'Truths' of Hiroshima Justified Dropping Bomb

To the Editor:

In discussing the decision to bomb Hiroshima, Robert Jay Lifton and Greg Mitchell (letter, Aug. 11) state that ''America after 51 years still refuses to face squarely the atomic bombings of Japan,'' but ''Americans will no longer resist Hiroshima truths as persistently as before.'' But what are those truths?

* The Manhattan Project was begun after German scientists discovered atomic fission. At that time, Hitler was threatening all of Europe and boasting of world domination.

* We were drawn into World War II when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, inflicting heavy casualties on our Pacific fleet. Simultaneously, Hitler declared war on us.

* We suffered casualties in the hundreds of thousands over a period of more than three years' fighting, finally defeating the Germans and at the same time incurring a record national debt.

* During that time, the battle of the Pacific was being waged against the Japanese. It, too, was very costly in American casualties and treasure, and the end was not in sight.

* We succeeded in producing a weapon that could end the war immediately.

Those were the ''truths'' faced by President Truman when he had ''to face squarely the atomic bombings of Japan.'' He made the right decision.

On the personal side, I was a G.I. on the Manhattan Project in Los Alamos at that time. My future brother-in-law was on his way to Japan with the fleet that was preparing for the inevitable invasion. Those were our ''Hiroshima truths.'' We welcomed the timely surrender of Japan.

PRESIDENT'S RANCH? 
   Newspapers have frequently referred to President Bush's "ranch" in Crawford, Texas. The latest mention dealt wth the recent wedding of his daughter. I looked up the meaning of the word "ranch" in the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. Here's how it defines "ranch":

1. An extensive farm in which large herds of cattle, sheep or horses are raised.
2. A large farm in which a particular crop or kind of animal is raised.
3. A house in which the owner of an extensive farm lives.

  Does Presiden Bush really have a "ranch"? Or is it really the George W. Bush estate? Or
does that sound too elitist.

What do you think?

Blackwater in Iraq, is, in essence, a private army opererating in
Iraq, funded by the Congress of the United States. It admittedly
also has units in the United States training and operating under
private contracts. Apparently, there is nothing to prevent it from
being hired to further the interests of individuals or organizations
with aims that are inimical to those of our duly elected state
and/or federal governments. This goes beyond the letter of the
second amendment which speaks of an armed militia run by state
entities. Thus, it is an unprecedent threat to our Constitution and
to the survival of our democracy. It must be disarmed and
dismantled immediately

 Just checked to see if it would have been a good idea to have bought Halliburton stock at the beginning of the invasion of Iraq in 2002. Answer: It WOULD have been a good idea!!
 In 2002 it was selling for 5. Today, July 25,2007, it is selling at 37. It's enough to make the Vice President smile.

I have been lookiing in vain for some analysis of why President Bush
did not pardon Scooter Libby, instead of only challenging the
length of Libby's sentence. Could it be that he does not trust Mr.
Libby to keep silent about illicit activities in his and Cheney's office? And that the pardon will be given just as the
President leaves office and is no longer vulnerable to impeachment?

Why did Vice President Cheney make that recent short visit to Pakistan? The administration said that its purpose was to send a personal message to Musharraf to toe the line with respect to al Qaeda activities in Afghanistan. But that could have been done electronically. I can't buy that. My guess is that he took along lots of dollars, our dollars, tax payers' dollars. I certainly hope that he brought enough! (Although, the way things are going, the Prime Minister has us over a barrel.)

There are seven major sectarian groups vying for control, and quite a few
minor ones with their own interests.

Total attacks average 180 per day, up from 70 per day in January 2006

Attacks against civilians have quadrupled since January 2006, with an
average of 3000 civilians killed per month.

1.6 million Iraqis have been displaced; 1.8 million have fled the country.

Inflation is over 50%. Unemployment runs between 20 and 60%.

Many areas only have 2 hours of electricity per day, the water is bad, and
garbage is waist high, as it goes uncollected.

Many criminal gangs are cooperating with the insurgency. I quote: "If there
were foreign forces in New Jersey, Tony Soprano would be an insurgent
leader."

There are 141,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. There is a total of 16,400 troops
committed by 27 coalition partners, with the largest foreign commitment from
the UK (only 7200 troops).

There are 5000 civilian contractors in the country (almost as many
contractors as UK troops)

21,000 American troops have been wounded, many of them seriously.

The U.S. has to date spent $400 billion on the war, and costs are currently
running $8 billion per month. Total appropriation for Iraqi defense forces
for FY 2006 is $3 billion, which is less than the U.S. spends in Iraq every
two weeks.  "Tail" costs are expected --"Caring for veterans and replacing
lost equipment will run into the hundreds of billions of dollars. Estimates
run as high as $2 trillion for the final cost of the U.S. involvement in
Iraq."

Official corruption costs Iraq an estimated $5-7 billion per year.

Estimates of oil stolen by corrupt entities are as high as 500,000 barrels
per day.

The Iraq war has greatly reduced the U.S.'s negotiating power with Iran. I
quote:  "Iran is negotiating with the United States in the streets of
Baghdad."

"The Iraqi police cannot control crime, and they routinely engage in
sectarian violence, including the unnecessary detention, torture, and
targeted execution of Sunni Arab civilians. The police are organized under
the Ministry of the Interior, which is confronted by corruption and militia
infiltration and lacks control over police in the provinces."
Contributed by Lou.

MORE THINKING:
I have been thinking-real hard: Will it really be catastrophic if we leave Iraq now? Certainly not for our troops. And not for our national debt. For Iraq it will be a mixed bag. It would probably end up as a Shi-ite country (except for Kurdistan) bordering on a Shi-ite Iran, but also surrounded by several Sunni nations. And all have ONE thing in common: The desire to sell their oil! That is an important factor that, in my opinion, should  discourage any destructive internecine warfare. After a period of tension it should be clear to all involved that cooperation will be more profitable (in every sense of the word) than war. And what about those countries without oil? They are a source of low wage labor, just like Viet Nam, where significant quantities of clothing sold in the U.S. is now manufactured. (Examine your clothing labels!). SO, MY CONCLUSION:  GET OUT OF IRAQ NOW!

I have always been puzzled by the broadcast of Osama bin Laden just prior to the 2004 presidential election. It certainly helped re-elect George Bush although he might have won anyway. On the other hand, in one of his subsequent press conferences, in brushing off a reporter's question, President Bush said that he had no interest in bin Laden anymore. And we are now apparently de-emphasizing Afghanistan. (Just Speaking Out, that's all.)

This is the initiation of my blog site. I will be commenting on various happenings related to important issues of the day.
For example, there is now an ongoing discussion of what our President will be deciding about Iraq in lieu of the Baker-Hamilton Report on Iraq. All of this is window dressing to indicate Bush is seriously considering the items in the report, in particular the possible conditions for removal of our GIs in the relatively near future. I repeat: It is window dressing. The public should remember that some months ago, Bush remarked, almost as an aside, that he would leave that decision to future Presidents. And that is what he will do. George Bush is at his best when he can shift responsibilioties to others. That is the story of his life.
BFE