• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Is Wikileaks revealing the truth or pushing for WW III

silverfox@

Alfrescian
Loyal
The leaks from Wikileaks has shown that Top Secret, Confidential news are no longer secrets nor confidential. As story progress, more and more leaks are shown and in this creates unnecessary tension between countries like China, S.Korea, N.Korea, US.....

Should certain things be left unleaked or leak everything out and let those involved fight till the end?

I think there should be a limit to what one is doing.
 

Sideswipe

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
If there was Wikileaks in 1945, the news that Japan had submitted official surrender terms to American Govt in Jan 1945 was leaked worldwide anytime before Aug 1945, many of WW2 post war tragedies will not happen.

A lot of things got good and bad. I really doubt the relevant parties will be taking this too seriously, it might even help those countries to understand each other better.
 

cheowyonglee

Alfrescian
Loyal
If there was Wikileaks in 1945, the news that Japan had submitted official surrender terms to American Govt in Jan 1945 was leaked worldwide anytime before Aug 1945, many of WW2 post war tragedies will not happen.

A lot of things got good and bad. I really doubt the relevant parties will be taking this too seriously, it might even help those countries to understand each other better.

true enough!!! actually the U.S wanted to put the Atomic bomb on Japan to let the world know they have a very powerful weapon on hand.
so, even if japan really already surrendered, the U.S tried all means to make sure their surrendered will be announced after the bomb had done what they supposed to!!!
 

iFARKurMADER

Alfrescian
Loyal
The leaks from Wikileaks has shown that Top Secret, Confidential news are no longer secrets nor confidential. As story progress, more and more leaks are shown and in this creates unnecessary tension between countries like China, S.Korea, N.Korea, US.....

Should certain things be left unleaked or leak everything out and let those involved fight till the end?

I think there should be a limit to what one is doing.

"unnecessary tension" ?

dude, do you really think those people at the top do not know about all those written in wikileaks then and now? the only people that do not know are the non politicians! you and me!
 

singveld

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
If there was Wikileaks in 1945, the news that Japan had submitted official surrender terms to American Govt in Jan 1945 was leaked worldwide anytime before Aug 1945, many of WW2 post war tragedies will not happen.

What rubbish, atomic bombs save Japanese lifes. If they did not surrender. USA will send troop to mainland. Japanese civilian army and more suicide attack will cause more life. Russia will also send in their forces to japan, their country will be divide like Korea.
 

silverfox@

Alfrescian
Loyal
I advocate for peace, no war. But it seems that if Wikileaks does leak out more and more such news, especially the govt and military confidential, top secret news, it puts the lives of people in danger. The ones who are going to fight the war will endanger the lives of innocents.

So sometimes I do think about 1 part, yes, they are revealing the truth, but will revealing the truth do any help or will it push countries to the brink of war? Take for instance the N.Korea and S.Korea. Their allies of US and China. Plus nearby countries Japan and Russia. We can't pinpoint all the fault at Wikileaks but I feel there is no need to be a catalyst.

However, if there are dirty govt secrets or financial corruption cases, by all means they can reveal. But inter-countries top secret files being leaked can lead much more to just bickerings and quarrels. Once war starts, lives will be lost before it ends. It also seems that Wikileaks is revealing more and more leaks recently. :(
 

Sideswipe

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
What rubbish, atomic bombs save Japanese lifes. If they did not surrender. USA will send troop to mainland. Japanese civilian army and more suicide attack will cause more life. Russia will also send in their forces to japan, their country will be divide like Korea.


In Jan 1945 before Yalta, Japan submitted her Surrender Terms to General MacArthur. Washington rejected Japan Surrender Offer. From Yalta to Potsdam July 1945 ( 5 months ) Japan asked Sweden, the Pope and Russians for help to negotiate her Surrender with USA. The attempts all failed. Russians only told Americans about Japan willingness to surrender at Potsdam.

Japan's initial rejection of Potsdam ultimatum led directly to Truman's decision to drop atomic bombs. The Potsdam Surrender Terms was almost the same as what Japan drafted for their Surrender before Yalta. It was USA Officials big failure to negotiate a Successful Surrender Treaty for Japan from the time period before Yalta to Potsdam.

US Navy and Air Force believed Japan was effectively defeated by Air and Sea blockade from late 1944 and a Land Invasion of Japan main islands was not needed but US Army insisted on a Land Invasion. The Bloody Battle of Iwo Jima and Okinawa need not be fought.

Stalin asked for joint Soviet-US occupation of Japan at Yalta, Roosevelt flatly rejected his suggestions. Stalin grand objectives in Far East at that moment was Manchuria not Japan. There was no Soviet-US race to occupy Japan. That make dropping the atomic bombs totally unnecessary.
 

iFARKurMADER

Alfrescian
Loyal
I advocate for peace, no war. But it seems that if Wikileaks does leak out more and more such news, especially the govt and military confidential, top secret news, it puts the lives of people in danger. The ones who are going to fight the war will endanger the lives of innocents.

So sometimes I do think about 1 part, yes, they are revealing the truth, but will revealing the truth do any help or will it push countries to the brink of war? Take for instance the N.Korea and S.Korea. Their allies of US and China. Plus nearby countries Japan and Russia. We can't pinpoint all the fault at Wikileaks but I feel there is no need to be a catalyst.

However, if there are dirty govt secrets or financial corruption cases, by all means they can reveal. But inter-countries top secret files being leaked can lead much more to just bickerings and quarrels. Once war starts, lives will be lost before it ends. It also seems that Wikileaks is revealing more and more leaks recently. :(

seriously, i beg to differ.

wars are often not started for the benefits of the people, but the greed of politicians. that's why politicians need to tell lies, propaganda, to convince and brainwash people to do harm to other human beings.

you think if politicians all tell the truth, civilians want to go to war? want to buy war bonds? want to vote in the pro war president again?

you mentioned tension between nations, who are these "nations" you refer to? every single person in that country agreed to these "tensions"? or just politicians?

if b4 the gulf war, wikileaks managed to get news that the war is fought because of oil, not because of WMD, how many americans will agree? how many frontline marines will actually want to go there ?
 

tanwahtiu

Alfrescian
Loyal
seriously, i beg to differ.

wars are often not started for the benefits of the people, but the greed of politicians. that's why politicians need to tell lies, propaganda, to convince and brainwash people to do harm to other human beings.

you think if politicians all tell the truth, civilians want to go to war? want to buy war bonds? want to vote in the pro war president again?

you mentioned tension between nations, who are these "nations" you refer to? every single person in that country agreed to these "tensions"? or just politicians?

if b4 the gulf war, wikileaks managed to get news that the war is fought because of oil, not because of WMD, how many americans will agree? how many frontline marines will actually want to go there ?

