It is weighing on me that while I've learned so much and have taken on new perspectives on Scripture, I'm afraid that I've been less successful in overcoming patriotism, at least to the degree I hear Yada condemn it. I now well recognize many, many flaws and indeed grossly immoral acts my nation has taken over its history, but like a stop clock, sometimes accomplishes something good, or at least "better" than had it not acted or acted otherwise, particularly in challenging times.

As an example on the BTR show for December 7th, I heard Yada condemn America's response to Imperial Japan's attack as grossly immoral. To me war is an inherently grossly immoral act, that flows from the aggressive use of force prevailing among peoples and nations in a fallen and sinful world. I can fault FDR for the treatment of Japanese American citizens in that war, but have been otherwise unsuccessful in learning from Yada what response America ought to have taken other than total war until unconditional surrender was obtained by the Axis nations. While I agree with Yada that allying with an otherwise vile and mass murdering dictator in Stalin makes little sense in the abstract, the fact that the Soviet Union like the UK and USA had been attacked and had NOT attacked US is utterly ignored.

I've studied Truman's decision to use atomic weapons to bring about an abrupt end to the most destructive and violent conflict and conclude that he made the correct choice if the objective was to defeat the Axis and not repeat the lessons hard learned from the second most destructive conflict in World history Truman participated in as a Colonel in France two decades or so earlier. This was to not leave a aggressor power bent on World conquest undefeated or under the illusion that it had not been defeated to reattempt another global war as soon as it recovered from the last attempt. The fact that World War Three did not occur as envisioned is powerful evidence to me that in this instance America acted appropriately in a horribly violent situation.

What makes this more surprising to me is that Yada did such a masterful job recognizing and expounding upon Islam's global jihadist intent but ignores the political-religious fanaticism that motivated the Nazi's zealots and Imperial Japan's Bushido motivated Kamikaze and other suicide fighters, and that such fanaticism makes rational negations a dubious proposition.

As horrible as the campaign against Japan was, the rapid end of the war seems to me to have been an relatively merciful act if the alternative is a fight to the last man, woman or youth act of national seppuku. Indeed a case can be made that the Pacific War and the resulting long and prosperous friendship that emerged, between America and Japan seems a case of loving your enemies, but subduing a totalitarian authority bent on violence and caring and providing foe a former enemy in desperate need.

If I should be condemning the Americans and other Allied peoples that defeated Japan's bid at world conquest, I fear that I'm still in need of much learning. I'd like to think that I'm open to this if a rational case can be made based on the realities of the time, but so far this has been lacking in my estimation.

Respectfully,

-Theophilus

I agree with what Yah Tselem said.

I have had trouble rejecting patriotism myself although I think that I have finally rejected it now. I grew up in the Midwest which is arguably the most patriotic part of the USA (love it or leave it). My dad was in the Navy in WWII and a few of my uncles were in the army in WWII. My uncles that were in the army in Africa, Battle of the Bulge, etc. never wanted to talk about the war because they had seen some very horrible things. Dad would talk about the war because he never saw real hand to hand, getting shot at and shelled combat.

As for Pearl Harbor, FDR just couldn't wait to get us into the war and the only way that he was going to get us into the war was for an attack. The Japanese code had been cracked long before Dec. 7, 1941 so the big wigs in Washington knew the Japs were going to attack and FDR let them. He sacrificed about 2500 American lives and 1300 wounded to get us into the war. He could have easily had all of the battleships, cruisers, and destroyers sent out to sea to avoid attack. It's a lot harder to hit a moving ship that knows that you are attacking than an anchored ship that doesn't know that you are attacking. “Conveniently” none of our aircraft carriers (Enterprise, Lexington, or Saratoga) were in Pearl Harbor at the time, hmm. Only the older battleships, cruisers were anchored. The USS Iowa (BB-61) was already under construction at the time and had vastly superior fire power and armament compared to any of the ships sunk at Pearl; Iowa class battleships have nine 16” guns that can fire 2700 pound armor piercing shells 23 miles. Aircraft carriers had already been proven to be more valuable than battleships, that is why our carriers were out to sea.

Remember what Franklin Delano Roosevelt said: In politics, nothing happens by accident, if it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.

The only “people” that benefit from war are international bankers (Federal Reserve), industrialists, and politicians. The US was selling Japan oil, iron, scrap metal, airplane parts, technology, etc. until about 6 months before Pearl Harbor. My dad was on the USS Randolph (CV-15) and it was hit by a twin-engined Yokosuka P1Y1 kamikaze on March 11, 1945 while anchored at Ulithi Atoll. That Japanese plane had American made Pratt-Whitney radial engines. Luckily my dad wasn't in the part of the ship that got hit or else I wouldn't be here. American participation in both world wars would not have occurred if the Federal Reserve Act was not enacted by Congress and Woodrow Wilson in 1913. WWI started 7 months later. Their may not have even been two World Wars without the Fed. The Japanese couldn't have built as great a war machine as they had without the USA selling them oil, raw materials, and technology. So number one lesson is don't sell your future enemy stuff that they will use against you. So why are we “selling” billions of dollars of arms to the Arabs I wonder?

What I have wondered about the atomic bombings is why were Hiroshima and Nagasaki chosen as targets? Hiroshima and especially Nagasaki had largely Christian (Catholic) populations. Nagasaki had a Catholic presence since 1549 when the Portuguese arrived. Was it to be politically correct; we can't just kill Shintoists and Buddhists? Or wasn't fire bombing good enough or was it so that the survivors of the initial blast would die a slow painful death due to radiation poisoning?

