On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 21:09:27 -0700 (PDT), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 7:50:42 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 16:48:28 -0700 (PDT), "russell...@yahoo.com"
>> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 9:28:31 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 6:41:57 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>> >> > On 4/25/2022 8:30 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >> > > On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 7:58:39 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>> >> > >> On 4/24/2022 8:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> >> > >>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 05:56:39 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
>> >> > >>> wrote:
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>> (chomp)
>> >> > >>>> But Tommy... Japan was not bombed into the stone age. In fact with the
>> >> > >>>> exception of fire bombing in Tokyo and the two "atom" bombs there was
>> >> > >>>> little bombing done in the rest of the country.
>> >> > >>>>
>> >> > >>>> And, I do know as I was there.
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>> I beg to differ somewhat.
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan>
>> >> > >>> "Much of Japan's industrial capacity was also destroyed by Allied
>> >> > >>> bombing. Over 600 major industrial facilities were destroyed or badly
>> >> > >>> damaged, contributing to a large decline in production."
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>> There were also raids on the coastal naval bases and some of the major
>> >> > >>> cities:
>> >> > >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Areas_of_principal_Japanese_cities_destoyed_by_US_bombing.jpg>
>> >> > >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan#/media/File:Allied_naval_operations_off_Japan_during_July_and_August_1945_(edit_1).svg>
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>> The target committee had a difficult time finding worthwhile targets
>> >> > >>> for the atom bombs because most of the worthwhile (military) targets
>> >> > >>> had already been destroyed. The sole exception was Kyoto:
>> >> > >>> "Why was Kyoto removed as the prime target for the A-Bomb?"
>> >> > >>> <https://www.vaguelyinteresting.co.uk/why-was-kyoto-removed-as-the-prime-target-for-the-a-bomb/>
>> >> > >>> Kyoto was the first choice for bombing, but was saved by Henry L.
>> >> > >>> Stimson. The other cities were thoroughly bombed.
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>> I couldn't find anything on whether the US bombed the smaller towns
>> >> > >>> and fields. When Japan decentralized production to small home
>> >> > >>> workshops, they might have considered bombing. My guess(tm) is they
>> >> > >>> didn't. Bombing isn't very effect against low density targets.
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >> +1
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> After weeks of firebombing, Curtis LeMay complained in July
>> >> > >> 1945 there were not enough targets for his Army Air Corps.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> "Official estimates from the United States Strategic Bombing
>> >> > >> Survey determined at least 330,000 killed, 476,000 injured,
>> >> > >> 8.5 million people made homeless, and 2.5 million buildings
>> >> > >> destroyed. Almost half of 64 Japanese mainland cities were
>> >> > >> completely destroyed. The destruction was not lost on LeMay.
>> >> > >> He acknowledged that if the Japanese had won the war, he
>> >> > >> would have been tried as a war criminal.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Later he would reveal that dropping the atomic bombs was
>> >> > >> totally unnecessary, given the level of destruction he had
>> >> > >> already waged on Japan. He said he only dropped them because
>> >> > >> of President Truman’s authority. After the war, Japan’s
>> >> > >> former Prime Minister Fumimaro Konoe confirmed that the
>> >> > >> decision to surrender was based on the prolonged bombing
>> >> > >> wrought by General LeMay’s Marianas-based air forces. "
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-history/7-awesome-airpower-quotes-general-curtis-lemay/
>> >> > >> --
>> >> > >> Andrew Muzi
>> >> > >> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>> >> > >> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Knives can kill people. One way is to cut a person multiple times all over their body and they will eventually lose enough blood to die. And suffer enormous pain from all the cuts. Other way a knife can kill someone is if you plunge it directly into a person's heart. Dead in 10 seconds or so.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Did LeMay explain why he did not completely destroy the other half of the 64 mainland Japanese cities? Did he not have enough airplanes or bombs? Was he planning to start completely destroying them in mid August 1945? So that by December 1945 all 64 mainland Japanese cities would all be completely destroyed.
>> >> > >
>> >> > You are not innumerate. The phrasing in the quoted link may
>> >> > be inartful but of 64 major cities, half were utterly
>> >> > destroyed. The other 32 were drastically damaged and reduced.
>> >> >
>> >> > p.s. There were administration/general staff limits on
>> >> > bombing certain cities and areas such as all of Kyoto and
>> >> > the Imperial Palace district in Tokyo. There may well have
>> >> > been others of which I am unaware.
