(Page 3 of 12)
Christopher Orlet asks whether Americans, if they had seen photos of Dresden, refugees etc., would have had the stomach to bomb Hiroshima, and then says “probably not.” Wrong. The simple truth is that there were plenty of photos and information around about Dresden, German refugees etcetera because the war in Europe ended in May 1945, and the atom bombs weren’t dropped until August 1945. It made no difference, the public attitude was that nobody cared about the Germans or the Japanese, they had started a terrible war and they got the hell beaten out of them for their trouble. There was more than enough concentration- and death-camp footage around in 1945 to make sure that there was no sympathy for Germans and Japanese. The currently fashionable, industrial scale sniveling about Dresden didn’t start until well after the war, when people who didn’t have to risk anything and weren’t responsible for the decisions made at the time could afford the luxury of self-aggrandizing moral pontificating.
The men who bombed Hiroshima certainly weren’t worried about it — their conversation on looking at the mushroom cloud after the bomb had gone off was about relief that the bomb had worked as planned and their mission was successful and about whether it would be enough to end the war. The fact that there was a destroyed city at the bottom of the cloud meant nothing to them. Defeating the Japanese and ending the war through victory was the only important thing, all other considerations were beside the point. Harry Truman said he never lost a moment’s sleep over his decision to drop the atom bombs. If he wasn’t worried, why should anybody else?…p>If Western democracy and civilization and the rule of law and protection of individual freedom and choice isn’t worth dying for, then it is not worth fighting for either, and if it is not worth fighting for, then what is the point of it? The idea of death before moral surrender is central to the whole concept of Christian morality — Jesus Christ died an agonizing death on the cross for his beliefs, he didn’t say “let’s just talk about this, guys, let’s do lunch and look for a win-win outcome.” If you aren’t prepared to fight for your beliefs, or to protect others from attack and incur the pain and suffering that goes with this, then surrender now and let them kill us like animals and do whatever they like. It isn’t moral courage to do that, it is failure, selfishness and cowardice…. br> — Christopher H. br> Australia /p> p> I sometimes think the administration uses the UN whenever it can until it is plainly obvious, after one more lethal massacre, that they simply can’t be trusted by anyone, anywhere. No one except maybe Israel is going to make another major move until disaster speaks again. There’s going to be one more sacrifice in order to destroy the UN —that’s our policy. Let’s hope it’s worth it. br> — M. Scott Horn br> Akron, Ohio /p> p> Well I should have read this article before I wrote the letter about “Come Home Democrats.” This is why I am not happy with Bush’s war in Iraq. He is too PC and not trying to win. I am glad to see Mr. Orlet putting this out, it needs to have wide coverage. Just go in and go to win, there would be less loss of life on both sides instead of dragging it out. br> — Elaine Kyle
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?