Forgive my rambling. Shalom

While oftentimes policy is blamed on "stupidity" and such, this seems to be a credible summary of what has happened, and the stage being set now:
http://www.threeworldwars.com/albert-pike2.htm

9/11 was a watershed event used to justify shreadding what was left of the bill of rights. Now under NDAA americans can be disappeared. Look at some of history's most murderous tyrants, and understand they could have never done what they done without all the deluded patriotic citizens, clerks, police, and military to do its bidding.
This video is eye-opening when analyzing the official govt story compared to evidence:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71aXlW4gFcg

I wish to say first that I truly appreciate what what each of you has written. It has given me much to consider and hope to provide a more substantial reply soon. At present I have several questions on what was written as some aspects appear dubious to my understanding and truly hope that together with an openness to evidence and reason, that we can approach a truer understanding at least of history, and ideally more.

Maybe I'm approaching YT's perspective of losing my patriotism, but not yet being hatefully condemning all actions my nation has taken, and use the analogy of a stopped clock being correct twice a day.

I do you we can support the claims made in the discussion. As an example I was sufficiently curious about the Japanese aircraft engine mentioned before to look up the craft on wikipedia and learned its first flight occurred in 1943 with no mention of a US engine.

I've heard theories about FDR being complicit in the Pearl Harbor attack, but little to no credible evidence. I was surprised to learn that the alleged Eisenhower comments about the atomic bomb, are in much doubt and that he likely had little to no intelligence on the Pacific theater at that time given his theater of responsibility. The most relevant for this discussion is what evidence support the notion that Japan was ready for unconditional surrender prior to the atomic bombings and the Soviet entry against Japan. More on this later, but if this claim is untrue than, the case against the US is weak indeed.

Also if true what was America's correct moral response to Japan's aggression in the Pacific?

Not reacting to Pearl Harbor does little good to the US forces on Wake, Guam, the Philippines or our Allied peoples under assault. This basic question has yet to be answered. The short answer otherwise appears to be surrender or at least acceptance of an Axis domination of much of the world.

Respectfully,

-Theophilus

Lets look at the concept of casualties during the war. The purpose of the atomic bomb was to kill people. While no one would think it wrong to drop weapons to destroy infrasture that aided in development of the weapons of war, that was not the purpose of the bomb - the purpose was to kill as many civilians as possible. In that instant, America forever changed the rules of war. The attach on the World Trade Center was directly in line with the warfare put forth by America, kill the people that have nothing at all to do with the attack. People don't go to war, countries do. Their military's fight each other until one military is incapable of holding its own. No, America intentional killed as many women and children, elderly and those not engaging in battle, and those farthest away from the fighting. We intentionally attacked a CIVILIAN population. While America declares there were weapons being manufactured in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we did NOT attack military installations - we intentionally attacked and killed civilians - on purpose. How did that save lives?
While Wikipedia isn't the best source in the world, they do have some good info. This link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan clearly indicates Japan was trying to negotiate surrender through the Soviets. However, the Soviets had already agreed to attack them with the US and the Brits. What did "unconditional surrender" mean? What was America asking for? That the Japanese become our slaves?
Also, the US, Brits, and Soviets were dividing up the entire planet like candy during WW2 - without any account to the wishes of the sovereign nations around the world. They handed over parts of Northern Africa and the Middle East and even islands in the Pacific to each other without ever addressing the people who lived in those regions directly. This was imperialism and it was wrong. Killing innocent civilians to force the hand of the Japanese was wrong. I don't care if 10 million soldiers chose to duke it out on the battlefield to the last man - intentionally killing tens of thousands of women, children, elderly is wrong - period. When the Twin Towers were attacked, we as American's were aghast at the horror of attacking innocents because you don't like the decisions of their government. How was that any different than what we did - yet we did it on a scale magnified by 1000.

If you can't see the wrong America has performed on others, do a bit of research on the wrong America has performed on its own citizens. Read "The Underground History of American Education" by John Taylor Gatto and see the true reason we have compulsory education. Everyone loves to say our education system is failing in this country - however it is doing exactly what it was originally designed to do. We repeal back in horror when we hear about China experimenting on its own people, forgetting about the Tuskegee Experiment that was done on America's own people. Want to see what your own country has done - check out this YouTube video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78nFY_XbJzE. Yes, radiation experiments on our own people, but it was "okay" because the people were just African American (I am African American and I cried the first time I saw this video).

No country is perfect and I don't know a better place to live than America in 2012. However, that doesn't excuse the absolutely horrible things this country has done and none of the good outweighs the bad. Radiation experiments on children? On the surface, America shines like a new penny - but as you peel back the onion you begin to see we haven't been much different that any other country to exist. The same shock and horror I felt when I learned about the true history of Christianity is the same shock and horror I felt when I learned about the true history of the United States. I had been fed a lie and fell victim to a really, really good propaganda machine; no different than those people in any other country pointing their weapons at us. We are all simply pawns to the powers that be.

Again, I wouldn't want to live any other place right now (okay, maybe on some private island with miles of beach and nice hammocks), but that is much different than patriotism. George Orwell's 1984 isn't far off - we go from fighting an "enemy" to being allies to being rivals to fighting again. Just like Christianity - I understand why its hard to break. American's are amazing people, its not the people that are a problem, its the system. This system that is intentionally manipulating international financial markets - so the poor in other countries stay poor. With the click of a mouse button we manipulate the earning power of billions of people on the planet - all for the gain of a select few. I am NOT a Occupy type - I am a staunch conservative and voted for a Republican or Constitution Party candidate in every election. However, when you peel back the onion - what this country (not the individual people, the system) has done throughout the world is wrong. Our being the reserve currency means we have power over the entire world. Instead of being fiscally responsible - we manipulated that position, went off the gold standard, and now operate in so much debt - and we pretty much force the world to finance our excess or we will bring the entire system down. Torah clearly tells us not to have unjust weights and measures, not to do harm to the poor - yet that is how this country has operated for decades. Not doing harm to our own citizens, we do harm to entire countries by manipulating the value of their country currency - all for cheap imports and high priced exports.

