Tuesday, July 31, 1945TOKYO HAS 90 DAYS. And no more, according to commentator Alexander F. Jones, who writes that the Japanese government has to be pondering gravely the predicament that faces them --"World-shaking discussions are taking place behind the locked doors of the Japanese Cabinet. The question before the cabinet is this: Shall Japan surrender now while there is still time for some semblance of face-saving negotiations, or shall Nippon wait 90 days, when the economy of the home islands will have been completely destroyed bv the United States Army Air Forces and the United States Navy and the High Command can make an exit a la Adolf Hitler? In either case there is no future for Japan or for the Japanese Cabinet. Nippon is now experiencing the prelude to the most terrible campaign of destruction ever devised by man. Another 90 days and every city of consequence in the home islands will be a horrible shambles, its railroads will be wrecked, its oil and steel destroyed, its food supply decimated and 80 per cent of its ability to wage war (home industry) wrecked. . . . The curtain is just going up on the last act of the Pacific drama." posted by Michael 8:19:00 AM . . .
JAPAN SCORES POTSDAM DECLARATION. Publicly, at least, Tokyo is treating theU.S.-Chinese-British surrender demand with utter contempt. Premier Suzuki said in an official statement last night that it was merely a rehash of the Cairo Declaration, and thus no notice of it would be taken "so far as the Imperial government is concerned." Much of the premier’s statement, supposedly made at a press conference and quoted like mad on Radio Tokyo, was propaganda hooey -- "thousands" of new warplanes are being built in bombproof underground factories, the 10 percent reduction in food rations is only temporary, etc. The government’s goal, he says, is to prepare Japan’s people for a "prolonged war." So, for the record, this is the official Japanese stance on surrender --"There is no change whatsoever in the fundamental policy of our government to continue the prosecution of the war. . . . I leave this with absolute confidence in the hands of our strategists."There doesn’t seem to be any contradiction between Suzuki’s words and the "peace feeler" broadcast a week ago on Radio Tokyo, which hinted that the Japanese were interested in a lenient peace offer -- "Should America show any sincerity in practicing what she preaches, as, for instance, in the Atlantic Charter, excepting its punitive clause, the Japanese government would automatically . . . follow in the stopping of the conflict and then and then only will sabers cease to rattle both in the East and in the West." The bottom line is that Japan’s stated position is no surrender, period.Perhaps significant, or perhaps not, is the fact that a scheduled broadcast by Suzuki to the Japanese people on "the coming battle of the streets" was called off the other day without explanation. Maybe it had something to do with a thousand of Admiral Halsey’s carrier planes, which flew on yet another record-setting bombing mission over the Tokyo area yesterday. Surely the ordinary folks of Japan’s vanishing cities know by now that the "battle of the streets" is a battle to merely stay alive, and that it’s not coming -- it’s here. posted by Michael 8:13:00 AM . . .
DOES CHURCHILL KNOW SOMETHING WE DON’T? There are still surrender stories floating around -- the latest one (from Newsweek magazine) says Tokyo is trying to offer a surrender through Stalin, but only if the Allies promise not to occupy Japan’s home islands. But you have to wonder what else the Big Three leaders are hearing that we’re not -- or at least not yet.In Churchill’s farewell statement to the nation, he exulted that victory over Japan might come "much quicker than we have hitherto been entitled to expect." That’s pretty atypical for the man, who so many times during his prime ministership warned his countrymen against over-confidence. Are the Japanese saying things in private, regarding surrender, that they don’t have the nerve to utter in public? Could the smashing success of the bombing campaign have sped up the prospect for an early invasion?We don’t know if there’s anything to Churchill’s remark, but it’s certainly intriguing. In the meantime, the United Press reports today that the adjournment of the Potsdam conference has been "suddenly postponed due to some development," and censorship, already extreme, has been clamped onto the talks to the "most extreme degree."Can we dare hope that the Japanese militarists have had an attack of common sense and are ready to quit this war before their entire nation comes crashing down? The head says "no," but the heart wants, oh, so much to believe. posted by Michael 8:09:00 AM . . .
