Obama’s policy “chaos ascribed to weakness”

President Reagan once had a foreign policy described as “peace through strength.” President Obama and Secretary Clinton have one better described as “chaos ascribed to weakness.”

They have failed in every major arena: They currently allow the Syrian government to gas and kill women and children in the streets. Over 120,000 killed and a million refugees while Obama does nothing but show weakness.

Iran has worked towards nuclear capabilities without fear. They fund, arm, and train terrorist groups around the globe. They have declared their military goal to destroy the US Navy. This administration has done nothing but legitimize their government and embolden their actions.

They have destroyed our relationship with Israel in deference to Iran and Islamic terror groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah.

In Libya, they used military force to remove a dictator who was harmless to the US. The resulting chaos spread dangerous weapons throughout the region. It lead to the death of four Americans in the Benghazi terrorist attack.

In Egypt, a loyal partner, who had promoted peace and stability in the region was thrown to the wolves in favor of another known terror group, The Muslim Brotherhood.

In Russia they boldly invade their neighbors. They supply Syria with weapons that are used to commit genocide. Yet Obama has placed our aspirations to space in their hands. He has made us reliant on Russia to launch military satellites.

Mrs. Clinton pressed a reset button and we gave concessions. Now we all deal with the consequences.

Bill Leach

80 Responses to "Obama’s policy “chaos ascribed to weakness”"

  1. ariely shein   May 29, 2014 at 11:27 pm

    Obama’s timeline legacy.
    In 2008, my slogan was ‘Yes we can.’
    In 2012, my slogan was ""control-alt-delete,"
    In 2013, my slogan is "" they don

  2. Really?   May 30, 2014 at 8:30 am

    The foreign policy failures of the Obama Administration is epic, and a mitigated disaster, only strong in one way- waffling and incoherence,the fruit of which is Obama and his peculiar blend of incompetence and incomprehension. At best a-strategic at worst anti-strategic, with absolutely no clue of how to employ our finite resources to accomplish our foreign policy goals because this hot mess of an administration has not articulated any clear goals or the objectives to be achieved. Putin is strutting about as a born again czar, laughing at our global impotence. We betrayed our European allies, and alienated Israel. Absolutely fumbled the victory in Iraq with an epic fail to hammer out a SOFA agreement that could have prevented Iraq from entanglement in the Iranian sphere of influence. A clown show flailing in Afghanistan; (Let

  3. Pink   May 30, 2014 at 10:10 am

    Jimmy Carter was worse, and not just because he was white.

  4. John the Baptist   May 30, 2014 at 4:18 pm

    "The world felt a little better about U.S. leadership last year, giving it the highest global approval ratings out of five global powers, including Germany, China, the European Union, and Russia. For the seventh straight year, Russia had the lowest median approval ratings in the world."
    (14 April 2014)

    Apparently the rest of the world doesn’t have Fox News to set the record straight.

  5. Hmm   May 31, 2014 at 1:43 pm

    Press secretary Carney finally quit drinking the Kool aid!and he was getting so good at his Obama impressions!l

  6. Paul   June 1, 2014 at 7:30 pm

    Lets see; Obama’s minions are all resigning, most amid scandal; Obama’s popularity is at an all time low; Obama’s policies are bankrupting the nation; Oh, but hey according to John the bap …. our countries policies and practices are more popular than China’s or Russia’s (I would certainly hope so) somehow though, anything the left doesn’t like to hear is always the fault of Fox News…. apparently the only ones watching Fox are the libs, that certainly isn’t where I get my info, I just look around and use some good old fashion common sense.

  7. Redneck Bill   June 1, 2014 at 8:44 pm

    I actually hate koolaid. Too sweet. But I understand your point.

    Here is something to consider. Would our nation be better off with one party rule?

    Have you noticed how well that works in say China, or North Korea? Is the ruling party in those countries Republican or Democrat?

    I think I prefer to live here in the United States, imperfect as out country is, with difference of opinion, and disagreement about how to best proceed. I think that is healthy.

    There are times when my point of view is better represented, and there are times when it is not. But I prefer our system of balance to one party rule.

    But God Bless those of you that feel only one political party represents "real" America.

  8. Pink   June 2, 2014 at 8:50 am

    I agree with you 100% RB, I also believe strongly in a 2 party system. I don’t believe that the people who think Obama is doing a terrible job want a 1 party system, we are merely exercising our rights to freedom of speech. Remember when Bush was president and people wrote frothing at the mouth diatribes about him? Did that mean you guys all wanted a 1 party system? Remember turn about is fair play…. God bless you my friend. It is a beautiful day.

  9. CK   June 2, 2014 at 10:20 am

    Off Topic, and irrelevant. No one is talking about one Party Rule or Fox News except those defending the indefensible. On the other hand, It is painful to watch Obama bounce from one crisis to another, each one coming as a surprise to him and no clue of how the situation occurred or a possible solution. Deadlines and redlines are all we get from this administration, just like rainbows. No matter how hard you try to get to one they just keep geeting farther and farther away until suddenly they are gone.

  10. Bill L   June 2, 2014 at 11:06 am

    Who is asking for a one party system? I wrote this article to voice my criticisms of the Obama, Clinton foreign policy.

    Would anyone here actually like to defend this policy? How about debate any of the points made in the piece?

    The effectiveness of US foreign policy shouldn’t be decided based on some international polling.

    Most of the international community dislikes America projecting its power. They prefer us to defer to the UN or their wishes. Should we defer to Iran, China, Russia, and other such countries? Or do what is right and best for America?

  11. John the Baptist   June 2, 2014 at 1:15 pm

    Re Comment #10:

    "The effectiveness of US foreign policy shouldn’t be decided based on some international polling."

    I agree. But I believe the perception provided by people on the receiving end provides a far better better gauge than does the domestic. That said, perceptions, both foreign and domestic, can be used to advantage in determining the best way to present foreign policy.

  12. Really?   June 2, 2014 at 3:03 pm

    So your saying that the Foreign Policy of the United States should be based on the perception of another country and or the country we are dealing with? Do you really argue that point?

  13. Bill L   June 2, 2014 at 3:41 pm

    The foreign policy of the US should be based on US interests.

    Only US interests.
    It should be geared towards helping to keep Americans safe, to promoting American ideals, and securing economic opportunities for Americans.

    The foreign policy of the US recently has done nothing of the sort.
    It has undermined US security. It has failed to create economic partnerships. It has failed to do anything of value.

    They have no coherent policy whatsoever. Americans are less safe then we were in 2007. Our economy is trashed. Americans have and continue to die because of these mishaps. Our enemies grow stronger and we weaken ourselves.

  14. VDH   June 3, 2014 at 12:03 pm

    Bush Blaming had a shelf life of four years, was idiotic & can

  15. Mike W   June 3, 2014 at 5:37 pm

    You can

  16. Mike W   June 3, 2014 at 5:52 pm

    Here’s what I can’t understand, at a time when more and more countries are wanting to dump the dollar as the world trade currency, and who can blame them, it only benefits the world central banks and the United States. So why are they now using trickery, lies and regime change in to push Russia into a corner forcing them to play the only card they have and dump the dollar which will no doubt start a domino effect with China and a host of smaller countries to do the same? Why can’t we be happy with what we have and leave everyone else alone do deal with their own lives, who put us in charge other than our boundless ego?

  17. ZZZ   June 3, 2014 at 10:36 pm

    Any comment on giving $1.4billion yesterday to house all the illegal children 13 and under in Point Mug that have somehow ‘appeared’. Obama said to house, educate, and to give medical assistance.

