Even after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Tojo was determined to keep on fighting:

http://news.yahoo.com/story//ap/20080812/ap_on_re_as/j apan_tojo_s_diary

That clearly indicates the bombing was barely enough to prevent the inevitable bloodbath that an invasion of the Japanese homeland would have entailed.  To quote Tojo:

“We now have to see our country surrender to the enemy without demonstrating our power up to 120 percent,” Tojo wrote on Aug. 13, 1945, just two days before Japan gave up. “We are now on a course for a humiliating peace, or rather a humiliating surrender.”

It is only fortunate that cooler heads prevailed, mainly the Emperor, and they surrendered.  To condemn necessary implements of war simply because they kill civilians as “terrorism” is completely irrational.  Would it be better if, as can be technically accomplished now, only “surgical” bombing is performed, in order to specifically target known military or paramilitary assets and minimize civilian casualties?  Sure.  But during the ending phase of the War in the Pacific, that wasn’t even possible technologically.  Even if it were, does anyone realistically think that the Japanese, whose leader, Prime Minister Tojo, could defy even the atomic onslaught, would be impressed by such niceties?  ナンセンス!

108354 by tentaculata on 10/19 at 3:52 pm: “...This is a brave, powerful, and heartbreaking article.  Robert Scheer courageously names the atomic bomb for what it is - the ultimate terrorist weapon....”

Thanks for that, TC. My last two posts were deleted some time back and have amazingly resurfaced after Scheer’s finally confronting his “technical” error. By the way, he is also a little out of date with the “A-bomb” which was replaced by the H-bomb in 1950. We now have Bush threatening the entire human race and the future of the planet with these creations of the then “Dr. Strangelove”, Edward Teller, as did madman USAF general Curtis Le May.

This is a brave, powerful, and heartbreaking article.  Robert Scheer courageously names the atomic bomb for what it is - the ultimate terrorist weapon.  The documentary mentioned by Scheer, White Light/Black Rain, includes a clip from a propaganda film made for the US Army about the Japanese.  It tells the Americans that the Japanese adhere to a primitive moral code, are fanatics who believe they will ascend straight to heaven to live with the gods when they die, and while they have modern technology, their thinking is 2000 years out of date.  It sounds curiously similar to what is being said about Muslims today.

GEORGE BERNARD SHAW
“I never thought much of the courage of a lion tamer. Inside the cage he is at least safe from (the American) people.”

#95260 by Blueboy1938 on 8/15 at 5:03 pm: “...As for excusing the Japanese for Pearl Harbor because they were “provoked,” that is no more supportable than excusing the terrorists because they perceive the U. S. to have caused all the problems in the world...”

Oops, I seem to have inadvertently posted your paragraph as being mine at the end of the first part of my reply, Blueboy1938, although I went on to quote it in the second part. Sorry about any confusion......  (#95324 by Douglas Chalmers on 8/15 at 10:44 pm)

By the way, you were quite wrong about “...the defense of the home islands (of Japan) would be the same as what Churchill planned for Hitler in Britain...”, too. Britain would have been a relative walkover for the Germans then - the Brits hardly even had anything to fight with.  Their biggest mistake of the war was not to follow through - and their subsequent major mistake was to invade Russia.

Its all part of the fantasy (a) of what people wanted to believe, and (b) what they are told or led to believe. Most probably the same for the Japanese who were a defeated nation by then and the civilian population were as sick of their government as Americans are of their Bush-Cheney gang now. Also, both are island nations and not at all like the European experience in WW2.

#Quote Blueboy1938: “...Would it have been better if nuclear devices were never used?  Certainly.  As Carl Sagan pointed out, any extraterrestrial civilization that we might ultimately receive communications from would have had to resolve the “nuclear problem” and survive beyond incinerating their whole planet....” ---------------------->

Obviously, humans don’t count for very much in the greater scheme of things and have failed over and over again to advance significantly either psychologically or spiritually on this Earth. Material progress counts for naught when all we still are is as primitive within ourselves as we once were when we slept in caves.

That is no recipe for survival once the clubs and spears are exchanged for nuclear weapons. We have had plenty of time to learn yet have not done so. One would have to ask why we have chose to continually repeat our mistakes? Today is one last chance......

Even the lessons of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are now again being ignored. “Bomb, bomb .......bomb Iran” is not a happy or clever tune and it is the criminally insane who are singing it. Doing to others what you think couldn’t possibly happen to yourself is simply stupid. Same with Pakistan!

But people in the USA are following a leader who advocates exactly that kind of thing despite the consequences. It is really a very primitive country whose people think that they are superior to everybody else and have some imagined right to rule the world.