>> >> Russell who tries to pass himself off as an accountant shows yet again that he understands absolutely nothing about the world around us. The object of the bombing was not to kill people save to terrorize Tokyo and weaken the resolve of the Emperor. The entire idea of bombing is destroy the enemies ability to wage wars. You don't simply bomb cities but the industries that allow the enemy to wage war.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Yes bombing Tokyo was an act of terror against civilians. Not a military target. That has been a part of war since the beginning. Your buddy Putin is bombing a maternity hospital in Ukraine. Pregnant women aren't very good soldiers. No Tommy, the idea of bombing is not only to destroy the ability to wage war. Militaries do bomb cities filled with non combatants. And round up and shoot non soldiers too. War is never ever just soldiers shooting soldiers. Tommy, you should read some history books and learn something. It would help you immensely to have even a little knowledge.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> This is why the USA should be supplying the Ukraine with the aircraft and billions of dollar of weapons that Biden left to the Taliban when he deserted American in Afghanistan after ordered by Obama to "correct" Obama's mistake of not getting us out of Afghanistan within six weeks of election.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Tommy, did you forget who was president of the USA from January 20, 2017 until January 20, 2021? Why didn't your hero Donald get the USA out of Afghanistan? He had 4 years to do the job. 4 years. Was he too busy playing golf to devote anytime to that immaterial problem. Before 2016, Trump promised to bring troops home and stop foreign wars. And he talked about it for Afghanistan for four years, but didn't do it.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> So the US in WW II bombed all of the industrial sites that made gunpowder, rifles, etc. Because they have already destroyed the industrial zones that made tanks and ships of war.
>> >>
>> >> Now in 2022, we cannot respond to the danger that the Ukraine is in because we left all of those excess weapons in Afghanistan. Let's just say that Biden is not a Harry Truman and Truman was not in charge of the war.
>> >
>> >https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2021/08/30/what-military-equipment-left-behind-afghanistan-us/5658895001/
>> >Article says armored anti landmine trucks and Humvees and 73 aircraft (planes and helicopters). US also left behind some "Counter-rocket, artillery and mortar systems". These would have been useful in Ukraine.
>> >
>> >The story says:
>> >"The U.S. military likely abandoned tens of millions of dollars’ worth of aircraft, armored vehicles and sophisticated defensive systems in the rush to leave the airport in Kabul safely."
>> >
>> >Tommy, millions, NOT billions as your lie above states. Again Tommy, millions, not billions. There is a one thousand times difference between millions and billions. One thousand times difference. I am aware you do not have an education so this is impossible for you to comprehend.
>> >
>> >Now, as for responding to the war in Ukraine with Russia, the USA, Joe Biden, is providing weapons to Ukraine. Even though some were left and abandoned in Afghanistan. The USA has lots of weapons to send lots of places. No shortage. Just announced were some howitzers going to Ukraine. Previously we, and UK, provided anti tank and anti plane missiles. And we, and other former Soviet countries, are providing rifles and bullets to Ukraine.
>> >
>> >And lest you forget, your buddy Trump in 2019 withheld military aid to Ukraine. Funny how you and the Republicans in congress forget that fact.
>> >
>> >https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/world/news/trump-who-was-impeached-for-withholding-nearly-400-million-in-military-aid-from-ukraine-said-this-deadly-ukraine-situation-would-never-have-happened-if-he-were-in-office/articleshow/89817109.cms
>> >https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/16/trump-administration-broke-law-in-withholding-ukraine-aid.html
>> >https://publicintegrity.org/national-security/timeline-how-trump-withheld-ukraine-aid/
>> >https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/trump-ordered-hold-on-military-aid-days-before-calling-ukrainian-president-officials-say/2019/09/23/df93a6ca-de38-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html
>> >https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/28/trump-ukraine-military-aid-russia-1689531
>> >https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/24/20881505/donald-trump-withhold-aid-ukraine-timeline-whistleblower
>> >https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/11/15/trump-resisted-ukraine-sale-javelin-antitank-missile/
>> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump%E2%80%93Ukraine_scandal
>> >
>> >Tommy, I frequently wonder if you have any intelligence at all. Despite your incessant calls of superiority.
>> When the U.S. left Vietnam they left considerable equipment behind and
>> there were the usual Head Lines about "U.S. leaves Umpteen Billion of
>> Dollars Behind".
>>
>> Some years after the war my company, working for the Caterpillar
>> dealer in Singapore, undertook a survey of CAT equipment left in
>> Vietnam with the thought that it might be salvageable.
>>
>> What we found was that the equipment we were shown was literally
>> "junk" and not worth the cost of repair and refurbishing. I was shown
>> a large warehouse full of CAT parts, for example... but the roof
>> leaked and hardly anything was usable.
>>
>> In short it does seem that many of the "Lurid" Head Lines are really
>> recounting the purchase cost of some battered old junk left behind.
>>
>> Which is not to say that there aren't "Losses in Combat" I once came
>> across a brand new, still in the crates, ice making plant in the
>> salvage yard at Cam Ranh Bay Air Base. But what would it have cost to
>> ship it back to the States?
>> --
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John B.
>
>The USA Today link I posted above listing the equipment left in Afghanistan totaling millions of dollars. It also said BILLIONS and BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars, USA dollars, not cheap Canadian or Australian or New Zealand or Jamaican dollars, were spent on equipment and supplies and training for the Afghanistan military in the 10 or 15 or 20 or however long the US was in Afghanistan. So the piddly pennies of equipment left or destroyed at the pullout in Afghanistan were nothing. For anyone who thinks anyway.

Sure, the army pays something like $8.5 million for a brand new,
shiny, M1A2 Tank. But how much is it worth in some remote mountain
village in Afghanistan with the tracks broken, the barrel of the main
weapon shot out and the engine frozen.
The newspapers say "$8.5 million" while the scrap dealer says $0.15 a
pound (:-)
--
Cheers,

John B.