A few facts about why we dropped the bomb on Hiroshima

[KarlMarx]

This August 6th will mark the 70th anniversary of the dropping of the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima. Without fail, some well meaning souls will post something on a blog or write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper deploring this highly immoral act.

Well, no one is going to argue that dropping the A-bomb on Hiroshima was not a horrible act..... but it was necessary. Here is why:

We like to think of World War II as one big war when, in fact, it was two wars. One fought in Europe and the other fought in the Pacific. Of the two conflicts, the War of the Pacific was the worse of the two. Given the fact that the Japanese soldier observed the "Bushido" military code that prohibited surrender under any circumstance, our servicemen had to fight tooth and nail to win battles and always at a high cost in lives. Each battle became more and more fierce as our forces neared the Japanese homeland.

We were in fact getting ready to invade Japan in the fall of 1945. The soldiers who fought in Europe were told after VE day (the day the Nazis surrendered) to start training for war in the Pacific and to expect to be shipped to there for the invasion of Japan.

The Japanese were holding 135,000 allied prisoners on Japanese soil and told us that, once the we landed on Japanese soil, that each and every one of them would be summarily executed.

We were preparing to invade Japan by firebombing their cities. Estimates are that nearly 250,000 Japanese lost their lives during these attacks, a mere prelude to what was to come.

The Japanese were training each and every man, woman, and child to kill American servicemen. Unlike our invasion of Europe, whose civilian population wanted us and welcomed us, the Japanese civilian would view us as hostile invaders and do everything in their power to kill our servicemen.

The number of American dead in World War II is approximately, 400,000. Had we invaded Japan, that figure would have at least doubled. Many of us would not be here today to discuss the necessity of dropping the bomb because our fathers and grandfathers would have died.

The Soviets were also preparing to invade the Japanese islands and given what they did in Europe, it is a certainty that had they invaded, Japan would be a divided country like Korea with a communist North and a democratic South.

Estimates of the number of Japanese deaths in such an invasion numbered around 6 to 7 million.

Had we invaded Japan, World War II would have dragged on for at least 2 to 3 more years.




On the other hand, 250,000 Japanese lost their lives with the dropping of the bomb. The Japanese finally surrendered after the 2nd bomb was dropped.

I am not in any way dismissing the deaths and suffering caused by these weapons but in light of the alternative.... I ask..... what other choice did President Truman have but to unleash these weapons on the Japanese?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

This August 6th will mark the 70th anniversary of the dropping of the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima. Without fail, some well meaning souls will post something on a blog or write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper deploring this highly immoral act.

Well, no one is going to argue that dropping the A-bomb on Hiroshima was not a horrible act..... but it was necessary. Here is why:

We like to think of World War II as one big war when, in fact, it was two wars. One fought in Europe and the other fought in the Pacific. Of the two conflicts, the War of the Pacific was the worse of the two. Given the fact that the Japanese soldier observed the "Bushido" military code that prohibited surrender under any circumstance, our servicemen had to fight tooth and nail to win battles and always at a high cost in lives. Each battle became more and more fierce as our forces neared the Japanese homeland.

We were in fact getting ready to invade Japan in the fall of 1945. The soldiers who fought in Europe were told after VE day (the day the Nazis surrendered) to start training for war in the Pacific and to expect to be shipped to there for the invasion of Japan.

The Japanese were holding 135,000 allied prisoners on Japanese soil and told us that, once the we landed on Japanese soil, that each and every one of them would be summarily executed.

We were preparing to invade Japan by firebombing their cities. Estimates are that nearly 250,000 Japanese lost their lives during these attacks, a mere prelude to what was to come.

The Japanese were training each and every man, woman, and child to kill American servicemen. Unlike our invasion of Europe, whose civilian population wanted us and welcomed us, the Japanese civilian would view us as hostile invaders and do everything in their power to kill our servicemen.

The number of American dead in World War II is approximately, 400,000. Had we invaded Japan, that figure would have at least doubled. Many of us would not be here today to discuss the necessity of dropping the bomb because our fathers and grandfathers would have died.

The Soviets were also preparing to invade the Japanese islands and given what they did in Europe, it is a certainty that had they invaded, Japan would be a divided country like Korea with a communist North and a democratic South.

Estimates of the number of Japanese deaths in such an invasion numbered around 6 to 7 million.

Had we invaded Japan, World War II would have dragged on for at least 2 to 3 more years.




On the other hand, 250,000 Japanese lost their lives with the dropping of the bomb. The Japanese finally surrendered after the 2nd bomb was dropped.

I am not in any way dismissing the deaths and suffering caused by these weapons but in light of the alternative.... I ask..... what other choice did President Truman have but to unleash these weapons on the Japanese?

Military at the time thought it would save maybe 150,000 American soldiers lives if we could end the war without invading Japan. Plus at least 200,000 Jap civilian lives. 2ND BOMB dropped war ends those lives were saved, the idiots condemning the dropping of A-bombs completely ignore these stats, f-them--they are craving little ignorant worms!-Tyr

[Noir]

Personally I think it would of been worth dropping a bomb on a safe (ie uninhabitated) Japanese island, before moving on to populated city's.

[KarlMarx]

Personally I think it would of been worth dropping a bomb on a safe (ie uninhabitated) Japanese island, before moving on to populated city's.

That was considered. I don't believe it would have convinced the Japanese.

After dropping the 2nd bomb on Nagasaki, of the Japanese War council still wanted to fight on. American president Truman threatened to drop a third bomb which made Emperor Hirohito agree to the terms of the surrender. Unbeknownst to the Japanese, we did not have a 3rd bomb. It would take months before we could build another. Truman played the biggest poker bluff in history and thank goodness, he succeeded.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

[Gunny]

Personally I think it would of been worth dropping a bomb on a safe (ie uninhabitated) Japanese island, before moving on to populated city's.

Yeah? I'd rather save the lives of a million servicemen. If you ever grow some balls and join the military, you might get a different POV.

[NightTrain]

Personally I think it would of been worth dropping a bomb on a safe (ie uninhabitated) Japanese island, before moving on to populated city's.


Karl Marx is right. We only had 2 of them.

Even after dropping the bomb on the first city, they still refused to surrender and it wasn't until the 2nd city was leveled that they caved.

The casualties were going to be staggering and the bomb saved many lives on both sides.

[namvet]

Personally I think it would of been worth dropping a bomb on a safe (ie uninhabitated) Japanese island, before moving on to populated city's.

they considered that. what if it failed to explode??

