Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
|
|
|
RE: 13 August: An Infamous Anniversary
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
   
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
 RE: 13 August: An Infamous Anniversary (in reply to Rain)
|
|
|
quote:
So you're saying my history teacher at Columbia University was wrong and so is the much respected Howard Zinn.
Hiroshima August 6, 1945; Nagasaki August 9, 1945; Japanese Emperor Hirohito announced decision to surrender August 15, 1945, after six days of furious and vigorous debate and argument within his War cabinet. These are facts, Rain. You are entitled to your own opinion regarding whether or not the U.S. should have used the bomb, but you are not entitled to your own facts regarding the lead-up to, and date of, Japan's surrender.
I have no idea what your Colombia history professor told you. But if he did not adhere to the above time-line, then yes, he was wrong. By the way, Rain, when do you think Japan officially announced its surrender?
Cheers,
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 25 2011 21:29:40
 |
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: 13 August: An Infamous Anniversary (in reply to Rain)
|
|
|
quote:
A staple of Hiroshima Revisionism has been the contention that the government of Japan was prepared to surrender during the summer of 1945, with the sole proviso that its sacred emperor be retained. President Harry S. Truman and those around him knew this through intercepted Japanese diplomatic messages, the story goes, but refused to extend such an assurance because they wanted the war to continue until atomic bombs became available. The real purpose of using the bombs was not to defeat an already-defeated Japan, but to give the United States a club to use against the Soviet Union. Thus Truman purposely slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Japanese, not to mention untold thousands of other Asians and Allied servicemen who would perish as the war needlessly ground on, primarily to gain diplomatic advantage.
Your quote above is just as you describe it, "A staple of Hiroshima revisionism." There is no evidence whatsoever, in intercepted communications or otherwise, that Japan was ready to surrender in the summer of 1945. In fact, much research during the last ten years reveals just the opposite, that the Japanese War Cabinet and even the Emperor, were ready to fight on, in spite of advances made by the allies. And we just had the examples of the Battles of Iwo Jima (Feb.-Mar. 1945) and Okinawa (April 1945) that demonstrated how fanatical and ready to continue the battle the Japanese were. Japan, ready to surrender in the summer of 1945? Hardly.
I've read my Barton Bernstein and Gar Aperowitz, too, Rain. They try to enhance their case by leaving out significant elements of the historical record that would diminish their case. For one thing, much is made of Japanese Prince Konoye's mission to Moscow to seek an end to the fighting. What they fail to address is the fact that Konoye offered nothing, absolutely nothing. He just wanted the Soviets to engineer an end to the fighting without terms. And another thing, the three days between Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the six days after Nagasaki, were taken up by the War Cabinet, and the preponderence of opinion was to continue fighting. It was only after Nagasaki that the Emperor made the decision himself to surrender. The minutes of these meetings are available to historians, Rain.
So, I want to go back to your original post on the subject, Rain. You stated the Japanese had surrendered two days before the dropping of the Atom bomb. That is your statement: The Japanese had surrendered two days prior to the dropping of the bomb. When did they surrender, in your mind, Rain, on August 4, two days before Hiroshima? Or on August 7, two days before Nagasaki?
Cheers,
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 25 2011 21:51:54
|
|
Rain
Posts: 475
Joined: Jul. 7 2005
|
|
RE: 13 August: An Infamous Anniversary (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
Stop harping on the timeline Bill, and open up your mind a little, be a little sensible.
The Japanese wanted to surrender, and wanted to open peace talks and the US knew it!
Yet we dropped not one bomb but two, killing innocent civilians. We did that, the USA. And the Japanese even today suffer from the repercussions.
My opinion is based on facts, not nationalism pr patriotism.
By the way, Rain, when do you think Japan officially announced its surrender?
September 2, 1945. What did I win, I hope its a new car, i could use one.
Again your harping on dates, and missing the point mate, the bombings were unnecessary.
Here's my honest opinion about History, and that is it teaches humanity absolutely nothing!!! And offers many perspectives and amongst those perspectives somewhere lies the truth. One truth is history will repeat itself.