CRUEL & UNUSUAL. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Oklahoma City, police arrested a naked woman who refused to put on her clothes for the trip to the police station. She was locked in a cell, still buff-bare, finally changed her mind after sitting for a while on an iron fixture." posted by Michael 8:06:00 AM . . .
Sunday, July 29, 1945CHURCHILL OUT, CLEMENT ATTLEE IN. Prior to the release of the British election results, it was widely reported that Prime Minister Churchill would either continue in power with a "slim majority," or be forced to jockey with opposition parties to stay in power at the head of a minority government. Well, so much for the smart money. The results are now in, and the British Labor Party has clobbered Churchill’s Conservatives by a 2-to-1 margin. This almost surely won’t make any difference in Britain’s foreign policy, at least for the duration of the Japanese war. Almost the first thing uttered by Prime Minister Attlee was a declaration that "we have first of all to finish the war against Japan."What the British have voted for in the long run is socialism, which the Labor Party has unabashedly proclaimed as their platform. The British people certainly have the right to build a socialist democracy if that is their wish, but I’m left wondering about the stupid timing of the vote count, which pulls Churchill down from power in the middle of the critical Big Three conference at Potsdam. Is this any way to run a democracy?The announcement of the election results forced Churchill to return to Britain this past Wednesday, halting the discussions with President Truman and Premier Stalin completely. The President, having nothing really to do without Britain’s prime minister on hand, went off to Frankfurt-on-Main to review some troops. Prime Minister Attlee has since flown to Potsdam and as of last night the Potsdam talks had resumed. But how much time and substance has been lost? Leaders of government aren’t interchangeable things, like batteries. Why couldn’t Churchill have remained as Prime Minister until the conference was over, perhaps with Attlee at his side? Or, why couldn’t the British manage to hold an election and announce the results before such an important set of Big Three discussions ever began?Anyway, for better or for worse, the future peace of the world now depends on Premier Stalin and two democratic leaders who weren’t in office four months ago. Time will tell how much the experienced hands of Prime Minister Churchill and President Roosevelt are being missed from Potsdam. posted by Michael 8:15:00 AM . . .
ABOUT ATTLEE. If this description of Clement Attlee in a United Press dispatch is correct, Britain’s new prime minister couldn’t be a greater contrast to Winston Churchill --"He is no fiery orator. He is quiet and almost demure, the sort of man whose desk is always tidy, whose fountain pen is always full, who is careful to knock the ashes of his pipe into an ash tray. He speaks slowly and quietly, his sentences fading away toward the end. He never speaks without deliberating momentarily and choosing his words carefully. The Labor Party deeply respects him."And Edward T. Foulliard writes in the Washington Post --"A lean man with a cropped moustache, and bald head rimmed by black hair, he looked neither like John Bull nor the popular conception of a labor leader. He did look something like a school teacher, which he actually was in the London School of Economics, after a career as a lawyer and an oficer in the first World War."This man is charged with leading a democratic socialist revolution that will transform the British Empire. posted by Michael 8:12:00 AM . . .
JAPAN GETS MORE WARNINGS -- AND BOMBS. If the Japanese end up surrounded by nothing but ruined cities full of smoking rubble, they can’t say they weren’t warned.President Truman, retiring Prime Minister Churchill and China’s Chiang Kai-shek issued a declaration Thursday promising "prompt and utter destruction" of the Japanese home islands unless Tokyo agrees to unconditionally surrender. The declaration states flatly that Allied troops must occupy the Japanese homeland, that Japan’s leaders must be held accountable for war crimes, that there will be no deviation from the surrender demand, and that "we shall not accept delay."Tough stuff. But ordinary Japanese are probably more alarmed by the 60,000 leaflets dropped from U.S. Twelfth Air Force planes vowing "total destruction" of 11 Japanese cities if Tokyo doesn’t surrender, and warning the citizens of these doomed cities to run for their lives. The cities are Ichinomiya (already 50 percent destroyed), Tsu, Ukiyamda, Negoka, Nishinomiya, Aomori, Ogaki, Koriyama, Uwajima (16 percent leveled), Kurame, and Hakodate (already battered by carrier planes from Admiral Halsey’s Third Fleet). Already the Superforts have gone to work fulfilling that pledge -- six of the cities on the death list were hit with a total of 3,500 tons of bombs last night.It’s Japan’s choice now. The message from the Allies to Tokyo is strident, unambiguous, and terrifying. And it’s exactly the right message to send. posted by Michael 8:07:00 AM . . .
