Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Brigadier General Paul Tibbets, RIP
|
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Brigadier General Paul Tibbets, RIP
On Nov 1, 3:59 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...article=1&catn... "...Tibbets, then a 30-year-old colonel.." WOAH! I think he has the right idea over secrecy in his burial, though. Knowing what I know now, I don't know if I could have done his job or not. Even though it was probablyt he right thing to do, I don't think it would be a prideful act. But I wasn't there either. mixed emotions |
#3
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Brigadier General Paul Tibbets, RIP
On Nov 1, 10:38 pm, Tim wrote:
On Nov 1, 3:59 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...article=1&catn... "...Tibbets, then a 30-year-old colonel.." WOAH! I think he has the right idea over secrecy in his burial, though. Knowing what I know now, I don't know if I could have done his job or not. Even though it was probablyt he right thing to do, I don't think it would be a prideful act. But I wasn't there either. mixed emotions If it means anything, my dad was there and thinks they did the right thing... |
#5
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Brigadier General Paul Tibbets, RIP
On Nov 1, 7:38?pm, Tim wrote:
On Nov 1, 3:59 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...article=1&catn... "...Tibbets, then a 30-year-old colonel.." WOAH! I think he has the right idea over secrecy in his burial, though. Knowing what I know now, I don't know if I could have done his job or not. Even though it was probablyt he right thing to do, I don't think it would be a prideful act. But I wasn't there either. mixed emotions We had reduced Japanese naval power to the point where an effective blockade of the island nation would probably have inspired its surrender within a matter of weeks...likely without an invasion. The nuke was only one of several options available for ending the war. We know that it worked, there's probably no way to know whether it was the best options available, and opinions at that time were most decidedly mixed. Truman felt it was neccessary to demonstrate the effectiveness of both the uranium bomb (Hiroshima) and the plutonium bomb (Nagasaki) to convince the Russians that we had the will and capability to react to any threat "with extreme prejudice". I was also strategically critical to end the Japanese war before our Russian "allies" marched in during the mop up with possible plans for occupying some of the islands and thereby establishing effective Naval bases in the Pacfic. Japanese people continued to die from radiation poisoning for many years after the explosions, with more than 500,000 civilian deaths by 1951. Many military leaders of the day disagreed with Truman's decision to use the atomic bomb. Dwight Eisenhower said that when he was infromed of Truman's decision to use nuclear bombs, "I voiced my misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unneccesary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon who employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of face." Admiral William Leahy, Chief of Saff to Presidents Roosevelt and Truman, said in his autobiography "It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons." General MacArthur apparently did not voice any official support for or opposition to the bombing in 1945, but his consultant Norman Cousins wrote in 1987 that MacArthur's oft-stated private opinion was "The war might have ended weeks earlier if the United States had agreed, as it later did anyway, to the retention of the institution of the emperor." Historic footnote: The "we dropped it to save American Lives" rationale didn't begin gathering a lot of traction until 1958- the year that Truman convened a news conference to defend his decision to drop atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The news conference was precipitated, in part, by a letter from the Hiroshima City Council asking Truman if, all those years later, he had any regrets or was inclined to apologize for the decision. Authors Robert Jay Lifton and Greg Mitchell, ("Hiroshima in America: Fifty Years of Denmial" published by Grossett/ Putnam in 1995), claim to have documentation that official US estimates for the number of military deaths that would result from an invasion of Japan would be between 20,000 and 63,000. So, yes, RIP Paul Tibbets. He was a brave and dutiful airman, simply doing his job. Opinions will vary enormously whether there is any guilt to bear over the manner in which we chose to end WWII, but the heroes of the hour (or the villians, depending on ones' point of view) will be found among the decision makers of the day- not down among the ranks of those who simply upheld their oath to follow orders. |
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Brigadier General Paul Tibbets, RIP
Chuck Gould wrote: .." General MacArthur apparently did not voice any official support for or opposition to the bombing in 1945, but his consultant Norman Cousins wrote in 1987 that MacArthur's oft-stated private opinion was "The war might have ended weeks earlier if the United States had agreed, as it later did anyway, to the retention of the institution of the emperor." Interesting to note, that later on, McArther thought it would have been a good idea to drop a nuke on N.Korea and even China during the time of the Korean conflict. So, yes, RIP Paul Tibbets. He was a brave and dutiful airman, simply doing his job. Opinions will vary enormously whether there is any guilt to bear over the manner in which we chose to end WWII, but the heroes of the hour (or the villians, depending on ones' point of view) will be found among the decision makers of the day- not down among the ranks of those who simply upheld their oath to follow orders. agreed. Also a note about Truman, I don't know for a fact but supposedly, Harry Truman was confronting Openheimer over the success of the nukings, and Openheimer said "Mr. President, I feel like I have blood on my hands" President Truman then gave Openheimer a handkerchief and casually said "Here, wipe it off." Of course, I can't confirm nor deny this story as fact. |
#7