“Apocalypse Now” is not just a movie. It is what happens during and after a nuclear war. So, too, Armageddon won’t necessarily be fought on “the plains of Meggido” but the plains of the Punjab or the hills and valleys of Iran. Only the contaminating effects will quickly become global. Even the lessons of Windscale (Sellarfield) and Chernobyl seem to have been forgotten!

Again, the earthquake in Japan recently and the closure of the world’s largest nuclear power plant was one last chance. According to the news reports, 24 million people in and around Tokyo now owe their lives to the simple fact that the epicentre of the earthquake was a mere few kilometers further away. Its time to wake up to the implications - or it really will be too late!

To continue/----->>>
#Quote Blueboy1938: “...As for excusing the Japanese for Pearl Harbor because they were “provoked,” that is no more supportable than excusing the terrorists because they perceive the U. S. to have caused all the problems in the world, let alone in the Middle East, and because their reprehensible acts against civilians are not quite as “bad” as Hiroshima/Nagasaki ....why don’t we just say that Spain caused Pearl Harbor by the conquest of the Philippines in 1565-71...” ------------>

Of course, starting their half of a world war was not excusable but, if you had lived in Japan 50 years earlier, you would most probably have felt the same towards the Americans and Europeans as people in the USA felt towards certain “unknown combatants” on 9th September, 2001. Neither did it excuse Japan’s subsequent “reprehensible acts” especially in China and Mongolia but how is that any different from what the US has been doing since 1991 in Iraq and surrounding areas?

A million now dead in Iraq and another four million people displaced??? Is that not another atrocity? Dispute the figures if you wish but that includes the deaths by starvation and disease which were a direct result of those blockades and embargos when they were deemed “convenient” by the USA. What excuse is there, really? Is this then not the depredations of the miserable US version of Japan’s “greater co-prosperity sphere” imperialist ambitions?

#Quote Blueboy1938: “...the “Doomsday Clock” fell back to “17 minutes to midnight” based on the end of the Cold War and subsequent major nuclear arms reductions by the U. S. and the reestablished Russia.  However, it’s back to “5 minutes to midnight” based on Korean and Iranian nuclear arms ambitions and attainments...”

Ahh, the Koreans had their country broken in two by the US-led military invasion in 1950. They were not even combatants in any conflict until then (lets not go into the minor details). They became the victims of the US desire to “restrain” neighboring Russia and China even though they both had legitimate involvement with Korea along common borders.

The USA was an outright invader then and all of its so-called wars since have been essentially the same.  Again, if you were living in N.Korea since the mid-1950’s, you would have been alarmed at the continued presence of US military forces and troop build-up in S.Korea. Its no wonder that they worked towards developing a nuclear weapon. They were literally pushed into it!

That is not comparable with Iran and the nuclear industry there is no different from any nuclear power plant anywhere else in the world. What is more, the Busheher plant is actually being built by the Russians. It is designed to produce electricity. That is very different from the Demona reactor in the Negev in Israel which was designed from the outset to produce fissile material for nuclear weapons! http://peace4palestine-housewife4palestine.blogspot.co m/2006/04/israels-silent-nuclear-attack-revealed.html

If you want a nuclear war, allow the USA or Israel to bomb Iran (a pre-emptive nuclear strike!) and see what happens. Russia will bomb (nuke) Israel in retaliation. Would the Christian Zionists in Texas then demand that Russia be ‘nuked’ as they did when they screamed for Iran to be ‘nuked’ before during the 1970’s oil crisis merely becuase of the price of oil? Wasn’t that another “inconvenience” caused by the US administration, then?

#95260 by Blueboy1938 on 8/15 at 5:03 pm: “...the Japanese were ...liberating the Philippines and ...Hawaii from the imperialist U. S. ...they still precipitated the war in the Pacific with their attack on Pearl Harbor...”

Oh, yes, you are gettting a little closer to Truth with your ‘fine-cut’ version, Blueboy1938, but do’t go too fast, will you - you could still choke, ha ha. Thank you though, for your interest in continuing.

#Quote Blueboy1938: “...The island capture strategy ...to acquire bomber bases closer to the Japanese Islands ...to accommodate the more limited range of the time.  It was even more important to bring fighter cover into effective range....” ------>

Never mind what the Japanese thought, the fact was that the US was in a hurry and the military command was willing to sacrifice as many US soldiers’ lives as it took to get control. The reason was, as you perceive, the main mission to bomb Japan - whether that was still necessary or not. After the fire-bombing of Tokyo, though, the two nuclear bombs were really excessive as well as unnecessary!