Friend, you shd refer to the Chirstians, they will tell you God's plan these wars, tensions and God's plan to destroy anything on this earht right from the beginging; God's travelled through the future and past and ALL are planned, says the Christians.

So why do human Christians still pray to their God, the ultimate creator of good, bad and evil?
 

tanwahtiu

Alfrescian
Loyal
I advocate for peace, no war. But it seems that if Wikileaks does leak out more and more such news, especially the govt and military confidential, top secret news, it puts the lives of people in danger. The ones who are going to fight the war will endanger the lives of innocents.

So sometimes I do think about 1 part, yes, they are revealing the truth, but will revealing the truth do any help or will it push countries to the brink of war? Take for instance the N.Korea and S.Korea. Their allies of US and China. Plus nearby countries Japan and Russia. We can't pinpoint all the fault at Wikileaks but I feel there is no need to be a catalyst.

However, if there are dirty govt secrets or financial corruption cases, by all means they can reveal. But inter-countries top secret files being leaked can lead much more to just bickerings and quarrels. Once war starts, lives will be lost before it ends. It also seems that Wikileaks is revealing more and more leaks recently. :(

Our human genes has been leaked, researched and breakthrough, known as DNA. So where is the problem of leaking top info, it shd be exposed and shamed.

What is top info or secret info? Who is it to decide it shd be secret info? So with all the bullshits I approved Wikileaks is the right way to achieve better human living conditions and ALL human lfie shd not be dicitated by a few cronies thinking they are Playing God for you and I.

WikiLeaks has proven to us that if you wish to Play God, we'll expose and shame you. Don't Play God! and Ang mohs are good at Playing God. And even Play God saying to the people in the Far East that they know there is Only One God, but We in the Far East oredi have many Gods befroe there is Judasim tribe in the West and We pray to Fortune God, right! 财神到。
 

red amoeba

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
it will be stupidity to go war bcos of the leak...

just becos one leader call another leader some names...must go war?

Or jus becos one country has some plans for another - must go war?

Probably, all is known before hand liao...it will probably damage the reputation of the country involved - thats all...ultimately, its the "action" not intended action that cause war.

Wouldn't a country have known if another country is planning hostilities? They would have picked up the signals long time ago...this age, we are spying and being spied on daily....

except only S Korea loh...haha...kenna assed twice without knowing.
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
You are again writing rubbish. The Japanese are a proud race and would not have given in until their enemies are within their own country and fighting becomes futile similar to the Germans. The bombs were dropped to prevent a bloodbath on the side of Allies as the Japanese driven by fever pitch nationalism and busihdo code.

Why would Japan surrender when its home soil had not been breeched?

I am just amazed that you have habit of writing the most bizzarre comments that have no factual basis.

The offer of surrender by various warring parties are in most instances smoke and mirrors to buy time to allow tactical movements etc

The communication was so bad that after the first bomb, they could not get the message across to its various units to stop the fighting , leading to the second bomb.



If there was Wikileaks in 1945, the news that Japan had submitted official surrender terms to American Govt in Jan 1945 was leaked worldwide anytime before Aug 1945, many of WW2 post war tragedies will not happen.

A lot of things got good and bad. I really doubt the relevant parties will be taking this too seriously, it might even help those countries to understand each other better.
 

drifter

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
You are again writing rubbish. The Japanese are a proud race and would not have given in until their enemies are within their own country and fighting becomes futile similar to the Germans. The bombs were dropped to prevent a bloodbath on the side of Allies as the Japanese driven by fever pitch nationalism and busihdo code.

Why would Japan surrender when its home soil had not been breeched?

I am just amazed that you have habit of writing the most bizzarre comments that have no factual basis.

The offer of surrender by various warring parties are in most instances smoke and mirrors to buy time to allow tactical movements etc

The communication was so bad that after the first bomb, they could not get the message across to its various units to stop the fighting , leading to the second bomb.[/QUOT



The story begins in Germany. In the 1930s, Germany and Japan had a number of scientists icing on the development of nuclear fission. In both of these countries, their leaders sternly forbade them to continue their research. Adolf Hitler said he would never allow anyone in Germany to work to work on such an inhumane weapon.

The Emperor of Japan let his scientists know that he would never approve such a weapon. At that time the United States had no one working on nuclear fission. The disgruntled German scientists contacted friends in the United States, and were told that there was a possibility of government support for their work here. As Don Beyer tells these immigrants to the United States pushed their program.

"Leo Szilard, together with his long time friends and fellow Hungarian physicists, Eugene Wigner and Edward Teller, agreed that the President must be warned; fission bomb tehnology was not so farfetched. The Jewish emigres, now living in America, had personal experience of fascism in Europe. In 1939, the three physicists enlisted the support of Albert Einstein, letter dated August 2 signed by Einstein was delivered by Alexander Sachs to Franklin D. Roosevelt at the White House on October 11, 39."

In May of 1945, the architects of postwar strategy, or, as they liked to call themselves, the "Masters of the Universe", gathered in San Francisco at the plush Palace Hotel to write the Charter for the United Nations. Several of the principals retired for a private meeting in the exclusive Garden Room. The head of the United States delegation had called this secret meeting with his top aide, Alger Hiss, representing the president of the United States and the Soviet KGB; John Foster Dulles, of the Wall Street law firm of Sullivan and Cromwell, whose mentor, William Nelson Cromwell, had been called a "professional revolutionary" on the floor of Congress; and W. Averill Harriman, plenipotentiary extraordinary, who had spent the last two years in Moscow directing Stalin's war for survival. These four men represented the awesome power of the American Republic in world affairs, yet of the four, only Secretary of State Edward Stettinius Jr., had a position authorized by the Constitution. Stettinius called the meeting to order to discuss an urgent matter; the Japanese were already privately suing for peace, which presented a grave crisis. The atomic bomb would not be ready for several more months. "We have already lost Germany," Stettinius said. "If Japan bows out, we will not have a live population on which to test the bomb."