    They came here by breaking the law, they need to be put back on a bus across the border. Why should our money pay for this when we have lawful Americans to feed, educate and medicate.

  18. Seriously??   June 4, 2014 at 11:47 am

    Why oh why do people on the left of the spectrum such as Mike W and Jon Monday always feel they have to write an entire book when a simple paragraph will suffice? Obama is not a good leader. It’s that simple. Carter was a joke (albeit a bad one) Bush 1 and Bush 2 weren’t great either but they were a tad better than the current president. Clinton was pretty good economically but he has no character. I don’t think any of our presidents were perfect but a few were better than others. I loved Reagan, because he spoke softly but carried a big stick.

  19. Bill L   June 4, 2014 at 12:24 pm

    @Mike W

    Now Obamas policy is being directed by neo conservatives? Wow this is taking bush blaming to a whole new level.

    The "War on terror" is a defensive war. We are merely defending ourselves against a global jihadist movement. Do you remember 9/11? Benghazi? The USS Cole?

    We have been attacked and are attempting to bring the fight to them. Would you prefer for the fight to be fought on American ground? We don’t want this war but we will not surrender to these cowardly terrorists.

    I would be in favor of bringing the fight to these jihadis wherever and whenever.

    We should use pressure on Iran to stop their nuclear programs.

    We should have left a force of troops in Iraq.

    Troops just sitting in Iraq would have deterred the Syrian regime from committing their genocide.

    Troops sitting there would have discouraged Iran’s ambitions.

    I would have supported welcoming Ukraine into NATO which would have protected their people from Russian oppression.

    We should be selling them our huge surplus of natural gas and booming our economy.
    We should have anti ballistic missile bases in eastern Europe that protects our allies.

    We should have protected our ambassador in Libya instead of leaving him to be raped and murdered.

    We should be designing and launching our own space shuttles, sending off our own astronauts, and launching our own military satellites.

    We should support our allies and project power onto our enemies.

    This is not warmongering it is a common sense approach to.foreign policy.

    We should build up our military presence not because we want war. But for exactly the opposite reason. We should be so powerful that no enemy would ever even consider attacking us or our allies. This is for the reason of promoting peace. For promoting freedom.

    No one in the history of time was ever attacked for being too strong.

  20. CK   June 4, 2014 at 1:05 pm

    It’s a vast right-wing NEOCON conspiracy! Oh my! There ya go making excuses for the whiner in chief. Trust me he has scores of people he pays to make excuses for him, you aren’t needed Mike W.

    If you want to have a legitimate discussion about what the presidents foolish acts have done and may do, then let’s debate it. So far this past week, obama has outed a top CIA station chief, endangering his and his families lives, not to mention his co-workers. He has now released 5 top terrorist leaders back into the middle east who in turn can seek revenge on America. Meanwhile, he has abandoned a Marine in Mexico, after stating we don’t leave anyone behind, like Benghazi maybe??? You have no argument to argue here Mike W, obama was wrong on all counts, period.

    BTW Does anyone know what the WORD COUNT LIMIT IS for writing something pithy…hint, hint… before the site Locks up?

  21. Mike W   June 5, 2014 at 4:45 pm

    * We should have protected our ambassador in Libya instead of leaving him to be raped and murdered.
    ~ OMG I can’t believe you are spreading these lies without actually checking, if you are going to be politically active, at least do some research. The Ambassador was locked in a safe room with two others, all of whom suffered from smoke inhalation and were taken to the hospital by Libyans after the attack but they later died from smoke inhalation injuries.
    The month after the attack, Clinton said she was responsible for the safety of those who had served in Benghazi, without acknowledging any specific mistakes on her part. Obama said the blame ultimately rested on his shoulders as president.
    Yet the administration says neither Obama nor Clinton was aware of the requests for better protection in Benghazi because they were handled at lower levels, (chain of command) and if I

  22. Mike W   June 5, 2014 at 5:34 pm

    Comment 20 ~ The officer’s name

  23. Hmmq   June 5, 2014 at 6:58 pm

    And yesterday the president of the United States stood next to the released traitors father who thanked Allah..it just gets better and better..his platoon was on Fox News tonight…gasp…because the mainstream news would not dare show this report…they were his platoon!

  24. Mike W   June 5, 2014 at 7:27 pm

    CK comment #20 " he (Obama) abandoned a Marine in Mexico, after stating we don’t leave anyone behind, like Benghazi maybe???

    That of course is as ridiculous as your other statements, can’t you see how Fox needs to be run out of business for misinforming the citizenry. Who am I dealing with, Clitus Kiddlehopper from hayseeds anonymous?
    I’m not wasting any more time on this BS other than to say that Mexico the United States, along with many other countries have very strict laws about bringing firearms into the country, other than shotguns for hunting that need to be registered prior to the trip. Also it is not the job of the president to do anything for service personal who get into trouble in Mex while on leave and not working in official capacity, it is the responsibility of his commanding officer to bail him out.. Would you please get a grip on reality?

    Just go here to find the truth ~ http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/06/05/an-american-service-member-in-a-mexican-jail-an/199614

    Although from your postings, I doubt you can handle the truth after being so thoroughly indoctrinated.

  25. Bill L   June 6, 2014 at 11:44 am

    @ Mike W

    Wow you write long posts that are incoherent and apocryphal. Maybe you have been watching MSNBC too often. You must have been indoctrinated by Chris Matthews.

    I guess the summary of your comments is that America is a horrible place that tries to control the entire world so that the rich bankers can exploit other people, animals, and natural resources. President Obama is a great guy and has his foreign policy locked down perfectly. Fox news is the new Der sturmer and Hannity is the new Goebbles.

    Putin is freedom fighter helping to fight the Nazis who we support. Iran is actually a great country just trying to have nuclear power. In Benghazi the protesters were just mad at that inappropriate and disgusting video. Us trading 5 of the most dangerous Taliban fighters for 1 treasonous traitor is just GREAT! The marine who fought his butt off for you and is sitting in a Mexican prison deserved it.

    I suppose 70 years ago our troops stormed the beaches of Normandy so that we could exploit the French and steal their wine.

    Is that about right?

  26. Pink   June 6, 2014 at 12:14 pm

    Good try Bill L, but unfortunately logic is completely lost on conspiracy theorists like Mike.

  27. Mike W   June 7, 2014 at 10:38 am

    Politics and religion have one thing in common, they both require blind faith in what someone else tells them. If you want to believe that they hate us for our freedoms, that fire, not controlled demolition, brought down the twin towers and building 7, that Oswald assassinated JFK, the war on drugs is to stem the use of drugs in this country rather than control and profit and fund the CIA, and the war on terror is anything other than an excuse to dominate the worlds resources for western businesses and that whistleblowers are anti american and Bowe Bergdahl is a traitor, then you are ill informed or an idiot

    It all begins with ignorance. First you keep people ignorant, then you easily plant false ideas in their minds (indoctrination), and if later on somebody tries to enlighten them, the result is cognitive dissonance!
    "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." – Mark Twain

  28. Pink   June 7, 2014 at 4:02 pm

    I don’t believe in The Illuminati, the Jewish Banking Conspiracy, or the Gray Alien Theory…. I don’t believe in little green men or that someone other than Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK. I believe that 911 happened because America was asleep at the wheel, just as it was when Pearl Harbor was attacked. I believe that many of today’s conspiracy theories is just evidence of Anti Semitism once again rearing it’s ugly head. I believe that most conspiracy theorists want to believe in a vast conspiracy because it is more comforting to them than facing the truth. If that makes me an ill informed idiot in your eyes Mikey, it is fine with me. How’s that tin foil hat working for you?