#Quote Blueboy1938: “...the decision was made to capture Iwo Jima in what became one of the costliest encounters of the war. ....The heavy losses on Iwo Jima ....an underestimation of the Japanese force strength ....“Simply blockading” islands such as Iwo Jima ...tied up scarce Naval forces. .....blockades would have been extremely counterproductive, strategically as well as tactically....” ----->

The error on the part of the US command was that they were in a hurry (for political reasons - mainly domestic) as well as supposedly underestimating the Japanese occupation or resisitance. Blockading would have been far less costly in terms of lives on both sides but you still somehow seem to see the “inconvenience” or “cost” to the US military as some kind of excuse or imperative. That’s nonsense - but it is typical of such situations throughout military history especially whenever an empire is involved (I mean the US imperialistic empire!).

#Quote Blueboy1938: “...an intent to awe China and the Soviet Union as well as the Japanese.  .....better to have abstained from the use of nuclear weapons?  Humanitarily, yes, of course.  Would China and the Soviet Union have forsworn their entry into the nuclear arms race if we had? ......Either way, the world would have looked pretty much the same after the war..."------->

The key here is that there was already a “nuclear arms race “ and that was the culmination since the 1930’s in Germany and the discovery of the atomic secrets in physics of uranium, etc etc. The Nazis were onto it immediately and the Russians and the US/Allies both sought to grab whoever and whatever they could in 1944 when they carved up the defeated Germany. That was ther real and only reason for the race to Berlin!

It played out in the Pacific and the USA came out ahead. Sunsequently, the race went on as the US had captured Von Braun and other German rocket scientists who were coerced into working for the Americans in the US. If that had not happened, the US would have lost the next and major phase of the nuclear arms race. They were only temporarily ahead in Korea - but not doing anybody any favors.

I’m sorry, but the world did turn out to be a very different place then and that was the beginning of the cold war! The fateful war in Vietnam was a direct result of cold war fears and especially the presumed “domino effect” of disgruntled smaller nations coming under the successive influence of an alternative empire. US military hegemony then reigned supreme - but only just.

As for excusing the Japanese for Pearl Harbor because they were “provoked,” that is no more supportable than excusing the terrorists because they perceive the U. S. to have caused all the problems in the world, let alone in the Middle East, and because their reprehensible acts against civilians are not quite as “bad” as Hiroshima/Nagasaki.

Ah, yes, the Japanese were actually liberating the Philippines and the former independent kingdom of Hawaii from the imperialist U. S.  However, they still precipitated the war in the Pacific with their attack on Pearl Harbor.

Since my monoparagraphic style has been criticized, I’ll dice this entry finer.

The island capture strategy was necessary in order to acquire bomber bases closer to the Japanese Islands in order to accommodate the more limited range of the time.  It was even more important to bring fighter cover into effective range.

As successive island groups fell, the war production facilities of Japan came under increasing attack.  Fighters based on Iwo Jima interfered with bombing missions and it was considered by both the Japanese and Allied high commands to be a strategically important asset.  Consequently, the decision was made to capture Iwo Jima in what became one of the costliest encounters of the war.

“Simply blockading” islands such as Iwo Jima would have tied up scarce Naval forces.  Combatting an island nation requires naval forces as well as air.  Tying these up in blockades would have been extremely counterproductive, strategically as well as tactically.

The heavy losses on Iwo Jima were due in part from an underestimation of the Japanese force strength on the island.  That kind of mistake can be laid at the feet of U. S. and Allied command, but not the overall island hopping strategy.  Blockade and bypass was not a viable tactic, as it would have limited air strike effectiveness and tied up resources.

Successive Japanese defeats in other areas resulted from curtailment of armament by the Allied air offensive, as well as manpower attrition and unsustainable lines of supply.  Basing air resources in an increasingly tighter radius of both mainland and island sites was the main reason the assault on the Japanese armament and supply industry succeeded.

Yes, there was an intent to awe China and the Soviet Union as well as the Japanese.  Would it have been better to have abstained from the use of nuclear weapons?  Humanitarily, yes, of course.  Would China and the Soviet Union have forsworn their entry into the nuclear arms race if we had?  No, of course not.  Either way, the world would have looked pretty much the same after the war.

As for excusing the Japanese for Pearl Harbor because they were “provoked,” that is no more supportable than excusing the terrorists because they perceive the U. S. to have caused all the problems in the world, let alone in the Middle East, and because their reprehensible acts against civilians are not quite as “bad” as Hiroshima/Nagasaki.

