Truman’s “War Criminal” Buck Stops Here

The point needs to be made, however...

ssshannon1026 (Diary) Friday, May 1st at 5:47PM EST (link)

…that if Bush is a war criminal for water boarding a mass murderer – in order to save lives – than certainly dropping nuclear weapons on utterly defensless women and children just to make a point to their government – in order to save lives – must be far more so. Our nation cannot condemn President Bush for his actions without condeming much of the history of our own nation of which we are, in fact, most proud. And that is what the witch hunt is really all about. They are not trying to put the Bush administration on trial, they are trying to put the entire country on trial, its traditions, its culture and its history, before a world court to condem us all for what we are and have always been.

Not to make a point but to stop agression.

Ron Robinson (Diary) Friday, May 1st at 6:15PM EST (link)

We bombed Japan not to make a point, but to force them to accept surrender as their only viable option. Surrender stopped their march across the Pacific and their atrocities such as the Rape of Nanking.

________________________________________
Ron Robinson
Chair, AD 49 Republican Central Committee
California Republican Central Committee
PROCINCT Author/ Founder
The Precinct Project
Unified Patriots – How-To: Activists Taking Action!

Thats fine and all

ssshannon1026 (Diary) Friday, May 1st at 7:31PM EST (link)

But the point remains that we dropped nuclear weapons on targets that had virtual no strategic or military significance. The only actual damage to Japan was the deaths of very large numbers of women and children. So why would doing that force them to surrender? The point is that we should not let John Steward and those like him off the hook. If he claims that pouring some water on the face of a mass murdered makes President Bush a war criminal, than he must conclude that Truman was a war criminal, and he should be forced to stand by that statement. Everyone who condemns Bush should be forced to publically acknowledge that they also condemn most of American history and many of its greates heros for doing things that were, in fact, far worse from any sane definition of morality. Doing that throws the left immediatly from an offensive to a defensive political position. Do we have the right to defend ourselves with extreme measures or do we not?

you missed the point...

Ron Robinson (Diary) Friday, May 1st at 8:26PM EST (link)

We could argue all day about whether is was justifiable to drop the bomb or not, although I think the 600,00 casualties this produced was preferable to the 1 million on each side (total of 2 million) that would have been produced by an invasion across the beaches.

Also note that Japan’s leaders always had the option to surrender earlier than they actually did. Their arming civilians and children suggested that they were determined to fight to the bitter end. When a society ‘makes combatants’ out of those who normally are not, it’s that society, not its attackers, who bears the moral responsibility for what it does,

In any event, you missed my point.

By making the decision he did, Truman guaranteed that not another pilot would bear the moral burden of firebombing Tokyo and not a single soldier would have to shoot a civilian or child. Thus the moral buck really did stop with Truman.

________________________________________
Ron Robinson
Chair, AD 49 Republican Central Committee
California Republican Central Committee
PROCINCT Author/ Founder
The Precinct Project
Unified Patriots – How-To: Activists Taking Action!

I'm not argueing about

ssshannon1026 (Diary) Friday, May 1st at 9:08PM EST (link)

whether it was justified. I wish they had nuclear bombs for every city in Japan with a few left over for Russia. I think it was perfectly justified. But, then, I also believe water boarding a terrorist was justified.

No, they are really putting the Bush administration on trial, or attempting to.

janis (Diary) Friday, May 1st at 7:53PM EST (link)

Their hatred of the man and everything he stands for is so overwhelming that they just can’t seem to stop themselves. As for the rest of the country, its culture and its history, they will continue to assail that as a sideline while they pander to our enemies and surrender our sovereignty to the UN.

As to your point below about why we dropped the atomic bombs where we did in Japan, it was done to make the point to Japan that we had a weapon that could kill huge numbers of them. Japan was prepared to have the United States mount a land invasion and the emperor was perfectly content to have every single citizen on the front lines as needed, even if it cost them a million KIA. We dropped the bombs to stop the prospect of even more slaughter.

Which is precisely why

ssshannon1026 (Diary) Friday, May 1st at 8:23PM EST (link)

we water boarded terrorists – to save lives. There is no rational moral distinction to be made between the two acts. There may be vague legal distinctions, but not moral ones.

And as for Bush, there is no way that putting him on trial will not become putting the entire coutny on trial, for the very reasons of this discussion. If we punish Bush, but leave Truman, or FDR, or Lincoln as national heros, we are a nation of hypocrits. Any such trial will be impossible for them to control. It will become about all of it, and they will have to stand by that, or apologize to Bush along with Truman, et al.

Zackly.

