"America Needs You Harry Truman"
So I's feeling like stirring the pot a bit last night and I figured what better way than via my seldom read blog.
With Memorial Day approaching and the "United" States firmly entrenched in a foreign war, I felt this to be the most opportune time to present my case against former U.S. President Harry S. Truman.
What's that you say JeffRey, have you some inspired piece, outlining all the evidence of political graft surrounding Truman and the Pendergast family whilst Harry S. was a political figure in Kansas City.
No my friends, that would be another blog for another time. No, since the U.S. is killing Iraqi citizens by the thousands I felt it time to call out ol' Harry for the senseless, and illegal, killing of tens of thousands of the Japanese citizenry at the end of World War II.
Now, for those not in the know, August 15th is celebrated as V-J Day (or victory over Japan day). Now, in the week and half prior, the United (at that time the quotes weren't really necessary) States propelled the world into the atomic age with the dropping of atom bombs on the Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
What would be the logical chain of events here? I'll show you:
Bomb Hiroshima--Bomb Nagasaki--Japan surrenders--slightly less famous pictures of sailors kissing women are taken
But what is the mistake in that little course of action you ask? Well how bout this sports fans?
Japan had actually made an offer to surrender in January of 1945. Yes folks, General Douglas MacArthur had in his hands an offer of surrender that, as it turns out, was pretty much identical to the one accepted by the States in August. But that is not all.....
In April the U.S. Navy laid mines around the ports of Osaka and Kobe. It was an extremely effective strategic move as afterward Japan was unable to send out supplies of any kind to its troops on the many islands of the South Pacific.
Furthermore, also in April Japan appointed a new Prime Minister in the form of Suzuki Kantaro, who did not allow himself to be controlled by the Japanese military interest as Hirohito had. In fact, Kantaro was widely known as a peace advocate. This was later proven by Japan's attempt to surrender through the Soviet Union in May 1945.
On July 11th Japan once again offered a surrender to the United States with but one condition. Japan wanted to keep its monarchy in place. Japan did offer to replace Hirohito, but did not want to lose their traditions. The United States did not respond.
Throughout July, Japanese officials made clear in negotiations with the Soviet Union (an American ally in the war remember) they wanted to reach an accord with the United States without further loss of life. America never responded.
The result?
--March fire-bombings of Japanese cities killed 75,000 citizens
--26,000 American soldiers and 21,000 Japanese died in the fighting on Iwo Jima
--39,000 American and 100,000 Japanese soldiers died fighting over Okinawa
--Finally the atomic bombs...used supposedly to prevent further loss of life (or American life anyway) and to make the Soviets more "manageable". Let's break it down.
Now you need to look at this through the eyes of the American leadership, who had yet to recognize a Japanese surrender. Numerous Japanese cities had already been destroyed through more conventional bombing. Why would destroying a city with an atomic bomb have any different result?
Also, why drop the atomic bombs on cities populated predominantly by citizens? Japan still had military targets worth destroying. And if the intended effect was to "shock and awe", a test over an less populated area would have proved just as effective.
That, incidentally, was the suggestion of those men involved with the Manhattan Project. It came partly through pragmatism and party through a fear of starting an arms race with the Soviet Union, who was our ally but not our friend. They feared the United States, with its heavily populated urban areas, would become a prime target for weapons of mass destruction. Hmmm....I guess it's too late to cork this bottle.
In May of 1945 General Douglas MacArthur supported a memorandum from former President Herbert Hoover which outlined a peace with Japan in which all major American objectives would have been met. MacArthur later said the losses in the summer of 1945, the atomic bomb and the entry of the Soviet Union into Manchuria could have been avoided. Wait a minute...no Russia in Manchuria. Could that have meant no Korean War, and more importantly, no Vietnam War?
Well as we all know the United States, on August 6 1945 dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima. On August 9 a second atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. 200,000 Japanese citizens died. The lingering results were higher rates of cancer and birth defects. The bombs dropped "to end the war sooner" came months after victory in the Pacific had become a foregone conclusion. In fact, in can be argued the United States artifically lengthened the war by delaying diplomacy (namely the Postdam Conference) so that the bombs could be prepared in time.
Immediately following the first bombing former President Hoover said "the use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul."
Former President Dwight Eisenhower (a U.S. General during the war) when first learning of the intended use of the bomb "voiced to [Secretary of War Henry Stimson] my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was at that very moment seeking some way to surrender with a minimum of loss of 'face'. It wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing."
Oh Harry S.....you fucked up buddy. And I'll not even get into your war with Korea, which was never approved by Congress, and which the U.S. probably could have won had you not hamstrung MacArthur.
But how is Harry remembered? With fondness, of course. So much so that both current Democrats and Republicans hold him up as what a President should be.
But I have to ask...did the buck every really stop at Harry's doorstep?
