1996-02-04 - Re: Sometimes ya just gotta nuke em

Header Data

From: “James A. Donald” <jamesd@echeque.com>
To: Jordan Hayes <cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: f6d21c335dd257eca663d19c58ac9e970eb56d6ed2f5e0ba848478bddb46b667
Message ID: <199602040611.WAA18584@blob.best.net>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-02-04 06:30:20 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 14:30:20 +0800

Raw message

From: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 14:30:20 +0800
To: Jordan Hayes <cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Sometimes ya just gotta nuke em
Message-ID: <199602040611.WAA18584@blob.best.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


http://www2.ari.net/home/bsabath/950711.html

At 12:25 PM 2/3/96 -0800, Jordan Hayes wrote:
>Sorry to inject a little scholarly research on this topic, but I
>would urge those of you who are interested in how this mythology
>was created and disseminated to do an AltaVista serach for Alperovitz;
>he's potentially the leading scholar on this subject.  I've read
>his book, and Tim probably ought to as well ...

SCHOLARLY RESEARCH!!!!

You do not know shit from beans:  Alperovitz is no more a scholar 
than Zundel is:  He is a historical revisionist 
who lies even more crudely than the holocaust revisionists.

It is clear that in the opinion of the high command, the decision to 
surrender after they were nuked was a dramatic and radical change of 
position.  Alperovitz says otherwise, thus he is either grotesquely 
ignorant or, more likely simply dishonest.


Alperovitz writes: 
        The use of the atomic bomb, most experts now believe, was totally
        unnecessary. Even people who support the decision for various 
        reasons acknowledge that almost certainly the Japanese would have
        surrendered before the initial invasion planned for November. 
        The U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey stated that officially in 1946. 

        We found a top-secret War Department study that said when the 
        Russians came in, which was August 8, the war would have ended 
        anyway. The invasion of Honshu, the main island, was not 

        [And so on and so forth]

After the second nuclear attack, the Japanese high command had a
meeting with the emperor:  They heard testimony on the effects of
atomic bombs.  About half wanted to surrender, about half argued that
Japan should die gloriously:  They were unaware that the US had just
used up almost its entire nuclear arsenal.  They expected that surrender
would be followed by the same kind of reign of terror, rape, brutal
degradation, and mass murder, that they inflicted on the people that
they conquered. They expected that failure to surrender would result
in continued nuclear bombardment at about the same rate.  (Both
beliefs were incorrect.)

The Emperor *at that meeting* made the decision to surrender, shocking
a large part of the high command, and then made a speech on radio
announcing the surrender, stating as reason for the surrender that if
they did not surrender, Japan would be utterly destroyed by nuclear
weapons.

Seeing as they were still debating the issue *after* two nuclear
weapons had landed on them, it seems reasonable to believe that
without atomic weapons, it would have been necessary to fight from
house to house from one end of Japan to the other.


When Hirohito ordered surrender in response to atomic bombing, the high 
command attempted to violently overthrow him, and when they failed, many
in the high command committed suicide.





>
>If you read nothing else on this topic, I urge you to check out
>an interview with him at http://www2.ari.net/home/bsabath/950711.html
>
>#endif
>
>/jordan
>
>
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              				|  
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