a different history

[ish mailian]

Terrorism in its broadest sense is the use of violence in the pursuit of
political aims. So, much as we bristle at the use of the loaded term, that
carries, especially in the U.S. post 11 September,  to describe the
bombings of Japan, it is, broadly accurate. In fact, it seems a term that
those who support the US bombings might employ because it places emphasis
on the political aims, that is, to force Japan to surrender and negotiate
an end of war. That said, it's still rather counter productive to use the
term, or  to engage in easy, up on the high horse history, to conflate the
bombings, thus diminishing them, making of the victims, and the all of the
lessons we have and continue to take from them, silent slaughtered sheep.
The facts are known and reasonable, moral people disagree about the
decision to use the weapons, and, for those who condemn or condone the
decision to use the weapons, still further disagreement exists about the
targets selected.

Two facts that should be considered when taking a position on the targets,
irrespective of one's position on the use of the bombs, is that the
decision makers wanted targets that had not been under significant
 previous bombing attacks.

It appalling, from our high horses of easy history, to reads that the
decision makers wanted to target cities that would burn, but this strategy
was employed with conventional bombs as well. The targeting of  factories,
working class neighborhoods, was the norm not the exception in WWII, a
noted exception, of course, London.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20150810/7295beee/attachment.html>