We have gotten so greedy that we are even hurting ourselves. Watch the movie "food, inc." - while there is some liberal drivel in the movie, truth is truth. Companies are being allowed to poison our food supply for money. The government now determines which companies succeed or fail based on their willingness to bribe politicians (taking bribes is clearly against the Torah). The problem is, patriotism sometimes has us excuse evil done by our own government while we condemn (and even go to war) when those same actions are done by other countries. It clouds our vision and makes it hard to see what Yahowah is saying. We are clearly in the last days and we must be loyal to Yahowah alone. 50, 60, 70 years ago it may not have been as big of a deal, but this age is different. Evil is being ramped up and we will need to be clearly in tune with Yahowah to know who is for Him and who is against Him.

While I am thoroughly enjoying these posts, I can't help but try to simplify the whole patriotism issue in my own mind.

For me, then, it all boils down to this: is it appropriate for me, as someone who knows Yahowah and has accepted His Covenant and its terms and conditions as outlined in the Torah, to participate in the flag-waving hero worship of our nation's armed forces and/or to take part in the political schemes of this nation's leaders by endorsing one liar over the others?

The answer is a very loud, "NO!"

All this other stuff, while informative, is unnecessary in bringing me to the all-important conclusion that patriotism is just as evil as every other religion.

I understand your struggle, I really do. I am not judging you at all. Just keep seeking Yah on this issue.

One of the first revalations I got (all on my own, I was so proud!) when reading the Scriptures once I found Yah, was the first sin. The tree Satan stood for in Genesis was the knowledge of good and evil. What I got from that was how absolutely horrid good and evil in the same pot are to Yahowah. When pointed to the evil done on behalf of the US, your mind immediately goes to the good. This, in my view, is the absolute only trick the devil has up his sleeve for all of humanity. We get pure evil - it is so easy to detect, to see, and to fight against. What is much harder to wage war against is good mixed with evil.

Many people will never leave Christianity, no matter what truth they find in Yahowah - because of the good the religion has done. This was an approach used by the mafia and used even by street gangs. Do enough "good" in the community and people will look past your faults, no matter how evil they may be. The same with patriotism - some people will support this country no matter what, because of the good it has done. In spite of any wrong, irregardless of all the things that are simply against Yahowah - they will hang on. After reflecting on the entire history of this nation - I cannot think of one evil it has not actively engaged in at some point in her history. I also can't think of any good it hasn't been a part of. It seems that the U.S. is the absolute embodiment of the tree of knowledge of good an evil. This is why patriotism is so hard to resist, especially in the USA.

Maybe a better way to look at things is to consider - is it for Yahowah? Does patriotism lead people to Yahowah? Could it lead people away from Yahowah? We are taught to revere the Statue of Liberty - call her Lady Liberty, children are taught to identify her in preschool. They never get taught they are learning to revere a pagan deity. What about pledging allegiance to the flag? Were we ever supposed to do that? Can one follow Yahowah and pledge allegiance to a flag and country? At the end of the day - if it doesn't lead to the straight and very narrow road, we must leave it. This path is a fight and a struggle and Yahoshua never, ever said it would be easy. Reading about our need to leave father, mother, etc. is so easy, doing it is painful to the core.

Again, I feel your turmoil and your anguish. You are looking for something, anything that will help throwing patriotism off be easy. I don't think that is going to happen for you. This road, this path - it is going to cost you everything. That is why I get so angry with Christianity - they told me it was easy. Just confess, believe, and everything would be easy peasy smooth sailing through the gates of heaven. No, I am being stripped of my entire identity to gain a new one in Yah. While I love Yah and this process has been the most rewording in my entire life - its the hardest thing I ever had to do. And you are not alone. While patriotism isn't my struggle now - it was. I loved my country - warts, flaws and all. I would cry whenever Hank Williams Jr. (or some impersonator) would crank up a rousing rendition of "Proud to be an American" - I would literally cry! You really want to see my boo hoo someone play Trace Atkins "Welcome to Arlington". (As you can tell, I am a big country music fan). Its hard, no judgement at all.

Thanks for the information Mike. That is remarkable.

It's not surprising to me that American companies like P&W would sell to an eager buyer, especially in the Great Depression, but would eb surprised if they were lend-leasing aircraft engines to the IJN in 1943 when the aircraft in question forst flew. Indeed I understand that teh A-6M Zeke / Zero had its design influenced by the designer of the Sopwith Camel, aslo a top figheter in its day.

It seems to me that Japan since Perry visited has excelled at seeking out someone else's tech (even beer) and replicating and even enhancing these to suite their own purposes. Thankfully their development of atomic weapons was not aided in time to make the difference in that era.

FWIW, the Japanese are IMHO a remarkable people and much prefer them as friends. I sense that the aftermath of the war has left their national politi-religion much diminished, but now accept the religion of Secular-Humanism in its' place. I pray that they like all peoples be reached with the truth of Yah's Torwah.

Respectfully,

-Theophilus

For the benefit of those who have read the discussion above, I thought that I should post Yada’s reply to a lengthy email I sent him which conveyed much of this discussion:


FWIW, I found that I basically agreed with Yada’s general sentiments, especially his larger point on criticizing super patriotism / nationalism / militarism, but I wish to do so rationally based on the support of evidence. I’ll need to ask for clarification on his comments on Churchill’s plan for entry into Europe, but that appears to be a separate matter from what I asked about regarding how better to have ended the Pacific War.

I do remain disappointed that no rational case supported by the evidence has yet to be made on how this could’ve been better attained which actually removed the rulers of Imperial Japan who attempted global domination from power and in so doing to also so discredit the Bushido politi-religion used to motivate their military and populace in that endeavor to such a fanatical degree. I will ask that until such a case can be made that the Pacific War cease being used as an example and to instead use better examples that a clear case can be made and supported.

