, mistaken, or wrong - so what's your point? They're just words that fell out of his mouth and if you stick around a bit, more words are going to fall out and they all mean the same thing, which is to say they mean nothing at all. Nobody knows where Trump wants to go or how he intends to get there, whether it's Heaven or Hell, by flying carpet or by paddle-boat - but they're willing to sign up for the ride regardless.
Personally, I blame ignorance and a failure of imagination. If you support Trump because hey, how could things get any worse? it's because you're ignorant of the fact that right now, today, there are more people enjoying a better life than ever before in the history of humanity and you can't imagine that no matter how bad things get, they can always get worse.
30 Weird Old-Timey Vending Machines For Everyday Essential From Between the 1930s and 1960s
Read "With The Old Breed: At Peleliu and Okinawa by Eugene Sledge...then you will get it.
the purpose of area bombing civilians was to end the war as quickly as possible by the least destructive means possible.
that sounds grotesque, but the war itself was unusually so.
the death of the Japanese child was an unintended consequence of the area bombing. See above, the Allied mission planners inevitably designated bombing points -- factories, military establishments. this was probably a salve to the conscience of some of the planners and air crew, I don't think it was necessary. the purpose of the bombing was to end the war by destroying Japan's ability to make war, not to end the war by killing children.
this is called the Principle of double effect. it explains how actions that are harmful to some can still be moral permissible. note that this is not a "lesser of two evils" argument. the idea is Christian, it was stated by Thomas Aquinas in Summa Theologica. [Ten, note well, there is no graphic novel version of this.]
of course, some will advocate bashing the brains of Japanese children into a red smear because they not pale skinned white demons from the North. but not me.
This would be an interesting civil rights class action for some male to file against the federal government, that the government discriminates on the basis of sex by only making males subject to the draft.
I have too many guns for home. That's why I have an office gun, a back of the pickup gun, and a concealed carry gun.
When I consider the hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children butchered by the Imperial Japanese Army in Nanking, the hundreds of U.S. and British prisoners of war, murdered in cold blood on the march to prison camps from Batan, the surrendered U.S. military forced to endure slavery in Japanese mines, and the thousands of G.I’s, Sailors and Marines who never returned, it occurs to me that the Japanese people collectively earned for themselves, every single thing they received at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Next time you want to start a war with the American people, it would be wise to think it through. Completely.
And stop the bitching about the way it ends.
Thanks for the warning, but this is the internet, so for me it doesn't matter how infectious you are.
that said, I'm sure penicillin would cure you.
Have never understood this guilt about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Japanese in their expansionistic period killed millions of people from the early 1900s up through WWII, including many hundreds of thousands in atrocities. My Dad and his brothers wouldn't understand it, having been in the Navy and Marines during WWII in the Pacific theater (two of my uncles were at Iwo Jima as marines, and both were lucky enough to survive). Nor would my Mom and father-in-law, who were both on Oahu and went through Pearl Harbor.
Talk to some Koreans about how they feel about the Japanese and what was done to them by the Japanese. They are still ready to go to war against Japan at a moment's notice, even though WWII has been over all these years (of course, their prime enemy is their crazy cousins to the North). One flashpoint is the island of Dokdo (in Japanese Takeshima), which since WWII has been possessed by Korea and is heavily fortified against possible Japanese attack. The Korean national TV channels on their nightly news always make a point to give the temperatures for the island of Dokdo and show the island on their weather maps, a sort of "in your eye" jab against the Japanese. A lot of older Koreans are still very very bitter about what the Japanese did to Korea from 1910-1945; many refuse to buy Japanese products and there are restrictions on bringing in Japanese goods (for example, if you own a Japanese-made car and move to Korea, Korean law prohibits you from bringing your car with you). (Frankly, if Korea and Japan ever got in another war, the Korean military would probably destroy the Japanese self-defense forces in a week or so, but I doubt that would ever happen, because if there ever was such a war, North Korea would then immediately invade South Korea while South Korea was distracted with Japan.)
I've always found it bizarre that Japan was like this in the past, having spent time in Japan and having a number of Japanese friends. Japanese people today are generally very, very nice. You really wonder how a country could have been so psychotic.
"[It] occurs to me that the Japanese people collectively [my bold] earned for themselves, every single thing they received at Hiroshima and Nagasaki."
Including, say, a seven-month old Japanese baby in a pram?
I can certainly buy the idea that the Empire of Japan set itself on a path that would end in its own destruction and that its adult subjects bore varying levels of responsibility for its fate (senior military and naval officers more so, peasant women working in rice paddies less so; you get the idea).
I'm not so enamored at the idea that an entire people - regardless of age and circumstance - somehow "deserved" what they got simply because they happened to be Japanese.
But of course (though I suppose I am a Northern European white of sorts), I'm no doubt lacking in the necessary steely Aryan resolve to neatly lay blame on whole peoples collectively, from infants to grandmothers.
given that apparently everyone on this board is pro-bomb (including me) with one possible neutral, that's a pretty immature point of view you've got.
explain again why you're yucking it up over the deaths of Japanese children. they deserved it why??
of course the baby in a pram didn't deserve to be nuked or firebombed. the death of the kid was an unintended consequence of the otherwise morally justifiable bombings. this is not because killing the child was a lesser of two evils, but because the raids were morally justifiable and the death of the child was not their purpose.
moral blame rests entirely on those who put the baby in harm's way: the navy and army warlords, the emperor, the civilian government ministers who intentionally put war manufacture into civilian areas. not nearly enough of these war criminals were called to account at war's end.
perhaps if you possessed the steely reserve of northern european Jew lawyers you'd see this more clearly.
