[BCrago66]

Yet more proof that LewRockwell.com = Whackjob.com

[Democratshavenobrains]

Yep, Nazi Germany was NEVER a threat to America...until they would have consolidated Europe and Russia.

[reagan_fanatic]

Lew Rockwell - proof that intelligence is an option, not a necessity.

[Tennessee_Bob]

We don't need a standing federal military. If someone invades, militias can pop up, with rifles and perhaps a government commission (while we still have forcible government) to get the job done and then disband until the next invasion.

A "popped-up" militia standing up against a professional military force that is here as an invader - and succeeding - I don't see it happening.

[Michael81Dus]

Sir,

I suppose this was about our last arguement:

Hitler and Germany never constituted a credible threat to the US, and Hitler himself made no secret that he thought the new world order should consist of Germany, England, and the United States.

I don´t want to re-open the discussion, just give note that my opinion cannot be that dumb.

Sincerely,

Michael

[RebelBanker]

...Truman bombed Japan because the Japanese demanded as their only condition of surrender that the emperor remain emperor. They continued to demand this after both bombings, so Truman just gave in. The bombings were for nothing. And with no retaliation for Truman or the US to fear, Truman still stopped, and gave the Japanese what they wanted...

Proof that the author does not know history either. The casualty estimates for Operation Olympic - the ground invasion of mainland Japan - were in the millions on each side. Two atomic bombs convinced the Japanese government that further resistance was futile.

[cynicom]

Awful lot of verbage by the author, trying to defend his own original statement. That is usually a sign of a man that is a tad insecure. If his original story could not stand on its own, trying to prop it up is even more telling. If differing opinions hurt his very sensitive nature, so be it.

[cubreporter]

What a no nothing....simply amazing.

[2banana]

Japan was goaded into Pearl Harbor

Indeed, to prove the disincentives work: Truman bombed Japan because the Japanese demanded as their only condition of surrender that the emperor remain emperor. They continued to demand this after both bombings, so Truman just gave in. The bombings were for nothing.

Mr. Edmonds still needs more history lessons. At least he now acknowledges that the US has been attacked other times than just Pearl Harbor.

The Japanese were never going to surrender. They were going to fight tooth and nail for the home islands. America was preparing and planning on 1 million US casualties for the invasion of the home islands

I leave a sneak attack that lead to a major war because someone was "goaded" for another poster...

[Publius6961]

This idiot got his freedom from a box of cornflakes?
Can you say... fruits and nuts?

[2banana]

From http://www.ww2pacific.com/downfal0.html

World War II in the Pacific
Operation Downfall
The Invasion of Japan

---

Operation DOWNFALL, the invasion of Japan, was in two components scheduled for the Fall and Spring of 1945-46:

Operation OLYMPIC, Nov 1, 1945, after the hurricane season, before winter. General Krueger, Sixth Army, with nine divisions (3 more in reserve) was to invade three beaches in southern Kyushu, the southern-most of the four Japanese home islands. This was to became a giant airbase to support the next invasion phase in the Spring of 1946. The Japanese had correctly predicted our invasion point and had reinforced Kyushu threefold over initial US expectations.

Operation CORONET, March 1, 1946, of Honshu, the main island, with 22 divisions in the Spring after air fields on Kyushu allowed landbased air support. There were to be two prongs:
General Hodges, with the 1st Army to land east of Tokyo, clear the peninsula, establish air fields, land tank divisions transferred from European, about 30 days, then charge across the plains to take the capital.
Ten days after the initial landing, LtGen Eichelberger with 8th Army was to attack west of Yokohama, Tokyo's seaport, open Tokyo Bay and block any reinforcement of Tokyo.