SENATE APPROVES U.N. CHARTER, 89-2. No surprise there. But as Barnet Nover warns in his latest column, the isolationists have only begun to fight. He notes a speech during the congressional debate by Senator Wheeler, the old isolationist lion, who "reluctantly" endorsed the Charter but made it clear his support was very conditional. What happens next will be more important than the simple act of ratification itself --"The real fight, Senator Wheeler made it clear, will not be over ratification of the Charter itself. That fight was lost before it could be begun. The real fight will be over legislation to carry out the obligations that have been accepted by the United Nations when the Charter has been ratified. In that fight the unpenitent and unreconstructed isolationists hope to win back all they seemingly lost by voting for the Charter. They hope to limit American participation in the United Nations in such a way as to make our participation worthless."The isolationists want to do this, Mr. Nover writes, by insisting that the enabling legislation be drawn up in the form of a treaty, which would require a two-thirds Senate approval. Then, in the hope that "the present mood of the American people will have been dissipated," the old America Firsters will try to bar the United States,.via amendments and reservations, from actually doing any of the things that we’ve pledged to do for the U.N. -- such as committing a portion of our armed forces for enforcing sanctions levied by the Security Council.I think Mr. Nover, rather than being unduly pessimistic, is doing a service here by pointing out that the triumphant "89-2" headlines are no reason for complacency. The American people overwhelmingly want the U.S. to be part of a world league after this war, but that won’t stop the hard-core isolationists -- who were so wrong on nearly everything in this war -- from trying to steer the country in the wrong direction in the post-war era as well. posted by Michael 8:04:00 AM . . .
BE ON THE LOOKOUT FOR... From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Portland, Ore., John Bribbon reported to police that a burglar had made off with 50 cents, five theater tickets, and two bananas." posted by Michael 8:01:00 AM . . .
Tuesday, July 24, 1945A REALLY DUMB PEACE PROPOSAL. Here’s a troubling A.P. story that seems to have gotten lost on the inside pages. Senator Wherry of Nebraska, a Republican, has circulated a letter to President Truman from an American "high military source" which compiles a list of recent Japanese peace feelers. Our "high military man" indicates agreement with them. The somewhat jumbled communication, directed to the President, reads in part as follows --"Won’t you stop slaughter of American boys and Japanese civilians immediately by message from Potsdam promising Japan that immediately after her unconditional surrender the Emperor will be reinstated in accordance with Secretary Byrnes’ promise that Japan shall retain her social and religious freedom and that the Emperor shall be empowered to set up a new cabinet, acceptable to our Allies and one that will protect our vital interests; further, that we do not regard military occupation of Japan proper as necessary, but a control commission be authorized to see to it that while Japan’s social and economic problems are left in her own hands, her capacity for military aggression shall be completely destroyed."Who is this screwball and what is he doing in a U.S. military uniform? I could imagine the Japanese would welcome a peace that leaves them free of Allied military occupation -- but such a peace would be something other than an "unconditional surrender." We would also be trusting the government responsible for the Pearl Harbor attack to fulfill in good faith our enemy’s guarantees that Tokyo’s "capacity for military aggression" would be forever broken. Good grief, face reality -- there’s no way to permanently break the power of Japanese militarism without occupying Japan. Period. No control commission could enforce anything without soldiers at hand to back up its word. Yes, this kind of watered-down peace would save untold thousands of American lives by removing the necessity for an invasion. But we would just be putting their sons’ lives in jeopardy if and when a revived corp of militarists rise under a future Emperor. To accept Japan’s vow it will voluntarily give up its militaristic ways would be a bitter insult to the Allied fighting men who’ve given their lives in the Pacific thus far. And no U.S. congressman in his right mind should be publicizing trash like this.For his part, Senator Wherry says that if President Truman doesn’t agree with this proposal, he should say what the U.S. can accept. Did he perhaps consider what this here Potsdam conference is all about? Senator, just shut up. posted by Michael 8:03:00 AM . . .
