Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul Kern who wrote (3321)	10/7/2001 9:14:04 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

It seems that the world is now divided into the bad terrorists who attack the U.S. and the good terrorists, sponsored by Syria and Iran that attack Israel. No? As far as our State Department is concerned, yes.

To: Paul Kern who wrote (3321)	10/8/2001 2:35:26 PM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

You forgot the third category of terrorists - the U.S.A.. Bin Laden has repeatedly referred to the American terrorist attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in which America killed 200,000 Japanese civilians while the country was in the process of surrender, for the purpose intimidating the Soviet Union. Some background: members.aol.com <<< Thus, it was with full knowledge that Japan was frantically trying to end the war, that President Truman and his hardline secretary of state, James Byrnes, included the term "unconditional surrender" in the July 26 Potsdam Declaration. This "final warning" and expression of surrender terms to Japan was in any case a charade. The day before it was issued, Harry Truman had approved the order to release a 15 kiloton atomic bomb over the city of Hiroshima. >>> <<< Finally, we have Gen. Dwight Eisenhower's account of a conversation with Stimson in which he told the secretary of war that: "Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary. ... I thought 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. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of "face". The secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude, almost angrily refuting the reasons I gave for my quick conclusions. >>> <<< Winston Churchill, who had known about the weapon before Truman, applauded and understood its use: "Here then was a speedy end to the Second World War," he said about the bomb, and added, thinking of Russian advances into Europe, "and perhaps to much else besides. ... We now had something in our hands which would redress the balance with the Russians." >>> <<< After the Enola Gay released its cargo on Hiroshima, common sense -- common decency wouldn't apply here -- would have dictated a pause long enough to allow Japanese officials to travel to the city, confirm the extent of the destruction, and respond before the U.S. dropped a second bomb. At 11 o'clock in the morning of August 9, Prime Minister Kintaro Suzuki addressed the Japanese Cabinet: "Under the present circumstances I have concluded that our only alternative is to accept the Potsdam Proclamation and terminate the war." Moments later, the second bomb fell on Nagasaki. Some hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians died in the two attacks; many more suffered terrible injury and permanent genetic damage. >>>