"But, Mr. Secretary," said Alger Hiss, "no one can ignore the terrible power of this weapon." "Nevertheless," said Stettinius, "our entire postwar program depends on terrifying the world with the atomic bomb." "To accomplish that goal," said John Foster Dulles, "you will need a very good tally. I should say a million." "Yes," replied Stettinius, "we are hoping for a million tally in Japan. But if they surrender, we won't have anything." "Then you have to keep them in the war until the bomb is ready," said John Foster Dulles. "That is no problem. Unconditional surrender." "They won't agree to that," said Stettinius. "They are sworn to protect the Emperor." "Exactly," said John Foster Dulles. "Keep Japan in the war another three months, and we can use the bomb on their cities; we will end this war with the naked fear of all the peoples of the world, who will then bow to our will."

Edward Stettinius Jr. was the son of a J.P. Morgan partner who had been the world's largest munitions dealer in the First World War. He had been named by J.P. Morgan to oversee all purchases of munitions by both France and England in the United States throughout the war. John Foster Dulles was also an accomplished warmonger. In 1933, he and his brother Allen had rushed to Cologne to meet with Adolf Hitler and guaranteed him the funds to maintain the Nazi regime. The Dulles brothers were representing their clients, Kuhn Loeb Co., and the Rothschilds. Alger Hiss was the golden prince of the communist elite in the united States. When he was chosen as head of the prestigious Carnegie Endowment for International Peace after World War II, his nomination was seconded by John Foster Dulles. Hiss was later sent to prison for perjury for lying about his exploits as a Soviet espionage agent.

This secret meeting in the Garden Room was actually the first military strategy session of the United Nations, because it was dedicated to its mission of exploding the world's first atomic weapon on a living population. It also forecast the entire strategy of the Cold War, which lasted forty-three years, cost American taxpayers five trillion dollars, and accomplished exactly nothing, as it was intended to do. Thus we see that the New World Order has based its entire strategy on the agony of the hundreds of thousands of civilians burned alive at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, including many thousands of children sitting in their schoolrooms. These leaders had learned from their master, Josef Stalin, that no one can rule without mass terrorism, which in turn required mass murder. As Senator Vandenberg, leader of the Republican loyal opposition, was to say (as quoted in American Heritage magazine, August 1977), "We have got to scare the hell out of "em."

THE JEWISH HELL-BOMB

The atomic bomb was developed at the Los Alamos Laboratories in New Mexico. The top secret project was called the Manhattan Project, because its secret director, Bernard Baruch, lived in Manhattan, as did many of the other principals. Baruch had chosen Maj. Gen. Leslie R. Groves to head the operation. He had previously built the Pentagon, and had a good reputation among the Washington politicians, who usually came when Baruch beckoned.

The scientific director at Los Alamos was J. Robert Oppenheimer, scion of a prosperous family of clothing merchants. In Oppenheimer; the Years Of Risk, by James Kunetka, Prentice Hall, NY, 1982, Kunetka writes, p. 106, "Baruch was especially interested in Oppenheimer for the position of senior scientific adviser." The project cost an estimated two billion dollars. No other nation in the world could have afforded to develop such a bomb. The first successful test of the atomic bomb occurred at the Trinity site, two hundred miles south of Los Alamos at 5:29:45 a.m. on July 16, 1945. Oppenheimer was beside himself at the spectacle. He shrieked, "I am become Death, the Destroyer of worlds." Indeed, this seemed to be the ultimate goal of the Manhattan Project, to destroy the world. There had been considerable fear among the scientists that the test explosion might indeed set off a chain reaction, which would destroy the entire world. Oppenheimer's exultation came from his realization that now his people had attained the ultimate power, through which they could implement their five-thousand-year desire to rule the entire world.

THE BUCK PASSES TO TRUMAN

Although Truman liked to take full credit for the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Japan, in fact, he was advised by a prestigious group, The National Defense Research Committee, consisting of George L. Harrison, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York; Dr. James B. Conant, president of Harvard, who had spent the First World War developing more effective poison gases, and who in 1942 had been commissioned by Winston Churchill to develop an Anthrax bomb to be used on Germany, which would have killed every living thing in Germany. Conant was unable to perfect the bomb before Germany surrendered, otherwise he would have had another line to add to his resume. His service on Truman's Committee which advised him to drop the atomic bomb on Japan, added to his previous record as a chemical warfare professional, allowed me to describe him in papers filed before the United States Court of Claims in 1957, as "the most notorious war criminal of the Second World War". As Gauleiter of Germany after the war, he had ordered the burning of my book, The Federal Reserve Conspiracy, ten thousand copies having been published in Oberammergau, the site of the world-famed Passion Play.

Also on the committee were Dr. Karl Compton, and James F. Byrnes, acting Secretary of State. For thirty years, Byrnes had been known as Bernard Baruch's man in Washington. With his Wall Street profits, Baruch had built the most lavish estate in South Carolina, which he named Hobcaw Barony. As the wealthiest man in South Carolina, this epitome of the carpet-bagger also controlled the political purse strings. Now Baruch was in a position to dictate to Truman, through his man Byrnes, that he should drop the atomic bomb on Japan.