U.S. PREPARATIONS
The previous phase of the war had been the capture of the Marshalls --Saipan, Tinian and the US island of Guam during June, July and Aug 1944. These were captured to provide air fields within the effective range of B-29 Superfortress, very heavy bombers. Previous attempts to fly B-29s from inland China could only reach the southern portions of Japan with minimal bomb loads and required an impossible to maintain rate of logistics. B-29 attacks started in November 1944, by March 1945, Tokyo, Osaka and other industrial cities had been bombed
Iwo Jima was taken in Feb-March 1945 to provide an intermediate airstrip for damaged B-29s, for fighter escorts, and for shorter ranged B-24 Liberator heavy bombers. Air attack was ratcheted up to 300 plane raids and the attack method changed from explosives to incendiary in which 15% of Tokyo was destroyed in the first raid.1
Air dropped mining began in March 1945 in the Shimonoseki Straight, separating Kyushu and Honshu, to isolate the invasion island. Over 120 ships succumb to these mines.
Submarine efforts were concentrated in the Sea of Japan, on the northwest coast, while carrier task forces concentrated on the Pacific Ocean side.
Preparation for the invasion began with the Okinawa campaign. This is the largest island in the Ryukuyu Islands, the chain nearest to Japan. The native Okinawans were of Chinese extraction but had been an independent kingdom for 800 years until Japan invaded in 1875. Annexed, they continued a race apart, looked down upon my Japanese.2

Carrier Task Forces. The first strike on Japan's home islands was the period 18-22March 1945 to disrupt attacks on our invasion fleet as it approached Okinawa. Raids by 11 fleet carriers and 6 light carriers destroyed aircraft such that the Japanese air attacks on Okinawa were delayed until 6 days after the landings.
Remnants of the Imperial Navy were destroyed in their yards at Kure (near Hiroshima) on the main island of Honshu during early July.
Two fleets were to participate in Olympic: The Strike fleet with 21 carriers, 10 fast battleships and their train. The Assault fleet had 1,500 transports and 800 warships including 26 carriers and 13 battleships.

Operation Zipper by Lord Mountbatten's southeast Asia command was to take Singapore and the Malay Peninsula about 1Sept45. Also, the US China theater was planning to take the Liuchow Peninsula, west of Hong Kong, in mid-August as a port to supply China.

JAPANESE DEFENSES

Troops. Japan was scrapping the bottom of a big barrel. Two million new recruits were called up and experienced Armies was brought back from China and Manchuria to defend the homeland.

Kamikaze. Numbers of about 2000 Navy and 3500 Army airplanes have been cited as available for the defense, and of course, preparations would have continued with 500 mini-subs under construction, specially designed aircraft build, motor boat and manned torpedo stations established. Japanese military was committed to and was convinced they could repel the initial assault. That we might make as second assault was too much to consider. 1,465 Kamikaze had attacked at Okinawa, 400 miles away, had sunk or damaged 250 warships. A ratio of 1 hit per 6 attempts. Troopships sailing into waters adjacent to Japan, they thought, didn't stand a chance. US planners estimated 250 hits; Japanese planners expected 480 ships sunk. See suicide page for a range of special attack (suicide) weapons used by the Japanese.

Expected casualties. By this stage in the war, the overwhelming American material condition had reduced the ratio of American killed vs. enemy. The assault by Pacific trained Army troops from the Philippine Campaign and combat hardened Marines lessened the expected causalities on the American side. Conversely, first rate Japanese troops with pre-war combat experience in China -- which had made the initial conquests in the Pacific against inexperienced Allied troops -- had mostly been killed. The combat trained troops in China had been replaced with secondary troops -- these now experienced troops were recalled to defend the home islands. These troops had never been exposed in China to the massive air attacks that were now normal operations from US land and sea forces. Japan's naval ships had been destroyed. Japan had never had an adequate new pilot training program. Industrial resupply was dramatically weakened with every war facility destroyed as soon as it was discover by American air reconnaissance. Raw materials had been cut off as the merchant marine was destroyed by American submarines and aircraft.

Usually omitted from the statistics, however, because the atomic bomb was a secret, is the 300,000 white slave laborers held by Japan. Most of these were to be executed if the invasion had happened. The appearance of the atomic bomb brought such a sudden end to the war, that these lives were saved, along with the expected military casualties of both sides and massive numbers of Japanese civilian population either participating in the defense or as collateral damage.

Prospects of Operation Olympic. Japan fully expected to be able to repel the first landing with the help of suicide tactics. As shown at Normandy, the Americans expected to overpower all in their way. The U.S. expected to have air superiority, which places an imposition on the defense. The Navy expected to interdict all movements of resupply and reinforcement.
Best guess, the attack would be a repeat of "bloody Omaha beach" with a successful American landing. The plan called for sealing the mountains rather than fighting an Okinawa type campaign. The goal of establishing air bases would proceed as an American specialty. There would be continued casualties, but the goal accomplished.

