Also, the shibboleth that Japan was a beaten nation should be carefully re-examined. It is true that by 1945 Japan lacked any offensive military capability. That did NOT mean, though, that Japan was defenceless. To the contrary, there were hundreds of thousands of armed and trained troops kept in Japan for the express purpose of repelling an Allied invasion (think D-Day on steroids). Also, there were 10,000 aircraft waiting for use as kamikazes, plus millions of civilians being organized into ad hoc home defense groups.
Estimates of Allied casualties were upwards of half a million. Japanese, up to 10 million.
0 ( +4 / -4 )
Again, the Japanese were attempting to NEGOTIATE through the Swiss. The Allies had agreed that there would be no negotiation. As usual, the Japanese cabinet was trying to dance around the turd without stepping in it. Nobody wanted to be the first one to actually say, "we give up". So instead, they were putting out feelers here and there, trying to read the wind, trying to possible secure some advantageous terms. None of which were possible. All it would have taken, even in April, would have been a simple "we surrender" message. particularly after Germany surrendered unconditionally in May of 1945, the Allies would have never been able to accept a negotiated settlement.
In short, the ball was 100% in Japan's court at that time. They were beaten, and knew it, but just couldn't bring themselves to actually say it. Maybe it was foolish pride, or Yamato spirit, but whatever the reason they couldn't make the right decision. And subsequently paid a terrible price.
-1 ( +1 / -3 )
ASDF, what is the evidence that Japan was going to surrender?
To the contrary, the war faction of the Japanese cabinet was committed to the idea of fighting to the death, or at least bleeding the Allies so much that they could negotiate a surrender. You should look up the plans for "Operation Ketsu-Go", which was the Japanese plan to defend Honshu and Kyushu from an amphibious invasion. They had carefully husbanded resources and materiel, and were prepared to sacrifice 15 MILLION civilians in the slaughter. Consider that the Battle of Okinawa alone saw 70,000 Allied casualties, and over 200,000 Japanese dead. Multiply that by a factor of 50 for an invasion of the Japanese Home Islands and you can see what might have been. A bloodbath.
Again, it would have been easy for Japan to surrender. There were open diplomatic channels through neutral countries that the Japanese government chose not to use.
-1 ( +0 / -2 )
Smith, by what evidence do you back up your claim that a continued conventional attack would have not possibly caused a single American loss? Each day the war continued, ALlied POWs were dying in the tender care of the Imperial Japanese Army. Each day the war continued, men became sick and died from myriad tropical diseases throughout the Pacific war theater, because Japan continued to fight.
Japan didn't "help" the continuation of the war- they chose it. And paid a terrible price.
Do you really imagine that, if Japan had accepted the terms of the Potsdam Declaration in July of 1945, the US would STILL have dropped atomic weapons in August? That is a ridiculous assertion, if you are suggesting it.
1 ( +2 / -2 )
ASDF, again the weasel words; "expressed willingness to surrender". Means nothing. It would have been simple for Japan to surrender. Send a representative to either the Swiss or Swedish embassies in Tokyo. Tell the Swiss or Swedish that Japan accepted the Potsdam Declaration and agreed to all its terms. The Swiss or Swedish contact their representatives in Washington. Bingo. War over, no atomic horror. Instead, they wasted time and wasted time and prevaricated and brought death upon themselves.
-2 ( +0 / -3 )
Steve; As an alternative to using such horrible weapons, what do you suggest? A blockade would have killed millions of civilians, as would an invasion, as would continued conventional bombing. There were no good alternatives, only a "least bad" option that saved Allied lives and, in retrospect, also saved innumerable Japanese lives.
6 ( +18 / -11 )
Sorry, Darnname. "Started pursuing" is a weasel phrase that means nothing. Japan was getting its collective butt whipped. If they wanted to surrender, the onus was on them to shout it LOUD. As late as July 1945 President Truman warned Japan of "prompt and utter destruction" if they didn't surrender immediately. Instead, the Declaration was met with a combination of silence and defiance. If there is any blame to be levied, it is on the Imperial War Cabinet, which refused to recognize reality.
2 ( +4 / -1 )
The annual guilt-fest begins, I see. Here are the options as to how to end the War:
Option 1: blockade. Millions of Japanese starve slowly to death before the inevitable surrender.
Option 2; invasion. Millions of Japanese die in human wave attacks on the Allied invaders before the inevitable surrender. Additionally, hundreds of thousands of Allied soldiers die.
Option 3: continued firebombing. Millions of Japanese burn to death as even more cities are torched before the inevitable surrender.