  29. What???   June 8, 2014 at 10:22 pm

    Wow Mike, wow. Are you for real???? If there is ever a time for an alien abduction it

  30. grunt   June 9, 2014 at 8:05 am

    Mike, the ethics pledge you mentioned " Revolving Door Ban", he has over 50 former lobbyist he has appointed to government jobs. It is one thing to say something – totally different to do something.

  31. Mike W   June 9, 2014 at 1:52 pm

    Grunt, none of us know the man, he is as separated from us as we are from him, all we have is the TV and all he has is his advisors. I’m reminded of something Nelson Mandela said after meeting and getting to know George Bush, he said he liked Bush and felt certain he could do business with him "if it weren’t for his advisors and the fact that Cheney was the real president." Catch my drift bro? Now just for a minute, put yourself in Obama’s shoes. You are a young family man with two beautiful daughters and the first black president of the United States of America, the most powerful country in the world. Wouldn’t you want to go down in history as one of the best presidents ever, for your kids and those who were celebrating your victory?
    I believe he intended to do everything he promised, all things this country desperately needs. But what he found out shortly after they planted that organic garden on the White House lawn, the president of the United States has now real power, o president or politician does and neither do we.. That

  32. Mike W   June 9, 2014 at 1:55 pm

    PS … This is for you Grunt ~
    Thom Hartmann on "The Crash of 2016: The Plot to Destroy America

  33. Mike W   June 9, 2014 at 2:20 pm

    PS … This is for you Grunt ~
    Thom Hartmann on "The Crash of 2016: The Plot to Destroy America

  34. Mike W   June 9, 2014 at 2:20 pm

    Pink, are you trying to tell me you didn

  35. Pink   June 9, 2014 at 4:02 pm

    Oh come on Mike, I’m a history major for Pete’s sake. Is there anyone over the age of 13 who doesn’t know that FDR wanted to get America into WWII in the worst way? I’m no FDR fan, but on that issue I believe he was right. Did he know that Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked? Who knows. It could have been anywhere in the South Pacific, but I certainly believe he knew it was a possibility, however I don’t believe for one minute that he knew it was coming as a surprise on the morning of December 7th, only a complete fool would have used battleship row as a sitting duck, and FDR was no fool. His best admirals advised him against putting the fleet at Pearl, and history has proven they were right, but if the admirals were really concerned, why oh why, weren’t they at least on alert? Believe what you want to believe Mike, but America was asleep at the switch, even when they saw the planes coming, they still couldn’t believe the evidence of their own eyes. As a nation, we have always been too trusting, and maybe that’s a good thing.

    Do I think our country is perfect? Good Lord no. We are really pretty naieve as a citizenry, much too trusting of our politicians. As far as I’m concerned they are all a dime a dozen, but some are worse than others. I don’t believe it matters much what we vote for they are going to do what they darn well please, and whatever lines their own collective pockets. All we can do is pray and keep on keepin on.

    As far as countries like Syria go, I think their democratic voting system is just about as good as the one in the Ukraine. The guy who wins is the guy in charge.

    I think Obama is a good family man but he is a terrible president. While I am personally thrilled to finally have a president of color, I just wish it would have been someone who knew what they were doing.


  36. Bill L   June 9, 2014 at 4:42 pm


    Are you for real?
    You can’t hope to be taken seriously. You obviously have some problems.

    Anyone who gets 90% of the vote is a dictator 100% of the time.
    Assad has killed over 100,000 civilians. He has displaced millions. He has used gas, tanks, and military helicopters on woman and children.

    You support that?
    Yet America is the bad place you disparage.

    Yes they voted for him at the barrel of a gun, the opposition dead and scattered.

    How do you think Kim Jong Il would do in North Korea? Would they vote him out or would they overwhelmingly support him out of fear?

    Should we not have intervened in WW2?

    We didn’t need to manufacture reasons to go to war. Do you remember the holocaust? Or is that made up as well? What about the rape millions of Chinese woman? Korean woman? Was that ok?

    Or wait, let me guess, it is the Jews that are conspiring behind the scenes?

    Your ideas carry no weight. They are ridiculous. Really there is not a whole lotta reason to reply to it other than you are using the comments section in my editorial to advance absolute insanity.

    Why don’t you write your own op ed with these ideas of yours and see if they publish it?

  37. grunt   June 10, 2014 at 11:51 am

    Just to set the record straight, Japan did attempt to arrange a peace – however they used the Wonderful Russia as the conduit; Russia did not forward the offer as it wanted to partake in the spoils. The rest of Mike’s ranting are eerily similar to Lee, and thus not worth a comment.

  38. Mike W   June 10, 2014 at 12:52 pm

    Pink ~ The only thing new in the world is the history you don’t know.. Harry S. Truman

    Sorry Bill L, While I do respect your love of country and wanting to make things right, nearly everything you say is wrong and incredibly full of hate which is obviously a result of watching television and believing the "official" account of every event, regardless of proof to the contrary. I have provided you websites and articles that reflect my thoughts, show me yours…
    In the meantime here is an article that is the best explanation of the Syrian situation. Btw Assad is a soft spoken doctor, I just don’t see him turning on his own people just to stay in power and I’m not alone in that regard. ~ http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/06/08/washingtons-iron-curtain-diana-johnstone/

    P.S…. U.S.S. Cole = U.S.S. Liberty … Same s**t different corner and by the way, you don’t see it mentioned much that it was a Russian war ship that saved the USS Liberty from further damage and escorted her to safety. Just like we celebrate the defeat of Nazi Germany at the anniversary of the Normandy invasion without mentioning the Russians when it is well known to historians and educated people, that the Red Army
    defeated Nazi Germany long before the US was able to get geared up to participate in the war. The Normandy invasion most certainly did not defeat Nazi Germany. What the Normandy invasion did was to prevent the Red Army from overrunning all of Europe.

    "Propaganda has always been with us. The difference is that in the 21st century Americans have nothing but propaganda. Nothing else at all. Just lies. Lies are the American experience. The actual world as it exists is foreign to most Americans." P.C. Roberts


  39. Pink   June 10, 2014 at 1:38 pm

    As I previously stated Mike, I was a history major in college, you have apparently never even taken a history class. If you really believe this moonshine you are attempting to sell I would say that someone has a done a tremendous job of brainwashing you, obviously someone with a great love for "mother Russia". Good try Mikey, but no cigar. Historians and educated people indeed. Give me a break. BTW I don’t need to list websites to make my points, I use the real world approach, not some contrived BS mixed with real facts and figures to create a convoluted conspiracy theorist approach to realism. Doo Doo Doo Doo….. The Twighlight Zone…

    "Hogwash is hogwash"……. Anonymous

  40. Bill L   June 10, 2014 at 4:52 pm


    The soviet unions role is ww2 is no secret that only you know of.
    Battles such as Stalingrad and Kursk have been well publicized and yes the USSR had a massive army that routed the Germans on the eastern front.

    But because of the Normandy invasions the Germans had to shift more troops to the west and allowed the Soviets to have the success that they did. In fact, Stalin begged FDR and Churchill to invade to take the pressure off the east. If there were no Normandy invasions then Hitler could have used all his forces against USSR. Although the Soviet army did well against the Nazis, the Nazis army also had a great deal of success against them as well. Also the soviets wouldn’t have been doing so well without our financial backing.

    Furthermore the area where the US had the biggest impact was in the pacific, where we destroyed the Japanese navy and proceeded to liberate almost all of Asia.

    Im sure this is all common knowledge to people that care about real history.

