Quote:
|
Originally Posted by djacq75
To take this in order:
1. The annihilation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are worse than that of Tokyo not because they were atomic, but because they were undertaken when peace was at hand, meaning those who lost their lives there lost them even more senselessly than those lost up to that point.
|
Again I return to the important questions. What did Truman know? What did he think Japan knew? Remember, America was about to embark on an invasion of Japan that was estimated at up to ˝ million American casualties. It demonstrates what their (American) perspectives were. To judge, one must first define 'their' perspective. Even having been asked those same questions that Kennedy asked, then would Truman have dropped those bombs? Yes. Again, you may think peace was at hand. But Japan gave America no reason to believe that to be true.
Talk is cheap. Without some action to demonstrate talk as something more than fiction, then talk has no merit - no integrity especially in a war so violent. Especially when we again take a most dominant American perspective. Japan was talking peace while ‘Pearl Harboring’ America. Don’t ever forget how powerful that American perspective was back then. Always appreciate why that was a most powerful 'smoking gun'. It is why America was so empowered as to even consider ˝ million American casualties to achieve 'unconditional surrender'. Peace was not at hand IF one considers the American perspective.
So tell me who is good and who is evil. Just another jab at the naive (children) who view and decide in terms of good and evil.