Delingpole:
‘If You Don’t Want To Get Nuked Don’t Bomb Pearl Harbor
President Obama has kowtowed to the Japanese and Western liberals by promising at the site of the Hiroshima nuclear bomb “we shall not repeat the evil.”
….Second, they should familiarize themselves with which country it was started this particular war; which country fought it with such sadistic determination that they would frequently torture and bayonet prisoners – even the wounded, in hospitals they’d over-run and would almost always refuse to surrender themselves, making any assault on territory they held more than usually costly in allied lives.
If ever the US finds itself in such circumstances again, let us pray that the president it has at the time is nothing like Barack Obama.’
Until the current Congressional leadership dies (the firing squad would work for me) gets rejected by their voters, or is purged by party members – the Grand Old Party – GOP – is Obama’s Little Bitch.
Did you really expect anything else?
Not really…but I keep hoping Obama will do one pro-American thing while in office.
The only pro-American thing he could do is have an effing stroke and bleed out on the WH lawn in full view of the public on July 4th.
Spontaneous combustion too much to hope for, I suppose…
Sigh….probably. Ignorant self-righteousness isn’t particularly flammable.
Delingpole is being pretty blunt, in his usual manner.
Alas, I now have mixed feelings on the topic. If the official narrative is true, then I believe it was necessary. Nasty, but necessary. Diana West published a short obituary in 2007 for the Hiroshima pilot, saying that she also thought it necessary:
http://dianawest.net/BlogArchive/tabid/56/EntryId/43/Brig-Gen-Paul-W-Tibbets.aspx
But since then Diana West has had her nose firmly glued to the official archives, and came to the conclusions that she published in “American Betrayal”. As a result of that research, she now has her metaphorical knife firmly into FDR amongst others. Now she seems to think that the US refused to accept offers of a Japanese surrender in January 1945 until the Soviet Union was in a position to take best advantage of it (August 1945).
http://dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/3123/Was-the-A-Bomb-the-Only-Way-to-Get-the-Japanese-to-Surrender.aspx
and largely repeated at
http://dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/3309/Hiroshima-Was-Not-the-Only-Choice.aspx
Given that David Irving (him of the The-Holocaust-never-happened-the-Jooz-made-it-all-up theories) has also latched on to this line, I am at a loss. Telling false conspiracy theories from real conspiracies is not an easy task!
It’d take a long reply to explain my opinion on this fully, Yokel.
But in short – I’d have done it with hardly a second thought and nothing that’s happened since makes me think otherwise.
What’s more, I’d do the same to several cities right now and sleep soundly afterwards.
The first imperative is survival – of the individual, of family, of tribe and of culture. All else is just words and posturing.
What we got in August 1945 was abject surrender. Under the circumstances (ie what they had done when fighting their war) such abject surrender by Japan was absolutely necessary. Leaving them with ANY pride intact would have been a recipe for disaster. To prevent any immediate repetition, it was necessary that their warrior caste be utterly humiliated and shown to be impotent. But Diana West seems to imply that such terms were on offer from Japan in January 1945, and were refused by FDR. So, if humiliating abject surrender without any pride intact was available eight months earlier, the Allied lives lost between January and August could have been saved. Crudely, Diana West’s thesis is that FDR and many others in the US government were being run from the Kremlin. And that the delay in accepting Japanese surrender was to give the Soviet Union time to make Far East gains. I have not gone all “anti-nuclear” or any other soft lefty pose. It is the lives lost between January and August 1945 that are exercising my mind. Were they lost at “Uncle Joe’s” behest?
Now if I have misunderstood Diana West, or if she has got it wrong, then I fully agree that it was right to drop those bombs to get a quick end to the campaign. Like you, I would also support dropping as many as were necessary to achieve total abject surrender and humiliation. As someone said more recently, the successful end to a war is: “We win, you lose”. The current “win – win” fashion is just another way of saying we want to do it all again soon. To my mind, once was enough.
We know that Obama is a traitor, there can be no other way of describing his behaviour in government. The suggestion is that such treachery started much sooner than any of us had realised.