THE MOST LOPSIDED MARGIN EVER? Usually when Dr. Gallup’s organization takes a poll, the result will show the country split in some manner over a controversial issue. But not this week, when the latest Gallup survey shows the people of the United States supporting ratification of the United Nations Charter by an overwhelming margin. How overwhelming? Try 66% yes, and 3% no. The sentiment is almost identical in every sector of the country -- in the Far West, the "no" number rises to a mighty 4%. The only sign of dislike for the Charter is in the large "no opinion" vote, which runs at 31% nationally. This number can be considered as people who don’t know anything about the Charter, are too chicken to declare their opposition to such a popular measure, or both.Not surprisingly, Dr. Gallup says there isn’t any difference in size of the public’s support for ratification and its expected margin in the Senate --"If, as some political observers in Washington report, there will only be about six votes in the Senate against ratification, then the division of the vote in the Senate will closely parallel the division in votes through the country on the Charter question."The Senate debate, which began yesterday, should be a breeze. No pun intended. posted by Michael 8:00:00 AM . . .
OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- In Pasadena, Calif., Motorist John Moore, fresh from a hair-raising ride on the cowcatcher of the speedy Santa Fe Chief, clambered down shaky but unhurt to get a ticket for ignoring the grade-crossing stop signal." posted by Michael 7:54:00 AM . . .
Sunday, July 22, 1945THE BOMBING GOES ON (AND ON). As far as I can tell from Associated Press reports, we’ve now hammered Japan’s homeland with firebombs for 48 consecutive days. And we keep setting records, according to the A.P. -- last Thursday more than 600 B-29 Superforts hit four cities on Honshu with about 4000 tons of bombs. ("A record," said the A.P.) Yesterday, another attack by more than 600 Superforts ("The greatest force ever sent aloft" -- A.P.) hit Nagoya and Osaka with another 4000 tons of firebombs. The B-29s seem to be roaring at will over Japanese cities without fighter escort, at medium and high altitude. Seem to that, is. The A.P. simply says that "it was not known whether the reluctant Japanese air force had risen to defend its homeland."Then again, the Japanese might not have much of an air force left to fight the Superforts with. Admiral Halsey’s Third Fleet is now into its third week of hitting the main islands with blistering shell fire and bombings from carrier planes. In their first two weeks of operations they sunk 416 enemy ships and brought down 516 planes. And in the last seven days alone they’ve pounded (deep breath now) Muroran, Hakodate, Kamaishi, Masuda, Matsushima, Korayama, Hitachi, Sukegawa, Hiigata, Choshi, Kawasaki, Yokosuka, Hiratsuka, Numazu, Fukui, Okazaki, Kuwana, Yokkaichi, Amagasaki, Shimotsui, Otake, Tokuyama, Kudamatsu, Oita, Miyazaki, and Kagoshima.It makes you wonder if the Japanese really can make good on their determination to fight onward for years, until the bitter end. In a profile in this morning’s Washington Post of Major General Curtis LeMay, architect of the B-29 campaign, there’s a great quote from the normally taciturn LeMay --"I think maybe the targets are going to be hard to find about Christmas time. They may choose to fight after that but if they do it will be a guerilla warfare. They won’t have any industries to supply their forces."That could be a pretty grim business in itself. But it would mean that the invasion of Japan would possibly be more of a mopping-up operation than the no-holds-barred battles for Iwo and Okinawa. In any case, there’s reason to hope that the bombing campaign will do more damage to Japan’s ability to fight on than our two-year-plus air war against Hitler did to hobble the Nazis, who managed remarkably well under dire circumstances. posted by Michael 8:04:00 AM . . .
