To my mind, Truman is morally culpable for waging atomic war. Is there any other sane answer? Truman himself would tell you the buck stops with him. We don’t hold the scientists or the generals or the flight crews responsible, so if there’s anybody left it’s him. Yes, I’d say, presidents are responsible for their actions, but then, I think we all are. I would rather not think that the Nuremberg trials were victors’ justice, that ‘following orders’ excuses everything, or that ‘national interests’ justify every horror and atrocity automagically. I’d say President Obama’s authority does not absolve him of culpability for what he’s done. Just like I’d say the fact President Washington was a butcher on horseback doesn’t absolve Trump of his part of the current genocide in Yemen.
And therefore is there anything any one single person could have done morally better given Truman's, Obama's or Washington's circumstances? I argue no.
By not dropping the bomb an invasion of Japan would have taken countless more lives.
By not droning Yemen Middle East outright war would taken countless more lives.
It is a trade off of shitty end game scenarios and any sensible person calculates the least shitty one and takes responsibility for the consequences.
How does one add all that up and conclude Obama was "bad" is beyond my comprehension. At most you might conclude that the presidency is "bad". That is not something I agree with but at least it's a line of thinking I can follow. But, regardless, it is a separate argument and certainly not what the article is arguing. The article is saying "we need to elect Jesus, anything less is fascism". That's profoundly immature and unimaginative.
And therefore is there anything any one single person could have done morally better given Truman’s, Obama’s or Washington’s circumstances?
Really? Blue skying this here, but Truman might’ve not nuked city after city. That’s not really what you mean, though, is it?
By not dropping the bomb an invasion of Japan would have taken countless more lives.
Nuking those cities wasn’t about defeating Japan. Japan had no air power, and newly built U.S. bases on Okinawa were set to field sorties of 625 B-29s at a time unopposed, all day, every day. The U.S. could’ve bombed Japan back under the ocean without stepping so much as a toe onshore. There’s nothing credible about the excuse that the atomic war against Japan was about not invading Japan. Authorities will tell you so, but then authorities will also tell you a lot of things.
By not droning Yemen Middle East outright war would taken countless more lives.
It is a trade off of shitty end game scenarios and any sensible person calculates the least shitty one and takes responsibility for the consequences.
Oh, people take responsibility for the consequences of their decisions now? I thought we were being all “might makes right,” but now we’re back to “my country, right or wrong” again?
How does one add all that up and conclude Obama was “bad” is beyond my comprehension.
Libya for the win, Alex.
At most you might conclude that the presidency is “bad”.
So especially high status people in authority exist on a plane above all moral dimensions. Got it. Stalin. Pol Pot. Hitler. It’s all good. Got it.
The article is saying “we need to elect Jesus, anything less is fascism”.
Your words. My suggestion is that sense of the article’s meaning sounds bogus to you because it is.
You feel attacked because someone gave you their viewpoint? Man, that is delicate. One shudders to think what you’d feel like as a victim of genocide callously justified as saving “countless lives.” Get a thicker hide.
All good questions. Hardly any straightforward answers, wouldn't you say?
To my mind, Truman is morally culpable for waging atomic war. Is there any other sane answer? Truman himself would tell you the buck stops with him. We don’t hold the scientists or the generals or the flight crews responsible, so if there’s anybody left it’s him. Yes, I’d say, presidents are responsible for their actions, but then, I think we all are. I would rather not think that the Nuremberg trials were victors’ justice, that ‘following orders’ excuses everything, or that ‘national interests’ justify every horror and atrocity automagically. I’d say President Obama’s authority does not absolve him of culpability for what he’s done. Just like I’d say the fact President Washington was a butcher on horseback doesn’t absolve Trump of his part of the current genocide in Yemen.
And therefore is there anything any one single person could have done morally better given Truman's, Obama's or Washington's circumstances? I argue no.
By not dropping the bomb an invasion of Japan would have taken countless more lives.
By not droning Yemen Middle East outright war would taken countless more lives.
It is a trade off of shitty end game scenarios and any sensible person calculates the least shitty one and takes responsibility for the consequences.
How does one add all that up and conclude Obama was "bad" is beyond my comprehension. At most you might conclude that the presidency is "bad". That is not something I agree with but at least it's a line of thinking I can follow. But, regardless, it is a separate argument and certainly not what the article is arguing. The article is saying "we need to elect Jesus, anything less is fascism". That's profoundly immature and unimaginative.
Really? Blue skying this here, but Truman might’ve not nuked city after city. That’s not really what you mean, though, is it?
Nuking those cities wasn’t about defeating Japan. Japan had no air power, and newly built U.S. bases on Okinawa were set to field sorties of 625 B-29s at a time unopposed, all day, every day. The U.S. could’ve bombed Japan back under the ocean without stepping so much as a toe onshore. There’s nothing credible about the excuse that the atomic war against Japan was about not invading Japan. Authorities will tell you so, but then authorities will also tell you a lot of things.
You don’t have to make shit up. Yemen was dirt poor and a hard place to live once, and now it’s an ongoing genocide in which the U.S. is an enthusiastic participant right alongside our mutual friends of the Saudis, Wahhabi Salafist terrorists somewhat better known as Al Qaeda. Countless more lives? Hogwash.
Oh, people take responsibility for the consequences of their decisions now? I thought we were being all “might makes right,” but now we’re back to “my country, right or wrong” again?
Libya for the win, Alex.
So especially high status people in authority exist on a plane above all moral dimensions. Got it. Stalin. Pol Pot. Hitler. It’s all good. Got it.
Your words. My suggestion is that sense of the article’s meaning sounds bogus to you because it is.
Oh-kaaaay. Good talk. Glad you feel strongly about... well whatever it is that your position is.
It must be really tough atacking a viewpoint without making your own clear.
You feel attacked because someone gave you their viewpoint? Man, that is delicate. One shudders to think what you’d feel like as a victim of genocide callously justified as saving “countless lives.” Get a thicker hide.
Whatevs