LIPMAN SIEW

Despite the fact that the Manhattan Project was the most closely guarded secret of World War II, one man, and one many only, was allowed to observe everything and to know everything about the project. He was Lipman Siew, a Lithuanian Jew who had come to the United States as a political refugee at the age of seventeen. He lived in Boston on Lawrence St., and decided to take the name of William L. Laurence. At Harvard, he became a close friend of James B. Conant and was tutored by him. When Laurence went to New York, he was hired by Herbert Bayard Swope, editor of the New York World, who was known as Bernard Baruch's personal publicity agent. Baruch owned the World. In 1930, Laurence accepted an offer from the New York Times to become its science editor. He states in Who's Who that he "was selected by the heads of the atomic bomb project as sole writer and public relations." How one could be a public relations writer for a top secret project was not explained. Laurence was the only civilian present at the historic explosion of the test bomb on July 16, 1945. Less than a month later, he sat in the copilots seat of the B-29 on the fateful Nagasaki bombing run.

WILL JAPAN SURRENDER BEFORE THE BOMB IS DROPPED?

There were still many anxious moments for the conspirators, who planned to launch a new reign of terror throughout the world. Japan had been suing for peace. Each day it seemed less likely that she could stay in the war. On March 9 and 10, 1945, 325 B-29s had burned thirty-five square miles of Tokyo, leaving more than one hundred thousand Japanese dead in the ensuing firestorm. Of Japan's 66 biggest cities, 59 had been mostly destroyed. 178 square miles of urban dwellings had been burned, 500,000 died in the fires, and now twenty million Japanese were homeless. Only four cities had not been destroyed; Hiroshima, Kokura, Niigata, and Nagasaki. Their inhabitants had no inkling that they had been saved as target cities for the experimental atomic bomb. Maj. Gen. Leslie Groves, at Bernard Baruch's insistence, had demanded that Kyoto be the initial target of the bomb. Secretary of War Stimson objected, saying that as the ancient capital of Japan, the city of Kyoto had hundreds of historic wooden temples, and no military targets. The Jews wanted to destroy it precisely because of its great cultural importance to the Japanese people.

THE HORROR OF HIROSHIMA

While the residents of Hiroshima continued to watch the B-29s fly overhead without dropping bombs on them, they had no inkling of the terrible fate which the scientists had reserved for them. William Manchester quotes General Douglas MacArtbur in American Caesar, Little Brown, 1978, p.437

[quoting:] There was another Japan, and MacArthur was one of the few Americans who suspected its existence. He kept urging the Pentagon and the State Department to be alert for conciliatory gestures. The General predicted that the break would come from Tokyo, not the Japanese army. The General was right. A dovish coalition was forming in the Japanese capital, and it was headed by Hirohito himself, who had concluded in the spring of 1945 that a negotiated peace was the only way to end his nation's agony. Beginning in early May, a six-man council of Japanese diplomats explored ways to accommodate the Allies. The delegates informed top military officials that "our resistance is finished". [End quoting]

On p.359, Gar Alperowitz quotes Brig. Gen. Carter W. Clarke, in charge of preparing the MAGIC summary in 1945, who stated in a 1959 historical interview, "We brought them down to an abject surrender through the accelerated sinking of their merchant marine and hunger alone, and when we didn't need to do it, and knew we didn't need to do it, we used them as an experiment for two atomic bombs."

Although President Truman referred to himself as the sole authority in the decision to drop the bomb, in fact he was totally influenced by Bernard Baruch's man in Washington, James F. Byrnes. Gar Alperowitz states, p. 196, "Byrnes spoke with the authority of—personally represented—the president of the United States on all bomb-related matters in the Interim Committee's deliberations." David McCullough, in his laudatory biography of Truman, which was described as "a valentine", admitted that "Truman didn't know his own Secretary of State, Stettinius. He had no background in foreign policy, no expert advisors of his own."

The tragedy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was that a weak, inexperienced president, completely under the influence of Byrnes and Baruch, allowed himself to be manipulated into perpetrating a terrible massacre. In the introduction to Hiroshima's Shadows, we find that "Truman was moving in quite the opposite direction, largely under the influence of Byrnes. The atom bomb for Byrnes was an instrument of diplomacy-atomic diplomacy."

MASS MURDER

On August 6, 1945, a uranium bomb 3-235, 20 kilotons yield, was exploded 1850 feet in the air above Hiroshima, for maximum explosive effect. It devastated four square miles, and killed 140,000 of the 255,000 inhabitants. In Hiroshima's Shadows, we find a statement by a doctor who treated some of the victims; p.415, Dr. Shuntaro Hida: "It was strange to us that Hiroshima had never been bombed, despite the fact that B-29 bombers flew over the city every day. Only after the war did I come to know that Hiroshima, according to American archives, had been kept untouched in order to preserve it as a target for the use of nuclear weapons. Perhaps, if the American administration and its military authorities had paid sufficient regard to the terrible nature of the fiery demon which mankind had discovered and yet knew so little about its consequences, the American authorities might never have used such a weapon against the 750,000 Japanese who ultimately became its victims."

Dr. Hida says that while treating the terribly mangled and burned victims, "My eyes were ready to overflow with tears. I spoke to myself and bit my lip so that I would not cry. If I had cried, I would have lost my courage to keep standing and working, treating dying victims of Hiroshima."

On p.433, Hiroshima's Shadows, Kensaburo Oe declares, "From the instant the atomic bomb exploded, it became the symbol of all human evil; it was a savagely primitive demon and most modern curse.... My nightmare stems from a suspicion that a 'certain trust in human strength' or 'humanism' flashed across the minds of American intellectuals who decided upon the project that concluded with the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima."

In the introduction to Hiroshima's Shadows, we find that "One of the myths of Hiroshima is that the inhabitants were warned by leaflets that an atomic bomb would be dropped. The leaflets Leonard Nadler and William P. Jones recall seeing in the Hiroshima Museum in 1960 and 1970 were dropped after the bombing. This happened because the President's Interim Committee on the Atomic Bomb decided on May 31 'that we could not give the Japanese any warning'. Furthermore, the decision to drop 'atomic' leaflets on Japanese cities was not made until August 7, the day after the Hiroshima bombing. They were not dropped until August 10, after Nagasaki had been bombed. We can say that the residents of Hiroshima received no advance warning about the use of the atomic bomb. On June 1, 1945, a formal and official decision was taken during a meeting of the so-called Interim Committee not to warn the populations of the specific target cities. James Byrnes and Oppenheimer insisted that the bombs must be used without prior warning."