Option 4: "test bombings" in unpopulated areas. No guarantee that the people in power will see the demonstrations, or believe any reports from those who do. Plus, the US had only enough nuclear material for two bombs. The next weapons wouldn't be available for months. This would have been a huge gamble, and politically impossible to sell the Allied civilian populations.
By comparison, the atomic bombings are almost, dare I say, humane?
-3 ( +2 / -4 )
I'm also a bit alarmed at the hysterical reaction to this story. "Man kills lion" wouldn't gain any headlines. I really wonder why people are advocating long prison sentences, business devastation etc for someone who at worst committed a minor offence.
Plus, in all the chest beating and one upmanship demanding harsh punishment, a few things get lost. First, the dentist's patients. By all accounts he is a skilled surgeon. Shut down his business, and where do they go? Second, the dentist's employees. They are innocent bystanders that have been put on the sidewalk by the cyber-lynching of their employer. Finally, his family. Should THEY be victimized too? I think not.
2 ( +3 / -1 )
Agreed. The western media are a bunch of feckless cowards. Completely unwilling to face the reality that they are ALL at risk from radical jihadism. How many mainstream groups published the much-maligned Muhammed cartoons? None. Only Charlie Hebdo, who took on the risk alone and paid the price. Even after that, how many outlets even bothered to show what Charlie had done to "provoke" such a response? Again, none. If 1,000 newspapers all agreed to publish at the same time, there would be no risk.
0 ( +3 / -3 )
Amidst the blockbuster deals for Price and Tulotwizki (sp), and the acquisition of Revere, Moony making the trip from Barfalo back to Hogtown is less than headline worthy.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Cleo, bored rich people like Palmer also ensure the survival of species like lions and elephants. They support local businesses in countries where the local governments don't give a crap about preserving animals or their habitat.
0 ( +2 / -2 )
Seriously, people, it's just a lion. Not an endangered species. Hunters like this dentist ensure that species like lions will be preserved in the future. They bring valuable dollars to countries like Zimbabwe that suffer terribly from mismanagement by kleptocratic governments. Do you think a thug like Mugabe cares about lions?
Also, there is no reason for a cyber lynch mob to hound him out of his home and his business, especially before he whole story comes out. People need to gain some perspective on what is really important.
-5 ( +3 / -8 )
Sorry, Tigers,that isn't how free societies work. Terrorism existed long before any images of Mohammed were produced. They are not dependent on each other.
There are many reasons for satirical and insulting images to be created. Some are political, some are social, some are simply just for the sake of being rude. However, ALL are equally deserving of protection. The artists ALL deserve equal protection.
4 ( +4 / -0 )
The easiest remedy for those who are offended by these kinds of images is a simple one: DON'T LOOK AT THEM.
The Pope is so wrong on this, as are the many others who are straw manning the idea of protecting free speech into the concept of "unlimited free speech". Few people are arguing for that. There are already many limits on speech, such as;
a/ incitement to violence b/ criminal conspiracy c/ breach of contract d/ libel and slander e/ uttering threats
None of these standards are disputed by even the most libertarian of free speechers. Simply being offended is part of the price of living in a pluralized democracy. Speech need not have any specific merit or public good behind it to deserve protection. It is overtly offensive and outrageous speech that needs protection the most of all.
2 ( +4 / -2 )
IMHO one of the biggest problem is that followers of Islam first need to look inside themselves. What is being done in their name? How can they reconcile living in a secular democracy with being a 'good' Muslim? How can they reform their faith into something more compatible with 21st century values and human rights?
In truth, only a very small number of Muslims would ever perpetrate such attacks. However, A surprisingly large minority (in some countries majority) support the ideals behind them. Legal penalties for blasphemy, adultery, and the like. Death penalty for apostasy. Prison/death for gays. These are not radical positions at all within the Islamic faith. They are mainstream belief. And they need to be changed before any meaningful reform can happen.
6 ( +9 / -3 )
That's good. Now, why doesn't Japan Today show it as well? This would be a true representation of the "je suis Charlie" spirit. Be bold in defending freedom of the press!
4 ( +7 / -3 )
Most of the lunches I had in my time teaching public school tended towards the bland and nasty. The biggest problem was the timing of them. By the time the food leaves the lunch center, gets shipped to schools, gets distributed to classes, and finally gets served, it is generally all room temperature.
The worst was the lunch in the staff rooms. The office ladies would divvie up the food at sometime around 1130am, even though lunch wasn't until past 1200. No reason to do so at all, it made everything congeal. After that, everyone had to wait until the school principal at his desk finally deigned to start eating before having their own food. Until then , everyone studiously ignored the tray of lunch sitting on their desk since of course they were "too busy" to start eating.....
Personally, I dont think force feeding kids food they don't like, and shaming/bullying them into finishing it, is a really good way to instill values and broaden their taste buds.