_____________________________
Free Palestine
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 25 2011 22:14:02
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: 13 August: An Infamous Anniversary (in reply to Rain)
|
|
|
quote:
Stop harping on the timeline Bill, and open up your mind a little, be a little sensible.
The Japanese wanted to surrender, and wanted to open peace talks and the US knew it!
Yet we dropped not one bomb but two, killing innocent civilians. We did that, the USA. And the Japanese even today suffer from the repercussions.
Stop harping on the timeline? You are the one who was very specific on your illusary timeline of Japan's surrender--"two days prior to the dropping of the bomb."
Apparently you also wish to persist in your fiction that the Japanese wanted to surrender and open peace talks. If you are referring to Prince Konoye and his Mission to Moscow, I have already covered that ground, and so have historians much more well-versed than I. If you have other evidence (your Colombia history professor and Wikipedia don't count), please provide it. I would be particularly interested in how you square your contention that Japan was ready to surrender with the Japanese War Cabinet's adament refusal to consider surrender. They, after all, were running the government.
Cheers,
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 25 2011 22:25:54
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: 13 August: An Infamous Anniversary (in reply to Rain)
|
|
|
Rain, apparently your response to those with whom you disagree is to launch ad-hominem attacks against the individual with whom you disagree, rather than to engage the argument itself. You are very good at hurling gratuitous insults at people; not so good at making your case. As I look at your posts over the past two days you have written the following insulting statements and ad-hominem attacks against those of us with whom you have disagreed.
A. (To me): "Barkellwh you just reminded me of a quote from Stephen Hawking that so clearly applies to you: The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance...it is the illusion of knowledge."
B. (To me): "My opinion is based on facts, not nationalism or patriotism." (Implying that mine was based on patriotism, not facts.)
C. (To me): "I believe I'm done with you and will now leave you to hospice care for your ignorance."
D. (Referring to Israelis): "the Israeli Zionist thieves."
E. (To Chester): "I'm sorry but was it not you who attacked me and behaved in a ignorant manner. Man, just read the rubbish written by you that I should have never replied to."
F. (To Chester): "Dear BamBam,don't you love Google, or how it makes you sound smart."
You seem to love calling people "ignorant," or pointing out their "ignorance." And you are not satisfied with an intellectual debate. You seem to have to hurl epithets at those with whom you disagree: "My facts, your patriotism," Israeli Zionist thieves," "Google makes you look smart," "rubbish written by you."
I hope you are proud of your accomplishments, Rain.
Cheers,
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 25 2011 23:38:59
|
|
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
|
RE: 13 August: An Infamous Anniversary (in reply to Rain)
|
|
|
Rain do you understand the term revisionism? Do you understand that Howard Zinn was a revisonist historian not Bill?
If you are talking about the book by Hasegawa that is also revisionism. Revisionism strays from canonic view of a subject and a offers a perspective or often a parallax view of a historical situation. If you were educated at such and such school I would think you would know that and not base your argument on calling someone with a mainstream take on history a revisionist. That book by Hasagawa, the premise of which is that the Japanese government surrendered when the Soviets made gestures towards entering the Pacific is a ludicrous package of hindsight speculation.
That book is not fact, but academic speculation, which is in academe what is called a parallax view; When two visions of the same event overlap and distort, one historic trajectory cancels out part of the other. It causes dissonance with a more established and thoughtfully researched view. It's also called the Rashoman Principle in post WWII history after a Japanese film called, you guessed it, Rashoman.
Often when books like Hasegawa's first comes out it may look like a revelation and provide a Rashomanaic explanation for an event, but as more scholars retrace the original investigators sources and research, often what happens is the salient issues which hold truth under cross investigation by other historians, move into place in a larger canonized over view. The parallax view is absorbed into the canon and adjusts it rather than radically alter it on the basis of one scholars work.
There may be some subjects where a revisionist view moves swiftly into place as a canonized version, but not when the subject is as important as the reason for the Japans surrender. Parallax view is not truth until it is cross examined by peer review and this theory has not been put to the test yet. If several scholars had had parallel discovery, as if this was in the air in the research of this subject that would be different. What I find rude and lacking in historic gravitas is your particularly vitriolic pattern of presenting Rashomanaic speculation as fact and being condescending about it.