"Closely linked to the question of whether a warning of an atomic bomb attack was given to the civilian populations of the target cities is the third 'article of fifth' that underpins the American legend of Hiroshima; the belief that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were military targets. The Headquarters of the Japanese Second army were located in Hiroshima and approximately 20,000 men—of which about half, or 10,000 died in the attack. In Nagasaki, there were about 150 deaths among military personnel in the city. Thus, between the two cities, 4.4% of the total death toll was made up of military personnel. In short, more than 95% of the casualties were civilians."

On p.39 of Hiroshima's Shadows we find that (at Hiroshima) "strictly military damage was insignificant." How are we to reconcile this statement with Harry Truman's vainglorious boast in Off The Record; the Private Papers of Harry S. Truman Harper, 1980, p.304, "In 1945 I had ordered the Atomic Bomb dropped on Japan at two places devoted almost exclusively to war production." In fact, many thousands of the Hiroshima casualties were children sitting in their classrooms.

The bomb was dropped because (p.35) "The Manhattan Project's managers were lobbying to use the atomic bomb. Byrnes sat in on these meetings. Maj. Gen. Groves seems to have been the author of the claim that the use of the bomb would save a million American lives—-a figure in the realm of fantasy."

Truman himself variously stated that the use of the use of the atomic bomb saved "a quarter of a million American lives", a "half-million American lives", and finally settled on the Gen. Groves figure of "a million American lives saved."

Meanwhile (p.64) William L. Laurence, who was writing for the New York Times at full salary while also receiving a full salary from the War Department as the "public relations agent for the atomic bomb" published several stories in the New York Times denying that there had been any radiation effects on the victims of the Hiroshima bombing (Sept. 5, 1945 et seq.) in which he quotes General Groves' indignant comment, "The Japanese are still continuing their propaganda aimed at creating the impression we won the war unfairly and thus attempting to create sympathy for themselves

"The Legation of Switzerland on August 11, 1945 forwarded from Tokyo the following memorandum to the State Department (which sat on it for twenty-five years before finally releasing it): 'The Legation of Switzerland has received a communication from the Japanese Government.' On August 6, 1945, American airplanes released on the residential district of the town of Hiroshima, bombs of a new type, killing and injuring in one second a large number of civilians and destroying a great part of the town. Not only is the city of Hiroshima a provincial town without any protection or special military installations of any kind, but also none of the neighboring regions or towns constitutes a military objective."

A PILOT'S STORY

Corroboration of these statements is found in the remarkable record of Ellsworth Torrey Carrington, "Reflections of a Hiroshima Pilot", (p.9) "As part of the Hiroshima atomic battle plan my B-29 (named Jabbitt III, Captain John Abbott Wilson's third war plane) flew the weather observation mission over the secondary target of Kokura on August 6, 1945." (p. 10) "After the first bomb was dropped, the atom bomb command was very fearful that Japan might surrender before we could drop the second bomb, so our people worked around the clock, 24-hours-a-day to avoid such a misfortune." This is, of course, satire on Carrington's part. (p. 13) "in city after city all over the face of Japan (except for our cities spared because reserved for atomic holocaust) they ignited the most terrible firestorms in history with very light losses (of B-29s). Sometimes the heat from these firestorms was so intense that later waves of B-29s were caught by updrafts strong enough to loft them upwards from 4 or 5,000 feet all the way up to 8 or 10,000 feet. The major told us that the fire-bombing of Japan had proven successful far beyond anything they had imagined possible and that the 20th Air Force was running out of cities to burn. Already there were no longer (as of the first week in June 1945) any target cities left that were worth the attention of more than 50 B-29s, and on a big day, we could send up as many as 450 planes!" "The totality of the devastation in Japan was extraordinary, and this was matched by the near-totality of Japan's defencelessness." (as of June 1, 1945, before the atomic bombs were dropped.) (p. 14) "The Truman government censored and controlled all the war information that was allowed to reach the public, and of course, Truman had a vested interest in obscuring the truth so as to surreptitiously prolong the war and be politically able to use the atom bomb. Regarding the second element of the Roosevelt-Truman atomic Cold War strategy of deceiving the public into believing that Japan was still militarily viable in the spring and summer of 1945, the centerpiece was the terribly expensive and criminally unnecessary campaign against Okinawa.

Carrington quotes Admiral William D. Leahy, p. 245, I Was There, McGraw Hill: "A large part of the Japanese Navy was already on the bottom of the sea. The combined Navy surface and air force action even by this time had forced Japan into a position that made her early surrender inevitable. None of us then knew the potentialities of the atomic bomb, but it was my opinion, and I urged it strongly on the Joint Chiefs, that no major land invasion of the Japanese mainland was necessary to win the war. The JCS did order the preparation of plans for an invasion, but the invasion itself was never authorized."

Thus Truman, urged on by General Groves, claims that "a million American lives were saved" by the use of the atomic bomb, when no invasion had ever been authorized, and was not in the cards. Carrington continues, p. 16, "The monstrous truth is that the timing of the Okinawa campaign was exclusively related to the early August timetable of the atomic bomb. J'accuse! I accuse Presidents Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman of deliberately committing war crimes against the American people for the sole purpose of helping set the stage for the criminally unnecessary use of atomic weapons on Japan."

Carrington further quotes Admiral Leahy, from I Was There, "It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagaski 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."

Carrington concludes, p.22, "Truman's wanton use of atomic weapons left the American people feeling dramatically less secure after winning World War II than they had ever felt before, and these feelings of insecurity have been exploited by unscrupulous Cold War Machine Politicians ever since." As Senator Vandenberg said, "We have to scare the hell out of 'em" in order to browbeat the American people into paying heavy taxes to support the Cold War.
 

drifter

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
DID THE ATOMIC BOMB WIN THE WAR AGAINST JAPAN?

Admiral William Leahy also stated in I Was There, "My own feeling is that being the first to use it (the atomic bomb) we had adopted an ethical standard common to the Barbarism of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children."