[Noir]

Karl Marx is right. We only had 2 of them.

Even after dropping the bomb on the first city, they still refused to surrender and it wasn't until the 2nd city was leveled that they caved.

The casualties were going to be staggering and the bomb saved many lives on both sides.

Fair dues - though its all speculation maybe history would have went *bomb dropped on uninhabited Japanese island, threaten next one will be on a city- Japanese refuse to surrender- 2nd bomb dropped, on a city, threaten the next city- *Japanese surrender.


they considered that. what if it failed to explode??

I don't see what that would of changed before sending the bomb...by the same assumption what if the Hiroshima bomb failed to explode?

[fj1200]

Fair dues - though its all speculation ...

Do you think firebombing was a better option? That was apparently the alternative, see Tokyo. I think the calculations done also don't include the millions? that were likely spared in China, etc. I think any sort of speculation would see the bombing as the best option.

[namvet]

Fair dues - though its all speculation maybe history would have went *bomb dropped on uninhabited Japanese island, threaten next one will be on a city- Japanese refuse to surrender- 2nd bomb dropped, on a city, threaten the next city- *Japanese surrender.



I don't see what that would of changed before sending the bomb...by the same assumption what if the Hiroshima bomb failed to explode?

that's the point. no one knew if the damned thing would work at all. it was a risk and a gamble. if it fails to explode in front of the Japanese delegation that inspires them to fight on. and the death toll climbs

[NightTrain]

Fair dues - though its all speculation maybe history would have went *bomb dropped on uninhabited Japanese island, threaten next one will be on a city- Japanese refuse to surrender- 2nd bomb dropped, on a city, threaten the next city- *Japanese surrender.

Sorry, but that's preposterous. War doesn't work like that.

Announcing that we were going to drop a nuke on an uninhabited island so they could behold the devastation on rocks and palm trees wouldn't have accomplished anything except wasting 1 of our 2 bombs. As it was, it took both of our bombs to destroy 2 major cities instantaneously to force them to surrender.

What you're proposing would entail everyone calling a Time Out while the Japanese got a bunch of scientists together, shipped them to the uninhabited radioactive island, carried out tests and studies, filed a report and then waited until they all got done debating how powerful this particular bomb was.

We had Japan on the ropes, and you don't win wars by calling a Time Out and allowing the enemy breathing room. We were in the fight to win it.

Don't you think that it was more humane to kill a few hundred thousand Japs instead of millions? That wasn't our consideration either, but it's still true. Our concern was saving American and Allied lives and ending the war, which nuking Nagasaki and Hiroshima did.

[darin]

Personally I think it would of been worth dropping a bomb on a safe (ie uninhabitated) Japanese island, before moving on to populated city's.

Of course you think that. You're a liberal. (shrug) Liberals NEVER have good ideas when it comes to the right way to do something.

[namvet]

there's now proof they were building their own bomb. and no doubt who it would have been used on. Truman faced being impeached if he didn't drop them. when grieving families found he had a weapon that could have saved all these lives they want him hung. there's some good docs posted on the Truman library if you want to read them. including leaflets that were dropped on cities warning civilians to get out:

http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/bomb/large (http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/bomb/large/)/

BTY I lived in Independence for many years

[sundaydriver]

Those 2 bombs took less lives than our firebombing of Dresden. The choosing of those 2 Japanese targets had a lot to do with the fact that they were clean targets, meaning very little to no previous bombing damage so the full effects of our bombs could be assessed.

Recently talking to my Navy Vet neighbor I was told how his ship the USS Wedderburn was the first ship into Tokyo Bay for the surrender. Due to radio silence his destroyer met the other ships entering the bay to relay orders so they ended up being the 5th to anchor in Tokyo Bay for the Japanese surrender. Before the dignitaries were flown in for the surrender they were sent nort in the bay to monitor for radiation and warn the others if radiation was being carried into the bay on the winds.

[NightTrain]

there's now proof they were building their own bomb. and no doubt who it would have been used on. Truman faced being impeached if he didn't drop them. when grieving families found he had a weapon that could have saved all these lives they want him hung. there's some good docs posted on the Truman library if you want to read them. including leaflets that were dropped on cities warning civilians to get out:

http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/bomb/large (http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/bomb/large/)/

BTY I lived in Independence for many years


Yeah, I watched a documentary about how Hitler sent information and uranium to Japan via submarine to give them a leg up. Germany wasn't 100% yet, but they were getting close and having Japan work on the technical problems they faced was a solid decision on his part... risky but worth it.

Hitler also gave Japan jet & rocket technology to aid them, but it was too little too late.

[Little-Acorn]

This August 6th will mark the 70th anniversary of the dropping of the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima.

Actually it's August 5.

It was only Aug. 6 across the International Date Line. But all the calendars here read Aug. 5. And since this is where the Forum is located, along with nearly all the people on it, Aug. 5 is the correct date.

If you wait till our calendars read August 6, you'll be a day late.

[Little-Acorn]

Personally I think it would of been worth dropping a bomb on a safe (ie uninhabitated) Japanese island, before moving on to populated city's.

(patiently)

We DID set one off in an uninhabited area, and invite Japanese officials to witness it. They thought it was a Hollywood stunt and didn't believe it was a real weapon.

The uninhabited area is called the Trinity Test Site in New Mexico.

[Balu]

You don't need to worry, Americans. Everything is fine. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/smile3.gif

Revising history: USSR bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
16.02.2015 19:51


Attempts to revise the history of World War II are not new at all, although the current scale of the revision of history is more than just impressive - it is shocking. Many Japanese people, under the influence of their propaganda machine, already believe that it was the USSR that dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Pravda.Ru spoke about it in an interview with journalist Daniel Estulin.

"Do you think that it is possible at all to revise the results of the Second World War today? The Americans have long been crediting themselves as the winners of that war. These days, they have been particularly brutal in their intention to plant this idea into people's minds around the world."

"This is possible, because, unfortunately, people have forgotten world history. They know the myths that the propaganda machine makes them to believe. We can see it every day, especially in Europe and the United States. Unfortunately, people's knowledge is scarce and limited.""Do people just believe what they hear?"