Assuming that Nagasaki would not have been bombed had the Emperor and his government capitulated after Hiroshima, that government bears full responsibility for Nagasaki.  To the extent that government gave every indication that the defense of the home islands would be the same as what Churchill planned for Hitler in Britain, it also bears responsibility for Hiroshima.

Would it have been better if nuclear devices were never used?  Certainly.  As Carl Sagan pointed out, any extraterrestrial civilization that we might ultimately receive communications from would have had to resolve the “nuclear problem” and survive beyond incinerating their whole planet.

In 1991, the “Doomsday Clock” fell back to “17 minutes to midnight” based on the end of the Cold War and subsequent major nuclear arms reductions by the U. S. and the reestablished Russia.  However, it’s back to “5 minutes to midnight” based on Korean and Iranian nuclear arms ambitions and attainments.

Oh, by the way, why don’t we just say that Spain caused Pearl Harbor by the conquest of the Philippines in 1565-71?

Not unexpectedly, after a while, reader comments range widely from the topic of the article that birthed them.  To return momentarily to Sheer’s expose of Truman’s horrifying act of terrorism in World War II, we should also remember that the current Bush gulag at Guantanamo was presaged by internment camps for American citizens of Japanese extraction during that same war, a small detail that inexplicably escaped the notice of the authors of my American history textbooks in both high school and university.  For those who are willing to examine this particular horror from the bowels of U.S. history, may I recommend a short but powerful story entitled “Farewell to Manzanar” by Jeanne Wakatsuki Houston?  It is truly worth a few hours of one’s lifespan to read.

#94770 by Outraged on 8/14 at 1:19 am
(94 comments total)

Re: #94126 by Elder Earl on 8/11 at 8:15 pm
#94152 by Elder Earl on 8/11 at 9:58 pm
#94160 by Elder Earl on 8/11 at 10:28 pm

Earl,

No matter how much we would like something to be true the facts speak for themselves.

You are not arguing facts, Earl. You are arguing rhetoric against facts. Rhetoric intertwined with facts is still rhetoric.  It’s fine to have an opinion but realize that an opinion is just that, AN OPINION.  In other words Earl, “Gone With the Wind” is a fictional book.  There are actual HISTORICAL FACTS in the book, but the book is FICTION.
_____________________________________________________

The fact obtained by members in this menagerie are written by men whose reference to fact is obscured by their unwillingness in facing phantasmal idealism.

In other words they just plan do not see life correctly but establish a new form of idealism.

#94768 by Blueboy1938 on 8/14 at 12:54 am: “...Japan started the war in the Pacific and attacked the United States at Pearl Harbor.  It continued to prosecute the war in the face of declining resources of men and materiel, intensifying its hostilities as combat reached successively closer to the “home islands.” There was every reason to assume that the defense of the home islands would be intractable and costly to allied forces....”

Wow, what a long paragraph, Blueboy1938. Oh, I see that you are an apologist for using anti-terrorsim as an excuse for any level of nuclear atrocities against anyone anywhere either in the past or in the future. Sad to see how you have had to work yourself up into an emotional state to justify any of that. You really just are a liar!

The “war in the Pacific” actually started in 1898 when the USA siezed the Philippines from the Spanish and used it as a naval base to threaten China and Japan. Pearl Harbor was only a consequence - whether you like to believe it or not. Its written in the history books of other countries in the Pacific, if not in US history books.

Japan was eventually going through the inevitable stages of defeat in 1945 and its forces outside of Japan were surrendering country by country, never mind a few insignificant islands which the stupid US generals squandered the lives of 1,000’s of US soldiers upon instead of simply blockading them. So unnecessary - except for the egotistical arrogance of bloody-minded US military supremacists!

The final “defense of the home islands” was thus not a significant issue and, in fact, the Japanese were willing to negotiate a surrender already. Instead, the nuclear murder-weapons were dropped - the US would have dropped a third if it could - and 100,000’s suffered. The real reason was solely as a warning to China and to Russia. You are a nuclear holocaust denier, Blueboy - nothing more.

Re: #94126 by Elder Earl on 8/11 at 8:15 pm
#94152 by Elder Earl on 8/11 at 9:58 pm
#94160 by Elder Earl on 8/11 at 10:28 pm

Earl,

No matter how much we would like something to be true the facts speak for themselves.

You are not arguing facts, Earl. You are arguing rhetoric against facts. Rhetoric intertwined with facts is still rhetoric.  It’s fine to have an opinion but realize that an opinion is just that, AN OPINION.  In other words Earl, “Gone With the Wind” is a fictional book.  There are actual HISTORICAL FACTS in the book, but the book is FICTION.

