On Monday, December 29, 2014 7:15:59 AM UTC, Brent wrote: > > On 12/28/2014 9:47 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > The estimates were in the hundreds of thousands - and that's among U.S. >> servicemen. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall they >> obviously would have also killed a lot of Japanese defenders. >> > > The estimates were continually revised upwards, from the initial > estimate of 30,000 (perhaps in an effort to retroactively justify the > bomb's use). > > > Estimates of hundreds of thousands were at the time. Perhaps they have > been continually revised downwards to attribute guilt. > > > >> >> Japanese casualties from Nagasaki and Hiroshima totaled about 200,000. >> Suppose U.S. casualties in an invasion had been only 10,000 and Japanese >> casualties only 20,000; do you think Truman should have sacrificed 10,000 >> of his own citizenry to save 180,000 of the enemy? I can assure you that >> the U.S. electorate would not have agreed with such a calculation. >> >> > So how high do you think the ratio of dead foreign civilians to dead > domestic soldiers can get before its no longer politically acceptable? > 100:1, 1000:1, 10000:1? At some point it becomes de facto genocide. > > > Ask yourself. If you were President what ratio would you countenance? > Remember, you're balancing the lives of your constituents who elected you > to lead in their interests, against the lives of an enemy who has already > killed 100,000 U.S. troops and between 10 and 20 million in China, Burma, > Indochina,... > > Brent >
What is most striking to me about this conversation, is that bar one, ever single contribution posted to the thread, basically draws on WWII allied propaganda ENTIRELY for the substance of what they say, the opposition relative to others, and so on. The point here isn't whether and how much was omitted, or included for misdirective effect. If it was accurate sufficiently to depend on 70 years later, that on its own would be unprecedented ....unique in history. I mean. We're talking here ab out what was broadcast for public consumption, while the war was still in play. Just that it's unchanged for getting on a century is unprecedented. It's also just dang unscholarly that you pelple use wartime propaganda like this. not one of you, all of you....without pre-arrangement. Particularly when major studies have taken plae, drawing on White House records and other soures. Primary sources. That have completely changed the picture. I don't think ay of you have authentic scientific values. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