"They neither know nor understand what happened 70 years ago. It was the USSR in the first place that won the war. Roosevelt knew that the war had been won in Stalingrad in 1943. At the end of the war, he was ready for all with Stalin, and so they made a pact. Roosevelt promised Stalin to invest $4.5 billion in the Soviet economy, to put the Soviet Union back on its feet. Unfortunately, Roosevelt died, and Anglophile Truman came to replace him, to stand up for England. The confrontation and the Cold War started, and it still continues today. Unfortunately, people do not understand."

"The USA and its controlled countries distort historical facts so much that in Japan, many people think that it was Russia, not America, that dropped the atomic bomb on them."

"They have bad teaching of history then, unfortunately. But without the knowledge of the past, one can not either understand the present or build a normal future."

"Daniel, you were born in the Soviet Union, but spent your conscious life living in Europe, in Switzerland."

"Well, not all my life ...My father is from Leningrad, my mother is from Minsk. I was born in Vilnius, the capital of the Lithuanian Soviet Socialist Republic. Back in those days, they were teaching history at schools well. I've never been a European person, I've always been a Soviet and a Russian man living in the West."

"We believe that we speak the truth, whereas European media lie and give one-sided information. They believe that it is the Russian media that lies. Who do you think lies here?"

"I believe that in the end, we have our propaganda and they have theirs. Yet again, one needs to understand why so much propaganda. It is important to understand what is happening today, what happened yesterday and what will happen in the near future. This war is being waged against Russia and China. This war is being done by masters of shadows - puppeteers, who show presidents of the United States, Canada, the European powers in their place. They realize that until Russia remains on its feet, they will never reach global reign. This war, including the information war, is being waged against Russia, against those who put obstacles for them. If Putin changes his stance and becomes a yes-man of Western powers, the bad Putin today will be the good Putin tomorrow. Yet, our president will not do it."

"In the West, they used to love Russia, when the first Russian president was dancing and falling down while being drunk."

"That's right. Yeltsin, in fact, was never our president. He always was an enemy of the Fatherland, like Gorbachev. He was raised by the powers that raised Obama, Cameron and all other American and European presidents. It's very easy to do. One only needs a large amount of money to prove to the population: this man is the most wonderful president. For example, Carter was a man that no one knew during the 1970s. All of a sudden, he became the president of the United States. Just like that. Just a few people knew him, but a month later he was a nation-wide celebrity. One needs a huge amount of money to do that. The people who do not understand it, just do not understand how these policy levers work."

"These days, Western journalists keep saying that Russia is an aggressor. They hold talk shows in European countries, for example, in Lithuania, asking people what they will do if Russia attack them. They call Russian-speaking communities asking them, which side they will take, should the war with Russia begin. People are served only one-sided information, and any attempt to present a different perspective break against the wall."

"Journalists were never free. Any journalist, no matter where he or she may come from - the United States, Canada, France, Italy, the UK - never expresses a personal opinion on serious issues. Journalists always work for someone owned by US banks or financial tycoons close to the government. They work for those who pay them. Therefore, they always go in a certain direction."

"That is, we can not count on some kind of objective assessment in the field of journalism, can we?"

"No, of course not. But I think that as long as they have created a problem for us, then this is our problem, inside Russia. I believe that our Russian, Soviet problem lies in out unwillingness to understand how these levers of power and propaganda in the West work.We believe that in the end truth will prevail. Yet, one must fight against their lies. In the end, the goals of those masters of shadows are always the same, they never change. Their goal is to defeat Russia, as they did to the Soviet Union and put another Yeltsin or Gorbachev at the head of the collapsed nation. They will never succeed, but they will never give up." Interviewed by Inna Novikova

[namvet]

https://chivethebrigade.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/jap-suicide-plane-500-25.jpg?w=500&h=375

the jet powered Ohka sported 3 rocket boosters. speeds up to 650 MPH made it almost impossible to shoot down. the Kamikaze pilots wet dream. they were far from done

photos (http://thebrigade.com/2013/09/18/you-do-not-want-to-fly-in-this-plane-ohka-cherry-blossom-suicide-plane-39-photos/)

[namvet]

You don't need to worry, Americans. Everything is fine. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/smile3.gif

Revising history: USSR bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
16.02.2015 19:51


Attempts to revise the history of World War II are not new at all, although the current scale of the revision of history is more than just impressive - it is shocking. Many Japanese people, under the influence of their propaganda machine, already believe that it was the USSR that dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Pravda.Ru spoke about it in an interview with journalist Daniel Estulin.

"Do you think that it is possible at all to revise the results of the Second World War today? The Americans have long been crediting themselves as the winners of that war. These days, they have been particularly brutal in their intention to plant this idea into people's minds around the world."

"This is possible, because, unfortunately, people have forgotten world history. They know the myths that the propaganda machine makes them to believe. We can see it every day, especially in Europe and the United States. Unfortunately, people's knowledge is scarce and limited.""Do people just believe what they hear?"

"They neither know nor understand what happened 70 years ago. It was the USSR in the first place that won the war. Roosevelt knew that the war had been won in Stalingrad in 1943. At the end of the war, he was ready for all with Stalin, and so they made a pact. Roosevelt promised Stalin to invest $4.5 billion in the Soviet economy, to put the Soviet Union back on its feet. Unfortunately, Roosevelt died, and Anglophile Truman came to replace him, to stand up for England. The confrontation and the Cold War started, and it still continues today. Unfortunately, people do not understand."

"The USA and its controlled countries distort historical facts so much that in Japan, many people think that it was Russia, not America, that dropped the atomic bomb on them."

"They have bad teaching of history then, unfortunately. But without the knowledge of the past, one can not either understand the present or build a normal future."

"Daniel, you were born in the Soviet Union, but spent your conscious life living in Europe, in Switzerland."

"Well, not all my life ...My father is from Leningrad, my mother is from Minsk. I was born in Vilnius, the capital of the Lithuanian Soviet Socialist Republic. Back in those days, they were teaching history at schools well. I've never been a European person, I've always been a Soviet and a Russian man living in the West."

"We believe that we speak the truth, whereas European media lie and give one-sided information. They believe that it is the Russian media that lies. Who do you think lies here?"

"I believe that in the end, we have our propaganda and they have theirs. Yet again, one needs to understand why so much propaganda. It is important to understand what is happening today, what happened yesterday and what will happen in the near future. This war is being waged against Russia and China. This war is being done by masters of shadows - puppeteers, who show presidents of the United States, Canada, the European powers in their place. They realize that until Russia remains on its feet, they will never reach global reign. This war, including the information war, is being waged against Russia, against those who put obstacles for them. If Putin changes his stance and becomes a yes-man of Western powers, the bad Putin today will be the good Putin tomorrow. Yet, our president will not do it."