Japan started the war in the Pacific and attacked the United States at Pearl Harbor.  It continued to prosecute the war in the face of declining resources of men and materiel, intensifying its hostilities as combat reached successively closer to the “home islands.” There was every reason to assume that the defense of the home islands would be intractable and costly to allied forces.  The suicidal defenses of small dots in the Pacific had demonstrated that the Japanese soldier would fight to the death for the Emperor so long as the Emperor continued to maintain his support for the war.  Even in the face of the Hiroshima catastrophe, the Emperor’s government gave no indication that it would surrender unconditionally as the allies demanded.  At the very least, that means the Emperor and his government were responsible for the death and destruction attendant on the Nagasaki bombing.  Was the extent of the destruction wrought by the atomic bomb a surprise to the Japanese?  Probably, as it more than likely was to everyone alive at the time.  Was the fact a surprise that the allies used whatever military means they had at their disposal to prosecute the war?  Of course not.  That’s what they did.  That’s what anyone prosecuting a war does.  Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were logical strategic targets beyond any psychological effect resulting from the inseparable “collateral damage” of incinerated civilians.  One can argue that the Japanese attack at Pearl Harbor concentrated on military targets.  That was possible because the targets were not in close proximity to civilian centers and the armament used was limited in immediate range of destruction, carried as it was by small fighter/bombers.  Getting a sufficiently large array of aircraft over the Japanese mainland to effect a massive concentration of aerial bombardment was still, at the time of Hiroshima/Nagasaki, a problematic endeavor.  Many aircraft would have been lost.  The impact would have been dispersed and vitiated even if all the prospective targets had been hit.  Therefore, ware the atomic attacks justified militarily?  Yes.  Were the attacks justifiable morally?  Given the ethical considerations of the time, the viciousness of the Japanese prosecution of the war both before and after Pearl Harbor, the evidence that casualties on both sides resulting from and invasion of the home islands would be many times that of Hiroshima/Nagasaki, including Japanese civilians, the answer has to have been, yes.  To compare that decision with the wanton destruction wrought by terrorists randomly and intentionally killing civilians with no military consideration whatsoever is ludicrous.  Would it be better if neither the technology of war nor the heartlessness of the current crop of terrorists could be restrained by moral compunction?  Of course.  Will it help to excuse modern day terrorism by comparing it to the Crusades, the Hundred Years’ War, the First or Second World Wars, the bombing of the King David Hotel by Jewish terrorists, the killing of fleeing Iraqi soldiers in the Gulf War, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Stalin’s Gulags, the ethnic cleansing of Bosnia, and on and on?  No.  Terrorism must be addressed in its current context and countered with the military, law enforcement, political, and diplomatic means available now that prove effective, and the social and moral forces that can only be wielded by the moral authorities within the societies that give rise to the terrorists.

#94400 by Elder Earl on 8/12 at 9:11 pm: “...Have you ever looked at a map and seen how Iraq is centrally located where one can fight all those who oppose sound reasoning.  Secondly in occupying Iraq who has the second larges oil supply in the world, we as allies will not loss our economy...”

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArt icle&code=CHO20060726&articleId=2824

Check the “MAP OF THE NEW MIDDLE EAST” at the foot of the page at this link. The “Free Kurdistan” does not even really exist and is actually only the Northern part of Iraq. The Kurds are still a stateless people existing in a semi-limbo between Turkey and Iran and largely in Iraq. So much for what goes on in the minds of the planners in the Pentagon!

******************************

#94395 by Elder Earl on 8/12 at 8:56 pm: “...People who seek truth shouldn’t mind having a conservative direct those who have forgotten what it means to have, honor, loyalty, integrity, and simple respect for our President and elected officials. .........Besides being open minded is not wrong unless morally inapt....”

In the context of today’s government administration in the USA and its “coalition of the willing” countries, this is clearly both hypocrisy and insanity.

“And I found several here that have lost their abilitiy for reasoning in righteous judgment....” because they are on the dope!!!

#94196 by Skruff on 8/12 at 5:21 am
(Unregistered commenter)

Footnote; Iraq, the Iraqi people and Saddam at his worst never posed a credible threat to the US.

Now if you want to use your scenerio above to represent our relationship with Communist China, I’ll be more reseptive, however we also helped them become a danger.