Respectfully,

-Theophilus

We would have to assume first, that it was alright for men to come here with lead and powder, and dessimate a people that fought with stick and stones, and after that, conquere the rest of the land and then remove a people from the dark continent to act as machinery all the while a good many profited from their labor. And then, act as if we were ashame of that act and kill half a million to release that guilt. We weren't freeing any black man with a civil war, he was already born free. And then we get into the, "spirits" of alcohol, drugs and tobacco, just what this country was built on. And for the present time as we exist we all are in a way debted to those that never renounced the shame we brought on ourselves through breaking Gods original text to us all. I personnally feel ashamed for what our founders have done to the world. Sure I know Yah had already witnessed it before hand, and maybe knew we were the ones that would be the real culprits by actually through the course of events of the elected officials, promote devastating agendas. Like being the major proveyor of weapons of war. Being the major consumers of drugs and alcohol, and actually promoting it, all the while reaping it's rewards by putting, "sin taxes" on it. Do we really have vital intreset. I say no we don't. We have one, and it's been plastered over too.
I use to feel we were an obediant nation, but now days, I just see everything is against, Yah. And I could just be simplstic in my view, but until I learn we had a right from God to do the unthinkable in many cases, I will continue to feel like we are the ones that are causing this world to rebel against Fathers Word.
There are many the would have me equate our nation with my very household. But I say, we are the ones that broke into a home and stole it from the owners so we can bring our form of justice that is predicated off the NT.

Richard, you ask an intriguing question. “Who cares?” I suppose few, if our conclusions and the condemnations we make from these are to be based on factors other than evidence and reason. If mine are incorrect I wish to consider what evidence I’m missing so as to better understand and render more meaningful conclusions and judgments.

Yada has impressed me as have others on this forum for doing just this, and it troubled me to hear him repeatedly make a condemnation that in this case that has yet to be supported, and is indeed in direct opposition to the relevant historical facts and evidence. Were it merely opinions for opinions sake that were unsupportable one way or another, I’d agree that the issue is ultimately irrelevant and bother with it no further. Regrettably to date, no material evidence has been presented to even contest the facts as I presented them, much less prove his position, so am troubled when this specific condemnation is advanced.

-All of that said, I do accept your final points with respect to Yah and the Torah having ultimate meaning for us, so yes can move past this, but will continue to carefully examine claims made by men, even those who have greatly impressed me with remarkable aspects of Yah’s Scriptures. Overcoming Patriotism continues to be a struggle for me, but something that Yada and others here have certainly helped me with and opened me eyes to some realties that needed to happen to better condemn and walk away from it.

May Yah richly bless you also Richard.

Respectfully,

-Theophilus

Sorry, Theophilus, I couldn't make my point clear enough, I guess my 'edumacation' is showing, but I think dajstill has worded alot of my viewpoints perfectly. The both of yours writing style is excellent and easy to understand and I love the exchange. I learn alot from reading you guys thoughts and appreciate it.
I have read a good number of things about our countrys history and in each reading, I find myself often wondering what the appropriate response should have been? So I'm not that far removed from your thoughts, "what should we, or what would have been a better action." But you know, when we learn that we have but six thousand years and not a day more to get things right, or wrong. Well I see it sort of like Richard does, and after reading this, article, I'll put below, and even though I have now an invalid relative under my roof to see after, and people in my family that work for me, so I must keep myself healthy for their sake, I still find myself finding new ways to remove myself from this culture.
Thank you brother for taking the time to answer us all, back.

http://www.thedailybeast...u-s-class-war.print.html

I think they are tipping us off in the paragraph just above the picture. More liberties lost.

Seems rather than history rewrote from the victors, and mostly accidental, I think it makes much more sense when you follow the money....er fiat money of those who create it out of thin air and charge interest with all the "money" as a debt owed to them. They fund both sides of conflicts and aggitate the world while ever manipulating toward global govenment. More often than not wars are justified thru lies and false-flag terror.

How did a nation suffering from 460billion% inflation (Weimar Republic), all the sudden build a huge war machine. Who funded and supported Hitler's rise to power. Who proffited off the slave labor at Auswitch and such. How does Hitler's use of false-flag terror (Reichstag Fire) relate to post 9/11 in our this nation? Is mass survellience, searches without warrants, killing of citizens by presidential decree and without due process, TSA groping our wives and children keeping us safe from the boogey man. Seems the greatest threat to mankind is organized government, which murdered +140million of their own citizens last century.

Who funded Japan's war machine, then who embargoed oil supplies provoking them. Who funded the Bolsheviks. Why was 1/2 of Europe simply handed over to the communists? Why Why...follow the money and the ambitions of megalomaniacs.

I'm excited when I read about prophecy concerning their end though!

I will first off say that ample evidence has been given in the form of quotes from individuals and communications and the like as well as logic and reason to show that first America was not a nation minding its own business in isolationist bliss but was rather actively maneuvering for war with Japan. There is a lot of circumstantial evidence in light of Japanese diplomatic and military communication intercepts and facts like ships of consequence (carriers) being out of the harbor on the day of the attack to say that the administration was quite aware of the attacks. And I think it is disengenous to say that no evidence has been given to say that America's role in the war was far from just. I am not going to sit here and quote entire books or for that matter lengthy passages from the court historians of the united states government. But I would rather ask you what incentives would historians have to follow the official narrative of the state? It is the Schlessingers of the world that get the access and tenure. I would rather advise you to read books from both perspectives (left and right) that seek to refute the official State narrative....seeing that you have already read the ones that would justify it. Books like Great Wars and Great Leaders by Raico (on the Right) and The Decision to Use the Bomb by Alperovitz (on the left) do this topic and many others justice and they can be found free on the internet by just doing a google search.

