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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (41562)	12/24/2001 10:21:42 AM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Merry Christmas JC Dithers.... JLA

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (41562)	12/24/2001 11:07:19 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I have seen that, Mr. Dithers. He is an apologist for the American bombing. As such he is putting a very selective, and, in my opinion, very misleading, biased, and unsupportable spin on the facts. He is not the author of the fact finding SBR, which clearly stated their conclusions that the war would have ended by the end of September regardless and that the Japanese leaders had publicly admitted defeat. It is well known that there was tremendous cruelty from the Japanese side. It is well known that probably never have two groups of combatants had a more intense hatred of one another. The marines hated them with every fiber of their being, and vice versa. Then there was Pearl Harbour... If you read the Supreme Court findings in the Yamashito trial, you will understanding how there was so much emotion happening at the time that many unjust actions were taken by the U.S. Government: actions intended more for revenge than for justice. They made the true points that one needed to step back from the emotion and the hate, in order to recognize that U.S. and International Principles of human rights and protection of the person needed to take precedence over revenge and emotion; because without reliance on principle and law, we have nothing to safeguard human freedom, dignity, and the right to be protected from the stronger. How more so, half a century later, that people should, with the impartiality and even-mindedness which time and distance may bring to the judgement--consider the matter unencumbered by hate or irrelevant patriotism; and, of course, it is the whole process of the incendiary bombing which is more critical than the a-bombing which continued what had been established, but with better weapons. I have not given you my opinion on this yet, although I chastised you for dismissing the rights of Y. and others to have an opinion--without denying their patriotism, and to express their and my concern for the rights and lives of children, regardless of the color of their skin. I pointed out to you that "patriotism" was not an argument that had any thing to do with the moral question of whether innocent lives are an acceptable means to the end of victory. I am glad you are finally willing to look at the issues although I certainly don't think Chuck's very biased opinion shows any thoughtfulnes of the kind that would indicate that a honest examination of facts had been made. Many people are constitutionally incapable of weighing the niceties of certain questions on the scales of justice. I do not wish to discuss this over the season, but I encourage you to try to stand back from the intense cruelty and hatred that marked that war, and consider some of the thoughtful essays that have been written by patriotic Americans and historians and philosophers from everywhere since that time. Here are some thoughtful remarks from the Supreme Court at the time. Keep in mind, that there was a limit to thoughtfulness, even for them, immersed as they were in the emotional grip of a tormented world which had been insane for several years. The point is that they were able to recognize that the Government was endangering the very basis of human democracy by placing emotion ahead of principle and law. We should not be surprised to believe that the war was ended with a great deal of horrifying injustice which happened under the stress of extreme hate and emotion. Indeed, I have read many accounts of "patriotic" pilots and marines who were sickened beyond measure by the incendiary bombings and all the cities and the innocents burn't to death. They were there, and they have their own opinions. And they certainly do not need any cowboy telling them they are unpatriotic because they recognized how much hate and revenge was adding to the final choices. Perhaps because of personal experiences, I may have quite a different perspective on this than you; but, in any case, people have a right to criticize the manner in which the war ended, and I would venture a guess that most educated people are able to criticize it--more and more so as time gives the opportunity for a more dispassionate and informed consideration. You are not so likely to find a redneck reaction, or a kneejerk absolutism amongst the more educated... caselaw.lp.findlaw.com