Ron Robinson (Diary) Friday, May 1st at 8:27PM EST (link)

Exactly. We are guaranteeing moral anarchy if we proceed in that fashion.

________________________________________
Ron Robinson
Chair, AD 49 Republican Central Committee
California Republican Central Committee
PROCINCT Author/ Founder
The Precinct Project
Unified Patriots – How-To: Activists Taking Action!

But it is not us doing the proceeding

ssshannon1026 (Diary) Friday, May 1st at 9:14PM EST (link)

It is the democrats. And we should hold them to the moral hypocricy of their arguments. To condemn Bush is to condemn our entire national history. They should not be allowed to have it both ways. If John Stewart can be made to apologize for what he said about Truman, why are we not demanding that he also apologize for what he and others have said about Bush? What is the moral difference?

That's why war should have no rules.

Common_Cents (Diary) Friday, May 1st at 9:34PM EST (link)

It sounds barbaric but it can save lives.

1. It is a bigger deterrent rather than fighting a “civil” war with rules that only serves to prolong war. A war with no rules forces you to truly exhaust all options. Not to mention many of our future enemies won’t adhere to any rules anyway.

2 If all else fails in avoiding war, you can go all in and make it quick. Any politically correct stuff only serves to prolong war and killing on both sides.

Obama=Golfer in Chief, Leading from, ~~behind~~, the Back Nine.
Leaders don’t create movements. Movements create leaders. Get involved. Your future depends on it.
Govt “invests” YOUR tax money for POLITICAL return rather than economic return.

I won't carry this too far, but

Flagstaff (Diary) Saturday, May 2nd at 5:31PM EST (link)

logically, the case can be made that killing anybody who could reproduce later saves hundreds, thousands, millions of lives. Their children will never be born, and that’s the only way they can be saved from dying.

The bombs of Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved lives more immediately, because they ended the war quickly, which is the best way to end one. But one could also argue that if Truman was a war criminal for dropping the first bomb, the Emperor war a criminal when he waited for the second bomb to be dropped before he surrendered. That decision was just as responsible as Truman’s was for the second bomb.

All this is to suggest that you may be right, and that the concept of a war crime is imprecisely defined. (Now a lawyer will contradict me. Go ahead. Make my day.)

“The press is so powerful in its image-making role that it can make a criminal look like he’s the victim and make the victim look like he’s the criminal. If you aren’t careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.”– Malcolm X, Audubon Ballroom, December 13, 1964

Concur.

Ron Robinson (Diary) Saturday, May 2nd at 6:11PM EST (link)

THe Emporer and the staffs of the Navy and Army were just as guilty because they should have surrendered when they were militarily defeated which happened at Miday and was confirmed at Leyte Gulf.

But instead, they planned a civilian struggle on the beaches because of their ‘honor’ and their inability to countenance defeat or surrender.

________________________________________
Ron Robinson
Chair, AD 49 Republican Central Committee
California Republican Central Committee
PROCINCT Author/ Founder
The Precinct Project
Unified Patriots – How-To: Activists Taking Action!

Precisely the point

ssshannon1026 (Diary) Saturday, May 2nd at 8:17AM EST (link)

History proves that the only way to defeat an enemy is to convince him that you are ready, willing and able to be meaner than he is. In all of human history no enemy has ever been ‘niced’ to death. Some will point to Gandhi and King as examples of that, but that were merely holdling an existing civilization to its own stated values. You cannot do that with an enemy which has no such values. The reason Japan refused to surrender is because they believed that we were constrained by our own stated values. Hiroshima and Nagasaki convinced them otherwise. The wanton slaughter of hundreds of thousands of defenseless women and children was a message – ‘There are no limits. Surrender or die’ Likewise, the terrorists of today believe there are limits beyond which we will not go in order to defeat them. As long as they are allowed to believe that, they will continue to attack.

Liberals would cringe at that,

Flagstaff (Diary) Sunday, May 3rd at 2:55PM EST (link)

but it’s true. In a real war, the party most committed to winning eventually wins or is annihilated by sheer force of superior power (but maybe that’s the same thing–you have to be committed to winning to use all of your power).

The final strategy is to convince your opponent that for them to continue to strive for victory guarantees their defeat without survival. That only happens if you convince them their cause isn’t worth it, or that you are willing to kill them all if necessary.

“The press is so powerful in its image-making role that it can make a criminal look like he’s the victim and make the victim look like he’s the criminal. If you aren’t careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.”– Malcolm X, Audubon Ballroom, December 13, 1964

That is indeed moral courage....nt

JadedByPolitics (Diary) Sunday, May 3rd at 3:00PM EST (link)

…

Unified Patriots – How-To:
Activists Taking Action