To be honest they all sell different kinds of beers, they are all great and they are all tourist traps! I’m sorry, but you won’t find any “fair” café’s in the medieval centre of Brugge. As long as you stick to drinking beer and DON’T order food this time of the season you’ll be fine. But don’t order moules et frites unless you know for sure many other clients do it as well, or else you’ll be stuck to the toilet the rest of your holiday. Ohh, and don’t eat Gentse Waterzoo too.

Yeah but the Suez-crisis was still the last act of european colonialism. France and the UK thought the US would allow the intervention silently, but instead they supported the USSR. The USSR even wanted to fire missiles at London and Paris and asked the US’s support, but that ofcourse, didn’t go ahead :).

But untill the six-day war Israel’s closest ally was most certainly France! They had one common enemy, namely Egypt, because Egypt also supported the rebels in Algeria.

I think that “fighting to the death” could have been solved with an unconditional surrender from the Japanese if they were able to keep their emperor. Before the tests at Alamogordo AFB the US didn’t really care that much about this unconditional surrender but after that 16th July Truman stressed on it several times, pissing off the allied military leaders. I still think the weapon had to be used, to get Japan AND the emperor on its knees (Hitler didn’t stay in the office as well), but to warn the USSR as well.

Ben.

Focussing on a pointless debate about the use of the atom bomb only serves to distract from what went previously.
Regards,

kev35

Well, my job is to get a focus on ALL aspects of history. Sure, I’m aware of the horrors of the Japanese in China, how they maltreated POW’s … But that doesn’t answer the original question, was it really necessairy? The debate is not pointless, because it may give new insights. The debate should be kept alive. If I have a mission as a history-teacher, than it’s not to overload my pupils with all kinds of details on WWII, but to give them some insight into the debate itself.

If Truman was so right, how come many of the Pentagon generals wanted to wait for the Russian Option? Like I said, it’s opening a can of worms. You may not like my ideas, you don’t even have to respect my opinion, but the questions remain … and your post didn’t solve a single one of them, in contrary! I agree my last remark was unsenstive and rude, for which I appologise to Rhlangham. It was not intended to minimise the horrors of the victims of Japanese camps. I’m sure the Japanese would have dropped the bomb on the US if they were in the same position, but again, that didn’t happen. These are the pointless questions …

I can conclude with reversing your remark “Focussing about what went previously only serves to distract from a debate about the use of the atom bomb …”

I think dropping the atomic bombs was very neccessary. My dad used to know someone that was in a POW camp during the war, after the war, whenever he saw a Japanese car he used to spit on it!

Sure that hadn’t anything to do with the American and European automobile crisis of the 1970s?? :diablo: :diablo: :diablo: :diablo:

I really like them, those hedgehogs. Unfortunatelly they always tend to cross busy streets at nights so you can see their eyes only when it’s too late to brake. 🙁 Last week I hit one and I really felt bad for a day. 🙁

I think Britain lost a great politician and statesman. I admired his opposition and moral obligations on Bliar’s war plans.

Asking this question is like opening a can of worms. Excuse me, but I don’t find the two A-bombs the lesser of “two evils”. The best thing would have been a surrender of Japan rightly after the Potsdam conference. It was well known Japan was near its end. The US and Great-Britain already won the war of the pacific, the war in Europe was over, it was a matter of time before Japan would surrender. Without the A-bomb Japan would probably be defeated two weeks later. On the 8th August, Stalin would have invaded Manchuria, cutting off Japan from mainland China (and the necessairy resources). The Russians could easily take out the remaining Japanese forces. I still think the A-bomb was indirectly aimed at the Soviet-Union, to scare off Stalin rather than Japan. Why didn’t Truman wait untill after 8th of August. If the Russian option didn’t work he could still use his A-bombs. But why didn’t he wait? The Russian invasion plans were already 3 years old back then, and though Stalin first wanted to end the war in Europe, he also wanted to get Japan on its knees. Questions which remain.

The only positive about these two bombs is that the world was warned to what horrors nuclear weapons can lead. I’m sure if they weren’t put into use back then, they might have been used during the Cuba Crisis or the Yum Kippur War … the whole M.A.D.-scenario and its consequences.

Personally I don’t feel regret too, because it happened 3 generations ago, and because as a historian I can’t get emotional for every bloody moment in history. However, this is no time for Victory-signs and flag-waving but for sceptic thoughts about how we can avoid this in the future.