TaggartI grew up under the gospel of "The bomb was the lesser of two evils" to end WWII. If you still feel this way, this essay is essential reading.
That myth seduces us into believing there's a moral case for nuclear weapons. There is none.
https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-world-learned-the-wrong-lesson-from-hiroshima
Eddie.@mttaggart@infosec.exchange
It was an interesting article, but with specific and intentional misrepresentations by the author. The US did not bomb Hiroshima with the intent of killing as many civilians as possible. It was to knock out a key part of Japan's industrial base.
Once I saw that was ignored, the author's bias dissuaded me from the rest of their argument. And using Hegseth as an example is weak low hanging fruit.
Richard W. Woodley ELBOWS UP 🇨🇦
🌹
🚴♂️
📷
🗺
️@mttaggart@infosec.exchange
The rationale for using nuclear weapons in WWII seemed to be that we can save the lives of our soldiers at the expense of the lives of their civilians.
I am pretty certain the racial difference played into the acceptability of this rationale at the time.
scottley@mttaggart@infosec.exchange
“My clothes were burnt and so was my skin,” she continued. “There were people, barely breathing, trying to push their intestines back in. People with their legs wrenched off. Without heads. Or with faces burned and swollen out of shape. The scene I saw was a living hell.”
-Yamaoko Michiko
As we teach our children, these are the stories we should tell, not the stories about how America became a super power due to our show of force...
As we look at our history books, note the significant lack of human stories... history books need to represent the history of the people, not the history of the countries or economies. It is incredibly easy to justify putting disabled people in asylums if you only consider the economic cost of someone being disabled...