"In the West, they used to love Russia, when the first Russian president was dancing and falling down while being drunk."

"That's right. Yeltsin, in fact, was never our president. He always was an enemy of the Fatherland, like Gorbachev. He was raised by the powers that raised Obama, Cameron and all other American and European presidents. It's very easy to do. One only needs a large amount of money to prove to the population: this man is the most wonderful president. For example, Carter was a man that no one knew during the 1970s. All of a sudden, he became the president of the United States. Just like that. Just a few people knew him, but a month later he was a nation-wide celebrity. One needs a huge amount of money to do that. The people who do not understand it, just do not understand how these policy levers work."

"These days, Western journalists keep saying that Russia is an aggressor. They hold talk shows in European countries, for example, in Lithuania, asking people what they will do if Russia attack them. They call Russian-speaking communities asking them, which side they will take, should the war with Russia begin. People are served only one-sided information, and any attempt to present a different perspective break against the wall."

"Journalists were never free. Any journalist, no matter where he or she may come from - the United States, Canada, France, Italy, the UK - never expresses a personal opinion on serious issues. Journalists always work for someone owned by US banks or financial tycoons close to the government. They work for those who pay them. Therefore, they always go in a certain direction."

"That is, we can not count on some kind of objective assessment in the field of journalism, can we?"

"No, of course not. But I think that as long as they have created a problem for us, then this is our problem, inside Russia. I believe that our Russian, Soviet problem lies in out unwillingness to understand how these levers of power and propaganda in the West work.We believe that in the end truth will prevail. Yet, one must fight against their lies. In the end, the goals of those masters of shadows are always the same, they never change. Their goal is to defeat Russia, as they did to the Soviet Union and put another Yeltsin or Gorbachev at the head of the collapsed nation. They will never succeed, but they will never give up." Interviewed by Inna Novikova

don't you have some toilets to lick clean???

[Max R.]

You don't need to worry, Americans. Everything is fine. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/smile3.gif

Revising history: USSR bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
16.02.2015 19:51


Attempts to revise the history of World War II are not new at all, although the current scale of the revision of history is more than just impressive - it is shocking. Many Japanese people, under the influence of their propaganda machine, already believe that it was the USSR that dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Pravda.Ru spoke about it in an interview with journalist Daniel Estulin......
It appears Pravda is no more accurate than it was during the Cold War.

I've been to Hiroshima and the Hiroshima Peace Museum. There's no doubt in anyone's mind who built and dropped the bomb there.

[Balu]

don't you have some toilets to lick clean???
This place is occupied by Polish, Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians and Ukrainians, and there is a sever competition among them for this working places in your Western Paradise. So they leave no chance for the others. Use their service or help yourself.

[Balu]

It appears Pravda is no more accurate than it was during the Cold War.

I've been to Hiroshima and the Hiroshima Peace Museum. There's no doubt in anyone's mind who built and dropped the bomb there.

If you dislike the context of the interview it doesn't mean that there is no Truth in it.
As to sources, I could find a lot of useful and bright ideas even in "Mein Kamph". Everything depends in our life.

[Drummond]

You don't need to worry, Americans. Everything is fine. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/smile3.gif

Revising history: USSR bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
16.02.2015 19:51


Attempts to revise the history of World War II are not new at all, although the current scale of the revision of history is more than just impressive - it is shocking. Many Japanese people, under the influence of their propaganda machine, already believe that it was the USSR that dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Pravda.Ru spoke about it in an interview with journalist Daniel Estulin.

"Do you think that it is possible at all to revise the results of the Second World War today? The Americans have long been crediting themselves as the winners of that war. These days, they have been particularly brutal in their intention to plant this idea into people's minds around the world."

"This is possible, because, unfortunately, people have forgotten world history. They know the myths that the propaganda machine makes them to believe. We can see it every day, especially in Europe and the United States. Unfortunately, people's knowledge is scarce and limited.""Do people just believe what they hear?"

"They neither know nor understand what happened 70 years ago. It was the USSR in the first place that won the war. Roosevelt knew that the war had been won in Stalingrad in 1943. At the end of the war, he was ready for all with Stalin, and so they made a pact. Roosevelt promised Stalin to invest $4.5 billion in the Soviet economy, to put the Soviet Union back on its feet. Unfortunately, Roosevelt died, and Anglophile Truman came to replace him, to stand up for England. The confrontation and the Cold War started, and it still continues today. Unfortunately, people do not understand."

"The USA and its controlled countries distort historical facts so much that in Japan, many people think that it was Russia, not America, that dropped the atomic bomb on them."

"They have bad teaching of history then, unfortunately. But without the knowledge of the past, one can not either understand the present or build a normal future."

"Daniel, you were born in the Soviet Union, but spent your conscious life living in Europe, in Switzerland."

"Well, not all my life ...My father is from Leningrad, my mother is from Minsk. I was born in Vilnius, the capital of the Lithuanian Soviet Socialist Republic. Back in those days, they were teaching history at schools well. I've never been a European person, I've always been a Soviet and a Russian man living in the West."

"We believe that we speak the truth, whereas European media lie and give one-sided information. They believe that it is the Russian media that lies. Who do you think lies here?"

"I believe that in the end, we have our propaganda and they have theirs. Yet again, one needs to understand why so much propaganda. It is important to understand what is happening today, what happened yesterday and what will happen in the near future. This war is being waged against Russia and China. This war is being done by masters of shadows - puppeteers, who show presidents of the United States, Canada, the European powers in their place. They realize that until Russia remains on its feet, they will never reach global reign. This war, including the information war, is being waged against Russia, against those who put obstacles for them. If Putin changes his stance and becomes a yes-man of Western powers, the bad Putin today will be the good Putin tomorrow. Yet, our president will not do it."

"In the West, they used to love Russia, when the first Russian president was dancing and falling down while being drunk."

"That's right. Yeltsin, in fact, was never our president. He always was an enemy of the Fatherland, like Gorbachev. He was raised by the powers that raised Obama, Cameron and all other American and European presidents. It's very easy to do. One only needs a large amount of money to prove to the population: this man is the most wonderful president. For example, Carter was a man that no one knew during the 1970s. All of a sudden, he became the president of the United States. Just like that. Just a few people knew him, but a month later he was a nation-wide celebrity. One needs a huge amount of money to do that. The people who do not understand it, just do not understand how these policy levers work."