  41. grunt   June 10, 2014 at 8:21 pm

    Here lies (both definitions) the problem with the internet; anyone can open a blog ad declare it the truth. Others, Mike for one, see that blog and believe it to be true. Or maybe some "know" something then find a blog that supports their claim. I am always intrigued by those that claim only they and few others know the facts and all others are Fox-addicts. How could all these conspiracies exist with not one person "leaking" the information? Why is Bush "blame-able" ad should be held accountable, Mike, while Obama is just a victim of his handlers?

  42. Mike W   June 11, 2014 at 1:39 pm

    Grunt, I’m not saying there is a difference between the two, that is my point.. It doesn’t matter who we put in office, the play remains the same.
    You are trying to say that because people have a blog and can be found on the internet that what they say can not be true but what ever comes from the government or the TV is? Give me a break will ya? The very reason people have blogs or news gathering services is because we have little to no real information coming from the (used to be our) media. I agree there is a lot of crud on the internet but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out how to find the good stuff. I have given many such links and quotes for your benefit, if you don’t like what they say, take it up with them or keep your head in the sand or where ever it is, if that makes life easy for you. As for me, I have kids and the thought of perpetual war against a nameless countryless entity "who ever they want it to be" is ludicrous and a sign of the times. Your kneejerk reaction to Russia is telling and you can’t realize just how many jobs went down the drain when the cold war ended, After all it was the perfect excuse to dump billions and billions of money into the defense industry and they have been looking for and trying to manufacture a new threat, the terrorist BS is wearing a bit thin these days so next up is WWIII and they are trying to get Obama to do it before he leaves

    So let me get this straight, if the internet has information contrary to your beliefs then the Internet must be wrong and if I say things contrary to your current beliefs then I have to be a tin hat wearing conspiracy nut, not just someone with a different point of view. I have noticed most here just say others are wrong without expressing your views if you have any other than, "That can’t be true".. so be it, I didn’t expect more so maybe you can take it from one of your own ~

    "It is part of the general pattern of misguided policy that our country is now geared to an arms economy which was bred in an artificially induced psychosis of war hysteria and nurtured upon an incessant propaganda of fear." – Douglas MacArthur

    "One cannot wage war under present conditions without the support of public opinion, which is tremendously molded by the press and other forms of propaganda." – Douglas MacArthur

    * "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves, in the course of time, a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it." Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850), French economist

    We need a new economy that respects people, nature and this tiny planet we all share.. We need an economy that includes everyone and guarantees the just distribution of all production so that everyone can live a life of dignity.
    Reforming the global debt-based money system is one of the most pressing issues of our time.

    Pity the poor far right. They live in mortal FEAR of anyone not EXACTLY like them with EXACTLY their same beliefs. They are afraid of other races. They are afraid of other religions. They are afraid of agnostics and atheists. They fear running out of oil. They fear change. Regardless of how much personal wealth they may own they fear it will never be enough. Fear is all they know. And it directs their actions. Out of their fear they try to assert control over others’ lives. Live and let live? They don’t know what that means. They wouldn’t know where to begin.

    When I was a kid I used to think that there had to be someone somewhere that knew what was going on and had a handle on it. That was when I was a kid

  43. Bill L   June 11, 2014 at 2:29 pm

    The reason why our country is rich is the same way you get other countries rich and the way that individuals climb their way out of poverty.

    That is free markets and hard work.

    The governments role isn’t to redistribute wealth to the people who refuse to work hard.

    Your communist ideas have been proven wrong time and time again. Where is your beloved Soviet union now? How is the economy of Cuba? North Korea?
    The free market economy creates wealth when government gets out of the way!!!

    These are the principals of our country. We need to get back to them.

  44. Bill L   June 11, 2014 at 2:39 pm

    Back on topic, foreign policy, look at what is going on today..

    Al Qaeda now taking over cities in Iraq, hardened veterans of the Syrian conflict.
    Now they are routing the Iraqi army and taking the arms that we gave them.

    Where was the status of forces agreement Mr. President? Where are our troops? Oh wait they are waiting for an appt at the VA.

    If we had troops in Iraq, just sitting there, the deterrent effect would be such that these horrible events would not be happening!
    This is ridiculous, our money spent, our blood spilled, then Obama turns it back over to the enemy.

    If you don’t like the Iraq war, fine, but we won this war then surrendered every single one of our gains.

    Now we are about to surrender to the Taliban, give them back their military, commanders, and walk away.
    In 3 years we will be talking about how the Taliban is reversing everything we worked toward there.

    Do you remember why we went into Afghanistan? They harbored and allowed terrorist cells to train and plan attacks on America. Now we just surrender and allow it to happen again?

  45. Pink   June 11, 2014 at 5:50 pm

    Well said Bill L., well said. All good points and good questions.

    Mike: Regarding your very last sentence, "when I was a kid I used to think there was someone somewhere who knew what was going on, and had a handle on it"

    There is Mike, He is called God.

  46. Hmm   June 12, 2014 at 6:59 am

    Maybe Hillary..who came out of the White House “dead broke..had trouble paying our mortgages..plural” can apply for an Obama phone? Interesting how the Clinton’s are worth more than 100 million…yet she wants income equality??? Sign me up if that means we can share in her wealth! And before she runs for President she better get her facts right..in her book she referred to Abraham Lincoln as a senator..he was not. But if she says it long enough..perhaps he will become one! The left blasted Romney in part for having a lot of money..well??.Monica Lewinsky will benefit in book sales if Hillary decides to run..Hillary who apparently lied to the public regarding Bengazi..and who told CBS news that it wasn’t important what happened there..Hillary who is married to a man who laughed at the American people..lied openly by saying “I did not have…” But as we all knew..and he admitted to later did..Here’s hoping the people of our great nation can use their heads this next election..how many people are better off now than 6 years ago?

  47. Mike W   June 12, 2014 at 10:09 am

    Free markets Bill? You obviously don’t know what the free market system is and the harm it and its factory farming has done and is doing, putting small farmers all over the world out of business and taking over their land to factory farming and its over use of chemicals and poisoning the water and air
    Bill, I think you are referring to the free "enterprise" system that made this country prosper above all others but it has been dead and gone for many years, like our country, it exists in name only, and in its place we have monopolistic corporations that have gobbled up all the competition and seek to privatize (own) everything under the sun and the underlying reason for all these wars is for control of every country’s economy and resources through control of their money (private central banks) and trade
    Surrendering authority of our trade policy to a nongovernmental agency (privatization) led by corporate superpowers and banksters was a bipartisan act of treason by Clinton and the Republican senate of the time.
    Corporate personhood and GATT, NAFTA, WTO, G-20, IMF, World Bank, and Federal Reserve. All of these agencies exist for one purpose: To consolidate power in the hands of the richest capitalists in the world and those who are willing to play by their rules to keep their own grip on power.
    They exercise hegemony over the world directly through overwhelming military might and indirectly through secretive organizations like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization. Though largely dominated by the US government, these are formally international organizations and therefore beyond Congressional oversight.

    Grunt is saying that bad old Russia knew the Japanese wanted to surrender but didn’t tell the US ? That is laughable, and you call me crazy Russia lover?

    History major? What’s that supposed to mean, other than you took a class in school? I’m talkin about the history we don’t get in school ~ http://www.themoneymasters.com/the-money-masters/famous-quotations-on-banking/

    It is obvious nobody here wants to hear what I have to say, this little venue has been taken over by the tea party mentality and those who have something worthwhile to say have moved on and only those of the narrow view remain here, content to bash the president, liberals and free thinkers, rather than to see things as they are, admit our mistakes and talk about solutions..