_____________________________________________________

Have you ever looked at a map and seen how Iraq is centrally located where one can fight all those who oppose sound reasoning.  Secondly in occupying Iraq who has the second larges oil supply in the world, we as allies will not loss our economy

#94343 by Don Knutsen on 8/12 at 8:50 pm
(Unregistered commenter)

HOw about Truthdig giving a few other folks besides Eleder Earl a chance to voice their opinion. I am a fan of this site...but Geeeze...enough is enough with Bone headed Earl the Elder.  Isn’t Yosemite Sam avail, or perhaps Krusty the clown ? We need alittle more balnce here....I’m suffocating from the depth of dogma....

_____________________________________________________

People who seek truth shouldn’t mind having a conservative direct those who have forgotten what it means to have, honor, loyalty, integrity, and simple respect for our President and elected officials. 

Besides being open minded is not wrong unless morally inapt.  And I found several here that have lost their abilitiy for reasoning in righteous judgment.

#94387 by Forkboy on 8/12 at 8:26 pm: “...I’m not going to stake a position in this argument, but this question has come to mind while reading ALL (and that took some time!) these comments:

Everything else aside, did the dropping of the bombs wind-up saving tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands or perhaps millions of lives, both Japanese (military and civilian) and American (soldiers ........As history has pretty much secured the idea .......If we can accept the answer as “yes”, then can we really define the dropping of the two atomic bombs as an act of ‘terrorism’...”

Better go back to the previous page, Forkboy. Its all been discussed, whether you want to use the term terrorism or not doesn’t matter, the answer was NO and “history” was effectively the same set of lies then as we are all being fed today! What is worse, it could all happen again soon.....

I’m not going to stake a position in this argument, but this question has come to mind while reading ALL (and that took some time!) these comments:

Everything else aside, did the dropping of the bombs wind-up saving tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands or perhaps millions of lives, both Japanese (military and civilian) and American (soldiers, obviously)? 

As history has pretty much secured the idea (and note I’m not saying that the position is correct, but let us assume that it is) that the Japanese military was not going to surrender or allow the Emperor to do such, then wasn’t the very regrettable and certainly morally reprehensible detonation of those two bombs also a way to save many more lives when compared to the losses that most certainly would have occurred with an invasion?

If we can accept the answer as “yes”, then can we really define the dropping of the two atomic bombs as an act of ‘terrorism’?

#94208 by Chris S on 8/12 at 7:19 am: “...dad and the family are scared while barricaded in a fortress with a massive weapons cache, telling scaring stories to their children about terrorists while their Fearless Leader and his handlers make plans just as terrifying as any strangers ......Wake up and get real...”

Oh, I haven’t heard the “Fearless Leader” term for a while ......do we have one, Chris???

non credo says:

“Wavelength supposedly doesn’t think the atom bombing of Japan was “terrorism”. Well, Zebo obviously doesn’t mind calling it terrorism. But in calling it so, Zebo doesn’t incur the wrath of Wavelength - because Zebo APPROVES of the act.”

Not approve, war is evil, but the crueler it is, the sooner it will be over.

#94187 by Mariam Russell on 8/12 at 3:50 am
(Unregistered commenter)

I understand, Elder Earl. You are a true believer of the AMERICA, THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD myth, and I am truly sorry for you, but the millions of bodies over the world credited to the LIGHT are still dead, and the many countries are still full of millions of poor so the citizens, or at least a few of the citizens of the LIGHT, can wallow in obscene wealth looted from said countries.
_____________________________________________________

It is obvious you are not numbered among one of the many countries that are still full of millions of poor citizens.  I see you have use of a computer.

continued....

My husband looks at our nine year old son standing in the window,
looking pitiful and ashamed at his answers to my husband’s questions and
he says, “Son.”

“Yes, Daddy.”

“Open the blinds, because that man.... he’s at your front door. “WHAT
DO YOU DO?”

My son looks at his father, anger and defiance in his eyes. He balls up
his tiny fists and looks his father square in the eyes, without
hesitation he says: “I’D DEFEND MY FAMILY, DAD!! I’M NOT GONNA LET HIM
HURT MOMMY OR MY SISTER, DAD!!! I’M GONNA FIGHT HIM, DAD, I’M GONNA
FIGHT HIM!!!!!”

I see a tear roll down my husband’s cheek and he grabs our son to his
chest and hugs him tight, and says… “It’s too late to fight him, he’s
too strong and he’s already at YOUR front door, son.....you should have
stopped him BEFORE he killed his wife, and his children and the old lady
across the way. You have to do what’s right, even if you have to do it
alone, before it’s too late,” my husband whispers.

THAT scenario I just gave you is WHY we are at war with Iraq. When good
men stand by and let evil happen, THAT is the greatest EVIL of all.