"These days, Western journalists keep saying that Russia is an aggressor. They hold talk shows in European countries, for example, in Lithuania, asking people what they will do if Russia attack them. They call Russian-speaking communities asking them, which side they will take, should the war with Russia begin. People are served only one-sided information, and any attempt to present a different perspective break against the wall."

"Journalists were never free. Any journalist, no matter where he or she may come from - the United States, Canada, France, Italy, the UK - never expresses a personal opinion on serious issues. Journalists always work for someone owned by US banks or financial tycoons close to the government. They work for those who pay them. Therefore, they always go in a certain direction."

"That is, we can not count on some kind of objective assessment in the field of journalism, can we?"

"No, of course not. But I think that as long as they have created a problem for us, then this is our problem, inside Russia. I believe that our Russian, Soviet problem lies in out unwillingness to understand how these levers of power and propaganda in the West work.We believe that in the end truth will prevail. Yet, one must fight against their lies. In the end, the goals of those masters of shadows are always the same, they never change. Their goal is to defeat Russia, as they did to the Soviet Union and put another Yeltsin or Gorbachev at the head of the collapsed nation. They will never succeed, but they will never give up." Interviewed by Inna Novikova

Some of this stuff is truly priceless ... it gives Revelarts' conspiracy theories, or Gabby's vitriol, a good run for their money, for sheer entertainment value.

Who ever knew that the Cold War was caused by an American 'broken promise' to pay the USSR some money ?? Me ... I thought it was down to Warsaw Pact belligerence. But, well, there y'go.

Perhaps Hungary never saw tanks rolling in the streets, in 1956. Czechoslovakia, ditto, in 1968. Afghanistan, ditto, in 1980 ?

Balu, are you aware that these things happened ?

Do you think that the Berlin Wall was there, courtesy of Hollywood .. ?

Yeltzin, a Presidential impostor. I love it !!:clap:

But we in the West can completely agree on one point. As your link said:


We believe that in the end truth will prevail.

[namvet]

another good post shot ta hell by a fat fuck Russian. im gone

[revelarts]

that's the point. no one knew if the damned thing would work at all. it was a risk and a gamble. if it fails to explode in front of the Japanese delegation that inspires them to fight on. and the death toll climbs


There were test done and there was little doubt the bomb would work.
The history is controversial but there's very good evidence that the PORT CHICAGO "accident" was a nuke test.

[Balu]

...Who ever knew that the Cold War was caused by an American 'broken promise' to pay the USSR some money ?? Me ... I thought it was down to Warsaw Pact belligerence. But, well, there y'go. ...
Once I had a girl fried native born in Australia. She wrote a thesis on the early Cold War, stating that it started from the time of Ivan the Terrible. She managed to defend her thesis. But she was strongly recommended not to touch this topic in future.
As to the rest of your topic I would recommend you to get acquainted with Churchill's speech in Fulton (Sinews of Peace. March the 5-th 1946.)

[NightTrain]

:laugh2:

Oh, Balu... you've gone too far.

I hope you were grinning sheepishly with a red face when you posted that article.

[namvet]

There were test done and there was little doubt the bomb would work.
The history is controversial but there's very good evidence that the PORT CHICAGO "accident" was a nuke test.

no. there were doubts if it would work, we are talking a new weapon with to many unknown factors. a test in the desert fixed on top of a tower was not the same as in the form of a bomb that had to detonate at exactly the right altitude. a lot of crossed fingers here as it left for Titian aboard the USS Indianapolis. even the scientists took bets on success or failure. maybe with more time and tests the demo for Japan would have ended it. but the urgency of ending the war ASAP was primary. the looming invasion would have be a disaster. IMO
if you have any evidence of the PORT CHICAGO blast please post it

[namvet]

Once I had a girl fried native born in Australia. She wrote a thesis on the early Cold War, stating that it started from the time of Ivan the Terrible. She managed to defend her thesis. But she was strongly recommended not to touch this topic in future.
As to the rest of your topic I would recommend you to get acquainted with Churchill's speech in Fulton (Sinews of Peace. March the 5-th 1946.)

you actually FRIED a girlfriend?? you monster

[jimnyc]

Many Japanese people, under the influence of their propaganda machine, already believe that it was the USSR that dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Too funny! So the Japanese apparently fell for propaganda, and those people believed it was the other propagandist machinery responsible. :lol:

[NightTrain]

The history is controversial but there's very good evidence that the PORT CHICAGO "accident" was a nuke test.

Rev, why on earth would we detonate a nuke in one of our major munitions shipping ports?

We already had test sites out in the desert, for crying out loud!

Sorry, buddy, but you earned this : :tinfoil:

[Balu]

you actually FRIED a girlfriend?? you monster
Nothing personal - a job (in my case - service) only. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/smile3.gif

[Max R.]

If you dislike the context of the interview it doesn't mean that there is no Truth in it.
As to sources, I could find a lot of useful and bright ideas even in "Mein Kamph". Everything depends in our life.
It's one thing for there to be flaws in an interview. It's another for it to be a big lie.

[Balu]

It's one thing for there to be flaws in an interview. It's another for it to be a big lie.
How can you judge if you are able "to drink only from ONE source"? Or you still believe in independence of Mass Media? http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/smile3.gif

[jimnyc]

Rev, why on earth would we detonate a nuke in one of our major munitions shipping ports?

We already had test sites out in the desert, for crying out loud!