Gar Alperowitz notes, p. 16, "On May 5, May 12 and June 7, the Office of Strategic Services (our intelligence operation), reported Japan was considering capitulation. Further messages came on May 18, July 7, July 13 and July 16."

Alperowitz points out, p.36, "The standing United States demand for 'unconditional surrender' directly threatened not only the person of the Emperor but such central tenets of Japanese culture as well."

Alperowitz also quotes General Curtis LeMay, chief of the Air Forces, p.334, "The war would have been over in two weeks without the Russians entering and without the atomic bomb. PRESS INQUIRY: You mean that, sir? Without the Russians and without the atomic bomb? LeMay: The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all." September 29, 1945, statement.

THE NAGASAKI BOMB

When the Air Force dropped the atomic bomb on Nagasaki, with William Laurence riding in the co-pilot's seat of the B-29, pretending to be Dr. Strangelove, here again the principal target was a Catholic church. P.93, The Fall Of Japan, by William Craig, Dial, NY, 1967, "the roof and masonry of the Catholic cathedral fell on the kneeling worshippers. All of them died." This church has now been rebuilt, and is a prominent feature of the Nagasaki tour.

After the terror bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the victorious Allies moved promptly to try Japanese officials for their "war crimes". From 1945-51 several thousand Japanese military men were found guilty of war crimes by an International Military Tribunal which met in Tokyo from 1946 to 1948. Twenty-eight Japanese military and civilian leaders were accused of having engaged in conspiracy to commit atrocities. The dissenting member of the Tokyo tribunal, Judge Radhabinod of India, dismissed the charge that Japanese leaders had conspired to commit atrocities, stating that a stronger case might be made against the victors, because the decision to use the atomic bomb resulted in indiscriminate murder.

A very popular movie in Japan today is Pride, The Fateful Moment, which shows Prime Minister General Hideki Tojo in a favorable light. With six others, he was hanged in 1968 as a war criminal. During his trial, his lawyers stated to the International Tribunal for the Far East, the Asian version of Nuremberg Trials, that Tojo's war crimes could not begin to approach the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The prosecutors immediately objected, and censored their statements. That was the last time there was any official recognition of the atomic bomb massacres in Japan. Japanese officials have been effectively prevented from taking any stand on this matter because the American military occupation, which officially ended in 1952 with the Treaty with Japan, was quietly continued. Today, 49,000 American troops are still stationed in Japan, and there is no public discussion of the crimes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

AMERICAN MILITARY AUTHORITIES SAY ATOMIC BOMB UNNECESSARY

The most authoritative Air Force unit during World War II was the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey, which selected targets on the basis of need, and which analyzed the results for future missions. In Hiroshima's Shadow, the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey report of July 1, 1946 states, "The Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs did not defeat Japan, nor by the testimony of the enemy leaders who ended the war did they persuade Japan to accept unconditional surrender. The Emperor, the lord privy seal, the prime minister, the foreign minister, and the navy minister had decided as early as May 1945 that the war should be ended even if it meant acceptance of defeat on allied terms.... It is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to December 1, 1945 and in all probability prior to November 1, 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."

Both military, political and religious leaders spoke out against the atomic bombing of Japanese civilians. The Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America issued a formal statement in March 1946 (cited by Gar Alperowitz):

"The surprise bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are morally indefensible. Both bombings must be judged to have been unnecessary for winning the war. As the power that first used the atomic bomb under these circumstances, we have sinned grievously against the laws of God and against the people of Japan."—Commission on the Relation of the Church to the War in the Light of the Christian Faith.

On p.438, Gar Alperowitz quotes James M. Gillis, editor of Catholic World, "I would call it a crime were it not that the word 'crime' implies sin, and sin requires a consciousness of guilt. The action taken by the Untied States government was in defiance of every sentiment and every conviction upon which our civilization is based."

One of the most vociferous critics of the atomic bombings was David Lawrence, founder and editor of U.S. News and World Report. He signed a number of stinging editorials, the first on August 17, 1945.

"Military necessity will be our constant cry in answer to criticism, but it will never erase from our minds the simple truth, that we, of all civilized nations, though hesitating to use poison gas, did not hesitate to employ the most destructive weapon of all times indiscriminately against men, women and children." On October 5, Lawrence continued his attack, "The United States should be the first to condemn the atomic bomb and apologize for its use against Japan. Spokesmen for the Army Air Forces said it wasn't necessary and that the war had been won already. Competent testimony exists to prove that Japan was seeking to surrender many weeks before the atomic bomb came." On November 23, Lawrence wrote, "The truth is we are guilty. Our conscience as a nation must trouble us. We must confess our sin. We have used a horrible weapon to asphyxiate and cremate more than 100,000 men, women and children in a sort of super-lethal gas chamber— and all this in a war already won or which spokesman for our Air Forces tell us we could have readily won without the atomic bomb. We ought, therefore, to apologize in unequivocal terms at once to the whole world for our misuse of the atomic bomb."

David Lawrence was an avowed conservative, a successful businessman, who knew eleven presidents of the United States intimately, and was awarded the Medal of Freedom by President Richard M. Nixon, April 22, 1970.

THE LEGAL ASPECTS OF NUCLEAR WARFARE

Because Japan was occupied by the U.S. Military in 1945, the Japanese Government was never allowed any opportunity to file any legal charges about the use of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Although Japanese leaders were tried and executed for "war crimes" no one was ever charged for the atomic bombings. It was not until 1996 that the World Court delivered an opinion on the use of nuclear weapons, (p.565, Hiroshima's Shadows) "In July 1996, the World court took a stand in its first formal opinion on the legality of nuclear weapons. Two years earlier, the United Nations had asked the Court for an advisory opinion. The General Assembly of the United Nations posed a single, yet profoundly basic, question for consideration. It the threat of use of nuclear weapons on any circumstances permitted under international law? For the first time, the world's pre-eminent judicial authority has considered the question of criminality vis-a-vis the use of a nuclear weapon, and, in doing so, it has come to the conclusion that the use of a nuclear weapon is 'unlawful'. It is also the Court's view that even the threat of the use of a nuclear weapon is illegal. Although there were differences concerning the implications of the right of self-defense provided by Article 51 of the U.N. Charter, ten of the fourteen judges hearing the case found the use of threat to use a nuclear weapon to be illegal on the basis of the existing canon of humanitarian law which governs the conduct of armed conflict. The judges based their opinion on more than a century of treatise and conventions that are collectively known as the 'Hague' and 'Geneva' laws."