This is not just some line of reasoning or viewpoint that I inherited from my parents....in fact I inherited the opposite. I have not always believed in the inate injustice of 99 percent of war and specifically issues like the bomb. Less than 2 years ago I was adamantly in favor of the war and individual decisions and actions (like dropping the bombs) and vociferously and publicly defended these actions. I cited all of the propaganda and the court historians and banteed the figures like more than a million dead American service men in a mainland invasion and saving Japan from communism or millions dead in a suicidal last stand. And I agree with the rest...love of country is such a waste of time when compared to the love of YHWH and his ways. I understand that America loving and for that matter America bashing takes our focus away from YHWH and Torah....but I will say this....I was a "warvangelical" patriotic American. I am ashamed to admit this now....but I was upset and ashamed that I couldn't be in the military during the outset of the Iraq war (due to hopelessly deformed flat feet...feet that eventually needed reconstructive surgery)....and oh yes I hated the left form of government....I hated the welfare state....but I loved loved loved the warfare state....to this day it amazes me that I could be so cyincal and skeptical about one part of government and be so invest so much trust and be so loyal to the other part. My parents comforted me by saying "don't worry there will be other wars....this is just the beginning"...please don't be too hard on my parents. I think they were just trying to console their son in a time of sorrow and I am pretty sure they knew and were relieved by the fact that I had not a snowballs chance in hell of passing military physicals....but I digress (how odd for me). Then I came accross PoD (as a way to shore up my suspicions about "those damn muslims") and then I came accross YY....and for the first time in a long time I cared enough to actually examine my beliefs rather than just have them confirmed. And all these suspicions and doubts and inconsistancies that I hadn't thought about or hadn't allowed to come to the front of my brain suddenly came to the forefront. So...what I am getting at is this....The beginning of my love for YHWH was the beginning of the end for my patriotism. It took me a long time to shed it...over years...so this is not just some judgement piece against you Theophilus...I understand it is not easy. Having said that.......

Going back further to your comments about the vast majority of military believing that the bombs were unnecessary.....and your response about what evidence did they have....I would say that if they didn't have evidence what were they doing in command? People like the admiral who was in charge of the naval blockade of Japan had direct operational knowledge and believed that the war would be over in a 2 weeks to a month.....people like LeMay (who did not shy away from bombing people into the "stone age") and was in charge of massive air operations and bombing campaigns in the war also concurred the war was going to be over in 2 weeks regardless of whether or not Japan was bombed at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Truman was quoted stating (about the Atomic bomb) that now he had a "hammer" against the soviets. (before he bombed the Japanese) I find that more than circumstantial. And as for the generals we are not just talking about brigadiers we are talking about theatre commanders like Eisenhower and MacArthur. As I have said and will reiterate....if they didn't understand the situation in Japan...then why were they in command? Contrary to what you have said before about the Eisenhower quotes about the bomb....there is no doubt that he publicly criticized the bomb which he did in his autobiography.
As for restraint....what restraint? The United States remains the only nation on the earth that has used such weapons and we can speculate about what the Russians would have done or what the Germans or the Japanese would have done or we can deal with reality that it was the United States who set the nuclear precedent in war and against civillian populations at that. Since the American acquisition of the bomb many other nations have acquired them. They have not used them....even the tyrannical regimes like Russia and China. Why didn't Russia just bomb Kabul (who would have cared...at least enough to do anything about it) or China just bomb Hanoi (we probably would have cheered)....if they are the loose cannons that you would purport them to be?

As I have written before about the targetting of civillians I would ask you again....if you were a soldier and you could save other soldiers lives (and in this specific case against an enemy that was all but defeated and on the run....an enemy that was ruined.....) by massacreing a city or even a village full of civillians....women, children, elderly, and peaceful men.....would you do it....go in and shoot and stab and burn them face to face?....to save men who were wearing a uniform that made them combatants? You have not answered. I will say that I would not. It is enough to see dead babies in black and white pictures....I have no desire to see it in living color...let alone be the one perpetrating it.

As an aside I literally have to scoff at your notion that we stopped Japanese global domination in its tracks. First off, I can't even believe that you would espouse a notion that Japan had the ability to project global power. Do you think for one second that we'd all be speaking Japanese now if we hadn't engaged in the war? Look around Japan at that time. You have the Soviet Union (which Japan was so afraid of they wouldn't even attack it at the height of its vulnerability as it was fighting a war in the west against Hitlerian Germany...much to the dismay of afore mentioned Hitlerian Germany). You have an Asia/Oceana that was dominated by the West. Burma, India, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, New Guineau, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Philippines, the Chinese concessions, Mongolia...all dominated or outright possessed by England, the U.S., France, the Netherlands, and Russia and you don't in the least see the quixotic notions of why we fought the war melt away...at least a little?

Japan did horrible things in asia....horrible unspeakable things....but the United States will not be put on the scale wth Japan....anymore than Yisrael/Yahuda was weighed with Assyria or Babylon. We will as a nation...we are as a nation judged by the inexorable and perfect standard of justice....that we weren't as bad as Hitler or Ahmadinajad will not be our saving grace.

I am not unsympathetic to the Chinese suffering. I have a Chinese wife....I know of the horrors from stories my Grandmother-in-law tells. But I also hear stories about communism....and I remember how we did our part to set the stage for that nightmare as well....and not just in China....but in Eastern Europe. Even if you will hold on to the notion that the United States entered the war with pure intentions.....have we not yet learned that actions no matter how well intentioned have consequences.

But I will reiterate that I do not believe the war was undertaken for humaintarian purposes. Look who we allied ourselves with, what we were willing to give to those allies, look at our tactics and look at the evidence I previously offered about our indifference and nearly tacit approval of the extermination of European Jewry.

And about the statement I made about French imperialism.....that you took issue with....I am sorry but regardless of our motives that is undisputable fact. Starting in 1950 America started giving direct aid to the French to support them in their attempted re-assertion in Vietnam. We also sent over military advisors to Vietnam starting in the early 1950s. So yes we were supporting French colonialism even as we fought to defeat Japanese colonialism. And after the french were defeated....we merely took over their place propping up and deposing Vietnamese puppets at will.and occupying (call it what you will) land that wasn't ours.