Sorry, buddy, but you earned this : :tinfoil:

Yeps:

The Port Chicago explosion was studied by the Los Alamos National Laboratory team working on the Manhattan project. The resulting damage was seen as being similar to the effects of a relatively small nuclear explosion with destructive power equivalent to 2,000 tons of TNT. Paul Masters—a photo technician at Los Alamos—made copies of some of the study documents and stored them at his home. In 1980, Peter Vogel discovered one of Masters' documents in a rummage sale and noticed that one section of text read "Ball of fire mushroom out at 18,000 ft in typical Port Chicago fashion".[104] Vogel—a New Mexican information officer-turned-journalist—began to research the possibility that the Port Chicago explosion was caused by a nuclear bomb. Beginning in 1982, Vogel publicly voiced his theory, raising a storm of controversy in the Bay Area press.[105]

Vogel continued to hunt for clues for the next 20 years, eventually writing a book and, in 2002,[106] establishing a website delineating various circumstantial reasons why the Port Chicago explosion could have been nuclear. After failing to find hard evidence to support his theory, Vogel abandoned it in 2005.[105] Vogel's website was remounted in 2009 under a different URL.[107]

Vogel's theory has not had any traction among mainstream historians. Nuclear historians Lawrence Badash and Richard G. Hewlett, in an article from 1993, took issue both with Vogel's alleged evidence of weapons effects residues as well as Vogel's proposed timetable for the production of the bomb itself. "It is impossible that there would have been no noticeable effects that later would have been identifiable as nuclear," they wrote, "Yet rescue and investigating personnel combed the area immediately after the blast, and the ammunition depot, which was quickly rebuilt, is in use today. These activities, without any reported injuries resulting from residual radioactivity, clearly indicate that only conventional explosives were detonated." They criticized Vogel for being "silent" about all of the evidence against his theory, and found the persistence in the propagation of the Vogel theory in the media "even in the face of evidence to the contrary" as exemplifying "...the process by which conspiracy theories and other astounding knowledge claims gain popular attention."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Chicago_disaster#Nuclear_bomb_theory

[indago]

This August 6th will mark the 70th anniversary of the dropping of the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima. Without fail, some well meaning souls will post something on a blog or write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper deploring this highly immoral act.

Well, no one is going to argue that dropping the A-bomb on Hiroshima was not a horrible act..... but it was necessary. Here is why:

We like to think of World War II as one big war when, in fact, it was two wars. One fought in Europe and the other fought in the Pacific. Of the two conflicts, the War of the Pacific was the worse of the two. Given the fact that the Japanese soldier observed the "Bushido" military code that prohibited surrender under any circumstance, our servicemen had to fight tooth and nail to win battles and always at a high cost in lives. Each battle became more and more fierce as our forces neared the Japanese homeland.

We were in fact getting ready to invade Japan in the fall of 1945. The soldiers who fought in Europe were told after VE day (the day the Nazis surrendered) to start training for war in the Pacific and to expect to be shipped to there for the invasion of Japan.

The Japanese were holding 135,000 allied prisoners on Japanese soil and told us that, once the we landed on Japanese soil, that each and every one of them would be summarily executed.

We were preparing to invade Japan by firebombing their cities. Estimates are that nearly 250,000 Japanese lost their lives during these attacks, a mere prelude to what was to come.

The Japanese were training each and every man, woman, and child to kill American servicemen. Unlike our invasion of Europe, whose civilian population wanted us and welcomed us, the Japanese civilian would view us as hostile invaders and do everything in their power to kill our servicemen.

The number of American dead in World War II is approximately, 400,000. Had we invaded Japan, that figure would have at least doubled. Many of us would not be here today to discuss the necessity of dropping the bomb because our fathers and grandfathers would have died.

The Soviets were also preparing to invade the Japanese islands and given what they did in Europe, it is a certainty that had they invaded, Japan would be a divided country like Korea with a communist North and a democratic South.

Estimates of the number of Japanese deaths in such an invasion numbered around 6 to 7 million.

Had we invaded Japan, World War II would have dragged on for at least 2 to 3 more years.




On the other hand, 250,000 Japanese lost their lives with the dropping of the bomb. The Japanese finally surrendered after the 2nd bomb was dropped.

I am not in any way dismissing the deaths and suffering caused by these weapons but in light of the alternative.... I ask..... what other choice did President Truman have but to unleash these weapons on the Japanese?

The Japanese populace is the support group for their war effort, and should be expected to be obliterated along with the troops, and manufacturing facilities. We should expect the same should our government involve itself in wars.

[namvet]

Yeps:

The Port Chicago explosion was studied by the Los Alamos National Laboratory team working on the Manhattan project. The resulting damage was seen as being similar to the effects of a relatively small nuclear explosion with destructive power equivalent to 2,000 tons of TNT. Paul Masters—a photo technician at Los Alamos—made copies of some of the study documents and stored them at his home. In 1980, Peter Vogel discovered one of Masters' documents in a rummage sale and noticed that one section of text read "Ball of fire mushroom out at 18,000 ft in typical Port Chicago fashion".[104] Vogel—a New Mexican information officer-turned-journalist—began to research the possibility that the Port Chicago explosion was caused by a nuclear bomb. Beginning in 1982, Vogel publicly voiced his theory, raising a storm of controversy in the Bay Area press.[105]

Vogel continued to hunt for clues for the next 20 years, eventually writing a book and, in 2002,[106] establishing a website delineating various circumstantial reasons why the Port Chicago explosion could have been nuclear. After failing to find hard evidence to support his theory, Vogel abandoned it in 2005.[105] Vogel's website was remounted in 2009 under a different URL.[107]

Vogel's theory has not had any traction among mainstream historians. Nuclear historians Lawrence Badash and Richard G. Hewlett, in an article from 1993, took issue both with Vogel's alleged evidence of weapons effects residues as well as Vogel's proposed timetable for the production of the bomb itself. "It is impossible that there would have been no noticeable effects that later would have been identifiable as nuclear," they wrote, "Yet rescue and investigating personnel combed the area immediately after the blast, and the ammunition depot, which was quickly rebuilt, is in use today. These activities, without any reported injuries resulting from residual radioactivity, clearly indicate that only conventional explosives were detonated." They criticized Vogel for being "silent" about all of the evidence against his theory, and found the persistence in the propagation of the Vogel theory in the media "even in the face of evidence to the contrary" as exemplifying "...the process by which conspiracy theories and other astounding knowledge claims gain popular attention."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Chicago_disaster#Nuclear_bomb_theory


port Chicago was not the only place this happened


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMs4IJQVRYM

[LongTermGuy]

The Japanese populace is the support group for their war effort, and should be expected to be obliterated along with the troops, and manufacturing facilities. We should expect the same should our government involve itself in wars.

​Wars are needed to stop evil....appeasement leads to slavery. (Good vs evil)... Weakness and ambivalence lead to war...

[Max R.]

How can you judge if you are able "to drink only from ONE source"? Or you still believe in independence of Mass Media? http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/smile3.gifWe have multiple sources including foreign ones. I like reading BBC news and, especially, Economist magazine for "outside" perspectives.

[Max R.]

​Wars are needed to stop evil....appeasement leads to slavery. (Good vs evil)... Weakness and ambivalence lead to war...


Well said and agreed.

A great combination of both Vegetius's statement and Edmund Burke's.