Thus the Court ruled that nuclear weapons are illegal under the Hague and Geneva conventions , agreements which were in existence at the time of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. They were illegal then, and they are illegal now.

GANDHI SPEAKS

Among world leaders who spoke out about the United States' use of atomic weapons in Japan, Mahatma Gandhi echoed the general climate of opinion. P.258, Hiroshima's Shadow: "The atomic bomb has deadened the finest feelings which have sustained mankind for ages. There used to be so-called laws of war which made it tolerable. Now we understand the naked truth. War knows no law except that of might. The atomic bomb brought an empty victory to the Allied armies. It has resulted for the time being in the soul of Japan being destroyed. What has happened to the soul of the destroying nation is yet too early to see. Truth needs to be repeated as long as there are men who do not believe it."
 

iFARKurMADER

Alfrescian
Loyal
hey Drifter,

care to share the source you get for this info on unneccssary dropping of A-Bomb on Japan?

I think it would shock many of my jap friends



DID THE ATOMIC BOMB WIN THE WAR AGAINST JAPAN?

Admiral William Leahy also stated in I Was There, "My own feeling is that being the first to use it (the atomic bomb) we had adopted an ethical standard common to the Barbarism of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children."

Gar Alperowitz notes, p. 16, "On May 5, May 12 and June 7, the Office of Strategic Services (our intelligence operation), reported Japan was considering capitulation. Further messages came on May 18, July 7, July 13 and July 16."

Alperowitz points out, p.36, "The standing United States demand for 'unconditional surrender' directly threatened not only the person of the Emperor but such central tenets of Japanese culture as well."

Alperowitz also quotes General Curtis LeMay, chief of the Air Forces, p.334, "The war would have been over in two weeks without the Russians entering and without the atomic bomb. PRESS INQUIRY: You mean that, sir? Without the Russians and without the atomic bomb? LeMay: The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all." September 29, 1945, statement.

THE NAGASAKI BOMB

When the Air Force dropped the atomic bomb on Nagasaki, with William Laurence riding in the co-pilot's seat of the B-29, pretending to be Dr. Strangelove, here again the principal target was a Catholic church. P.93, The Fall Of Japan, by William Craig, Dial, NY, 1967, "the roof and masonry of the Catholic cathedral fell on the kneeling worshippers. All of them died." This church has now been rebuilt, and is a prominent feature of the Nagasaki tour.

After the terror bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the victorious Allies moved promptly to try Japanese officials for their "war crimes". From 1945-51 several thousand Japanese military men were found guilty of war crimes by an International Military Tribunal which met in Tokyo from 1946 to 1948. Twenty-eight Japanese military and civilian leaders were accused of having engaged in conspiracy to commit atrocities. The dissenting member of the Tokyo tribunal, Judge Radhabinod of India, dismissed the charge that Japanese leaders had conspired to commit atrocities, stating that a stronger case might be made against the victors, because the decision to use the atomic bomb resulted in indiscriminate murder.

A very popular movie in Japan today is Pride, The Fateful Moment, which shows Prime Minister General Hideki Tojo in a favorable light. With six others, he was hanged in 1968 as a war criminal. During his trial, his lawyers stated to the International Tribunal for the Far East, the Asian version of Nuremberg Trials, that Tojo's war crimes could not begin to approach the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The prosecutors immediately objected, and censored their statements. That was the last time there was any official recognition of the atomic bomb massacres in Japan. Japanese officials have been effectively prevented from taking any stand on this matter because the American military occupation, which officially ended in 1952 with the Treaty with Japan, was quietly continued. Today, 49,000 American troops are still stationed in Japan, and there is no public discussion of the crimes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

AMERICAN MILITARY AUTHORITIES SAY ATOMIC BOMB UNNECESSARY

The most authoritative Air Force unit during World War II was the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey, which selected targets on the basis of need, and which analyzed the results for future missions. In Hiroshima's Shadow, the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey report of July 1, 1946 states, "The Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs did not defeat Japan, nor by the testimony of the enemy leaders who ended the war did they persuade Japan to accept unconditional surrender. The Emperor, the lord privy seal, the prime minister, the foreign minister, and the navy minister had decided as early as May 1945 that the war should be ended even if it meant acceptance of defeat on allied terms.... It is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to December 1, 1945 and in all probability prior to November 1, 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."

Both military, political and religious leaders spoke out against the atomic bombing of Japanese civilians. The Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America issued a formal statement in March 1946 (cited by Gar Alperowitz):

"The surprise bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are morally indefensible. Both bombings must be judged to have been unnecessary for winning the war. As the power that first used the atomic bomb under these circumstances, we have sinned grievously against the laws of God and against the people of Japan."—Commission on the Relation of the Church to the War in the Light of the Christian Faith.

On p.438, Gar Alperowitz quotes James M. Gillis, editor of Catholic World, "I would call it a crime were it not that the word 'crime' implies sin, and sin requires a consciousness of guilt. The action taken by the Untied States government was in defiance of every sentiment and every conviction upon which our civilization is based."

One of the most vociferous critics of the atomic bombings was David Lawrence, founder and editor of U.S. News and World Report. He signed a number of stinging editorials, the first on August 17, 1945.

"Military necessity will be our constant cry in answer to criticism, but it will never erase from our minds the simple truth, that we, of all civilized nations, though hesitating to use poison gas, did not hesitate to employ the most destructive weapon of all times indiscriminately against men, women and children." On October 5, Lawrence continued his attack, "The United States should be the first to condemn the atomic bomb and apologize for its use against Japan. Spokesmen for the Army Air Forces said it wasn't necessary and that the war had been won already. Competent testimony exists to prove that Japan was seeking to surrender many weeks before the atomic bomb came." On November 23, Lawrence wrote, "The truth is we are guilty. Our conscience as a nation must trouble us. We must confess our sin. We have used a horrible weapon to asphyxiate and cremate more than 100,000 men, women and children in a sort of super-lethal gas chamber— and all this in a war already won or which spokesman for our Air Forces tell us we could have readily won without the atomic bomb. We ought, therefore, to apologize in unequivocal terms at once to the whole world for our misuse of the atomic bomb."