RUSSIA SHOULD END HER INFORMATION BLACKOUT. Edwin L. James raises a really good point in the New York Times this morning about Soviet Russia’s information blackout in eastern Europe. It’s not only a troublesome issue President Truman should raise with Stalin, but also one which the President should try to solve -- on the spot -- by insisting on a commitment to allow the Western press the same access in those countries that we grant to Red reporters in the countries we occupy --"It is possible that at Potsdam President Truman will bring up the issue of the right of the American people to know what is going on in Eastern Europe; they certainly do not know now. . . . What is going on in Eastern Germany, in Poland, in Hungary and in Austria is about completely veiled from the world at large. Russian correspondents are, of course, at large, but if their reporting is objective, little of it has reached the United States. As a matter of hard cold fact, the people of this country have no idea of what is going on in Russian-occupied territory. The Russians can know what is going on in territory occupied by the American and British because correspondents are free to tell about it; but the converse is not true."The questions are many, Mr. James tells us. They are troubling, and they are mounting --"Have hundreds of thousands of men from Rumania, Bulgaria, and Hungary been taken to Russia to work? That is something the Americans and British have a right to know. If for no other reason they have to right to know in weighing the steps for reparation, which is to include labor for Russia. What has become of the assets of the national banks of countries occupied by the Russians? Have those assets been taken away to Russia, or is the allegation a libel on our Allies? In planning for economic and financial reconstruction of Europe all parties concerned have a right to an answer of that question. Did the Russians round up all Swiss officials and nationals in Budapest and ship them to Istanbul simply because they wished to even things up with the Swiss who did not recognize the Moscow regime, or did the Russians have other purposes? Were members of foreign staffs in any of the capitals killed or mistreated, as has been alleged? Would it not be better to have the facts than ugly rumors? Is there a concentration camp in Hungary where 40,000 persons were placed by the Russians? Were those 40,000 all prisoners of war or not? Is there any element of political coercion involved? Perhaps not at all. But if not, it might be to the advantage of the Russians to have the facts revealed. How much Russian censorship goes on in Yugoslavia? Here correspondents have been allowed in restricted numbers, but no one supposes their reports are freely made. Why is a Russian in charge of the UNRRA in Yugoslavia? There may be a good reason, but the question is being asked whether these supplies are being used for political purposes. Was a shipload of flour from America announced as flour from Russia for which the Americans had supplied bags? Such matters should be open to investigation. On a larger viewpoint, if Russia is to get financial aid from the United States as well as other forms of aid, have not the American people the right to know what the Russians are doing in the parts of Europe held by them?"It’s possible, and even likely, that some of these allegations are nothing but bunk peddled by aging America Firsters, most of whom are even more anti-Red than they ever were anti-Nazi. But which ones have some basis in fact? And how to tell? In any case, here we have still more instances of the Russian penchant for secrecy and contrariness, which as Mr. James points out, is hurting Moscow the most --"It may well be that full publicity will help the cause of Russia here. Uncontrolled tales grow in the passing of them. Anyhow the truth should be known."Amen to that. posted by Michael 8:02:00 AM . . .
BEAUTY CAN BE A DRAWBACK. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Overland, Mo., the Lions Club gave the community six green trash cans so good-looking that citizens mailed letters in them." posted by Michael 7:55:00 AM . . .
