| No one doubts that the savagery of war is deplorable. If Solon were attempting a tutorial on "shared humanity", he arrogated to himself an unnecessary task. The question is whether the decision were reasonable, particularly in view of the incendiary bombing which had already gone on as part of the war effort. To judge that, one has to balance what did happen with what was anticipated by those best informed at the time. From that standpoint, the dicta of people on the sidelines are irrelevant. Furthermore, no one says that reasonable people could not have differed on the matter. The question is, was it a defensible decision according to the conditions under which it was made. Second guessing is irrelevant. All that is relevant is the conditions under which Truman and his advisors operated. I have reviewed much of the material, and as far as I can see, the decision is defensible, and probably saved more lives then were taken. Furthermore, the anticipation of massive homefront resistance made it reasonable to believe that there would be any number of civilian fatalities, and, in any case, once one uses minors and old men as conscripts, as was done in preparing for home defenses, the concept of "civilian" becomes fuzzy....... |