Our President is doing what is right. We, as a free nation, must
understand that this war is a war of humanity. WE must remove evil men
from power so that we can continue to live in a free world where we are
not afraid to look out our windowso that my nine year old son won’t
grow up in a world where he feels that if he just “closes” the blinds
the atrocities in the world won’t affect him.

“YOU MUST NEVER BE AFRAID TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT! EVEN IF YOU HAVE TO DO
IT ALONE!” BE PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN! BE PROUD OF OUR
TROOPS!! SUPPORT THEM!!! SUPPORT AMERICA SO THAT IN THE FUTURE OUR
CHILDREN WILL NEVER HAVE TO CLOSE THEIR BLINDS...”

continue....

“I’d call the police, Dad.”

“OK. Pretend that the police are the United Nations and they take your
call, listen to what you know and saw but they refuse to help. What do
you do then, son?”

“Dad.......... but the police are supposed to help!” My son starts to
whine.

“They don’t want to son, because they say that it is not their place or
your place to get involved and that you should stay out of it,” my
husband says.

“But Dad...he killed her!!” my son exclaims.

“I know he did...but the police tell you to stay out of it. Now I want
you to look out that windowand pretend you see our neighbor who you’re
pretending is Saddam turn around and do the same thing to his children.”

“Daddy...he kills them?”

“Yes son, he does. What do you do?”

“Well, if the police don’t want to help, I will go and ask my next door
neighbor to help me stop him.” our son says.

“Son, our next door neighbor sees what is happening and refuses to get
involved as well. He refuses to open the door and help you stop him,” my
husband says.

“But Dad, I NEED help!!! I can’t stop him by myself!!”

“WHAT DO YOU DO, SON?” Our son starts to cry.

“OK, no one wants to help you, the man across the street saw you ask for
help and saw that no one would help you stop him. He stands taller and
puffs out his chest. Guess what he does next, son?”

“What Daddy?”

“He walks across the street to the old lady’s house and breaks down her
door and drags her out, steals all her stuff and sets her house on fire
and then...he kills her. He turns around and sees you standing in the
windowand laughs at you. WHAT DO YOU DO?”

“Daddy...”

“WHAT DO YOU DO?”

Our son is crying and he looks down and he whispers, “I’d close the
blinds, Daddy.”

My husband looks at our son with tears in his eyes and asks him, “Why?”

“Because, Daddy.....the police are supposed to help people who need
them...and they won’t help.... you always say that neighbors are
supposed to HELP neighbors, but they won’t help either...they won’t help
me stop him...I’m afraid....I can’t do it by myself, Daddy....I can’t
look out my windowand just watch him do all these terrible things
and...and.....do nothing...so....I’m just going to close the blinds...so
I can’t see what he’s doing........and I’m going to pretend that it is
not happening.”

I start to cry.

to be continued....

To All,

I hope this story will help Doug, and others to understand the importance of The United States to entering Iraq.

The other day, my nine year old son wanted to know why we were at
war. My husband looked at our son and then looked at me. My husband and
I were in the Army during the Gulf War and we would be honored to serve
and defend our Country again today. I knew that my husband would give
him a good explanation.
My husband thought for a few minutes and then told my son to go stand
in our front living room window. He said “Son, stand there and tell me
what you see?”

“I see trees and cars and our neighbor’s houses.” he replied.

“OK, now I want you to pretend that our house and our yard is the
United States of America and you are President Bush.”

Our son giggled and said “OK.”

“Now son, I want you to look out the windowand pretend that every
house and yard on this block is a different country” my husband said.

“OK, Dad, I’m pretending.”

“Now I want you to stand there and look out the windowand pretend you
see Saddam come out of his house with his wife. He has her by the hair
and is hitting her. You see her bleeding and crying. He hits her in the
face, he throws her on the ground, then he starts to kick her to
death. Their children run out and are afraid to stop him, they are
screaming and crying, they are watching this but do nothing because they
are kids and they are afraid of their father. You see all of this
son.... what do you do?”

“Dad?”

“What do you do son?”

to be continued....

Doug,

Here are some complaints against President Bush which in all your fulmination my reveal your true consciences.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak my mind. I lost my job this past year. When Clinton was president I was secure and prosperous, but in the last year we had to close our operations. I was forced out of the place where I had worked for 34 years.

Not a single government program was there to help me.

Just so you know I lost both my sons fighting for their country. I lost them in Iraq and for what? So that Bush’s oil buddies can get rich? My pain is indescribable.

I simply have nothing left. How can Bush call himself a Christian when he neglects people like me? I am a senior citizen with various medical problems. I’m not in a position where I can begin a new career, all because of President Bush.