Tuesday, July 17, 1945FORGET THOSE PEACE RUMORS. Call it the battle of the undersecrertaries. First, Undersecretary of State Joseph Grew said the Japanese are putting out "peace feelers", a statement bitterly mocked by Radio Tokyo. Well, it’s also being mocked by none other than Undersecretary of War Robert Patterson. I think Mr. Patterson has the better argument --"We must prepare ourselves to win our war with Japan the hard way -- by killing Japanese soldiers right through the ruins of Tokyo and throughout the home islands. . . . [The Japanese army] will not surrender to an inference, the inference that it is beaten."And yes, it’s true that Japan’s food shortage is getting critical, and the blasting or her oil refining centers at Tokyo Bay (not to mention the loss of Japan’s oil fields in faraway Borneo) will create an oil shortage that will be even more critical to the functioning of her military. But Japan’s growing disadvantages are partially offset by the fact that, as Mr. Patterson says, our enemy has learned to fight smarter --"On Okinawa they did not attempt a defense of the beaches, where they would be under point-blank naval gunfire: they went back to prepared positions. In other words they picked their battlefield. Their artillery fire is far more effective than a year ago."Remember this when the headlines announce we’ve invaded Kyushu, and the press is full of glowing accounts of how "amazingly light" Japanese resistance is right after our Marines hit the beaches. And in the meantime, let’s not clutch at any more straws about Japanese "peace feelers." It’s bad enough when the press circulates them -- must Truman administration officials spread them as well? posted by Michael 8:08:00 AM . . .
WHAT IS "UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER"? Should we demand the right to get rid of the Emperor, dismantle the Japanese dynasty, and eradicate Japan’s long-time political and religious system? Or should we simply boot out the militarists and leave everything else pretty much as is? This is the crux of the debate right now, and I think Walter Lippman’s latest New York Herald Tribune column provides a sharp answer --"The question . . . is whether it is necessary to demand the liquidation of the Japanese social order, with its peculiar dynastic and religious domination. There is substantial reason for thinking that all Japanese interpret 'unconditional surrender' as meaning just that, and that this is the sticking point when they consider whether they should sue for peace. . . . My own view is that, in determining war aims, that is to say conditions for which we deem it necessary to fight , we should -- if there is a choice -- choose the minimum terms which are certainly necessary rather than maximum terms which may be desirable but are not clearly necessary. The burden of proof, in other words, is on those who wish to go beyond the Cairo terms, and to identify unconditional surrender with a forced internal revolution. In examining the argument, we are bound to ask ourselves whether the Japanese problem is the same as the German. It was certain that Hitler had to be destroyed, and since he had usurped all the powers of the German state, he could not have any legitimate successor. But the Japanese Emperor is not a usurper, and more often than not in Japanese history the Emperor has reigned but has not ruled. It is quite conceivable then that he might continue to reign, but that the country would be ruled by men who had surrendered the conquests and military power of Japan and had given guarantees. If this is the right course, and provided the Allies have reached a strategical and political agreement, it would be no sign of weakness to let it be known in Tokyo."At the risk of belaboring the point, I don’t think we should get at all hopeful that we can persuade the enemy to "sue for peace" simply by defining surrender by some minimal standard. But a pronouncement of what "unconditional surrender" entails could be a meaningful weapon in the battles to come. If our offer to leave the Emperor in place were to simply reduce the willingness of Japanese civilians to fight to the death, or to erode the influence of fight-to-the-finish militarists, it can save U.S. soldiers’ lives in the weeks and months ahead. That alone makes Mr. Lippmann’s prescribed course desirable. posted by Michael 8:05:00 AM . . .
WHERE’S HITLER? The Chicago Tribune says that he and Eva Braun have both made it to South America, via German submarine. From correspondent Vincent de Pascal --"From information just received from Buenos Aires, I am virtually certain that Adolf Hitler and his 'wife,' Eva Braun, the latter dressed in masculine clothes, landed in Argentina and are on an immense German-owned estate in Patagonia."The Tribune doesn’t explain how the submarine successfully ferried the Fuehrer and his gal out of battle-blasted Berlin, but I’m sure some creative wordsmith will soon enlighten us. Maybe the Tribune will want to play that up, too. posted by Michael 8:02:00 AM . . .
I’LL PASS, THANKS. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Springfield, Ohio, hospital attendants reported Willie Martin’s condition as 'good' after he had been treated for absorption of a homemade punch made of iodine, turpentine, kerosene, rat poison, lighter fluid, shoe polish, and wine." posted by Michael 7:56:00 AM . . .
