“...you insist that the United States was on the “correct” side of it.
“You stated earlier that it was not the original intent of the United States to target Japanese cities with incendiary bombs. I have already demonstrated that this is simply false; our statements, our planning, and our military campaign against the country is a matter of public record...
“...I suspect you’re a “moralizer” yourself, even as you may still be in the closet.
“The unquestioning defender of the bombing campaign shrugs off the moral arguments...
...why is it important to you whether our actions were “morally right” or “morally wrong”?” [Captain Walker, post 158]
I still shrink from claiming any sort of status as a moralizer. My ego isn’t so huge that I can talk myself into the delusion that I can set standards of behavior for humanity at large, outside a narrow range of professional expertise and legal authority conveyed by my commission (which hasn’t been active for a couple decades).
By way of contrast, your tone and word choice hint that you somehow came to believe you have been handed an unlimited right to set moral standards for all people on the globe, in all times and every circumstance, as if you owned a secret hotline or decoder ring that distinguishes Right from Wrong for you and must never be questioned. The fact that you’ve no factual knowledge nor experience in the subjects you presume to pass judgment on seems of no moment to you.
The mildest response I can make is that you are in error about my opinions on the Allied victories of 1945. I will offer the summary judgment that the world is better off today that events turned out as they did. Americans were darned lucky. Which in turn tells us nothing about what was “right” or “wrong” concerning decisions made at the time or the actions taken to implement them.
It seems urgent to you that the rest of the forum be impressed by your rectitude. I can’t say that it means anything. I resolved to take the career path I did while the anti-war protests concerning Vietnam were at their height; the words “We are complying with a higher morality” could be heard from a lot of lips then. In the 49 years that have come and gone since I signed on the dotted line, a multitude of other people have uttered that same sentence, defending or attacking every cause that can be imagined, on all sides of every issue.
I wasn’t impressed with the sentence back then. After unending repetitions, year after year after year, it impresses me less than ever.
The mildest response I can make is that you are in error about my opinions on the Allied victories of 1945. I will offer the summary judgment that the world is better off today that events turned out as they did. Americans were darned lucky. Which in turn tells us nothing about what was “right” or “wrong” concerning decisions made at the time or the actions taken to implement them.
If "right" and "wrong" should ever be left up to either whim or the winning side of an armed conflict, you certainly don't need me to tell you how disastrous that would be.
From what you've revealed, you've grown up during the halcyon days of the American heyday. In terms of serious reflection on the country you've grown up in or in whose military you've served, it's not clear if this is good or bad; some emotional distance from a subject is usually required for critical thought.
I will bid adieu here and thank you for your time on this thread (as well as for your military service). If I may, I would only point out that almost nothing is what it first appears to be.