Si vis pacem, para bellum = "If you want peace, prepare for war".


The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

[gabosaurus]

First of all, no one actually believe that Russia built or dropped the A-bombs on Japan except the Russians. The Japanese knew who did it. Americans dropped leaflets in Japanese on Japan. Stalin himself knew what was going on.
The Russian threat did factor into the equation. Japan was deeply afraid of the Russians, knowing how vindictive and blood thirsty that Stalin was. Plus, Russian wanted to occupy parts of Japan to add to its empire.

Those who feel Japan would have surrendered anyway do not take into account the determination of the Japanese military command. They were determined to sacrifice the entire country before they would accept surrender. Some even plotted to kill the Emperor to keep him from intervening.
The effect of the A-bombs came with the suffering of the people, and the threat of total destruction. It the first time that the Emperor ever put the consideration of the common person ahead of the military. When the Emperor announce surrender, it was the time the Japanese people had ever heard his voice. He was considered a living deity.

There have been a couple of great books on this subject, written by those familiar with the inside working of the Japanese government.

[namvet]

Japan's Atomic Bomb (Full Documentary)



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iE-0tRGjy8

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Once I had a girl fried native born in Australia. She wrote a thesis on the early Cold War, stating that it started from the time of Ivan the Terrible. She managed to defend her thesis. But she was strongly recommended not to touch this topic in future.
As to the rest of your topic I would recommend you to get acquainted with Churchill's speech in Fulton (Sinews of Peace. March the 5-th 1946.)

http://www.winstonchurchill.org/resources/speeches/1946-1963-elder-statesman/the-sinews-of-peace

The Sinews of Peace ("Iron Curtain Speech")
March 5, 1946.
Westminster College, Fulton, Missouri
Listen to the full speech from the BBC Archives

This speech may be regarded as the most important Churchill delivered as Leader of the
Opposition (1945-1951). It contains certain phrases- "the special relationship," "the sinews
of peace " - which at once entered into general use, and which have survived. But it is the
passage on "the iron curtain" which attracted immediate international attention, and had
incalculable impact upon public opinion in the United States and in Western Europe.
Russian historians date the beginning of the Cold War from this speech. In its phraseology,
in its intricate drawing together of several themes to an electrifying climax- this speech
may be regarded as a technical classic. – Robert Rhodes James
The United States stands at this time at the pinnacle of world power. It is a solemn moment for the American Democracy. For with primacy in power is also joined an awe inspiring accountability to the future. If you look around you, you must feel not only the sense of duty done but also you must feel anxiety lest you fall below the level of achievement. Opportunity is here now, clear and shining for both our countries. To reject it or ignore it or fritter it away will bring upon us all the long reproaches of the after-time. It is necessary that constancy of mind, persistency of purpose, and the grand simplicity of decision shall guide and rule the conduct of the English-speaking peoples in peace as they did in war. We must, and I believe we shall, prove ourselves equal to this severe requirement.

When American military men approach some serious situation they are wont to write at the head of their directive the words "over-all strategic concept." There is wisdom in this, as it leads to clarity of thought. What then is the over-all strategic concept which we should inscribe today? It is nothing less than the safety and welfare, the freedom and progress, of all the homes and families of all the men and women in all the lands. And here I speak particularly of the myriad cottage or apartment homes where the wage-earner strives amid the accidents and difficulties of life to guard his wife and children from privation and bring the family up in the fear of the Lord, or upon ethical conceptions which often play their potent part.

To give security to these countless homes, they must be shielded from the two giant marauders, war and tyranny. We all know the frightful disturbances in which the ordinary family is plunged when the curse of war swoops down upon the bread-winner and those for whom he works and contrives. The awful ruin of Europe, with all its vanished glories, and of large parts of Asia glares us in the eyes. When the designs of wicked men or the aggressive urge of mighty States dissolve over large areas the frame of civilised society, humble folk are confronted with difficulties with which they cannot cope. For them all is distorted, all is broken, even ground to pulp.

When I stand here this quiet afternoon I shudder to visualise what is actually happening to millions now and what is going to happen in this period when famine stalks the earth. None can compute what has been called "the unestimated sum of human pain." Our supreme task and duty is to guard the homes of the common people from the horrors and miseries of another war. We are all agreed on that.

Our American military colleagues, after having proclaimed their "over-all strategic concept" and computed available resources, always proceed to the next step-namely, the method. Here again there is widespread agreement. A world organisation has already been erected for the prime purpose of preventing war, UNO, the successor of the League of Nations, with the decisive addition of the United States and all that that means, is already at work. We must make sure that its work is fruitful, that it is a reality and not a sham, that it is a force for action, and not merely a frothing of words, that it is a true temple of peace in which the shields of many nations can some day be hung up, and not merely a cockpit in a Tower of Babel. Before we cast away the solid assurances of national armaments for self-preservation we must be certain that our temple is built, not upon shifting sands or quagmires, but upon the rock. Anyone can see with his eyes open that our path will be difficult and also long, but if we persevere together as we did in the two world wars-though not, alas, in the interval between them-I cannot doubt that we shall achieve our common purpose in the end.

I have, however, a definite and practical proposal to make for action. Courts and magistrates may be set up but they cannot function without sheriffs and constables. The United Nations Organisation must immediately begin to be equipped with an international armed force. In such a matter we can only go step by step, but we must begin now. I propose that each of the Powers and States should be invited to delegate a certain number of air squadrons to the service of the world organisation. These squadrons would be trained and prepared in their own countries, but would move around in rotation from one country to another. They would wear the uniform of their own countries but with different badges. They would not be required to act against their own nation, but in other respects they would be directed by the world organisation. This might be started on a modest scale and would grow as confidence grew. I wished to see this done after the First World War, and I devoutly trust it may be done forthwith.

It would nevertheless be wrong and imprudent to entrust the secret knowledge or experience of the atomic bomb, which the United States, Great Britain, and Canada now share, to the world organisation, while it is still in its infancy. It would be criminal madness to cast it adrift in this still agitated and un-united world. No one in any country has slept less well in their beds because this knowledge and the method and the raw materials to apply it, are at present largely retained in American hands. I do not believe we should all have slept so soundly had the positions been reversed and if some Communist or neo-Fascist State monopolised for the time being these dread agencies. The fear of them alone might easily have been used to enforce totalitarian systems upon the free democratic world, with consequences appalling to human imagination. God has willed that this shall not be and we have at least a breathing space to set our house in order before this peril has to be encountered: and even then, if no effort is spared, we should still possess So formidable a superiority as to impose effective deterrents upon its employment, or threat of employment, by others. Ultimately, when the essential brotherhood of man is truly embodied and expressed in a world organisation with all the necessary practical safeguards to make it effective, these powers would naturally be confided to that world organisation.