When we try to export our goodness through the bayonet and the bomb we fail immediately before we even do the act because we destroy our goodness. It was so important to go to war in Vietnam to save the Vietnamese from communism but what we did was radicalize the North (in what they saw as yet another form of western colonialist aggression...which turned them to embrace what usually would be age old enemies such as the Chinese....the Ho regime, approached us several times immediately following the WW2 and before we put a stamp of approval on French domination of indochina. Perhaps if we had approached them in the spirit of diplomacy and approachment 60 years ago we could have saved millions of people from the misery that was perpetrated in the decades to follow. Maybe not....but we will never know because we chose war.)and probably prolongued the suffering and the duration of that suffering for all involved.

McDonalds has done more to foster peace, freedom and understanding between the United States and Vietnam that Boeing or Browning ever have. It is harder to hate a people when you taste a delicious hamburger as your child plays with a happy meal toy than it is when you daughter is a camp whore, your son has had his skin melted off by napalm and your mother has died of sorrow by being moved into a refugee camp displaced from her home and all that is familiar in her life. And diplomacy of the bomb is the option of first resort for the United states anymore. And yes....I see it with Iran once again...this incessant drum beat to war. If we go to war with Iran...everybody will have blame....there will be no innocent parties. I am not so naive to think Iran is a saintly nation.....but we will not be blameless. What I see on a daily basis in this country can only be described as warmongering.....piss and vinegar...lock stock and barrel. I don't see a government afraid of war....I see a government all but embracing war....and I am terrified....because I think...perhaps our number is up....perhaps Iran will be the instrument of this haughty bloodthirsty fool's chastisement.

So I ask you what do we have to be patriotic for? You yourself acknowledge that we have done terrible things....but yes we have done some good things....wonderful things too. Yeah....so? You look at the Tanakh and it is a read that Abe Foxman at the ADL would just about declare today to be downright anti-semitic!!!! Do you think that Yisrael did everything bad? That they had no redeeming qualities or that they didn't do anything positive in the world? And frankly, YHWH wasn't interested.

Do you think that we are really so different from the Assyrians or the Babylonian/Persians or the Romans all mentioned with such hatred in the Tanakh? All the historians will tell you these nations did much for civilization....they had gardens and music and art....they forwarded science and technology and were actually quite tolerant and free (at certain points) Well, that is not how YHWH saw things.. And then look at how they were described in the scriptures. And I have mentioned the Assyrians....do you think that they openly just admitted to themselves....oh yeah baby...we are a terrorist nation and that's the way we like it!!!!!" But rather I am sure they couched their rhetoric the same way we do now....that it is an national security emergency....that its either them or us.....that the reason we are fighting over there is so that we aren't fighting here.....and the soldiers....they weren't just mercenaries of the state making a good living off of killing and destroying....no...they were the selfless young men serving the collective whole as represented by the rulers and the state apparatus...downright worthy or near worship.. And when there was some peaceful Assyrian that saw the folly and ultimate destiny of destruction that awaited the nation and spoke out I am sure the populace booed him or beheaded him with the best of intentions and with the utmost sincerity. There is no doubt that religion even if it is false does bring about sincerity even if it is the brainless unexamined sincerity of a parrot. And that is what patriotism has bred today in America. We have the "warvangical" party. A party that has perfectly fused the state and religion. So WWJD? Probably bomb someone. YHWH and by extension Yahoshua suffered from no such illusions about power and the motives of power and that it corrupted not only those who held it but those who were its victims. and that can plainly be seen from history. Patriotism isn't an earnest honest love....it is infatuation and chauvinism.....and to some degree we have become the nation that we thought we were fighting when we fought Japan or Germany. We would have a very large cross section of this nation today that if Yahoshua came back not as the Lion of the Tribe of Yahuda...but as the rabbi circa J'lem 33 c.e. and said "blessed are the peacemakers..." They would boo him and say "get off the stage hippy....your cuttin into Lee Greenwood's time!!!!"


And I will say this about Abraham Lincoln.....if you have no right to dissolve the bonds of a political union....then ultimately you have no rights at all.....and I think to myself as I write this "To your Tents O Israel!!!!". You should rather ask if the northern states were so incensed about slavery....why did they not secede from the South? As was proposed in Hartford in 1814....the answer is because it was not about slavery or any sense of justice.....it was about preserving power....and the power to exploit specifically.

Let's take the logic to an example that I admit is absurd but I think demonstrates a point. Lets say that You live in a nation that demands a tax of 1 percent of the children from in the entire nation be handed over to the state. They then take those children and ground them up into hamburger for the military. They also demand that every girl who has escaped such a fate at the age of 15 in the entire nation shall be subject to 4 years of military prostitution to be decided upon by regional military councils. Also any boy who has escaped the fate of hamburger will be conscripted into the military at the age of 12. If he is deemed unfit for military service...even if the 1 percent quota has been met he shall be shipped off to the goverment meat grinding factories to become a patty for his former playmates. These boys who do make military service shall know nothing but war for at least 30 years...if they live that long because the nation being an unproductive collectivist wealth destroying leviathan must constantly engage in warfare to keep it afloat. If there were people in that state who saw the evil and the folly of such practices and decided not on revolution but rather secession in order to preserve their children and themselves would you blame them and credit the "Union's" leaders for saying the afore mentioned union? The point is what is so sacred about the union? The south did not secede to overthrow the north, the south did not wish to conquer the north or occupy the north or enslave the northerners and carry them off to plantations. The south simply wanted to be left alone....free from the tyranny of Northern mercantilism. Lincoln admitted the real reason for invasion when he proclaimed in his first innagural that his duty was to "to collect the duties and imposts,"

There was no reason that secession had to mean war....that more than 600,000 men had to die and over a million had to be maimed and over 50,000 civillians had to die. Secession did not have to mean that h. Corpus would be suspended, and that we would see the arrest of a Chief justice for opposition to such a measure and that civillian courts would be suspended in favor of the holy vehm of military tribunals and 14,000 "copperheads would be arrested and imprisoned for opposing the war with the closure of more than 300 publications opposed to the northern crusade to impose the same mercantilism that we broke away from England for. And then you look at all this....and we see it repeated again with fascists like Wilson in world war 1 and yet we still worship Lincoln in his temple at D.C......the father of tyrany in this nation. But hey...I suppose old Abe had a tough job ahead of him to preserve the union....."Yes, my father laid heavy burdens on you, but I'm going to make them even heavier! My father beat you with whips, but I will beat you with scorpions!"