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Brigadier General Paul Tibbets, RIP
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message oups.com... We had reduced Japanese naval power to the point where an effective blockade of the island nation would probably have inspired its surrender within a matter of weeks...likely without an invasion. rest snipped for brevity Monday morning quarterbacking is always easier than playing the game and we'll probably never know for sure, but there where many then and many today that believed Japan was close to using an A-bomb ... on *us*. If Truman hadn't authorized it and the war lasted just long enough for Japan to toss one on San Diego from a submarine, how would Truman be viewed today knowing that he could have ended the war before it happened? http://www.kimsoft.com/korea/jp-hung.htm Eisboch |
#8
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Brigadier General Paul Tibbets, RIP
"Eisboch" wrote in message ... "Chuck Gould" wrote in message oups.com... We had reduced Japanese naval power to the point where an effective blockade of the island nation would probably have inspired its surrender within a matter of weeks...likely without an invasion. rest snipped for brevity Monday morning quarterbacking is always easier than playing the game and we'll probably never know for sure, but there where many then and many today that believed Japan was close to using an A-bomb ... on *us*. If Truman hadn't authorized it and the war lasted just long enough for Japan to toss one on San Diego from a submarine, how would Truman be viewed today knowing that he could have ended the war before it happened? http://www.kimsoft.com/korea/jp-hung.htm Eisboch "were" not "where" damit. Eisboch |
#9
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Brigadier General Paul Tibbets, RIP
Eisboch wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message oups.com... We had reduced Japanese naval power to the point where an effective blockade of the island nation would probably have inspired its surrender within a matter of weeks...likely without an invasion. rest snipped for brevity Monday morning quarterbacking is always easier than playing the game and we'll probably never know for sure, but there where many then and many today that believed Japan was close to using an A-bomb ... on *us http://www.kimsoft.com/korea/jp-hung.htm Eisboch I didn't know that Japan had that type of technology....yet. But then again, anyone who can (at that time) successfully calculate bombs carried by weather ballons, that could make it to the US from Japan all those thousands of miles across the Pacific, were actually no dummies. |
#10
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Brigadier General Paul Tibbets, RIP
On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:08:53 -0700, Tim wrote:
Eisboch wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message oups.com... We had reduced Japanese naval power to the point where an effective blockade of the island nation would probably have inspired its surrender within a matter of weeks...likely without an invasion. rest snipped for brevity Monday morning quarterbacking is always easier than playing the game and we'll probably never know for sure, but there where many then and many today that believed Japan was close to using an A-bomb ... on *us http://www.kimsoft.com/korea/jp-hung.htm Eisboch I didn't know that Japan had that type of technology....yet. Nothing close. That's an "internet speculation piece" to me. A few facts, then like fission, they split into a mushroom cloud of speculation. Might as well believe anything. Like Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Garbage intelligence, and mindless and erroneous speculation. The MacArthur and Ike views mentioned by Chuck are almost irrelevant, if even accurate and contemporaneous with the time the bombs were dropped. Theater generals painting rosy scenarios of easy victory, or greatly underestimating actual costs wasn't new then, and still happens. Truman and Marshall were running the show, and had the best picture. Personally, I would have asked a grunt who survived Tarawa or Iwo Jima or Okinawa, who had seen, heard and smelled the mayhem, his buddies killed and maimed. He fought the Japs on those islands, and the Japs fought to their death. "Well, son, we have a choice. We can drop a couple A-bombs on Japan, war's over, and you can go home. Or if you prefer, gear up and we'll land you in Japan to fight more Japs. What'll it be?" Then go with the answer. Truman already knew the answer. Anyway, having read much on the then Japanese view of combat and honor, it isn't much different in effect than Islamo-facism. They were nuts. The A-bomb was a nutcracker. Nukes generate a lot of fear, which is perfectly understandable, but the firebombing of cities, starvation, disease, and endless combat needed to take Japan would have been much worse. Victory in combat was the primary Jap goal, but dying in combat ran a close second. Being toasted by an unseen enemy tossing a nuke on your head turned their world upside down, and cracked the nut. IMHO. Tibbets belonged to that great generation to whom we owe so much, and I salute him. May he RIP. BTW, I was born in 1947. For all I know, my Dad might have died in the invasion of Japan in '45 or '46 and then I would be writing this as somebody else. But then again, anyone who can (at that time) successfully calculate bombs carried by weather ballons, that could make it to the US from Japan all those thousands of miles across the Pacific, were actually no dummies. Fat lot of good that did them. Might as well throw TNT-rigged coconuts in the gulf stream to blow up Ireland. But hey, everything can help in war. Kept some number of West-coasters busy on balloon patrol. Whenever the Jap balloons come up, I'm reminded of the American bat guy whose bats, incendiaries on their legs, were near the point of being dropped in Japan. Those bats might have caused more Jap casualties than the A-bombs. Who knows? --Vic |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
where doesn't Paul recollect badly | ASA | |||
where doesn't Paul dream finally | ASA | |||
who doesn't Paul explain monthly | ASA | |||
( OT ) Paul Wolfowitz -- General F up to run world bank | General |