Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.


Expand Messages
  • doug john
    Dear Dale, The Soviet Union which declared war on Japan on the 8th August 1945 according to the three power Potsdam Agreement. The Russians quickly captured
    Message 1 of 1 , Sep 1, 2006
      Dear Dale,
      The Soviet Union which declared war on Japan on the 8th August 1945 according to the three power Potsdam Agreement. The Russians quickly captured the islands Kuril, Sakhalin which are visible with the naked eye from the Japanese island of Hokkaido they also took over Japanese Shikotan, Etorofu, Kunashiri and the tiny Habomai island group.

      They then invaded Japanese held China and swept the Japanese aside with a devastating and overwhelming armoured push. Japanese gains in China over the last 12 years were taken by Soviets in a matter of weeks The Americans must have been alarmed with the success of the Soviets even though the Russia had declared war on Japan at the behest of the United States and Britain at a three power Potsdam Summit meeting.

      I believe with you that this was the main factor in the decision to Atom bomb Japan; it was in effect, the first blow in the Cold War.

      However I cannot go past the comments of Brigadier General Carter Clarke The military intelligence officer in charge of preparing intercepted Japanese cables - the MAGIC summaries - for Truman and his advisors) "...when we didn't need to do it, and we knew we didn't need to do it, and they knew that we knew we didn't need to do it, we used them as an experiment for two atomic bombs." Quoted in Gar Alperovitz, The Decision To Use the Atomic Bomb, pg. 359

      Couple Carter Clarke statements with the fact that both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were deliberately left untouched by conventional ordinance even though they were considered military targets. Many commentators believe they were left untouched in order that the effects of the atom bombs on the civilian population and buildings could be accurately assessed.

      I believe that the United States administration would have no compunction

      of using Nuclear weapons in the quest to control the world.

      "What's the point of having this superb military

      weapon that you're always talking about if we

      can't use it?" Madeleine Albright, former United States

      Secretary of State to General Colin Powell, as quoted in Powell's book

      'My American Journey' 1995.

      Then there is the fact that the United States was the only country in the

      United Nations that refused to sign up to the international control of

      all nuclear material.

      The UN vote on a proposed UN Fissile Materials Cutoff Treaty (FMCT), wherein all fissile materials worldwide would be placed under the control of the International Atomic Energy authority. The UN General Assembly vote occurred on April 11, 2004. On that day 147 nations, including Iran, voted in favor of UN resolution A/RES/48/75L. The resolution calls for the immediate drafting of such a treaty. Clearly, the whole world is demanding that the nuclear powers consent to be disarmed. The USA cast the sole “no” vote. Israel and the UK abstained.
      For more details regarding this important UN resolution go to: http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2004/gadis3291.doc.htm

      And this from an administration that says embryonic cell stem research cannot be Federal funded. These cells cannot be observed with the naked eyed and could fit on the sharp end of a pin. The Born again Christian Bush vetoed the U.S. congress passing of the research.

      So another road block has been placed against efforts which offer great hope for the cure of many illnesses on the grounds “THAT THIS WOULD MEAN THE DISTRUCTION OF LIFE and against the word of GOD! Is that religious hypocrisy or what? Regards Doug Adam

      Dale Snyder <nasdaq2005qqqq@...> wrote: Ahh, no. It was Truman's hard-on for Stalin. PERIOD.

      doug john <theadamfamilyoz@...> wrote: Dear Dale,

      Your point of view is shared by many thinking people, I however think there was an additinal reason based on the fact that Hiroshima and Nagaski were left unscarred and free from conventional bombing tends to lead one to the conclusion that it was an experiment to see the effect on human beings.

      And this from persons who profess to have a belief in a loving god, hypocracy still survives even today all over the world..

      Regards Doug Adam

      Dale Snyder <nasdaq2005qqqq@...> wrote:
      The only reason, and let me emphasize, THE ONLY REASON, that bastard Truman decided to murder in a most hideous and agonizingly painful manner so many tens of thousands of innocent japanese civilians was to relieve his hard-on he had for Stalin. PERIOD.

      It was a "look what I have, don't fuck with me" mentality.


      doug john <theadamfamilyoz@...> wrote:


      Second-guessing the necessity and morality of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki 55 years ago is nothing new. Contrary to widely held opinion, the first critics of America's use of atomic weapons were not disillusioned 1960’s radicals but figures from the conservative establishment and the highest ranks of the military.

      EDWARD TELLER American nuclear physicist.
      Father of the Atom bomb, in the days just before their use, argued that the destructive power of the bomb could have been demonstrated without the taking of lives.


      Who played a major role in the development of the atomic bomb, argued:
      "If the Germans had dropped atomic bombs on cities instead of us, we would have defined the dropping of atomic bombs on cities as a war crime, and we would have sentenced the Germans who were guilty of this crime to death at Nuremberg and hanged them."

      General Leslie Groves, head of the Manhattan Project

      Described Truman as a man on a toboggan, the momentum too great to stop it.

