devil wrote in message ...
On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 16:49:36 +0000, Frank F. Matthews wrote:


Two wrongs don't make a right. However, the statement has nothing to do
with the topic. Destruction is a part of war. It would be more likely
to avoid war if you avoid starting one by attacking the other party.
The destruction of Hiroshima was fully justified by it's result. In
fact, it produced an end to the war with less impact on Japan than any
other end that could be envisioned at the time. FFM

None of which is anywhere near as significant as the impact it had on
Stalin. Which looking at the Potsdam transcripts, was clearly the
foremost thing on Truman's mind.

How would the Potsdam transcipts indicate to you what was foremost
on Truman's mind when he gave final authorization to use the bomb?
He didn't decide at Potsdam. Why wouldn't it be a more reasonable
presumption, on an occum's razor sorta basis, that the previous 4
years of deadly war, rationing, and misery was the basis, including
some fairly recent and extremely deadly island battles in the Pacific?
Just because he realized there may be other benefits to using the bomb,
doesn't mean that they were either the "justification" nor "foremost
on his mind". An incredible number of soldiers had already died.
They were expecting, and preparing for, an incredible number to die
in the taking of the island. Why wouldn't you presume THAT was
foremost on his mind?