  48. CK   June 12, 2014 at 10:20 am

    What Mike? Your suprised some folks take you to task when you completely abandone logic and engage your mouth into a situational tourettes festival spewing Bush/Bilderberg/Zionist Derangement Syndrom like Symptoms?

    It’s not what your saying,…we’ll yes it is, because it’s all crazy & cliched…but really it’s your whole premise, the whole schtick of I’m "enlightented" and you are hayseeds, pretentious, condescending, Faux elitist attitude, oh

  49. Mike W   June 12, 2014 at 11:21 am

    "Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking; where it is absent, discussion is apt to become worse than useless." — Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoi – (1828-1910)

  50. LoL   June 12, 2014 at 2:08 pm

    @#49 "Said the most closed-minded, demanding members of American society"

  51. Pink   June 12, 2014 at 2:43 pm

    All "thoughts" are free Mikey. Our minds are the one thing that no one can control, not even at the point of a gun.

  52. Lol   June 13, 2014 at 7:07 am

    "Although neither would have liked to admit it, there was much in common between Lenin and Tolstoy.

  53. grunt   June 13, 2014 at 3:55 pm

    `Mike, Japan’s crown Prince went to the Russian ambassador to ask that Russia interceded with the US to end the war; Russia then shortly after declared war on Japan with the intended purpose to seize Hokkaido. All facts. You continual site obscure web sites that have no more credibility than my 6 year-old neighbor, then claim that all that do not believe have something wrong with their thought process. I ask:

  54. Mike W   June 17, 2014 at 2:56 pm

    Grunt, save me some time and supply your source of info, Thanks but can’t see what you are trying to say here except Russia is bad. I don’t know enough about the history around that incident to judge anything

    LOL .. they both had their good parts, you miss out by being so judgmental and dismissing as rubbish, the good along with the bad.

  55. Pink   June 17, 2014 at 4:35 pm

    Seriously Mike? You actually accuse grunt of being judgmental? You are the one continually crying that America is evil, always at fault, and guilty of everything up to and including the Mrs. O’Leary’s cow incident. What grunt said about Russia and Japan is historical fact. Look it up. When it comes to judging however, I would say that while the USA might not be perfect, it is for certain that Russia certainly isn’t!! There is so much bad in the things you tell us Mike, that if there is any good in there at all it has been lost in the translation.

  56. Mike W   June 17, 2014 at 9:02 pm

    MYOB Pink, The judgmental remark was for Lol, not Grunt, I was asking him to send me a link so I can save time ? Unlike yourself, I don’t have all day to sit in front of the PC

  57. Pink   June 18, 2014 at 9:31 am

    This is an open forum Mike, I can comment if I wish. Freedom of speech and all. Trust me I don’t have all day to get in front of a computer either, that is what I-Phones are for, to check on things, such as websites, periodically, no matter where you are. If you need a "link" to everything, I would suggest that you are spending more time on the I-Net than I am. I usually just crack a book when I need info.


  58. Pink   June 18, 2014 at 9:33 am

    ….Oh by the way Mike, do you really believe that Lenin had his good points???? Seriously???? If so, much is explained about your mindset.

  59. Grunt   June 19, 2014 at 10:12 pm

    Mike, sorry for the delay – it took me a little time to find one of the sources: read Robert Butow’s "Japan’s Decision To Surrender" My reason for mentioning this was in response to your comment that Russia "did more to end the war". You also mentioned my "knee-jerk reaction" to Russia- please provide your reference. (BTW, in addition to the book, I also have personal knowledge from my conversations with George Sakai, Japanese-American who was on MacArthur’s staff and read/translated papers after the surrender that claimed the same.

  60. grunt   June 19, 2014 at 10:21 pm

    Mike – to correct my above, by "find" I meant relocate. I do not search the internet to find something to support my ideas after I have stated them, I research, learn study THEN develop my beliefs.

  61. Mike W   June 21, 2014 at 1:33 pm

    Comment 60 ~ I do not search the internet to find something to support my ideas after I have stated them, I research, learn study THEN develop my beliefs.

    Really grunt? Then you must know that by July 1945, Japan was defeated and on the verge of surrender and everyone knew it. However, the dynamics had changed. Churchill, just defeated in his bid for reelection, was no longer a factor. Harry Truman had replaced Roosevelt. Stalin’s Red Army had defeated the Third Reich with virtually no meaningful assistance from the Western allies, and he had promised that within 90 days of the fall of Berlin, he would declare war on Japan. He intended to keep his promise and the deadline was approaching. HST knew FDR’s policy of conciliation toward Stalin had been naive and foolish. FDR insisted he did not believe Stalin would make territorial demands after the war, but would work with the US to foster democracy across Europe HST viewed the USSR with the same jaundiced eye as he did the German National Socialists. Unlike FDR, he saw them as two sides of the same coin. He also believed that Mao Zedong would prevail over Chiang Kai Shek in China and he knew who would be the next enemies of the US. He had to make a statement. He chose Japan as the victim of that statement.

    At Potsdam, Truman told Stalin that the US had developed a new weapon of incredible destructive power. Overtly, Stalin expressed disbelief. Stalin knew better because his spies had infiltrated the Manhattan Project and he knew the Trinity tests at White Sands had been successful. Truman had to show Stalin we had the bomb and weren’t afraid to use it (on civilians, no less). It was decided to demand the unconditional surrender of Japan. Unconditional surrender is an inane, immoral, self-defeating concept. An enemy otherwise willing to surrender traditionally has refused to do so unconditionally and has historically found new resolve to fight. Negotiated peace brings some guarantee of the direction the peace will take. Unconditional surrender is another matter, and generally is tantamount to national suicide as the Treaty of Versailles so clearly proved in 1919.

    Military leaders in positions to have the best information and intelligence all recommended not using the bombs and recommended negotiating a peace, preferably with a cease fire in place. There is no room to quote them here, but read the words of CinCPac Chester Nimitz, Gen Douglas MacArthur, Chief of Staff Wm Leahy, Gen Dwight Eisenhower and Gen Carl Spaatz (Commander of USAAF forces in the Pacific). To a man, they opposed use of the bombs, claiming Japan had already sought peace and that the bombs weren’t necessary and wouldn’t save lives.
    I rest my case

  62. grunt   June 21, 2014 at 5:34 pm

    Mike, as late as July 1945 Japan had refused to surrender. Once the first A-bomb was dropped, then russia joined in – but make no mistake, Russia wanted Hokkaido, and had not MacArthur refused they would have divided Japan as Germany. The cease fire was not a surrender. I don’t know where you got the information that the military was opposed to the bomb – in the operations order for the invasion of Japan three Marine divisions were expected to be destroyed by D+5 (do not recall if D+5 or D+7) just seizing beaches for the US Army to land upon. What I understand is that many people, AFTER the bomb was dropped expressed a desire that atomic weapons had not be invented. But i have not read any of the above were opposed to its use prior to the dropping.

  63. Pink   June 22, 2014 at 9:26 pm

    Grunt is correct, what Mike is repeating is "revisionist history". Japan refused to surrender, and unfortunately the Japanese people paid the price chosen by their emperor. Thousands of American lives were save by the dropping of the A bomb. I wish, with all my heart, that such a destructive devise had never been invented or used, but humans being what they are, it was.

  64. Mike W   June 23, 2014 at 2:51 pm

    "what Mike is repeating is "revisionist history".
    Historical revisionism, the reinterpretation of orthodox views on evidence, motivations, and decision-making processes surrounding a historical event.
    The problem with history majors is they make uninformed statements like ~ "Japan refused to surrender, and unfortunately the Japanese people paid the price chosen by their emperor."
    So easy to believe but so far from the truth..

