Monday, August 02, 2004

Two Traditions: WMD and Official Disinformation

By Mickey Z.

Read full article...

Posted 08/02 | Add a Comment

    Comments:

    You must register to comment.

    Login | Register

  1. It isn’t just American lives, Mickey.  Every week, on average, 50-100,000 Chinese were killed by Japan.  There were also people dying in Korea, the Philippines, Indonesia, and elsewhere.

    As for the American death toll, against Kyushu the Navy would have faced 900,000 or more Japanese troops and between 5-10,000 kamikazes who had been trained to go after transports rather than battleships and carriers.  The death toll would have obviously been gruesome, even assuming the best possible outcomes.

    Japan was also not trying to surrender.  The communications often cited between Russia and Japan were about trading fishing rights and port usage rights in exchange for a cease fire that would allow Japan to retain some of its overseas empire.  Russia was uninterested and the propsals were never supported or developed in to a coherent proposal by the Japanese government or the military.

    A lot of what the American left believes about the war in the Pacific (i.e., Japan was about to surrender) comes from Japanese fascist propaganda.  I think it’s true that the dropping of the bomb did result in a lower net loss of life than would have happened if there were an invasion.  Assuming those are the only two options, then dropping the bomb was the right thing to do.  To me, the question is whether or not those were the only two options.  And that’s a question I’m not sure I know the answer to.

    Posted by Justin Felux from San Antonio, TX  on  08/03  at  06:18 AM

  2. I appreciate Justin’s historical knowledge and, of course, I’ll admit that my article didn’t (and wasn’t meant to) cover all the context we need on this topic. It was more a linkage to today’s lies and deceptions and how we’ve been programmed to swallow the company line.

    Justin writes: “To me, the question is whether or not those were the only two options.” There are rarely just two options and I’d propose in this case, an option few ever contemplate is the U.S. not engaging in the type of military interventions and economic provocations that always precede war.

    Posted by Mickey Z. from  on  08/03  at  10:46 AM

  3. Justin’s historical knowledge?  I’d like to know what sources Justin is invoking which contradict Gar Alperovitz’s points about The Decision (to use the Atomic Bomb)...which make very clear that it was not justified, “called for” or given the green light for the reasons usually cited.  I agree with Mick that it’s a red herring of sorts to be discussing that sort of thing, regardless, at this juncture.  Do I have Justin mixed up with someone else, or is Justin one of those people who have been justifying America’s interventions overseas, serving as an apologist for our abominable foreign policy?  Is it Justin who has said (on this site)...or suggested...that America sometimes intervenes for admirable reasons, for something other than self-interest?  Clear, Oxie

    Posted by Ox from  on  08/04  at  04:11 PM

  4. To me, Justin was broadening the context a bit and I felt his critique missed the point of my article. That said, I’m open to his input even if I might disgree with other comments he’s made here. I don’t wanna totally write someone off if they differ from me in one area but agree in others. I will likely give them some shit...but, hey.

    Posted by Mickey Z. from  on  08/04  at  07:15 PM

  5. To me, it’s not a matter of writing anyone off...completely or otherwise.  Fact is we can go on till Doomsday respectfully disagreeing...following the polite parameters set up for us in school...or we can insist upon certain premises being agreed upon.  It will be impossible, for instance, to make any significant changes in our foreign policy --totally impossible-- unless the starting point for all activists (on the “same side") is that this country NEVER intervenes for humanitarian reasons...continues to contribute to genocide, etc.  If Justin, for example, makes a case for our recent intervention in Haiti...then he’s not on the same IMPORTANT page.  That page says that our attitude must be that either party can’t be trusted...has NEVER done more good than harm, etc.  I think you know the verbal routine.  If that’s NOT the starting point...then the creative work required to come up with good plans for action will be too seriously hampered. If our goal is to get along in “a general sense” as we move along criticizing The Powers...then the approach of avoiding the “fifth” difference...as we applaud the “first four” similiarities among us...makes perfect sense.  However, if we want to change things...not just talk about things...again, certain crucial agreements are necessary.  It has zero to do with forcing someone to adopt MY opinions, and everything to do with the fact that you can’t make a permanent “dent” in capitalism without adopting particular assumptions, without agreeing upon certain historical motivations and facts.  In fact, I’d take the whole shebang even further; I’d say we’re going nowhere unless the “leaders” of this country...and their supporters...whoever they are...make a public show of Deep Apology, erect a physical monument as acknowledgement to our “mistakes”...that is comparable to the profile given to, say, the Vietnam Wall in DC.