David Lawrence was an avowed conservative, a successful businessman, who knew eleven presidents of the United States intimately, and was awarded the Medal of Freedom by President Richard M. Nixon, April 22, 1970.

THE LEGAL ASPECTS OF NUCLEAR WARFARE

Because Japan was occupied by the U.S. Military in 1945, the Japanese Government was never allowed any opportunity to file any legal charges about the use of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Although Japanese leaders were tried and executed for "war crimes" no one was ever charged for the atomic bombings. It was not until 1996 that the World Court delivered an opinion on the use of nuclear weapons, (p.565, Hiroshima's Shadows) "In July 1996, the World court took a stand in its first formal opinion on the legality of nuclear weapons. Two years earlier, the United Nations had asked the Court for an advisory opinion. The General Assembly of the United Nations posed a single, yet profoundly basic, question for consideration. It the threat of use of nuclear weapons on any circumstances permitted under international law? For the first time, the world's pre-eminent judicial authority has considered the question of criminality vis-a-vis the use of a nuclear weapon, and, in doing so, it has come to the conclusion that the use of a nuclear weapon is 'unlawful'. It is also the Court's view that even the threat of the use of a nuclear weapon is illegal. Although there were differences concerning the implications of the right of self-defense provided by Article 51 of the U.N. Charter, ten of the fourteen judges hearing the case found the use of threat to use a nuclear weapon to be illegal on the basis of the existing canon of humanitarian law which governs the conduct of armed conflict. The judges based their opinion on more than a century of treatise and conventions that are collectively known as the 'Hague' and 'Geneva' laws."

Thus the Court ruled that nuclear weapons are illegal under the Hague and Geneva conventions , agreements which were in existence at the time of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. They were illegal then, and they are illegal now.

GANDHI SPEAKS

Among world leaders who spoke out about the United States' use of atomic weapons in Japan, Mahatma Gandhi echoed the general climate of opinion. P.258, Hiroshima's Shadow: "The atomic bomb has deadened the finest feelings which have sustained mankind for ages. There used to be so-called laws of war which made it tolerable. Now we understand the naked truth. War knows no law except that of might. The atomic bomb brought an empty victory to the Allied armies. It has resulted for the time being in the soul of Japan being destroyed. What has happened to the soul of the destroying nation is yet too early to see. Truth needs to be repeated as long as there are men who do not believe it."
 

Sideswipe

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
You are again writing rubbish. The Japanese are a proud race and would not have given in until their enemies are within their own country and fighting becomes futile similar to the Germans. The bombs were dropped to prevent a bloodbath on the side of Allies as the Japanese driven by fever pitch nationalism and busihdo code.

Why would Japan surrender when its home soil had not been breeched?

I am just amazed that you have habit of writing the most bizzarre comments that have no factual basis.

The offer of surrender by various warring parties are in most instances smoke and mirrors to buy time to allow tactical movements etc

The communication was so bad that after the first bomb, they could not get the message across to its various units to stop the fighting , leading to the second bomb.


In April 1945, the Koiso Cabinet was succeeded by a new Cabinet headed by Admiral Suzuki. That change of administration was the clearest sign that Japan was willing to move toward peace talks. It was revealed after the War that Suzuki was given instructions from the Emperor to find an end to the War or Surrender as soon as possible to prevent total destruction of Japan.
[ Institute of Pacific Relations P.728 ]

The WW2 Japanese Leaders were proud but they were not stupid. They had analyzed the events of the War and realized they faced certain defeat as early as after the Defeat of Saipan.

Geroge Marshall, Dean Acheson, Elmer Davis, Harry Hopkins and Owen Lattimore plotted to make sure USA couldn't successfully negotiate a surrender treaty with Japan from Yalta to Potsdam.
Go and read up on those Men before you shout so loudly here.
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
The losses in Iwo Jima was clear indication that the Japanese would fight to their death and the Kamikaze pilots were the precursor. Do you sacrifice 20,000 men on your side or would you drop a bomb.

It was a no brainer.

No one in his right mind would drop a bomb. History is very clear. Until the bombs were dropped, the Japanese fought ferociously. To sustain their enery and with food supplies cut out, they began eating their dead colleagues across a number of islands in the Pacific.

When you want to find the truth, read extensively and work out the chronological sequence of events. You then draw your conclusion. Did the Japanese High Command issue a withdrawal across the various theatres of war - No. Did their men fight valiantly - Yes. Was there any indication of surrender - no.

The issue is not whether the bomb is evil or not. The issue is whether it is worth dropping the bomb to secure an early victory and save the lifes of thousands of men and women on the Allied side.
 

iFARKurMADER

Alfrescian
Loyal
The losses in Iwo Jima was clear indication that the Japanese would fight to their death and the Kamikaze pilots were the precursor. Do you sacrifice 20,000 men on your side or would you drop a bomb.

It was a no brainer.

No one in his right mind would drop a bomb. History is very clear. Until the bombs were dropped, the Japanese fought ferociously. To sustain their enery and with food supplies cut out, they began eating their dead colleagues across a number of islands in the Pacific.

When you want to find the truth, read extensively and work out the chronological sequence of events. You then draw your conclusion. Did the Japanese High Command issue a withdrawal across the various theatres of war - No. Did their men fight valiantly - Yes. Was there any indication of surrender - no.

The issue is not whether the bomb is evil or not. The issue is whether it is worth dropping the bomb to secure an early victory and save the lifes of thousands of men and women on the Allied side.

i look forward to the answers from drifter to the above queries but personally, i am more inclined towards the "failure to negotiate a surrender" theory based on my interactions with japanese so far, old and young.
 
Top