    Pfft.. You people…Really need to get a grip on reality rather than living within an illusion that was fed to you since you were a child..

    Surrender and Unconditional Surrender are two very different things, especially when you consider the psychological makeup of the Japanese where honor is everything. Would accept unconditional surrender Miss better dead than red? It was used to manipulate them into dragging their feet so the bombs could be used. They notified England, Germany, Russia and the US that they wanted to negotiate surrender as thy were already beaten but England and the US ignored it.. If we would have offered what we ended up giving them (leaving the emperor in place) they would have accepted surrender.

    grunt, I showed you mine now you show me yours

    "…in [July] 1945… Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. …the Secretary, upon giving me the news of the successful bomb test in New Mexico, and of the plan for using it, asked for my reaction, apparently expecting a vigorous assent.

    "During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of ‘face’. The Secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude…"

    – Dwight Eisenhower, Mandate For Change, pg. 380

    In a Newsweek interview, Eisenhower again recalled the meeting with Stimson:

    "…the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing."

    – Ike on Ike, Newsweek, 11/11/63


    (Chief of Staff to Presidents Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman)
    "It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons.

    "The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children."

    – William Leahy, I Was There, pg. 441.


    On May 28, 1945, Hoover visited President Truman and suggested a way to end the Pacific war quickly: "I am convinced that if you, as President, will make a shortwave broadcast to the people of Japan – tell them they can have their Emperor if they surrender, that it will not mean unconditional surrender except for the militarists – you’ll get a peace in Japan – you’ll have both wars over."

    Richard Norton Smith, An Uncommon Man: The Triumph of Herbert Hoover, pg. 347.

    On August 8, 1945, after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, Hoover wrote to Army and Navy Journal publisher Colonel John Callan O’Laughlin, "The use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul."

    quoted from Gar Alperovitz, The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb, pg. 635.

    "…the Japanese were prepared to negotiate all the way from February 1945…up to and before the time the atomic bombs were dropped; …if such leads had been followed up, there would have been no occasion to drop the [atomic] bombs."

    – quoted by Barton Bernstein in Philip Nobile, ed., Judgment at the Smithsonian, pg. 142

    Hoover biographer Richard Norton Smith has written: "Use of the bomb had besmirched America’s reputation, he [Hoover] told friends. It ought to have been described in graphic terms before being flung out into the sky over Japan."

    Richard Norton Smith, An Uncommon Man: The Triumph of Herbert Hoover, pg. 349-350.

    In early May of 1946 Hoover met with General Douglas MacArthur. Hoover recorded in his diary, "I told MacArthur of my memorandum of mid-May 1945 to Truman, that peace could be had with Japan by which our major objectives would be accomplished. MacArthur said that was correct and that we would have avoided all of the losses, the Atomic bomb, and the entry of Russia into Manchuria."

    Gar Alperovitz, The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb, pg. 350-351.


    MacArthur biographer William Manchester has described MacArthur’s reaction to the issuance by the Allies of the Potsdam Proclamation to Japan: "…the Potsdam declaration in July, demand[ed] that Japan surrender unconditionally or face ‘prompt and utter destruction.’ MacArthur was appalled. He knew that the Japanese would never renounce their emperor, and that without him an orderly transition to peace would be impossible anyhow, because his people would never submit to Allied occupation unless he ordered it. Ironically, when the surrender did come, it was conditional, and the condition was a continuation of the imperial reign. Had the General’s advice been followed, the resort to atomic weapons at Hiroshima and Nagasaki might have been unnecessary."

    William Manchester, American Caesar: Douglas MacArthur 1880-1964, pg. 512.

    Norman Cousins was a consultant to General MacArthur during the American occupation of Japan. Cousins writes of his conversations with MacArthur, "MacArthur’s views about the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were starkly different from what the general public supposed." He continues, "When I asked General MacArthur about the decision to drop the bomb, I was surprised to learn he had not even been consulted. What, I asked, would his advice have been? He replied that he saw no military justification for the dropping of the bomb. The war might have ended weeks earlier, he said, if the United States had agreed, as it later did anyway, to the retention of the institution of the emperor."

    Norman Cousins, The Pathology of Power, pg. 65, 70-71.


    (Under Sec. of State)
    In a February 12, 1947 letter to Henry Stimson (Sec. of War during WWII), Grew responded to the defense of the atomic bombings Stimson had made in a February 1947 Harpers magazine article:

    "…in the light of available evidence I myself and others felt that if such a categorical statement about the [retention of the] dynasty had been issued in May, 1945, the surrender-minded elements in the [Japanese] Government might well have been afforded by such a statement a valid reason and the necessary strength to come to an early clearcut decision.

    "If surrender could have been brought about in May, 1945, or even in June or July, before the entrance of Soviet Russia into the [Pacific] war and the use of the atomic bomb, the world would have been the gainer."

    Grew quoted in Barton Bernstein, ed.,The Atomic Bomb, pg. 29-32.

    ~~~JOHN McCLOY

    (Assistant Sec. of War)
    "I have always felt that if, in our ultimatum to the Japanese government issued from Potsdam [in July 1945], we had referred to the retention of the emperor as a constitutional monarch and had made some reference to the reasonable accessibility of raw materials to the future Japanese government, it would have been accepted. Indeed, I believe that even in the form it was delivered, there was some disposition on the part of the Japanese to give it favorable consideration. When the war was over I arrived at this conclusion after talking with a number of Japanese officials who had been closely associated with the decision of the then Japanese government, to reject the ultimatum, as it was presented. I believe we missed the opportunity of effecting a Japanese surrender, completely satisfactory to us, without the necessity of dropping the bombs."

    McCloy quoted in James Reston, Deadline, pg. 500.


    (Under Sec. of the Navy)
    On June 28, 1945, a memorandum written by Bard the previous day was given to Sec. of War Henry Stimson. It stated, in part:

    "Following the three-power [July 1945 Potsdam] conference emissaries from this country could contact representatives from Japan somewhere on the China Coast and make representations with regard to Russia’s position [they were about to declare war on Japan] and at the same time give them some information regarding the proposed use of atomic power, together with whatever assurances the President might care to make with regard to the [retention of the] Emperor of Japan and the treatment of the Japanese nation following unconditional surrender. It seems quite possible to me that this presents the opportunity which the Japanese are looking for.

    "I don’t see that we have anything in particular to lose in following such a program." He concluded the memorandum by noting, "The only way to find out is to try it out."

    Memorandum on the Use of S-1 Bomb, Manhattan Engineer District Records, Harrison-Bundy files, folder # 77, National Archives (also contained in: Martin Sherwin, A World Destroyed, 1987 edition, pg. 307-308).

    Later Bard related, "…it definitely seemed to me that the Japanese were becoming weaker and weaker. They were surrounded by the Navy. They couldn’t get any imports and they couldn’t export anything. Naturally, as time went on and the war developed in our favor it was quite logical to hope and expect that with the proper kind of a warning the Japanese would then be in a position to make peace, which would have made it unnecessary for us to drop the bomb and have had to bring Russia in…".

    quoted in Len Giovannitti and Fred Freed, The Decision To Drop the Bomb, pg. 144-145, 324.