Now I come to the second danger of these two marauders which threatens the cottage, the home, and the ordinary people-namely, tyranny. We cannot be blind to the fact that the liberties enjoyed by individual citizens throughout the British Empire are not valid in a considerable number of countries, some of which are very powerful. In these States control is enforced upon the common people by various kinds of all-embracing police governments. The power of the State is exercised without restraint, either by dictators or by compact oligarchies operating through a privileged party and a political police. It is not our duty at this time when difficulties are so numerous to interfere forcibly in the internal affairs of countries which we have not conquered in war. But we must never cease to proclaim in fearless tones the great principles of freedom and the rights of man which are the joint inheritance of the English-speaking world and which through Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, the Habeas Corpus, trial by jury, and the English common law find their most famous expression in the American Declaration of Independence.

All this means that the people of any country have the right, and should have the power by constitutional action, by free unfettered elections, with secret ballot, to choose or change the character or form of government under which they dwell; that freedom of speech and thought should reign; that courts of justice, independent of the executive, unbiased by any party, should administer laws which have received the broad assent of large majorities or are consecrated by time and custom. Here are the title deeds of freedom which should lie in every cottage home. Here is the message of the British and American peoples to mankind. Let us preach what we practise - let us practise what we preach.

I have now stated the two great dangers which menace the homes of the people: War and Tyranny. I have not yet spoken of poverty and privation which are in many cases the prevailing anxiety. But if the dangers of war and tyranny are removed, there is no doubt that science and co-operation can bring in the next few years to the world, certainly in the next few decades newly taught in the sharpening school of war, an expansion of material well-being beyond anything that has yet occurred in human experience. Now, at this sad and breathless moment, we are plunged in the hunger and distress which are the aftermath of our stupendous struggle; but this will pass and may pass quickly, and there is no reason except human folly or sub-human crime which should deny to all the nations the inauguration and enjoyment of an age of plenty. I have often used words which I learned fifty years ago from a great Irish-American orator, a friend of mine, Mr. Bourke Cockran. "There is enough for all. The earth is a generous mother; she will provide in plentiful abundance food for all her children if they will but cultivate her soil in justice and in peace." So far I feel that we are in full agreement.

Now, while still pursuing the method of realising our overall strategic concept, I come to the crux of what I have travelled here to Say. Neither the sure prevention of war, nor the continuous rise of world organisation will be gained without what I have called the fraternal association of the English-speaking peoples. This means a special relationship between the British Commonwealth and Empire and the United States. This is no time for generalities, and I will venture to be precise. Fraternal association requires not only the growing friendship and mutual understanding between our two vast but kindred Systems of society, but the continuance of the intimate relationship between our military advisers, leading to common study of potential dangers, the similarity of weapons and manuals of instructions, and to the interchange of officers and cadets at technical colleges. It should carry with it the continuance of the present facilities for mutual security by the joint use of all Naval and Air Force bases in the possession of either country all over the world. This would perhaps double the mobility of the American Navy and Air Force. It would greatly expand that of the British Empire Forces and it might well lead, if and as the world calms down, to important financial savings. Already we use together a large number of islands; more may well be entrusted to our joint care in the near future.

The United States has already a Permanent Defence Agreement with the Do-minion of Canada, which is so devotedly attached to the British Commonwealth and Empire. This Agreement is more effective than many of those which have often been made under formal alliances. This principle should be extended to all British Commonwealths with full reciprocity. Thus, whatever happens, and thus only, shall we be secure ourselves and able to work together for the high and simple causes that are dear to us and bode no ill to any. Eventually there may come-I feel eventually there will come-the principle of common citizenship, but that we may be content to leave to destiny, whose outstretched arm many of us can already clearly see.

There is however an important question we must ask ourselves. Would a special relationship between the United States and the British Commonwealth be inconsistent with our over-riding loyalties to the World Organisation? I reply that, on the contrary, it is probably the only means by which that organisation will achieve its full stature and strength. There are already the special United States relations with Canada which I have just mentioned, and there are the special relations between the United States and the South American Republics. We British have our twenty years Treaty of Collaboration and Mutual Assistance with Soviet Russia. I agree with Mr. Bevin, the Foreign Secretary of Great Britain, that it might well be a fifty years Treaty so far as we are concerned. We aim at nothing but mutual assistance and collaboration. The British have an alliance with Portugal unbroken since 1384, and which produced fruitful results at critical moments in the late war. None of these clash with the general interest of a world agreement, or a world organisation; on the contrary they help it. "In my father's house are many mansions." Special associations between members of the United Nations which have no aggressive point against any other country, which harbour no design incompatible with the Charter of the United Nations, far from being harmful, are beneficial and, as I believe, indispensable.

I spoke earlier of the Temple of Peace. Workmen from all countries must build that temple. If two of the workmen know each other particularly well and are old friends, if their families are inter-mingled, and if they have "faith in each other's purpose, hope in each other's future and charity towards each other's shortcomings"-to quote some good words I read here the other day-why cannot they work together at the common task as friends and partners? Why cannot they share their tools and thus increase each other's working powers? Indeed they must do so or else the temple may not be built, or, being built, it may collapse, and we shall all be proved again unteachable and have to go and try to learn again for a third time in a school of war, incomparably more rigorous than that from which we have just been released. The dark ages may return, the Stone Age may return on the gleaming wings of science, and what might now shower immeasurable material blessings upon mankind, may even bring about its total destruction. Beware, I say; time may be short. Do not let us take the course of allowing events to drift along until it is too late. If there is to be a fraternal association of the kind I have described, with all the extra strength and security which both our countries can derive from it, let us make sure that that great fact is known to the world, and that it plays its part in steadying and stabilising the foundations of peace. There is the path of wisdom. Prevention is better than cure.

A shadow has fallen upon the scenes so lately lighted by the Allied victory. Nobody knows what Soviet Russia and its Communist international organisation intends to do in the immediate future, or what are the limits, if any, to their expansive and proselytising tendencies. I have a strong admiration and regard for the valiant Russian people and for my wartime comrade, Marshal Stalin. There is deep symp..................