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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Terry Swift who wrote (6471)	1/22/1998 3:39:00 AM
From: marcos	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116756

I don't think this thread spends near enough time examining in minute detail the ethics of the theft of Tejas, Arizona, and Alta California from a M‚xico weakened by her first steps in independence from Spain. Perhaps the title puts people off. Something about gold, I think. Pt moving 165.247.180.114 Btw, I heard the 250,000 casualty figure was expected in the establishment of beachheads on Honshu only.

To: Terry Swift who wrote (6471)	1/22/1998 10:01:00 AM
From: IngotWeTrust	Respond to of 116756

Forgot t'tell hapless victim U'r practicing Christian, TS(g). DO believe Ur account=closer t'what happened than Richnorths, tho'...

To: Terry Swift who wrote (6471)	1/22/1998 11:43:00 AM
From: Rob	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116756

Terry, Ask yourself WHY the Allies had to invade Japan to end the war. From a military point of view, it wasn't necessary. Japan is an island nation with virtually no natural resources, and very dependent on maintaining transportation links outside the country (eg Shipping). At that point in the war, they were beaten. No air force, no means of waging any real offensive. They had fallen back to their island. Allied forces were as close as Okinawa. Why did the allies have to invade to end the war? When a nation is arming its women and children to defend against attack, that is a clear sign of a defeated nation eg germany in 1945 was using 13-15 year olds in their infantry units. The Allies had tremendous naval and air power. All they would have had to have done was to impose a naval blockade around the island and kill any Japanese shipping, and with their air power, destroy all industrial capacity and infrastructure. In a period of 6 months to a year they would have likely achieved Japanese surrender with very very light allied casualties and very light Japanese CIVILIAN casualties. The answer to the original question is that there was NO NEED for a land invasion of Japan. That is simply the line the Spin Doctors have fed history in order to justify the atomic bombings. Of course, they could never admit the real reasons. As for Pearl Harbour, it was a brilliantly executed military attack on MILITARY TARGETS. It incorporated deception and surprise, key principles in a military operation. If the US had executed a similar attack, you would be heralding it as a textbook example of how to conduct such an operation. The point is that Pearl Harbour targeted military targets, while Truman targeted civilian cities. As for calling Richnorth "a blithering idiot", do you really think that's necessary? Is that how you deal with someone who has a different opinion than you?

To: Terry Swift who wrote (6471)	2/4/1998 2:53:00 AM
From: Richnorth	Read Replies (8) \| Respond to of 116756

OFF TOPIC To all ye folks (Alex, Ben Spofford, Bill Grant, Gary H, Mark Hutnick, Surething and Terry Swift) and others who directly or indirectly responded to my post #6410, please accept my thanks and also my apologies for not having been able to reply to each of you individually. You see, I was away on holiday ever since 21st January and I did not get back until a few hours ago. And man o' man, did my post ever stir up a little controversy!!! And as if I was cursed and damned by not a few, I have had a couple of harrowing experiences and close calls while I was driving through mountainous passes, highways and bye ways. At one point, my truck spun out of control down a steep incline, banged against snow embankments and rebounded from them This happened no less than half as dozen times until I was at the bottom of the mountain. Fortunately for me, no other vehicles were coming my way, or going away from me, at that time. My truck went dead, and despite my best efforts, my (fuel-injection) truck would not start up until I reset the computer of the engine by disconnecting the negative terminal of the battery and then reconnecting it about five minutes later. Upon realizing that this might have been a fluke, I emptied a can of fuel-injector cleaner fluid and a can of gas-line antifreeze, the next day, into the gas tank. After that, my truck performed beautifully every time, like when it was new!!! Now that much water has passed under the bridge, I no longer wish to continue the WWII discussion at length. However, to Terry Swift, I wish to return your compliment by calling him a half-baked nincompoop! He seems to exemplify one of those characters that have eyes but won't see. I have clearly indicated in my posts that Ted Roosevelt 'knew' of the impending Japanese attack but did nothing to turn it into a fiasco because he wanted an excuse to rally the full support of the American people in the war against Japan. Also, I have pointed out that the Americans had broken the 'secret' code of the Japanese forces and were so highly successful in anticipating and thwarting and defeating enemy action that Japanese surrender was inevitable. I believe the atom bombs were dropped because 1. Harry Truman (a Southerner and a red-neck) wanted more-than-a-pound-of-flesh revenge; the "Japs" were considered subhuman and use of the A-bombs on them was rationalized to be justified; 2. the American politicians wanted an "ACE" card to play with Russia; 3. the military wanted to gauge the bombs' efficacy as weapons of mass destruction; 4. the scientists were keen to see whether the second bomb (a plutonium bomb) dropped on Nagasaki would work and be as effective as the uranium bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Terry,you seem to think that, thanks to the A-bombs, you were born! What cock-eyed logic! If you were not born a 'Swift', you might still have come into existence by some other name. Or, as some self-styled mystics might tell you, you could have reincarnated as a dog. And that won't be so bad when it is realized that many Americans treat their pets better than they treat their own children and, besides, every dog has its day!!! To be sure, you won't miss much, eh? And you will have lots of opportunity to display your affection and loyalty!!! and sense of duty!!!