Take Cover
JeffRey
With Memorial Day approaching and the "United" States firmly entrenched in a foreign war, I felt this to be the most opportune time to present my case against former U.S. President Harry S. Truman.
What's that you say JeffRey, have you some inspired piece, outlining all the evidence of political graft surrounding Truman and the Pendergast family whilst Harry S. was a political figure in Kansas City.
No my friends, that would be another blog for another time. No, since the U.S. is killing Iraqi citizens by the thousands I felt it time to call out ol' Harry for the senseless, and illegal, killing of tens of thousands of the Japanese citizenry at the end of World War II.
Now, for those not in the know, August 15th is celebrated as V-J Day (or victory over Japan day). Now, in the week and half prior, the United (at that time the quotes weren't really necessary) States propelled the world into the atomic age with the dropping of atom bombs on the Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
What would be the logical chain of events here? I'll show you:
Bomb Hiroshima--Bomb Nagasaki--Japan surrenders--slightly less famous pictures of sailors kissing women are taken
But what is the mistake in that little course of action you ask? Well how bout this sports fans?
Japan had actually made an offer to surrender in January of 1945. Yes folks, General Douglas MacArthur had in his hands an offer of surrender that, as it turns out, was pretty much identical to the one accepted by the States in August. But that is not all.....
In April the U.S. Navy laid mines around the ports of Osaka and Kobe. It was an extremely effective strategic move as afterward Japan was unable to send out supplies of any kind to its troops on the many islands of the South Pacific.
Furthermore, also in April Japan appointed a new Prime Minister in the form of Suzuki Kantaro, who did not allow himself to be controlled by the Japanese military interest as Hirohito had. In fact, Kantaro was widely known as a peace advocate. This was later proven by Japan's attempt to surrender through the Soviet Union in May 1945.
On July 11th Japan once again offered a surrender to the United States with but one condition. Japan wanted to keep its monarchy in place. Japan did offer to replace Hirohito, but did not want to lose their traditions. The United States did not respond.
Throughout July, Japanese officials made clear in negotiations with the Soviet Union (an American ally in the war remember) they wanted to reach an accord with the United States without further loss of life. America never responded.
The result?
--March fire-bombings of Japanese cities killed 75,000 citizens
--26,000 American soldiers and 21,000 Japanese died in the fighting on Iwo Jima
--39,000 American and 100,000 Japanese soldiers died fighting over Okinawa
--Finally the atomic bombs...used supposedly to prevent further loss of life (or American life anyway) and to make the Soviets more "manageable". Let's break it down.
Now you need to look at this through the eyes of the American leadership, who had yet to recognize a Japanese surrender. Numerous Japanese cities had already been destroyed through more conventional bombing. Why would destroying a city with an atomic bomb have any different result?
Also, why drop the atomic bombs on cities populated predominantly by citizens? Japan still had military targets worth destroying. And if the intended effect was to "shock and awe", a test over an less populated area would have proved just as effective.
That, incidentally, was the suggestion of those men involved with the Manhattan Project. It came partly through pragmatism and party through a fear of starting an arms race with the Soviet Union, who was our ally but not our friend. They feared the United States, with its heavily populated urban areas, would become a prime target for weapons of mass destruction. Hmmm....I guess it's too late to cork this bottle.
In May of 1945 General Douglas MacArthur supported a memorandum from former President Herbert Hoover which outlined a peace with Japan in which all major American objectives would have been met. MacArthur later said the losses in the summer of 1945, the atomic bomb and the entry of the Soviet Union into Manchuria could have been avoided. Wait a minute...no Russia in Manchuria. Could that have meant no Korean War, and more importantly, no Vietnam War?
Well as we all know the United States, on August 6 1945 dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima. On August 9 a second atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. 200,000 Japanese citizens died. The lingering results were higher rates of cancer and birth defects. The bombs dropped "to end the war sooner" came months after victory in the Pacific had become a foregone conclusion. In fact, in can be argued the United States artifically lengthened the war by delaying diplomacy (namely the Postdam Conference) so that the bombs could be prepared in time.
Immediately following the first bombing former President Hoover said "the use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul."
Former President Dwight Eisenhower (a U.S. General during the war) when first learning of the intended use of the bomb "voiced to [Secretary of War Henry Stimson] my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was at that very moment seeking some way to surrender with a minimum of loss of 'face'. It wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing."
Oh Harry S.....you fucked up buddy. And I'll not even get into your war with Korea, which was never approved by Congress, and which the U.S. probably could have won had you not hamstrung MacArthur.
But how is Harry remembered? With fondness, of course. So much so that both current Democrats and Republicans hold him up as what a President should be.
But I have to ask...did the buck every really stop at Harry's doorstep?
Take Cover
JeffRey
posted by The Crazy Leftist at 8:13 AM
1 comments
