Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 60 years later: America, as always, is still the bad guy to many

The debate rages on among many: was it necessary to drop atomic bombs on Japan 60 years ago?

Oddly enough, polls say that most Americans say “yes”, and most Japanese say “no”. Go figure. The rest of those polled these days thought that “Fat Man and Little Boy” were Michael Moore and Robert Reich.

You don’t often see polls on whether or not it was necessary to bomb Pearl Harbor in 1941, but then that wouldn’t make America look like the jerk in the scenario, which is usually the goal.

The arguments have been presented ad nauseum… there would have been millions of casualties on both sides in an allied invasion of mainland Japan. Almost a quarter of a million Japanese died in the atomic bombings. It might sound awful to say, but lives were saved. Period.

Not to sound rash (a statement that almost always precedes something rash), but how is it that a quarter of a million-plus deaths in atomic bombings is more horrible than millions dying in the “regular” way? That seems to be the argument presented, and one that’s never made sense.

Should it have been dropped first in a display of the bomb’s power, such as on a deserted island or military base somewhere? That seems to be an argument, but the problem is that it’s an argument made by people who assume mindsets were rational– Imperial Japanese leadership was anything but.

If you’re somebody who thinks a “demonstration” would have made Japan surrender, think about it for a minute. Hell, Japan didn’t even surrender after the first bomb was dropped on Hiroshima and killed well over 100,000 of their citizens in an instant. Do you really think blowing up a rock pile somewhere in the Pacific would have made them throw their hands in the air and wave the white flag?

Rational people who figure their enemy is also rational are often making a lethal assumption.

By the way, did you know that there are still remote places where you can find American liberals who still think their philosophies haven’t been completely discredited?

The Prodigal Yooper returns to a bounty of email about the NASA columns

Back from a week in Michigan’s beautiful upper peninsula. I was near a sprawling metropolis called Newberry (here’s the Chamber of Commerce). I hadn’t had ‘net access for several days, and returned to a pile of email about a couple of previous columns.

My perhaps seemingly contradictory columns (one purposefully more humorous than the other) on the space program, one in the Honolulu Advertiser about the need to continue funding space exploration, and one in WorldNetDaily about providing incentives to involve the private sector, brought a bunch of emails. Here are a couple from some detractors…

This from Jack K.:

you seem to be a bit misinformed regarding the corvair and space shuttle reference. The covair was cleared by the NHTSA of all of the allegations made by mr nadar. chose something more intelligent as a comparison in the future.

i dare you to print this response.

And I dare you to properly operate the upper case button on the keyboard. That aside, the truth, or lack thereof, of Mr. Nader’s claims about the Corvair are irrelevant, since I’m referring to somebody reading the book while in the Corvair. That person wouldn’t know if it were true or not at the time of their reading, and may be somewhat nervous by reading it at that particular place and time. The fact that these things need to be explained to some is stunning.

Frankly, I hear from some people who I’m pretty sure must actually get up and answer the door every time somebody starts a “knock knock” joke.

Corbett C. says:

You say that space exploration is a worthy and necessary investment. I have a question for you. Would you invest YOUR money in it? If some company had the goal of sending an astronaut to Mars, would you invest in that company?

Probably not. If it were your money, you’d want to know things about return on investment. You’d want to know what was in it fo you. When you found out that a trip to Mars would not yield ANY return on your investment and that there was absolutely nothing in it for you, you’d look elsewhere for a place to put your money. And you’d be right to do so.

If I were super wealthy, would I “invest”? No, I wouldn’t “invest.” I would personally finance it to the hilt, however. There are many, many examples of people who have paid for fascination. Capitalism isn’t just putting money into something for a tenfold return in dollars– it’s also about the ability to feed your greed for wonder and amazement.

Yes, I really believe the money would be there. Especially with the added caveat of “if it ends up lucrative, you get to keep it” motivator.

There were many more, but the drive home in the “screaming child express” was draining, so I’ll be back in the morning.

The book will be out next week, by the way. I got the first copy today, and it looks good.

Dealing NASA a Trump card – Handing the space program to the private sector

Okay, before we unplug and move a couple hours further west to hook up with some friends, today’s WorldNetDaily column is up. The title of this post pretty much says it all.

Otherwise, I have no idea what’s been happening in the world for the last couple of days, and it’s actually pretty relaxing. I plan to maintain that momentum until this coming weekend, then next week I have a book to start trying to sell.

Have a good week everybody.