Sunday, July 15, 1945A CLEW THAT SOMETHING’S UP? Like an early invasion of Japan, maybe? The big news this morning is that President Truman has suddenly decided to cut short his European trip and will "hurry back" to the White House as soon as the Big Three conference at Potsdam is over. From Edward Foulliard in the Washington Post --"The decision of the Chief Executive, reported by a correspondent who crossed the Atlantic with him on the cruiser Augusta, was believed in some quarters here to be linked with the war against Japan. That war is now mounting to a crescendo. American warships and planes are giving the Japanese homeland the most terrible pounding in history, and there is nothing the Japanese can do to stop it except to surrender. In the opinion of some high-ranking officers, the question of whether Japan is going to surrender or fight it out to a bloody and catastrophic finish will be answered soon, perhaps in the next six weeks. If this view is shared by President Truman, it would be explanation enough for his decision to cut short his trip . . . . Certainly he would want to be here if any great decisions had to be made. It is possible, of course, that the President was informed of some important development while he was out on the Atlantic. At any rate, something seems to have come up between the time he left here and the time the Augusta started through the English Channel. The day that President Truman left the White House and started for Newport News, there was no suggestion that he would be in a hurry to return."It’s tempting, but way too optimistic, to speculate that the "important development" could be a signal from Tokyo that they’re willing to surrender. The Japanese have fought fanatically over scraps of land far from the home islands, and there’s no reason to believe they wouldn’t fight twice as fanatically for their own territory. But it is interesting (and maybe not too optimistic) to consider the possibility that the blistering, ongoing assault from U.S. warplanes and naval guns, such as the latest attacks this week-end against the steel city of Muroran, have reduced Japanese defenses to the point that an invasion could be launched much earlier than previously thought. The earlier an invasion can begin, the less time Tokyo will have to coordinate an all-out civilian defense. And the less likely our ground forces will be sucked into fighting a new round of Aachens, Cassinos, and Stalingrads. posted by Michael 8:03:00 AM . . .
POTSDAM WON’T SOLVE EVERYTHING. The upcoming Potsdam conference is being hailed in some quarters as critical, historic, determinative of the fate of the world for decades to come, etc. (Remember, they said the same thing about Yalta.) So it’s kind of refreshing to read Herbert L. Matthews in today’s New York Times, who seems to realize that, with all the problems facing the Big Three and the emerging United Nations, there’s only so much a conference can do. There’s the huge issue of how to govern Germany in the years ahead, of course, but there’s so much more. Mr. Matthews identifies some of what the Big Three will be concerned with --"The problems of Turkey, for instance, directly involve the Balkans and that cockpit of Europe has never been more of a battleground than today. There is Greece frantically worried about her northern frontiers. There is Marshal Tito on something of a rampage, growling about the Greeks and clamoring for Trieste, Venezia, Giulia and Carinthia. And across the Adriatic is Italy threatening to become a major problem through her economic distress and demands for settlement of her status. There are minor questions like Iran, with her oil, her port of Basra and her occupation by armies of Russia and Britain. Just last week the Communist party newspaper Pravda attacked the Iranian government severely. There are the Polish elections. There is German and Polish coal. There are Spain and Generalissimo Francisco Franco. . . . And do not forget that the war is still on. Most people expect the Soviet Union to enter the war against Japan and that is certainly something that the Big Three will discuss. And that brings up the vast problem of China and minor ones like Korea, Manchukuo, Hong Kong and foreign investments in the Far East."It’s no wonder, as Mr. Matthews writes, that "those three master magicians in Potsdam are not going to wave their magic wands and quell the floods. The waters are too deep and turbulent. All they can hope to do is pour a little oil on them here and there, put up a dike at one point and a breakwater at another than then wait, hope and work for things to calm down. . . . One can plot roughly what they will aim at. In general the British must play for international setups, the Russians for as free a hand as possible, and the Americans for their long-term strategic considerations, their foreign trade and finances and their intense desire for a settlement that will safeguard the peace -- a desire shared by the other two." posted by Michael 7:57:00 AM . . .
