The quote of Schuler is an excellent summary of the difficulty of bringing a war to an end rather than give time to regroup and attack again.
Economist Kurt Schuler has a fascinating post on the various currencies that were used in mainland East Asia during World War II over at the Free Banking group blog.
Unfortunately, there are three paragraphs in the post that attempt to take libertarians to task for daring to challenge both the narrative of the state and the narrative of the nation regarding that horrific reminder of humanity’s shortcomings. He is writing of the certainty of the US’s moral clarity when it came to fighting Japan (the post was published around Pearl Harbor remembrance day):
The 1940 U.S embargo of certain materials frequently used for military purposes was intended to pressure Japan to stop its campaign of invasion and murder in China. The embargo was a peaceful response to violent actions. Japan could have stopped; it would have been the libertarian thing to do. For libertarians to claim that the embargo was…
View original post 1,475 more words
8.15 am, 6 August 1945 bit.ly/1IrpJoA
Those that argue that Japan surrendered for reasons other than the atomic bomb put forward contradictory arguments.
The first is the Japan was already seeking terms for surrender. That is true, but among those terms was avoiding occupation.
The Japanese leadership had already interpreted the terms of the Potsdam declaration was a sign of weakness. They hoped that by making the invasion of Japan as bloody as possible, they could extract even better terms in light of this sign of weakness at Potsdam. Kyushu, the obvious initial invasion site in southern Japan, was being heavily reinforced by the middle of 1945.
Japan no longer had a realistic prospect of winning the war by the end of 1994 and they knew it.
Japan’s leaders believed they could make the cost of conquering Japan too high for the Allies to accept, leading to some sort of armistice rather than total defeat. The Japanese…
View original post 529 more words