1996-02-05 - Re: Sometimes ya just gotta nuke em

Header Data

From: jamesd@echeque.com
To: “James M. Cobb” <llurch@networking.stanford.edu
Message Hash: 644088367f9229c88f0c6b3cad247e1e7398f709075a12b830fe12c111e7fca6
Message ID: <199602050359.TAA03592@news1.best.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-02-05 04:20:51 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 12:20:51 +0800

Raw message

From: jamesd@echeque.com
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 12:20:51 +0800
To: "James M. Cobb" <llurch@networking.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: Sometimes ya just gotta nuke em
Message-ID: <199602050359.TAA03592@news1.best.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 04:36 AM 2/4/96 -0500, James M. Cobb wrote:
>  Neither dropping nuclear weapons on Japanese cities nor an invasion 
>  of Japan was necessary to secure surrender of the Japanese government. 

After the first nuclear bomb was dropped, the Japanese government
held a cabinet meeting in which they summoned Nishina, head of the
atomic program, and asked him if he could duplicate atomic weapons
within a few months.

After two nuclear weapons had been dropped on Japan, the cabinet concluded
that Japan faced utter destruction with nuclear weapons, and some advocated
surrender.  But according to emperor Hirohito

   "At the time of the surrender, there was no prospect of agreement"

Even with two nuclear weapons, surrender was far from assured.  It was touch
and go:  Had the coup succeeded, Japan would not have surrendered, and 
a considerably more nuclear bombing would have been necessary.  The bullet
holes in the imperial palace testify that even after two nuclear bombs,
there was a substantial faction of the government determined not to surrender.

It was certainly true that Japan was defeated, and reasonable people may
disagree on justice of using nuclear weapons under these circumstances, but
to claim, as Alperovitz claims, that Japan was on the verge of surrender, 
is not a mere difference of opinion on the interpretation of the facts, but
a simple, crude, barefaced, blatant lie.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              				|  
We have the right to defend ourselves	|   http://www.jim.com/jamesd/
and our property, because of the kind	|  
of animals that we are. True law	|   James A. Donald
derives from this right, not from the	|  
arbitrary power of the state.		|   jamesd@echeque.com






Thread