      I never thought the bomb would actually be used, especially three months after the surrender of Germany. A year afterward, he expressed his view on the bombing, saying that “he was sure that President Roosevelt would have forbidden the atomic bombing of Hiroshima had he been alive”. He also said: "I have always condemned the use of the atomic bomb against Japan." Albert Einstein did not build the atomic bomb. But, with his Theory of Relativity, he published the formula which constitutes the basic principle of the atomic bomb, or how a huge amount of energy can be released from a small amount of matter. This theory was summarised by the equation: E=mc² (energy = mass times the speed of light squared)


      "The use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul."


      "The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace the atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in the defeat of Japan”

      Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Truman

      The use of [the atomic bombs] at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender."

      President Eisenhower, the Allied commander in Europe World War II,

      In 1963 recalled, as he did on several other occasions, that in July 1945 he had opposed using the atomic bomb on Japan during a meeting with Secretary of War Henry Stimson. I told him I was against it on two counts;. Firstly 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.

      The military intelligence officer in charge of preparing intercepted Japanese cables - the MAGIC summaries - for Truman and his advisors) "...when we didn't need to do it, and we knew we didn't need to do it, and they knew that we knew we didn't need to do it, we used them as an experiment for two atomic bombs." Quoted in Gar Alperovitz, The Decision To Use the Atomic Bomb, pg. 359

      General Douglas MacArthur, commander Allied forces Pacific,

      Recorded in his diary that he was "appalled and depressed by this Frankenstein monster and that there was no military justification for the bombing.”

      The same opinion was expressed by: -

      William D. Leahy, Fleet Admiral (the Chief of Staff to the President, General Carl Spaatz, (commander of the U.S. Strategic Air Forces Pacific
      Curtis Le May Major General
      Ernest King, Admiral U.S. Chief of Naval Operations

      JOHN McCLOY (Assistant Sec. of War)
      "I have always felt that if, in our ultimatum to the Japanese government issued from Potsdam [in July 1945], we had referred to the retention of the emperor as a constitutional monarch and had made some reference to the reasonable accessibility of raw materials to the future Japanese government, it would have been accepted.

      RALPH BARD (Under Sec. of the Navy
      "...it definitely seemed to me that the Japanese were becoming weaker and weaker. They were surrounded by the Navy. They couldn't get any imports and they couldn't export anything. Naturally, as time went on and the war developed in our favor it was quite logical to hope and expect that with the proper kind of a warning the Japanese would then be in a position to make peace, which would have made it unnecessary for us to drop the bomb

      LEWIS STRAUSS(Special Assistant to the Sec. of the Navy)
      "I proposed to Secretary Forrestal that the weapon should be demonstrated before it was used. Primarily it was because it was clear to a number of people, myself among them, that the war was very nearly over. The Japanese were nearly ready to capitulate.. Secretary Forrestal agreed wholeheartedly with the recommendation..."

      PAUL NITZE (Vice Chairman, U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey)
      ""While I was working on the new plan of air attack... [I] concluded that even without the atomic bomb, Japan was likely to surrender in a matter of months. My own view was that Japan would capitulate by November 1945." , Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated." Paul Nitze, From Hiroshima to Glasnost, pg. 36-37

      ELLIS ZACHARIAS(Deputy Director of the Office of Naval Intelligence)
      "What prevented them from suing for peace or from bringing their plot into the open was their uncertainty on two scores. First, they wanted to know the meaning of unconditional surrender and the fate we planned for Japan after defeat. Second, they tried to obtain from us assurances that the Emperor could remain on the throne after surrender." "I submit that it was the wrong decision. It was wrong on strategic grounds. And it was wrong on humanitarian grounds."
      Ellis Zacharias, Eighteen Words That Bagged Japan, Saturday Evening Post, 11/17/45, pg. 17.

      David Lawrence, the editor of what is now "U.S. News & World Report,"

      Within days of the Hiroshima bombing, wrote that Japanese surrender had appeared inevitable weeks before the bomb's use.

      John Foster Dulles former secretary of state

      Urged President Truman to forgo additional use of the new weapon, saying they opposed the bomb's indiscriminate obliteration of human beings.

      On July 13, Foreign Minister Shigenori Togo wired his ambassador in Moscow: "Unconditional surrender is the only obstacle to peace." Martin Sherwin, after an exhaustive study of the relevant historical documents, concludes: "Having broken the Japanese code before the war, American Intelligence was able to — and did — relay this message to the President, but it had no effect whatever on efforts to bring the war to conclusion

      If only Americans had not insisted on unconditional surrender — that is, if they were willing to accept one condition to the surrender, that the Emperor, a holy figure to the Japanese, remain in place — the Japanese would have agreed to stop the war.

      Why did the United States not take that small step to save both American and Japanese lives?

      Fellow atheists,
      The average American believes there is only one point of view on the dropping of the Atom bombs on Japan was the only way to stop the war and save American lives. The opinions of the above people have never been publicised to any great extent in the corporate mass media. The question should be asked. Why not?

      Regards Doug. Adam

      On Yahoo!7
      Great meals in less than 30 mins - Family Circle Sept – out now

      Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

      On Yahoo!7
      360°: Share your blog, photos, interests and what matters most to you

      Stay in the know. Pulse on the new Yahoo.com. Check it out.

      Do you Yahoo!?
      Take part in Total Girl’s Ultimate Slumber Party and help break a world record

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.