CORONET . With American aircraft numbers measured in the 5-digits by aircraft type, and Japan's total aircraft numbers measured in the 4-digits, possibly 3-or 2-digits after Olympic, it is inconceivable why Coronet should happen. Japan could be allowed to suffocate under a siege with sea and air attack. No item of military importance would exist within 10 miles of the shore or any item that could be seen from the air. However, if Japan had persisted, it could only be because of great resistance at Kyushu. The momentum of war would have followed the plan. Invasion of Honshu would have been brutal with total destruction of every square yard before the troops and ruthless combat. The atomic bomb not only saved many Japanese lives, it may have saved the nation. With surrender, the occupying troops could be magnanimous in the American manner. If they had to fight fanatical resistance, they would have been compelled to destroy everything in sight as a potential military threat.

[u-89]

This here is the Paul Craig Roberts article he mentioned. It's worth a read.

[sergeantdave]

This hyperbole is barely worth confronting.

The mere threat our military presents to potential enemies insures our relative freedom and prosperity. To suppose that two oceans prevent attack by an enemy is stupid in this age of ICBMs. What prevents an attack is the threat of retaliation by our military's missles.

There may be a better way to run a country, but until Libertopia is established and shows us the enlightened path, this will have to do.

[delapaz]

I am very sympathetic to Mr. Rockwells views on our military. It would be nice to live in a country where we could just worry about whats going on in here. I wish that he were correct. But he's not.

in 1801, barely 14 years after the constitution was signed, the President, Thomas Jefferson, sent an expeditionary force halfway across the world to wage war against the Barbary coast pirates. and Thomas Jefferson was as strong an opponent of federal power as you can find.

Jefferson did it because the choice was clear. Wage war or allow thugs and barbarians to ravage American shipping, and American interests because of perceived American weakness. Jefferson chose war and it was the right choice. That war sent a message about American strength and resolve and saved a whole heap of trouble.

President Bush is making the same choice for the same reasons.

[Just another Joe]

He makes some good points and some points that are just WAAAYYY out there.

Good points - The only thing the military can do for our freedom is to repel an attack from an invader who, in occupying, would offer us a less free society than we have now.

With a nation full of rifle-toting rednecks, a hostile foreign power can never succeed. To obliterate us, they would be forced to nuke us.

Bad points - So, for our military to have been effective in protecting our freedom, the enemy must be (1) credible; (2) willing and prepared to attack; (3) likely to reduce our freedom if he wins; and (4) repelled by either the action, or the threat, of our military.

Without our military I believe there woiuld have been many countries in the past 200+ years that would have met requirements 1, 2, and 3.

This circumstance has never obtained in our history, and probably never will.

And again, I believe this is due DIRECTLY to our military.

Hitler and Germany never constituted a credible threat to the US

Never let this man into public office.
Hitler's Germany was the most advanced country, next to the USA, in the world. Hitler would have consolidated Europe, Russia, AND the mideast and come a running after the USA. We probably would have been speaking German before 1950.

Truman bombed Japan because the Japanese demanded as their only condition of surrender that the emperor remain emperor. They continued to demand this after both bombings, so Truman just gave in. The bombings were for nothing.

It seems to me that it is a fairly well known fact that more US lives were saved by this than, almost, any other single event in WWII.

We don't need a standing federal military. If someone invades, militias can pop up, with rifles and perhaps a government commission (while we still have forcible government) to get the job done and then disband until the next invasion.

Sure, if you want to prove it every 50 years to the next tinhorn dictator that doesn't remember the last time we opened a can of USA mean on someone.
The militias better have more than rifles though. Somebody better be passing out the grenades, LAWS rockets, machine guns, aircraft, anti-aircraft missiles, etc, with which todays battles are being won. Otherwise we will be toast in short order.

[CholeraJoe]

Listen to a retired Marine general, twice winner of the Congressional Medal of Honor, on the subject.

Number One: It's Medal of Honor RECIPIENT

Number Two: If in fact Smedley Butler said this, I doubt he meant it the way that the author has twisted it.