2 ( +7 / -6 )
I think they react badly to criticism because they are largely insulated from it. No dissidence or dissent is tolerated in most Muslim countries, particularly in terms of religion. These beliefs are packed into whatever better land they choose to immigrate to.
1 ( +3 / -2 )
What she said makes sense. I have read similar reports about NK defectors in the South. They are often marginalized, ignored, and discriminated against. South Korea is not exactly a warm and welcoming host at the best of times, as anyone who has lived/worked there can attest.
As time goes by, I realize that there really isn't a lot of space between the North and South in regards to their political thought and beliefs.
1 ( +3 / -2 )
Mitt is a good man. I imagine many Americans are regretting re-electing the current president. The economy remains the biggest issue to most people. I can't understand why they elected and re-elected a man who has no experience running or managing so much as a lemonade stand.
-3 ( +5 / -8 )
Freedom of speech is easy when it is speech you agree with. Much harder when it is not. Offensive speech needs protecting much more than common sense.
I wonder why people simply don't believe the terrorists when they say "I am doing this to revenge my prophet". This IS Islam at it's core. It is true that very few Muslims would go so far as to actually perpetrate crimes like this. However, a substantial number would SUPPORT such attacks and understand their motivation. Surveys have been done in myriad predominantly Muslim countries that show widespread approval for harsh Sharia law. Death for apostates, death for blasphemers, death for insulting the religion and/or prophet, death for adultery. These are NOT extreme positions within Islam. They are mainstream.
1 ( +4 / -3 )
Posted in: There can be no such thing as a developed country without anti-racial discrimination laws. I feel angry about organizations promoting xenophobia using public facilities for their activities. See in context
Yeah, there is nothing really in common between discrimination and hate speech. Let haters have their say, then either ignore them or prove them wrong in the court of public opinion. I'd rather know who the haters are than have them skulk about in the dark.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
Actually, in Japan there isn't much difference. Most so-called "private" universities get government funding to some degree or another. Ditto for private high and junior high schools. Plus, students get government sponsored loans and scholarships to attend. If they were actually private, I would be more sympathetic.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
Perhaps, Dutchman, people are somewhat immune to stories about a suicide bomber from The Religion That Shall Not Be Named (at least in this article). It's nothing new or unusual, sadly.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
She is a name without any substance. An Obama financial supporter and member of the 1%. A lightweight. Somewhat similar to the windbag she replaced, John Roos. Another friend of Obama, whose sole qualification seems to be his fundraising prowess (he raised over $500,000) for Obama's presidential bid. He was also rewarded with the ambassadorship.
Japan is an important American ally and trading partner. It is insulting to Japan in the extreme to grant the ambassador's post as a gift to reward political support. Make her ambassador to the Solomon Islands, or to Lesotho.
Let's contrast our Caroline to the Japanese amassador to the United States- Kenichiro Sasae. A former vice foreign minister, a professional diplomat for 30 years, graduate of the Tokyo University school of law and politics.
-2 ( +1 / -3 )
I wonder why the writer felt it necessary to mention that Obuchi has two children. This is constant in the media. I don't recall ever reading "Shinzo Abe, father of zero".
2 ( +3 / -1 )
Is this crap pornography? Perhaps, perhaps not. It certainly does skate very close to the line, though.
What really gripes my cookies, though, is thinking about the parents of these 'models'. WTF are they thinking? Who ever told them it was a good idea to have their prepubescent daughters pose in such magazines? I guess they are simply either greedy or stupid. To me, this is akin to child abuse or exploitation. As a father, I couldn't sleep at night knowing that my 10 year old daughter was wank bait for thousands of greasy cretins across the country.
6 ( +9 / -4 )
Unfortunately, this kind of result is commonplace when dealing with liberals. They try to refute facts with emotional outbursts, ignore inconvenient truths, and generally refuse to listen. As for Affleck, he is paid to read other people's work. He isn't used to being challenged on his ideas. His type generally live in a comfortable cocoon of support from like minded people.
The truth about the state of the Muslim world is uncomfortable for many, it is true. Recent polling done by Pew Research (hardly a right wing organization) shows many disturbing trends in the way Muslims perceive the world and react to it. In countries like Egypt for example, a large majority of the population voices approval for stoning adulterers and the death sentence for apostasy. I am not saying that the majority of Muslims are actually violent- they aren't. However, there is widespread tacit support FOR violence when it comes to what are seen as attacks on their faith.
Can you imagine the outcry if a survey found that, for example, 80% of Italian catholics were in favour of the death penalty for anyone who voluntarily left the Holy Mother Church?
2 ( +4 / -2 )