a different history

[Keith Davis]

As usual, your skillful timing and superb research, and a deft touch, are on display....excellent. 


Www.innergroovemusic.com

> On Aug 9, 2015, at 12:25 AM, Dave Monroe <against.the.dave at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> http://www.npr.org/2015/08/06/429433621/why-did-the-u-s-choose-hiroshima
> 
>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:43 PM, rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>> easy for you all to say that 60 yrs in the future. so you call it terrorism,
>> good for you guys. you've shown your moral worth. but the fact remains that
>> with the hell of Iwo Jima and Okinawa fresh in the minds of most well if
>> youve got something that will end it well youre gonna use that rightly or
>> wrongly not to mention showing the Russians something, too. now, what was
>> decided is always debatable but getting on your high horse from afar is
>> easy. history isn't.
>> 
>> rich
>> 
>>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 8:32 PM, John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hiroshima and Nagasaki were mostly chosen as targets due to the high
>>> numbers of civilian casualties that would result and how this would
>>> affect morale. It was a show of force. It's pretty much on the record
>>> that any military gain would just be a by-product. I think a similar
>>> move today (eg using biological weapons on a civilian population)
>>> would be a war crime, although we're in a totally different world and
>>> I'm not retroactively applying that label to the atomic bombings. But
>>> the intention to kill a huge number of civilians in order to instil
>>> fear is pretty much my textbook definition of terrorism.
>>> 
>>> I've said on the list before that Hiroshima is a beeeeeautiful city
>>> today and I highly recommend visiting, which no sitting US president
>>> has done (still!). I might pass through Nagasaki later in the month,
>>> too, but that's to visit the new hotel staffed by robots:
>>> 
>>> http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/16/japans-robot-hotel-a-dinosaur-at-reception-a-machine-for-room-service
>>> 
>>>> On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I have been practically unable to read anything at all about the events.
>>>> Not Hiroshima.
>>>> Learning by existing what I have learned--and even seen about it--I,
>>>> too, still am viscerally against it and must be forever now.
>>>> But, I usually reserve the word terrorism for acts outside of declared
>>>> war acts. The U.S. had declared war on Japan.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 8, 2015, at 6:22 PM, John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> It's a neat trick how 'terrorism' becomes 'demonstration of dominance'
>>>>> when the good guys push the button.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 7:45 AM, Dave Monroe
>>>>>> <against.the.dave at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Death is Lighter than a Feather
>>>>>> Westheimer, David
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://untpress.unt.edu/catalog/3060
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Monte Davis <montedavis49 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Wellerstein's an excellent historian of the nuclear weapons complex
>>>>>>> -- see
>>>>>>> his blog at http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> There's no knowing how long Japan might have withstood a blockade
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> Manchuria gone (and undoubtedly further Soviet advances or threats
>>>>>>> into
>>>>>>> northern China), but that alternative too would have been far from
>>>>>>> bloodless: see German health and mortality late in WWI, Leningrad and
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> 1944-45 "hunger winter" in the  Netherlands in WWII. Japanese
>>>>>>> nutrition was
>>>>>>> already hurting badly by mid-1945; unless and until the Emperor
>>>>>>> endorsed
>>>>>>> surrender, I can imagine hundreds of thousands of additional civilian
>>>>>>> deaths
>>>>>>> from malnutrition and disease.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> That said, my 1960 reaction to reading 'Hiroshima' remains the same:
>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>> all the "strategic" bombing of cities from 1939 on, it was terrorism
>>>>>>> and it
>>>>>>> was wrong in any context -- as was the rationale for 70 years of
>>>>>>> nuclear
>>>>>>> weapons development and deployment.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> https://ideas.aeon.co/viewpoints/alex-wellerstein-on-what-options-were-there-for-the-united-states-regarding-the-atomic-bomb-in-1945
>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>>> -
>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
> -
> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l