Short post today. Visits from supposedly anti-war Secretary John Kerry, and President Barack Obama to the Hiroshima memorial brought up a question I've entertained in my mind on different occasions over the years--one that others had posed for me: it's easy to understand that an overwhelming show of extreme superiority was necessary to prevent Emperor Hirohito from forcing his citizens to fight to the last even in a losing war, but why Nagasaki? Why the second bomb? Why did the US have to kill dozens of thousands of civilians AGAIN? Beyond the explanation that cultural ideals of honor under which the society was operating at the time dictated that a warrior not submit even after the first devastatingly superior blow, I'm at a loss to understand why the Emperor didn't capitulate immediately. Maybe it's even simpler than that: he was a tyrant dictator and was quite comfortable asking his citizens to commit suicide for him. After all that is where we get the
Candid evaluation of assumptions as well as musings on consequences of political, religious, moral, scientific, linguistic and literary truths and pretensions thereto. Dissecting representations, critiquing arguments, discussing liberty, equality, justice, faith, values, facts, and the principles and institutions that make them all possible.