The moral differences between the holocaust and bombing Japan

oralloy wrote:

The Smithsonian exhibit was not tolerated because it was filled with outrageous lies.

Really? What were the lies that they were purposing?

What kind of world do you want to leave your grandchildren A propaganda world?

All my life, to cite just one example, I have believed, as you probably also have, that the atomic bombing of Japan avoided the necessity of an invasion that would have resulted in one million American deaths. It appears that this number, so frequently quoted, is not based on the military analyses done at the time:

...military staff studies in the spring of 1945 estimated 30,000 to 50,000 casualties--dead and wounded--in "Olympic", the invasion of Kyushu. Based on the Okinawa campaign, that would have meant perhaps 10,000 American dead. Military planners made no firm estimates for...the second invasion, but losses clearly would have been higher.

(That was another quote from the proposed Smithsonian exhibit.) But if the losses for the second invasion were five times higher, that still totals 60,000 dead, not one million. Doesn't a Smithsonian curator have a right to put this information before the public?

Let me guess, You think that America believed that they had "extenuating circumstances," but you do not think that Hitler believed he had an "extenuating circumstances," on his hands and was trying to clean up Europe?

These same old farts "that you old farts look up to, thought segregation was normal

It was; it is.

Frank Apisa wrote:

I think Truman would have been less likely to okay the nuclear bombing of German cities (although some of the German cities were obliterated through conventional weapons) than Japanese cities...primarily because of the ethnic, cultural, and perceived physical differences.

Oh,c'mon, Frank, you know better than that. The fire-bombing of Dresden was in many ways a more horrendous event than either the Hiroshima or Nagasaki attacks. Harry "the buck stops here" Truman would, I'm quite sure, have had no qualms whatever about dropping a nuke on Frankfurt or Manheim or Bonn. But we didn't yet have the bomb when Hitler's little empire fell apart and we could celebrate V-E Day (that's 'Victory in Europe' for you youngsters) in April. The first successful test of an A-bomb wasn't conducted until July at the White Sands range in Almagordo, NM. So we then rushed into production of a couple more of the new 'devices' to insure that we could celebrate V-J ('Victory in Japan') Day in August instead of fighting on til maybe Christmas or January of 1946. As Set has already pointed out, the Japanese just fought on...and on...and on.

Quote:

These same old farts "that you old farts look up to, thought segregation was normal

It was; it is.

Is Sunday your favorite day of the week?

So WHAT ??

...and I choose to guess that Truman would NOT have used the "gadget" on Germany...but had little trouble using it on Japan.

Quote:

...and I choose to guess that Truman would NOT have used the "gadget" on Germany...but had little trouble using it on Japan.

You would be wrong on that. Einstein met with Roosevelt in 1939 to warn him of the new physics and the fct that Germany had suspended all exprots of uranium oxides and Autunite and carnotite from the areas under her control. Roosevelt began a research committee that wound up , in 1942, as the Manhattan District Project. There is a museum at the Oak Ridge Labs (ORNL) which shows that Germany was the pimary target and that our spy (Actually Britain) had discovered the German plans for the "NEw York Bomber" which was only designed to deliver one type weapon on NYC. We were then in a hurry. Only Germany's surrender intervened and the entire project became devoted to Japan. (In order to help eliminate or reduce loss of life to the Allied troops that would invade the Japanese Home Islands.

All the added story , including the US culpability in actually "Starting WWII" came later, as time separated folks from facts.

We would have bombed the NAzis had we needed to. We could have had a perfect platform to deliver several bombs. (We had an ally, Britain, that was actually a partner in the Manhattan Project)

Their project name was something like the Alloy Tubes Project (sounded like a public works project)

Yours is a hunch based upon your belief that Truman would have continued the costly war when a weapon to end it was at hand.

My "guess" is based upon evidence. Yours is a hunch based upon your belief that Truman would have continued the costly war when a weapon to end it was at hand.

We didn't go into the Manhattan District Project for the sole purpose of bombing Japan.
You should go and visit the museum at Oak Ridge some time. It follows the history and politics of "Appliances" and "the gadget" and the "peaceful atom"
It even includes the fascinating ,mistakes we made in developing the H bomb after WWII. (We created a bomb of 5 times the destructive potential than calculated because we didn't realize that the two isotopes of Lithium were interchangeable )

Quote:

No, "credence" does not need to be given to that belief. I mean, not everyone believes laws should be followed (I'm referring to malum in se laws). These people are often referred to as sociopaths.

Just consider how many sociopaths there are that have contributed to this thread. You rarely to never hear folks say that US administrations [UK and others too] should be held to account for their numerous war crimes and terrorist activities.

You, Tico, are among the leaders when it comes to being a sociopath. You rank right up there with Oralloy, BillRM, Setanta, ... .

...In any case, all we can do is to guess...and I choose to guess that Truman would NOT have used the "gadget" on Germany...but had little trouble using it on Japan.

JTT wrote:

Quote:

No, "credence" does not need to be given to that belief. I mean, not everyone believes laws should be followed (I'm referring to malum in se laws). These people are often referred to as sociopaths.

Just consider how many sociopaths there are that have contributed to this thread. You rarely to never hear folks say that US administrations [UK and others too] should be held to account for their numerous war crimes and terrorist activities.

You, Tico, are among the leaders when it comes to being a sociopath. You rank right up there with Oralloy, BillRM, Setanta, ... .

Your premise is false based on the fact that being unconcerned does not equal sociopathology. It only equals having more important things to occupy one's thoughts and daily activities. Now if you had a baby to feed, would you be on the computer, reading my post, if the child was hungry and crying. I believe not. Now extrapolate that towards others and you'll see that your attempting to reprioritize other's concerns is just your personal brand of self-empowerment. However, in the real world, you have no empowerment, nor any authority to redirect anyone's concerns on a public forum.

Simply put, you are only pretending to have an ethical right to be on your soapbox; it is really just your self-annointing of yourself to have a self-rightous mission. Sorry. Your game of self-annointing with a mission is quite boring, in my opinion. I really have no need to stroke your ego; you should find a more ego stroking venue, in my opinion.