Mr. Bush, I dare you to look me in the face and tell me you are a compassionate man!! I dare you to look me in the face and tell me you are a Christian. If I had any money left, I would donate it all to the Democratic Party.

If Al Gore had been elected in 2000 I would still have a job, a home and most importantly, a family.

Regards,

Saddam Huessein

#94141 by Elder Earl on 8/11 at 9:26 pm (31 comments total)-----------------

____________________________________________________

#94139 by Douglas Chalmers on 8/11 at 9:18 pm (588 comments total)

#94130 by Elder Earl on 8/11 at 8:22 pm: “...Last of Quotes .....“We are in possession of what I think to be ...Saddam Hussein...”

Watch out! This guy is flying high on the stuff this weekend - and posting ad infinitum as well as at length while channelling Saddam Hussein with an English accent!?!?

****************************************************

31 comments too many from snake-in-the-grass, EE - but I thought the above comment worth repeating.

#94133 by Non Credo on 8/11 at 8:28 pm
(222 comments total)

#93956 by Steve on 8/11 at 8:20 am
(Unregistered commenter)

When you target civilians in order to pressure the Japanese political authorities as Truman did by dropping two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, this by definition is terrorism.

Justify these acts all you want with the Bible or with twisted appeals to patriotism, but it cannot change the fact that what Truman did was evil.  Truman was a terrorist just like Osama.

The only difference is that one is a state terrorist and the other is a private terrorist. Presidents should be judged by their conduct the same as all other people.
-----------------

I thought the above comment worth repeating.
_____________________________________________________

Just for you I will repeat way Steve’s reasonings from a wrong point of veiw.

Steve, zebo, Mariam Russell, LoveSweetLove, Skruff, Hattsof,

It becomes obvious in the collect writing of Steve, zebo, Mariam Russell, LoveSweetLove, Skruff, Hattsof, that the rational of mental pursuit is obscured by the insentient relationship with reasoning from a wrong perspective.  Allow me to illuminate the on the point of reference taken by those posted above.

Terrorist:Quote:
The drama can only be brought to its climax in one of two ways—through the selective brutality of terrorism or the impartial horrors of war.

by Kaunda, Kenneth

It was a beautiful day.  The wind blew gently through the trees revealing the sun’s light as the leaves danced in the breeze.  Under the trees could be seen the rays of the sun darting between the branches stimulating the green grass where friends and families had gathered to enjoy the fraternity of life.  There were people preparing food, some were setting tables, others played with their children.  A blanket had been lain on the grass in the shade of the trees where an infant and its mother lay resting.  Rockwell would have been glad to paint such scenic beauty.  It was so tranquil and serene as I moved among the surroundings.
Steven called Gina as she laid beside their baby daughter, “Honey come help me with the drinks. It shouldn’t take but a minute.  The baby asleep and she will be safe.  Besides, we can see her.  She is only ten feet away from us.” Gina got up and started helping Steven. I watched with great pleasure. As everyone, was busy enjoying life.
Suddenly a huge diamond back rattler appeared.  He quietly crawled toward the blanket.  I noticed him and moved calmly toward the baby not wanting to startle anyone, for fear the serpent would strike the baby.  Swiftly I moved coming in contact upon the snake’s head with the heel of my boot as he approached the edge of the blanket.  The snake made his presence know as he twitched his body and rattled his tail.  The people panicked, Gena thunderbolts toward the baby, with Steven in hot pursuit.  She seized the baby as the snake bushed up against her leg while it was flinching in death underneath my foot.  A greater fright seized her and she pasted out with Steven taking the baby from her arms.

NOW HERE WHAT HAS HAPPEN TO THE EVIL AT HAND AND THE REASONING BY THOSE POSTED ABOVE.....

The snake was under control.  Nevertheless, the people did not see the victory.  Hysteria seized the people, some were crying uncontrollably while holding their children, others only imagined what could have happened if I had not been there.  Further more, there were those who ranted about how deadly the venom of the snake was.  They even went into detail of how the venom effects its victim, thus maintaining the fears of the people.

It is time for us to put away all fear, for the victory is won. As our nation stands in defiance of terrorist through the impartial horrors of war. 

rek
6/22/00

#94130 by Elder Earl on 8/11 at 8:22 pm: “...Last of Quotes .....“We are in possession of what I think to be ...Saddam Hussein...”

Watch out! This guy is flying high on the stuff this weekend - and posting ad infinitum as well as at length while channelling Saddam Hussein with an English accent!?!?

Last of Quotes

“We are in possession of what I think to be
compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has