Let's say for one second that there was no issue of economic tyranny....what if the majority of southerner saw it in their best interest to secede...out of a common heritage or cultural affinity or to espouse a more agreeable form of government....much like a large segment of the quebec population does today....Should Canada go to war with Quebec if the separatists win the day at some future time? The south would have seceded, in all likelihood slavery would have ended before the dawning of the 20th century PEACEFULLY....just like it had in the rest of the western world and there would be four (or possibly more) nations on the North American continent all trading with each other and having cultural exchanges. Life would have gone on. The successful outcome of northern aggression ultimately means that you and I have no rights that are not granted to us by the State....whether or not that is what is admitted. And the state has acted as such since that time. I am no worshipper of the constitution....but a government that actually followed the constitution would be a much more tolerable government than the monstrosity we have now.

Slavery is wrong....I am not going to go down the twisting road of scritpual slavery as outlined in the Torah now because this discussion is an old one and I firmly believe that the attitudes expressed and the manners in which slavery was to be practiced in the Torah made it a forgone conclussion that slavery would be rejected and abolished. I see no hypocrisy in the 18th and 19th century abolitionist movement that took their inspiration from the scriptures. I can reconcile myself to slave revolt and self-emancipation with help from sympathetic private parties like that of John Brown without justifying a ruinous and murderous war....which is just how H.D. Thoreau saw things. The north could have let the south secede and not interferred with private northern citizens giving aid to slave revolt (with the understanding that these citizens would be subject to southern law in southern land), and they could have welcomed with open arms any slave that escaped from southern slavery with automatic emancipation and citizenship.....but to show that the war was not about slavery....in fact the federal government enforced such laws as the fugitive slave act. Slavery was the facade which government has now used for 150 years to make us happy that we are ourselves enslaved to such a state. Slavery gave creditablity to a war that otherwise would have done down as one of the most obsene injustices ever witnessed in our history.

The fact of the matter is that the war was fought to save the union. It was not fought to free the slaves. The war was not fought to preserve slavery in the south. It was a war of aggression by the northern industrial complex to keep a captive population in the south that was ALREADY burderned by paying 80 percent of the tariffs imposed in the country. The tariff rates were scheduled to be TRIPLED under the Lincoln administration!!! (the list of items that could be taxed was also greatly expanded) The war was fought by mountain boys in Tennessee and smallholding farmers from Georgia and laborers in North Carolina not to preserve the institution of slavery but for literally the shirts on their backs...shovels and nails and coffee. Less than 25% of white southerners held slaves. There were a lot of southern men that died for the confederacy as slaveless men. They fought to ward off Northern corporatism that was strangling their economic welfare. If you believe that Americans were justified in fighting the revolution then you just about ought to get out of your seat and applaud Southern Secession. Abraham Lincoln was the picked man of the pro-tariff industrialists and it was his duty to keep the south subject to the tariff system by keeping them in the union. The man ruled like a dictator and the defeat of the South rather than things such as the 1913 resurrection of the national bank or the administration of FDR is what really marked the beginning of the end of freedom in this nation. Henry C. Carey (Lincoln's economic advisor) wrote, -"Nothing less than a dictator is required for making a really good tariff"....and that is what Lincoln was. His unwavering ambition, repressive actions and cynical political maneuvering have all been covered up by a loveable goofy looking raconteur giant....a caricature easily accepted by all...and that is just one glaring example of the power of state propaganda and the willing court historians corruption of the facts.

So...yes...love your nation. Love the land, love the people, love the common bonds and the ties that bind. Love the traditions and the character of this nation. But love it as a prophet. Love it with the understanding that we have a date with judgement. Compassion ultimately must be grounded in truth. Do not love the government....do not love those who would be your masters or would serve those would be masters. They move only as slowly as they think they must. If they thought they could dominate you completely in a day and make you a serf.....thanking them for stamping on your face every day of your life...they would do it.

The power elite want you to be patriotic....that should tell you something. It doesn't matter if it is because we are a "great society" that takes care of the weak, the meek, and the unable or if it is because we are a great military power that "shocks and awes" the world with our might. They want you to be patriotic. They want you to love them and justify their actions and accept their stated intentions and their narrative. They seek to corrupt you from the time you are born. They want you to worship the state....it doesn't matter if you worship jeezus christ as a warvangelical republican or if you worship Woodrow Delano Johnson as a sosec humanist democrat...either will do. As long as your are corrupted you will not only accept being ruled....you will be thankful you aren't Chinese or North Korean or Iranian...no matter how bad your lot has gotten....and you will focus on the faults of others and ignore the plank in your own eye and slip into the oblivion of serfdom with a smile and a thank you on your lips.

"The truth is that the state is a conspiracy designed not only to exploit but above all to corrupt its citizens...Henceforth, I shall never serve any government anywhere" - Leo Tolstoy

-I wish to sincerely thank each of you for your thoughtful responses and especially S82. Before making a detailed rely, I would like to take some time to read and consider your comments, and am thankful that someone has now at least pointed me toward possibly relevant evidence to consider regarding the thrust of my question regarding the end of WW-2. That said, I'll briefly make a few comments in reply that occur to me.

