So has the author of this piece apparently.
L
Who do you think we are going to firebomb or nuke?
I think Peters is brilliant.
Not that it makes any difference to a propagandist, but Dresden was bombed by British bombers.
The point of fighting a war is to win and end it.
Just like the Civil War could have gone on for many years except the South was convinced with Sherman's March to the Sea, that there would be nothing left if they continued.
With Germany, it had to come to the point that there was not an ability to continue or it would have drug on.
The Battle of the Bulge demonstrated that Germany could still fight. It was dicey for a while, and if they had continued, they would have split the Allied Army when they got to the Netherlands. It is easy now to say they could never have done that, but if they weren't still effective, there would have been no "bulge".
With Japan, they still had a large army, and a lot of airplanes. They also had to be convinced that there would be nothing left if they continued.
To end hostilities, someone has to win and both sides recognize who won.
In Korea, there has been a stalemate for over 50 years. The job will still have to be done, and at a much higher cost than if it had been finished 50 years ago.
Israel has been fighting to a stalemate for years. Now they are entering a very dangerous time. Hamas thinks they have won. Maybe they have.
The total deaths in Hiroshima and Nagasaki are probably less than the average daily BIRTH rate in China.
The traditional strategy for China over the millenia has been the 'pillow'. Invaders strike into the interior and become surrounded by the pillow effect of the huge population.
Mao and his collegues used to boast they were capable of surviving a nuclear exchange that would kill hundreds of millions because their populatiion could withstand those losses and their undeveloped infrastructure was not as dependent on maintaining their infrastructure and technology as the West. Not much has changed.