Re: [OT] The record industry, RIAA and US law

[Celejar <celejar@gmail.com>]

On Thu, 10 May 2007 18:24:42 +0200
Joe Hart <j.hart@orange.nl> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
> > Celejar wrote:
> >> On Wed, 09 May 2007 16:14:44 -0400
> >> Amy Templeton <amy.g.templeton@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >>> Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> Johannes Wiedersich <johannes@physik.blm.tu-muenchen.de> wrote:
> >>>>> The whole mission is a textbook example of how it probably is
> >>>>> impossible to bring about democracy, peace and freedom by
> >>>>> application of force.
> >>>> Impossible? Where were Germany and Japan before and after WWII?
> >>> Before: A lot more populous.
> >>> After: In ruins.
> >>>
> >>> Seriously, though...are you advocating dropping nuclear bombs on
> >>> people in order to force them to be "free"? 'Cause if I recall
> >>> that's how we got Japan to lay down arms...
> >> First, I was simply providing a counter example to Johannes'
> >> aforementioned assertion, but not necessarily advocating anything.
> >> Second, what about Germany? Third, WRT Japan I suppose we had three
> >> choices: a) the Bomb b) continued conventional war c) negotiated
> >> peace / truce / ceasefire. It's easy to argue for a over b
> >> (minimization of the total loss of life, including total loss of enemy
> >> life), although I know that one can argue the contrary also. WRT option
> >> c, do you think that was a historically realistic possibility? [It's
> >> not a rhetorical question; my knowledge of the period isn't that
> >> strong.]
> > 
> > You forget about the second bomb. It was dropped before the Japanese
> > government had a chance to figure out what had happened in Hiroshima and
> > before they had a chance to surrender in face of the first bomb.
> > 
> > (The second bomb was dropped 3 days after the first. In the confusion
> > and destruction caused by the first bombing it took days for the
> > Japanese government to figure out what had happened in Hiroshima. No
> > internet, no telephone, etc.)
> > 
> > No matter what justification one might have for dropping the first bomb,
> > I guess at least the second bomb was both military and morally 'useless'.
> > 
> > Johannes
> > 
> > Further reading:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki
> 
> My understanding of the period leads me to believe that the second bomb
> was dropped as to prove to the Japanese that the first bomb was not a
> fluke and the same type of bomb could be repeatedly dropped until they
> surrendered.  While I agree that it came a bit too soon after the first
> bomb, and some diplomatic efforts should have been attempted after the
> first, lines of communication were poor then, and how many more Allied
> lives would have been lost if the fighting continued?
> 
> The number of American lives were the only things that the US considered
> worthwhile at the time.

I appreciate the defense of my country (our country? do you still
consider it yours?), but I would disagree about the number of American
lives being the only thing the US considered worthwhile; they probably
saved (in the long run) Japanese lives too, and I daresay at least some
US politicians and military personnel considered that.

> Joe

Celejar
--
mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP) email
ssuds.sourceforge.net - A Simple Sudoku Solver and Generator