-S82, I believe that I already commented that Imperial Japan was not then in an immanent position to conquer North America on its own in the early 1940s, since the bulk of their army was bogged down China and the Pacific, but I could have been unclear. The greater danger toward Axis domination of the globe came in conjunction with the European Axis powers, particularly if they were successful in knocking Britain and or the Soviet Union out of the war. If you truly believe the Axis were doomed to defeat absent American support and ultimately intervention on the Allied side, I suggest considering Richard Overy's analysis in "Why the Allies Won."

-If on the other hand, you can make a rational case that Axis were doomed with the USA peacefully absorbing Imperial Japan's attacks on Hawaii, Wake and Midway along with the conquests of the Philippines, Guam, the Aleutians, while severing Australia and New Zealand's life line, while Nazi Germany's u-boats were sinking American shipping off of our coast and threatening England's life line, I'm certainly interested.

-By examining the ideologies behind Soviet Communism, Nazism and Imperial Japan, yes, I can safely conclude that like Islam, global domination was/is a goal that each shares that would not refrain from the use of nuclear weapons, especially if they had a monopoly and the relative military and industrial power the US had attained by 1945. The reason no other atomic weapons have been used appears to be US restraint when America did possess that unique position of power to have swiftly defeat any opponent, and by the dangers of MAD once the monopoly ended.

-So the US and UN were wrong to not ignore Communist North Korea's invasion of South Korea, but why? I suspect Truman's Containment policy was the basic rational / justification behind US participation in resisting Communist expansion in both South Korea and South Vietnam.

-Yes the US preferred the French and the non-Communist South Vietnamese government to invading the Communists and thought it worthwhile to offer some support to the French to that end. After the French were defeated and pulled out of South Vietnam, I'm not seeing the case for the US military presence having the goal of returning that nation to French control, or adding it as n American State, but rather preserve it as its' own state.

-FWIW, I don't see much to disagree with you on Lincoln, except to note that the South opted to first make their session violent by firing on the US facility in Fort Sumpter. I find the case Lincoln's Constitutional case to preserve the Union against the will of the peoples of the States that opted to leave to be weak, and used the slavery issue to keep outside powers form intervening in the conflict. While it seems we applaud the end result of abolishing slavery, the expansion of national power at the expense of state and local representative government has indeed lead to a reduction of individual liberty.

-This last issue, preservation of liberty would indeed have at least in part have placed the ideals expressed for the reason for severing form British rule in common with the Confederates. Unfortunately the Confederates were guilty of ignoring the Declaration’s other ideal that it being the self-evident truth that all men (and women) are created equal and are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights to include life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

-Were the Pilgrims not doomed to religions traps by trusting their translated "Holy Bible" regardless of their intentions?

-Daniel, since you mention you’re a wounded veteran, are you open to discussing how that came to be? Also Daniel why was the war of 1812-15 justified? Did that war not also involve the US using force for the “greater good”?

FWIW, I expressed to Yada, that he helped me to see that in my participation in Desert Storm, may have freed the Kuwaitis and their neighbors from the terrors of Saddam’s occupation, for which they openly expressed their gratitude, since they were trapped in the politi-religion of Islam, they were not made free in an ultimate sense.
At present I find the other “victory” I participated in, and original reason for my volunteering to serve, to have been more meaningful, which was the defense of western Europe by deterring Warsaw Pact expansion into that region, until Soviet Communism peacefully collapsed. I suspect to many that was wrong too, as you may view living in our system no better than living under Soviet Communism. For my part I remain pleased to have witnessed the Berlin Wall come peacefully down and increased individual liberties restored to peoples long denied these.

We’ve covered much ground that is far removed the central question I asked, and do sincelrely hope that the evidence I presented was wrong and that Truman acted despite having clear knowledge that short of atomic weapons Imperial Japan’s rulers in a position to have actually ended the war were truly trying to unconditionally surrender. So far I’ve not encounter this evidence, but will continue reading in hopes that there is more than the opinions of American Generals to support this notion.

Respectfully,

-Theophilus

USMC: Grenada 1983 (Coming up on THIRTY years ago! That hurts more than the AK-47 projectile received as a 'parting gift' from the Cuban 'construction workers'!)



They (Britain) wuz invading Us (US).

The doctrine of (narrowly defined) self-defense comes straight from Torah.

RON PAUL 2012!!!

Daniel, I hope that means that you made a full recovery. Thankfully while a high intensity kinetic action (are we still allowed to call them battles?), my Apache squadron made it through Desert Storm without a casualty. That said being under fire was not enjoyable. FWIW, I was shocked last year to realize that it had been 20 years ago.

Agreed. So there is a forceful response permitted when attacked. It seems to me all of the Axis powers choose to initiate war on America in their bid for global conquest, which begs the question what America's appropriate response was?

It seems to me America choose to rapidly subdue, and then aid and redeem those states as friends under new and elected representative gov’t, not inclined towards global conquest wasn't inappropriate.



Unfortunately true, plus a conditional surrender that retained Japan’s rulers and Bushido politi-religion to try world war yet again, just as soon as they amassed the means to try again as the Germans had so painfully just demonstrated was a non-starter for the Allies.

Rupaul 2012! 

Respectfully,

-Theophilus

That animation is really funny, Chuck. It's thought-provoking in a clever, amusing way. Thanks for sharing the link, brother!

A lot of nationals and citizens seem to have a great tendency to think of patriotism as something that would save them in times of dire challenge.

The problem with people though is that they lose some level of sight of the reality and what is true when the task is then presented to them.

In this age, it is not about patriotism that should work as that would mean that you are to stand up for your land against whatever adversity that comes its way.

^
Eddie Murphy better turn around..."not coming to america"