Protestor Damages Enola Gay

Both Eisenhower and MacArthur thought otherwise, but what do they
know? Hell, they were just the generals running the war and commanding
the troops who fought it. Probably a couple of bleeding-heart, pinko,
commie, rat-******* liberals anyway. I'm sure YOU know FAR more about
it than they ever did....

"Japan was already defeated and that dropping the
bomb was completely unnecessary"
Dwight Eisenhower, "Mandate for Change", pg 380

"the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't
necessary to hit them with that awful thing."
Dwight Eisenhower, Newsweek, 11/11/63

"No military justification for the dropping of the bomb".
Douglas MacArthur
Norman Cousins, The Pathology of Power, pg. 65



On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 12:41:58 +0900, Ernest Schaal
wrote:

I agree that there should have been more information in the exhibit. Besides
mentioning the thousands who died because of the bombs, there should have
been mention of the greater number of Japanese lives that were spared from
their inhumane government, who had wanted all Japanese to die rather than
admit that their leaders lost the war, a war they never could have won.

in article , KenG at
wrote on 12/18/03 10:22 AM:

And Hunderds of thousands did not die.....

KenG

Gunnar wrote:
Why not simply include the wanted information in the exhibit ? It seams like
a small request to me.
It is after all true that 100+ thousand humans died because of this
plane/bomb.

Is history now politically uncorrect in the US ?

?
G



__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
The Worlds Uncensored News Source

Dear Mr. NoSpam,

If you had been keeping up with the news (specifically the Japanese
newspapers), you would have known that even after the Nagasaki bomb was
dropped, the military wanted to continue the struggle to the death of the
last Japanese, rather than admit defeat. There were a few stories to that
effect in the Japan Times within the past year or so. Those stories might
still be accessible somewhere.

Needless to say, both Eisenhower and MacArthur had been dead before those
revelations had been made, although I remember reading about the role of the
emperor in finally admitting the defeat as early as the 1970s.

It is true that many in Japan were ready to surrender, but that didn't
really matter, since the Japan of that time was under the tight control of a
government run by the military. While there were civilians in the
government, the cabinet could be brought down (and often did) at any time by
the Army or Navy quitting from the cabinet. Throughout that period, thought
police persecuted anyone who dared voice a dissenting opinion.

The net result of all this is that Japan has become very pacifist since the
war, and there is major political turmoil with even the sending of
noncombatants to Iraq, or anywhere for that matter. On television, the
Japanese military of the period are often the heavies, far more than the
American military.

Do you ever bother to study Japanese history or Japanese society? Have you
ever visited here or lived here?


in article , at
wrote on 12/18/03 1:03 PM:


Both Eisenhower and MacArthur thought otherwise, but what do they
know? Hell, they were just the generals running the war and commanding
the troops who fought it. Probably a couple of bleeding-heart, pinko,
commie, rat-******* liberals anyway. I'm sure YOU know FAR more about
it than they ever did....

"Japan was already defeated and that dropping the
bomb was completely unnecessary"
Dwight Eisenhower, "Mandate for Change", pg 380

"the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't
necessary to hit them with that awful thing."
Dwight Eisenhower, Newsweek, 11/11/63

"No military justification for the dropping of the bomb".
Douglas MacArthur
Norman Cousins, The Pathology of Power, pg. 65

I

From: jake

On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 13:39:19 +0900, Ernest Schaal
wrote:

The Japanese military infrastructure and capacity to wage effective war may
have already been destroyed, and sensible people would have quit under those
circumstances, but according to at least one Japan Times story the military
was quite willing to sacrifice the lives of all Japanese civilians rather
than stand the shame of living with those civilians after losing the war.

sure...
I dont doubt it for a moment..throughout human history meglomaniacs
have always been prepared to do so..

but they were the ravings of defeated meglomaniacs who had LOST their
power.

Most sources I know of talk about the resistance of the military to
surrender, and the uncommon action of the Emperor of resisting the military
on this matter.

Indeed ..
but the Japanese military had already been defeated..

The nuclear bombs were dropped for other reasons than military..

Nagasaki was chosen as a target almost randomly by the pilot
because of weather conditions..on the strength of it having a
Mitsubushi factory there..



You don't read much hsitory do you? Nagasaki was on a list of targets given to
the aircrew. Nothing "almost random" there. There were several cities, 5 or 6
IIRC, that were selected for primary or alternate nuke targets.

As for the Japanese military being defeated by August 1945 tell that to the
bunch of fully functional combat units in China, Viet Nam, Korea etc. It wasn't
until the Soviets entered the Pacific war that the Japanese forces were facing
defeat in China. If Japan hadn't surrendered who knows how long the war in
China would have lasted. The Japanese had a lot of things to cover up and had
no intention of leaving easily.

As for the Home Islands every civilian was to be armed with everything from
sharpened bamboo sticks to real weapons. Let's assume 50% of the civilians
actually acted in the invasions the number of American and Japanese casualties
would have been unbelievable. How many children would have been slaughtered?
How many suicides? Thank God we will never know.

This made the atomic bombings a military necessity. Add the casualties in
China, Korea etc to those involved in the invasions and you get numbers too big
for most people to comprehend.

I will admit there were also political reasons for dropping the bombs, but they
HAD to be used primarilay for military reasons.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

rom: (MIB529)
Date: 12/18/2003 4:58 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

"Bjørnar" wrote in message
...
Why not simply include the wanted information in the exhibit ? It
seams like a small request to me.
It is after all true that 100+ thousand humans died because of this
plane/bomb.

Is history now politically uncorrect in the US ?

?
G

Civilian casualities is always a touchy subject for the winning
team. Just look at Irak and Afghanistan, somewhere between 10-20.000
civilians have died as a consequense of the US and allied bombings,
but it's hardly mentioned.

As a reminder, 3,000 died in the WTC attack.

Not only that, but that doesn't include the number of babies who will
die from 'depleted' uranium-related birth defects. Or all the people
dying of cholera and other diseases because water-treatment facilities
were considered legitimate military targets.

What's bad is, the hijackers were mostly from Saudi Arabia; none were
from Iraq, and IIRC, they were all from 'moderate' Muslim countries.

Saudi Arabia is by no stretch of the immagination "moderate."

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired