Re: Pros and cons of using the A-Bomb
- From: mtfester@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 21:18:02 -0400
Joel Shepherd <joelshep@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <eveg0a$k5o$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
an410@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Jim Garner) wrote:
I know this is not a new topic in this group. But I'm bringing it up
again beecause . . . well, you'll see:
Actually, I don't see. There was nothing new in the various points of
view you put forward (including the gently misleading "Japan [...] was
clearly beaten" canard).
Actually, that's the one part of the post that rings true. The Japanese
were, clearly beaten.
They weren't admitting to anyone, including (in most cases) themselves,
which is where the problems arose.
Mike
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Pros and cons of using the A-Bomb
- From: Richard Macdonald
- Re: Pros and cons of using the A-Bomb
- References:
- Pros and cons of using the A-Bomb
- From: Jim Garner
- Re: Pros and cons of using the A-Bomb
- From: Joel Shepherd
- Pros and cons of using the A-Bomb
- Prev by Date: Re: Anglo-French war plans in 1940?
- Next by Date: Germanaggression against Canada pre declaration of war
- Previous by thread: Re: Pros and cons of using the A-Bomb
- Next by thread: Re: Pros and cons of using the A-Bomb
- Index(es):