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 25 2011 23:54:13
|
|
Rain
Posts: 475
Joined: Jul. 7 2005
|
|
RE: 13 August: An Infamous Anniversary (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
Funny how you don't consider these comments condescending:
Barkellwh directed at Deniz:
If you honestly do not understand the difference between a wall built by authorities to prevent people from leaving a country, and one built to prevent invaders and infiltrators from entering and attacking a country, then it is no wonder that you consider any such discussion as "silly comments." People often consider as "silly" that which they do not understand.
Cheers,
Bill
As well Bill can say falsely whatever he wants and you don't consider it INFLAMMATORY:
I think that had you been an East German at the time, whose only exit from East Germany was cut off by the wall vs. an Israeli today, who can travel the world over in spite of the wall to keep out Palestinian terrorists, the difference would become much clearer.
and again:
Israel's wall is a completely different animal than the Berlin Wall. Israel built the wall, not to keep Israelis in (which would be analogous to the Berlin Wall), but to keep Palestinian terrorists in Gaza out
You:
That wall is to keep disgusting surfers off of rich peoples beachfront property. :)
Someone like my self who enjoys surfing might take offence to being called disgusting.
Barkell once again:
It is true that thousands of law-abiding Palestinians are kept from entering Israel because their government failed to crack down on the terrorists among them, and, thus, Israel built the wall
and theres many more, but I'll leave it at that.
I have the right, since it was not i who brought Israel and Palestine into this discussion,
to voice my opinion. And you have the right to ignore it or challenge it.
So stop being a hypocrite.
_____________________________
Free Palestine
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 26 2011 20:04:58
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: 13 August: An Infamous Anniversary (in reply to Rain)
|
|
|
quote:
As well Bill can say falsely whatever he wants and you don't consider it INFLAMMATORY:
Up to your old tricks again, eh Rain? Anyone with whom you disagree is not someone with an honest but different opinion, who looks at the same facts and reaches a different conclusion. No, with Rain, anyone with whom he disagrees is "saying falsely whatever he wants..." Only Rain has access to ground truth. Everyone else's opinions, no matter how well-researched and understood, are "false."
In your very narrow, small-minded way, you may consider my statements "false," rather than statements and opinions with which you disagree. I suppose that is your prerogative. False though my statements and opinions may be to you, though, Rain, there is one thing I do not do. I do not hurl epithets and insults at others with whom I disagree. You will not see me calling others "ignorant" and "thieves," nor will you see me refer to their (and this applies to yours as well) writing as "rubbish."
There is an old concept in psychology called "projection," Rain. It basically states that people who recognize an inadequacy in themselves attempt to compensate for their perceived lack of ability or intellectual capacity or (fill in the blank) by projecting that inadequacy onto others.
Cheers,
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 26 2011 20:50:24
|
|
Rain
Posts: 475
Joined: Jul. 7 2005
|
|
RE: 13 August: An Infamous Anniversary (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
Estebanana, You want more of your hypocrisy regarding the inflammatory remarks other then the surfer one, I'll be glad to point them out.
Barkellwh, are you kidding me! try backing up your claims with facts, rather then attacks, just as I do when I claim that your statements are false. And calling Chester's provided links, especially the Kurdish one rubbish is being to kind, Go check it out for yourself, I would be embarrassed with myself if I provided such a link and define it as atrocity.
I would love to be in a room filled with intelligent people and debate the both of you.
Zionism=Racism, even worse a nazi mentality. So when i make a strong statement such as FILTHY ISRAELI ZIONIST try to equate it with FILTHY NAZI GERMANS. Perhaps than you would dive into humanity and surf along with the good proactive people of the world, rather then so blindly as the world did during the holocaust, turn a blind eye. Be outraged as humans do. Be outraged that one group of people see themselves as superior than the other, and regard them as roaches that need to be terminated.
For two super intelligent brilliant minds who share such an understanding of psychology as well as the understanding of the rashomon effect, the both of you have very little common sense.
_____________________________
Free Palestine
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 26 2011 21:35:55
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET |
0.09375 secs.
|
Printable Version
I hope so.