    Bard also asserted, "I think that the Japanese were ready for peace, and they already had approached the Russians and, I think, the Swiss. And that suggestion of [giving] a warning [of the atomic bomb] was a face-saving proposition for them, and one that they could have readily accepted." He continued, "In my opinion, the Japanese war was really won before we ever used the atom bomb. Thus, it wouldn’t have been necessary for us to disclose our nuclear position and stimulate the Russians to develop the same thing much more rapidly than they would have if we had not dropped the bomb."

    War Was Really Won Before We Used A-Bomb, U.S. News and World Report, 8/15/60, pg. 73-75.

  65. Pink   June 23, 2014 at 6:35 pm

    Wow Mike, did you cut and paste all of those quotes onto your blog? Every one of them, verbatim, are all listed together, in the exact same order under "Hiroshima Quotes – Doug Long" found, of course on an internet website by some foundation for peace. Found it in about 3 minutes. Anybody, anywhere, can take quotes that people say, use them out of context, and make or break any argument that they choose.

    Japan did indeed approach Russia about a conditional surrender, where Japan could save face and look good to the rest of the world. How in the name of all that is holy, they could hope to save face after such incidents as the surprise attack on Pearl harbor, the rape of China and the Phillapines, the Bataan Death March, just to name a few of their atrocities, is beyond me, and most of us. The Emperor was a barbarian of the worst order. Russia played along with them of course, while secretly planning their attack on a Japanese held island, which by the way, coincided with the dropping of the A Bomb.

    It is no secret that Eisenhower and Truman hated the sight of one another, and I’m certain that Eisenhower, a decent man, and a good soldier, wanted no part in the actual decision to drop "the bomb". I believe he would have rather taken the risk of the loss of more American lives by attacking Japan with several divisions of Marines.

    Hiro Hito had absolutely no intention of signing an unconditional surrender. The loss of the lives of more men, on both sides, meant nothing to him. The world, as a whole, was not very favorable to Japan in 1945, and the sentiment of the American people was certainly not condusive to giving Japan an inch. Truman, in particular, wanted Japan to pay, and pay dearly, thus the decision to use the ultimate weapon. I cannot imagine that anyone who was part of this decision making process ever slept very well after the photos of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were published.

    Hind sight, as they say, is 20/20. Truman believed that by dropping that horrible device he saved countless American lives, what he did was to open a terrible "Pandora’s Box" showing what man is capable of when pushed too far.

    Question Mike. Do you believe that the Holocaust was real or do you believe, like some do, that it never happened. In your rush to condemn the United States of America, you throw the baby out with the bath water. Here is some facts for you, that in your zeal to blame America for every bad thing that has ever happened, you have apparently overlooked: Hitler was a bad guy. Mussolini was a bad guy. Hiro Hito was a bad guy.

    "War is Hell" atrocities were most likely committed by all sides, but in this particular instance, we were the "good guys". Like it or not.

  66. grunt   June 23, 2014 at 7:33 pm

    Mike – ok: President Truman steadfastly defended his use of the atomic bomb, claiming that it "saved millions of lives" by bringing the war to a quick end. Justifying his decision, he went so far as to declare: "The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians."
    Winston Churchill,: There are voices which assert that the bomb should never have been used at all. I cannot associate myself with such ideas
    nuclear physicist Karl T. Compton: If the atomic bomb had not been used, evidence like that I have cited points to the practical certainty that there would have been many more months of death and destruction on an enormous scale
    Philippine justice Delfin Jaranilla: the use of the atomic bomb was justified for it brought Japan to her knees and ended the horrible war. If the war had gone longer, without the use of the atomic bomb, how many thousands and thousands of helpless men, women and children would have needlessly died and suffered
    Japan’s defense minister Fumio Kyuma said the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan by the United States during World War II was an inevitable way to end the war. Kyuma said: "I now have come to accept in my mind that in order to end the war, it could not be helped (shikata ga nai) that an atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki and that countless numbers of people suffered great tragedy
    Emperor Hirohito when, in his first ever press conference given in Tokyo in 1975, he was asked what he thought of the bombing of Hiroshima, and answered: "It’s very regrettable that nuclear bombs were dropped and I feel sorry for the citizens of Hiroshima but it couldn’t be helped (shikata ga nai) because that happened in wartime."
    According to historian Richard B. Frank,
    The intercepts of Japanese Imperial Army and Navy messages disclosed without exception that Japan’s armed forces were determined to fight a final Armageddon battle in the homeland against an Allied invasion.
    military leaders in Japan:also hoped that if they could hold out until the ground invasion of Japan began, they would be able to inflict so many casualties on the Allies that Japan still might win some sort of negotiated settlement.
    History professor Robert James Maddox wrote:
    Another myth that has attained wide attention is that at least several of Truman’s top military advisers later informed him that using atomic bombs against Japan would be militarily unnecessary or immoral, or both. There is no persuasive evidence that any of them did so
    Neither MacArthur nor Nimitz ever communicated to Truman any change of mind about the need for invasion or expressed reservations about using the bombs

  67. grunt   June 23, 2014 at 7:36 pm

    Mike, please note above that two who said it was necessary were Japanese: One the emperor. Japan’s "conditional" peace included maintaining the status quo, no occupation of Japanese HELD lands- Manchuria, Formosa and Korea were to remain Japanese; the Japanese military structure would remain, and no war crimes trail except by Japanese.

  68. Redneck Bill   June 24, 2014 at 9:45 pm

    My favorite thing about Mike W is that he is a veteran. My thinking is, why would he serve his country if he didn’t love it. I reject the notion that because he doesn’t agree with the “mainstream” he is wrong. I enjoy being presented with ideas that differ from mine. It requires critical thinking on my part.

    But back to Mike. He’s a veteran. He’s EARNED the right to his opinion. Why is there so little respect for him? Why is his hat made of tin foil? If he thought as you do would he be one of us?

    Iraq is in the news right now. For me it is a perfect example of the necessity of diversity of thought. Had more of us thought, and said, “what are you thinking invading a country that has no threat to us”, perhaps our precious resources, especially our young men and women, would not have made the sacrifices they did. Not to mention the dollar amount that has clearly gone up in smoke. When we don’t have dollars to waste.

    My buddy Dick Cheney likes to criticize the current president for not doing enough in Iraq. General Zinni has said Dick Cheney criticizing Obama for his policy in Iraq is like a pitcher who gives up 10 runs in the 1st inning and then blames the loss on the bullpen.

    Open your mind. Maybe what you think is correct really is. Maybe it isn’t. You’ll be amazed by considering possibilities.

  69. Really?   June 25, 2014 at 10:50 am

    OK RB. First being a Vet is no free pass when one advocates for Socialism. IMO In fact it’s actually worse if a Vet openly advocates to transform our Republic into an authoritarian centrally controlled and dictated economic and social control regime of the sort favored in most of Europe. It is legalized theft that contradicts the U.S Constitution and our ancient American traditions of self-reliance, capitalism and limited government. You may call it fascist, socialist, communist or European. The name makes no difference.
    Their blindness and sense of entitlement to others’ property are breathtaking in their violence. People of this ilk represent everything I wanted to keep as far away from our great nation and my children as possible when I enlisted. These people are the enemy of individual liberties and the Constitutional freedoms I swore to defend and continue to believe in and enjoy. Those that advocate publicly and demand social "needs" and push phony class "fairness" warfare while trying to "Star" in their own moral melodrama have no valid claim to another’s pocket – except in the jungle. These Liberal socialists are primitives, infatuated with insect "social" organization. That is fine; I give them leave to organize – amongst themselves – the most splendid mound they can. Unfortunately, and wrongly, they do not grant me nor my children leave to not join the colony. So, of course, I break out the insecticide.

