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 : World Affairs Discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (2574)	12/13/2002 6:13:23 PM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3959

My fault on the post-war study. Actually, it was a study conducted before the A-Bombs were dropped, which further reinforces my case (it is in my previous link). The post-war study concluded this: <<< Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to I November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated. >>> Thus, the majority of the U.S. military leadership was vindicated in its belief that the a-bombs were unnecessary. Clearly, military strategists disagreed with ideologues because the ideologues had Russia in mind as the enemy, while the strategists had Japan in mind as the enemy. anesi.com Tom