    Posted by Ox from  on  08/04  at  08:54 PM

  6. I typed a huge fucking reply and lost it.  This is the second time in a few days this shit has happened on here.  I don’t know why I didn’t think to copy it to the clipboard before sending it.

    So here is the short version:

    Mickey:  wasn’t criticizing the point of your article, which I agreed with.  was criticizing statements you made in making your case.

    Ox:  don’t see how this is a “red herring.” Haven’t the the guy’s book, but from what I can tell it is a rehashing of all the same (flawed) arguments given by people attempting to prove the bomb was not necessary.  I did not have any particular source in mind when I posted earlier, but I’m sure all can be found in Toland’s Rising Sun.

    As regards me being an apologist for empire, you are referring to a disagreement we had over “aid” a while back.  I said that sometimes the U.S. govt aids countries in ways that I have no problem with.  For example, if there was some outbreak of a deadly disease in London, the U.S. would probably send drugs or doctors or some form of assistance to the British govt.  I would not have any problem with this, nor do I see why any rational person would.

    As regards Haiti, I said that I supported the intervention in 1994 because Haitians were being slaughtered by CIA trained thugs and the intervention brought an end to that, at least temporarily.  Had the intervention not occurred, many, many, many, more people would be dead today.  Because I recognize this fact does not make me an apologist for empire.  I did not support the intervention in March.

    Posted by Justin Felux from San Antonio, TX  on  08/04  at  09:28 PM

  7. “Haven’t the the guy’s book”

    Obviously, this should say “read the.”

    Posted by Justin Felux from San Antonio, TX  on  08/04  at  09:30 PM

  8. Thanks, Justin.  I like you and your stuff a lot more than might meet the quick eye.  However, Toland is “dated” as per Alperovitz.  Merci for the clarity regarding Haiti, etc....  Nevertheless, respecting Haiti ‘94...as I remember...the thugs were being thuggish as per our instigation...to set up the excuse for U.S. entry...as per the usual script.  Loving thoughts in solidarity, Ox

    Posted by Ox from  on  08/04  at  10:26 PM

  9. If the purpose for dropping atomic bombs on Japan was to overwhelm Japanese authorities with their destructive power and bring about a surrender then why not obliterate Mt. Fuji, a revered mounument and mythical God to the Japanese, with a warning that a second bomb is poised to drop on the Chrysanthemum Throne? The targetting is questionable. To be so callous of enemy life in preservation of American lives is morally anathema. I cannot fathom anyone evoking justification for using WMD in such murderous ways when other options were open.

    Posted by kim from  on  08/07  at  06:36 AM

  10. Well said, Kim.  Now...as per our previous interchanges respecting solidarity or “no solidarity” in the U.S. (among the Left) at the moment...PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE enter your two cents attached to my latest Pilger/Zinn piece; or did you do so already, and I’m being remiss?  You see, this business of being callous --as I know you know-- is going on right now.  There are OPTIONS --to use your word-- to the paradigms that are being followed for “action” against our momentum, but...people are not picking up on them; my article touches upon that touchy territory.  PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE.  At the very least...I want to get your help with the plea I’m making in the “comment” I just attached to the piece...responding to Seth and Caleb et. al.  Love, Rich

    Posted by Richard Oxman from  on  08/07  at  12:46 PM
    11. Commenting is not available in this weblog entry. {/if}

    Next entry: Why I Am Scared to Death of George Bush - And Why You Should Be, Too

    Previous entry: Environmental and Community Destruction, Baltimore-style

    [ads]

    Support Press Action