There have been 7 Marine Corps double recipients of the MOH, however Smedley Butler and Daniel Daly were the only ones who received it for separate actions.

[joesnuffy]

Brad...you should have a nice view of your entrails from there....

[OldSmaj]

I see no real reason to go into this again with this nitwit, as he is obviously too full of himself to see that some folks really don't give a rat's patootie about what he says, one way of the other. The fool provided a moments distraction for me at the time of the original posting, but his continued silliness now tells me I was right about him in the first place.

Nothing but a loudmouthed REMF with nothing better to do.

By the way, idiot, no one WINS the Medal of Honor. One RECEIVES the medal.

And there ain't no such thing as a Congressional Medal of Honor.

Geez, one would think with all the education and intelligence you have, you'd at least be able to get that right.

Posted by OldSmaj to dixiepatriot On News/Activism 01/29/2004 7:15:12 AM PST #48 of 107

I don't idolize, but I do admire those 99% of the members of the armed forces who have served honorably. But I owe them nothing.

Hmmm. Should I or shouldn't I?

Yeah, I guess I should. Listen pogey-bait, I'm speaking as one those that you owe nothing to: I didn't ask for anything from you, in the first place, you stinking REMF.

I served because I got paid reasonably well to do things that I enjoyed doing. Others may call it what they wish, I called it a job. I didn't fail at it, either. Your stinking ass is still around to spew this crap, ain't it?

Thanks for paying your taxes, so that I could be paid, but otherwise, I really don't give a damn if you live or die.

In fact, you mealy-mouthed wanna-be spook, your type is the same type that did nothing but piss me off day after day, anyway, since all you could do was postulate and present your silly-ass pipe dreams based upon your fabricated imaginings, with no other purpose than to make a pitiful attempt to justify your own job. Good and honorable men died for your Clancy imaginings.

Your type wasted my time and talents on many occasions, with your Cold War crap and the constant doom and gloom crap that never existed.

You would have been better off just keeping your idiotic mouth shut. Tis better to keep silent and be thought a fool, than to open ones mouth and verify the suspicion.

CIA, my ass. The good ones don't go around spouting this crap. If you knew half of what you think you know about why someone serves, you wouldn't be wasting your time writing your silliness for Lew Rockwell forums.

But, you, you ignorant James Bond wannabe, you don't know diddly about your subject, best you go back to writing assessments of non-existant planned invasions of Bora-Bora or whatever it is you ring-knocking, joe college CIA dipshits do.

[optimistically_conservative]

I have to admit that I agree with much of this.

No one owes me because I chose to serve in the AVF military. This is the opposite side of the wrong-headed coin that subscribes to the idea that my parents made some sort of sacrifice for my decision.

I also agree that our military is more Machiavellian than a militia-based last line of defense.

I do think it is appropriate to honor those that choose to serve in the military as we should those that choose to serve in the police, firefighter, medical, etc. services that are based on selflessnes over, say, entertainers whose self-aggrandizement motivates them more than a concern for the welfare of others.

I would also say that during my service, I have probably done more to ensure the freedoms of Europeans, Asians and South Americans directly. Whether that has pushed the frontiers of our own national security out from our borders, making the risk of foreign attack less, can certainly be debated.

I also have understood that Americans do not trust the military to be directly involved within our borders in enforcing security - choosing to engage our military abroad rather than against non-citizens and interlopers domestically.

The author is entitled to his opinion, and in uniform or out, I support his right to publish it. Given the success of our freedoms, I do not see a need to defend it, or rail against it, with anything more than the tools at hand in my civilian role.

Should that change, he can count on me to do it in my military role.

[spodefly]

Freepers, as they're called, are self-selected, and virtually all neocons; almost no libertarians are among them.

No wonder I feel so left out here. You're all a bunch of damn neo-cons.

Paleo and Proud!!!

With a nation full of rifle-toting rednecks ...

I resemble that remark.

All in all, an interesting supposition on the authors part, but I vote we keep the military. In case anyone invades the US, I don't want to have to have the militias trying to battle lean, mean professional soldiers without air cover and artillery (and a bunch of other stuff) provided by the US military.