this guilt about Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
in '45, the atomic bombs were just another weapon in the arsenal. they were on the upper end of destruction, but Japan was already being subjected to raids that killed more and destroyed more. then the war in the pacific ended.
and the cold war began. Now, atomic weapons were magnitudes more powerful than those used in '45. there was a for good reasons or bad, a legitimate fear among the population that a-bombs could come raining down any minute. if you grew up in this time you remember the Cuber Missile Crisis and civil defense. for about 40 years only the effective, but still insane, idea of mutually assured destruction kept the peace.
most people don't think of the Hiroshima and Nagasaka bombings as the culmination of four months of intensive firebomb raids on Japanese cities, they think of cold war megabombs, MIRVS, plutonium bombs, hydrogen bombs, tsar bombs, Dr Strangelove, dirty bombs, bombs that kill people and leave structures intact.
you have to understand that these were everyday, average citizens, scared for their lives who thought Hiroshima and saw the apocalypse. you know, morons.
My father worked at Los Alamos on sabbatical every summer when I was growing up. He never had a moment's doubt about his role. I wonder how many people now can imagine what it was like to come of age at a time when Nazis weren't yet absolutely certain to be defeated, or when it wasn't clear whether Japanese expansion could be contained. There sure is a lot of fluffy-headed nonsense being talked--by the same people who thinks it's adorable to advocate all kinds of violence about their domestic political opponents for daring to buck the party line about abortion or climate change.
Actually, I agree with everything you've just said.
Japan had to be defeated and lots of people were going to have to die to achieve victory, including that seven-month old Japanese baby.
But that seven-month old Japanese baby wasn't General Tojo and didn't earn "every single thing [it] received at Hiroshima" as Scullman suggested.
See, D"BJ"D, you're so predictable that I can lead you around by the nose before you catch on.
1. Find one of your many illogical projections;
2. Exploit it;
3. Let you answer with some completely random insult, hoping against hope you'll evade detection;
4. Exploit that too;
And away we go. The really funny thing is it's like handing you a weapon - which it is - knowing that you'll take perfect aim at your foot just to see if it's loaded this time.
You're the malt liquor of the internets: Works every time.
I understand the anger. Mom, until the day she died, hated the Japanese, because they tried to kill my father (wartime service, USN) and did kill her brother (Philippines, '42, USA). Dad would never think of buying a Japanese car. Or a German one, for that matter.
neither one of them ever expressed any desire to toss Chinese Japanese babies back and forth on bayonets, like some here want to do, possibly even now.
5. Change your name and run away;
6. Go on putting words in other's mouths, predictably.
Especially liked the one about Japanese babies and bayonets, above. Pithily insightful. A veritably exquisite grasp of character. Laser-like.
My uncle was on a ship a few weeks from invading Japan. There was no maybe about the invasion it was on. Also there is no doubt that the Japanese would have fought to the death, man, woman and child to defend their homeland. The two bombs saved a million or so American lives and perhaps as many as 20 million Japanese lives.
I'm supposed to take some anonymous global IQ map posted by a guy called "enric" as signifying what, pray tell?
you must have remembered incorrectly.
"The southern Kyushu landings were to take place on 1 November 1945 ... ." --
Reports of General MacArthur -- THE CAMPAIGNS OF MACARTHUR IN THE PACIFIC -- VOLUME I -- PREPARED BY HIS GENERAL STAFF -- CHAPTER XIII "DOWNFALL" THE PLAN FOR THE INVASION OF JAPAN - Evolution of "Downfall"
I believe a late season typhoon would have delayed the Nov. 1 date, and the war would have ended by then.
You lack curiosity. If you are married to your beliefs and fear discovering anything uncomfortable than I suggest that you don't look. But you can't go through life assuming everyone who disagrees with you is automatically wrong because it makes you look uninformed. I would suggest you take some time and research this for yourself. Start with "The Bell Curve" perhaps. Even more enlightening would be to understand why (like you) so many people opposed the Bell Curve. Why these two authors were stigmatized and almost burned at the stake. Before you embrace knee jerking as a life style do some homework.
Both A-bomb targets were military targets. Fighting men and assets. The Russians were planning on invading Japan from the West within weeks of our dropping the bombs. Our troops absolutely were already on ships headed to Japan when they surrendered the invasion was a few weeks away. There was ZERO evidence at the time that Japan would surrender in fact the exact opposite was true. In a typical Japanese fashion they were preparing to fight to the last man, woman and child to protect the homeland. It was ONLY the power (not the deaths or destruction) of the A-bombs that turned them around. They wanted a fight, hand to hand, pride and a chance to die well, to kill many of our soldiers. That is what the Japanese lived for and were willing to die for. They did not want to be killed by an enemy who was 20,000 feet above them. The Japanese of WW II are NOT the Japanese of today, they were vicious and committed to killing anyone and everyone in their way. It is ironic that by their own writings they have said they expected to lose 20 million Japanese in the invasion and they were willing to accept that. The irnoy is that the A-bombs that we wring our hands about today saved 20 million Japanese lives. You can rewrite history all you want, and many have, but the facts stay the same.
Thank you for your patronizing response.
I have filed it in the same place as all the other postings I receive from persons obsessed with establishing racial hierarchies and asserting crank race theories.
there's a cure for your stupidity, and its not relying on your senile uncle's memory.
just kidding, you're invincibly stupid.
You hide your inadequacies behind a false bravado. You don't debate you simply shout louder and insult. I suppose this works for you and allows you to think you are correct and effective. When you don't have the facts you argue the law and vice versa. You are a one trick pony. I could write an app to do what you do.