  70. Pink   June 25, 2014 at 1:46 pm

    I believe that I have a fairly open mind RB, but I also know ridiculous when I hear it. I don’t buy into conspiracy theories, and I dislike the attempt by many today to change history simply because they don’t like the original version. Certainly some historical facts are slanted or colored by the particular ideals of the person writing it, but for the most part the history of WWII is what actually took place at the time. Monday morning quarterbacking the decisions that were made in 1940-1945 60 years after the fact won’t change the outcome.

    I tend to agree with Really? (comment 69) just because someone is a veteran doesn’t necessarily mean they “love” their country. After all Timothy McVeigh was a veteran and look what he became. I don’t dislike Mike W, I just completely disagree with 90 percent of what he says. He has a right to say whatever he pleases (thank you first amendment) and I have a right to do the same.

    RB, if you really believe that we should all “open our minds” perhaps you should go out and meet some Tea Party members, read their literature, study their ideals, you might just be amazed by the possibilities (LOL, just kidding).

    Back to Obama (the topic) it is easy to continue to blame Bush and Cheney, but why the heck, after 6 years of the present administration, are we still “over there”?? Bring our troops home and let the middle east police itself.

  71. Mike W   June 25, 2014 at 3:34 pm

    Thanks RB, your tolerance and understanding is much appreciated..

    Comment #69, All I can say is Wow man!! You are really misinformed and opinionated to the point where it would be a great waste of time and energy to attempt to straighten out your misconceptions about me and everything else
    If Really?, grunt and Pink have taught me anything it is that some people don’t want to know anything contrary to their current beliefs. So why try?

    To P & G ~ I can see this is never going to get anywhere with your dogged determination to adhere to your beliefs in American exceptionalism, and belief that we

  72. grunt   June 25, 2014 at 4:04 pm

    One last time Mike, my (and I would bet Pink’s and others here) opinions have changed from time to time; as for Japan’s surrender I have visited most of the country, talked to several ranking members of the then Japanese military, read Japanese documents as well as US documents. Dropping the bomb was, by Japanese in the know and American’s the only way to end the War on a favorable-to-US means. I know you don’t trust the MSM, but you must look to the source of where your information is coming. Some guy in a basement typing on the internet just maybe does not have all the information. You seem to be the only one that says if we do nto agree with you something is the matter with our reasoning ability.

  73. Pink   June 25, 2014 at 6:26 pm

    The only one commenting here who refuses to be accepting of any opinions other than his own is you Mike. I believe that I made it quite clear how I personally feel about the A Bomb. It is deplorable that such a device was ever created, much less used. The world is not a better place for it’s invention. We are, I believe, headed on the fast track to Armageddon and there is unfortunately, no going back

    Japan was most certainly defeated in August of 1945, but they were still capable of inflicting a large toll on Marines landing on their shores. The Japanese war ministry refused to sign an unconditional surrender. Russia had no real desire to help the Japanese, thus the surprise attack on Manchuria. These are all facts, written by both American and Japanese historians.

    I’m not sure what you mean Mike, when you say "who would want to deny the Holocaust ever happened? Is that your only defense" Defense of what? I merely asked you a question. You appear to deny that America should have gotten into to the war in the first place, you seem to believe that the allies didn’t need to land on Normandy (in your world the Russians had the war all sewn up) and of course, you question the decision to drop the "bomb" after all, Russia apparently had that handled as well….. there are quite a few people who believe that the Holocaust never happened Mike, I’m glad to hear that you at least believe that portion of history. I know that the Holocaust did happen, and I believe that America did the right thing by joining in the fight. I had an uncle, God rest his soul, who was one of the first American soldiers to see first hand man’s inhumanity to man, when he toured a concentration camp. The images he saw never left him. He always said it was too horrible to comprehend.

    I find it interesting that those who claim to have an open mind usually mean it is open to their own theories and beliefs and no one else’s, as a matter of fact Mike, you love to belittle the beliefs of anyone who doesn’t agree with everything you say. I personally tend to believe that there is a grain of truth in most of our perspectives, and I might add Mike, that my reasoning ability is just fine, thank you.

  74. Really? (the real one)   June 26, 2014 at 7:39 am

    Well #71, you are what you are, own it:

    You said: "We need an economy that includes everyone and guarantees the just distribution of all production so that everyone can live a life of dignity."

    Shameful. That statement is Socialist Garbage 101. Of course we are going to take you to the woodshed. Again, your blindness and sense of entitlement to others’ property are breathtaking. You appear to be quite enamored with the idea of using the force of government to extort your neighbors into taking care of you and others financial needs. BTW, save the "but, but, the Corporations pay no taxes…"

    Do you really believe you are going to convince anyone other than like minded drones with your socialist contentions? Maybe debate would be easier for you if you got back to us when you clearly understand circular reasoning and Strawman Fallacies.

    For example Your Statements (caps are mine)

    " nearly everything you say is wrong and incredibly full of hate which is OBVIOUSLY a result of …"

    "Pfft.. YOU people…Really need to get a grip on reality rather than living within an illusion "

    "That OF COURSE is as ridiculous as your other statements…"

    Look Mike, here’s a little advice for you. When you feel you are the only sane person and the rest of the world is crazy, it’s time to seek help for yourself. Seriously.

    In the interim; while childishly amusing, your rants are nothing more than verbal shrimp food. Feel free to actual follow the logic of the comment thread, instead of HIJACKING the thread..(AGAIN). Hiroshima? You may come off less hysterical that way. Do try harder to avoid looking ridiculous and coming off as a pretentious bore; stick with credibility and avoid sensationalism or go back and play in the shallow end of the pool.

  75. Mike W   June 27, 2014 at 9:04 am

    At a time in our history when unbridled capitalism is poisoning the land, water and air, tanking the economy and the dollar and involving us in senseless resource wars around the world, you call me a socialist, anti-semite, and un American because I am in favor of changing this deplorable trajectory we are on for one of peace and compassion for others?

  76. Paul   June 27, 2014 at 11:58 am

    By your own admission Mike W, you are a socialist, and the only person commenting here who has referred to you as an anti semite is yourself. Calm down. I have compassion for others, and I would love nothing more than a world at peace, but look around you; it hasn’t happened and it probably never will. Mankind is basically greedy and socialism will never work because the people on top (and there are always people on the top) will still be greedy so in so’s. All socialism does is to eliminate the middle class.

  77. grunt   June 27, 2014 at 7:03 pm

    Mike, I suspect you are Lee, so this is (probably) my last comment to you: which country has done the most to stop poisoning the land? America or any of your socialist countries? Just remember, our fences are designed to keep people OUT, all the socialist fences are to keep people IN,

  78. Mike W   June 28, 2014 at 5:58 pm

    Sorry, not Lee, not into the socialism you are speaking of, these days Socialism seems to be a Tea Party name tag, an empty designation for anyone having opposing views and used like any other curse word. The anti-socialism spirit that is so highly visible in the US almost makes me wonder if the anti-socialism is driven by the rich like so many things in this world.
    Comment #76

  79. Pink   June 29, 2014 at 5:57 pm

    Let me see if I have this correct Mike: You can call "everyone" commenting here, who happens to disagree with you, a "tea party member" but we are not allowed to refer to you as "socialist" because that is "name calling". I see how that works, and it seems to be the same old liberal mantra.

    The ideals you appear to adhere too certainly sounds quite a bit like socialism to me, and the countries that you praise are certainly considered to be socialist countries, so if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck….. well, you get my drift.

  80. Really?   June 30, 2014 at 12:35 pm

    Liberty must be given a higher priority than all other objectives


Leave a Reply