OTHERWISE, IT’S PERFECT. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Nora Springs, Iowa, town officials forked over $25 for running a truck with no headlights, no tail lights, no sidelights, no stoplights, no clearance lights, no identification lights, no flares, no red flags, no windshield wiper, no rear-view mirror, no license plates." posted by Michael 7:54:00 AM . . .
Tuesday, July 3, 1945HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY. Starting tomorrow I’m taking off for a one-week vacation of reading and radio-listening. Alas, it’s likely this won’t be the last wartime Fourth, but we can always hope -- and pray. Regular blogging will resume July 15. posted by Michael 8:07:00 AM . . .
TWO YEARS? TEN YEARS? ALWAYS? Here are three more sober (if not grim) predictions of what the future portends, for the war with Japan and beyond --General Joseph Stilwell, in last week’s Time magazine -- "A lot of people have the idea that this is a pushover. . . . It will take a long time -- easily two years."Willis Church Lamott, in the June issue of Harper’s -- "Our progress may become a succession of Japanese Aachens and we may face a decade of guerilla warfare."General Patton, talking to a group of Sunday-school children, as quoted in Time: "In my opinion there will be another war because there have always been wars."Patton probably has it right, but we can certainly hope for making this the last great war, and we have one good omen in that regard -- contrary to the developments of 1918 and thereafter, this time the United States will not be on the sidelines. The Truman administration and Congress have made it clear that this time around we will do everything we can to create a long-lasting postwar peace. And with America’s political and military power in the world now greater than ever, there is surely much we can do. posted by Michael 8:03:00 AM . . .
THE U.N. CHARTER IS A SHOO-IN. The old America Firsters on their isolationist brethren probably can’t stand it, but this time the Congress isn’t going to stand in the way of America’s participation in a world league. Ever since President Truman joined representatives of forty-nine other countries last Tuesday in signing the United Nations Charter, the number of Senators who’ve pledged to vote "yea" on this historic agreement has been astoundingly high. The first estimates had only 53 Senate members definitely for approval, but the signs were there from the start that this wouldn’t be another 1919. Senator Burton K. Wheeler, once a lion of the isolationist faction, meekly listed himself as "unsure" on the Charter and said there would be no organized fight against ratification. Senator Hiram W. Johnson, who helped kill U.S. participation in the League a generation ago, says now of Charter proponents that "they’ve got the votes," and that they might get his as well.Since then, the A.P. has finished its poll of the Senate on the Charter vote, which shows 65 Senators definitely voting yes, five more saying they would "probably" vote yes, 17 noncommital, and eight Senators unavailable for comment. Not one solon piped up to declare he would vote no.That’s a testament partly to the power of polls, which have consistently shown over the last year that two-thirds of Americans want the U.S. to play a major role in an international peace-keeping body after the war. But it’s also a testament to the common sense of the Senate, whose members seem to realize that we face a historic opportunity for peace after the end of this war that we simply can’t shirk.President Truman asked in his address yesterday that the Charter be ratified "swiftly." He should get his wish. The pundits say the Senate should approve it by August 1. posted by Michael 8:00:00 AM . . .
MAKE $10 IN YOUR SPARE TIME. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Columbus, S.C., Dentist C.B. Draffin stepped out of his office and a stranger stepped in, collected $10 in advance for repairs on a patient’s plates, quickly stepped out again." posted by Michael 7:56:00 AM . . .
Sunday, July 1, 1945DESTROYING JAPAN, CITY BY CITY. Another week, another record air assault over the Japanese home islands. This time it was about 600 B-29 Superforts, raining over 4000 tons of fire bombs on four big industrial cities -- Kure, Shimonoseki, Ube, and Kumamoto. The targets included Japan’s biggest naval base, a number of heavy industrial plants, the empire’s coal mining facilities, and railway hubs. No one’s put an exact total on the number of bombs, but the United Press says it’s "almost certain" that Monday’s bombing beat the old record of 4,119 tons of bombs dropped on Tokyo in the May 24 fire raid.So why are we bombing lesser-known cities, some in the range of 100,000-200,000 population? Because (1) regardless of their size, they’re still important military and economic centers, and (2) we’ve pretty much blasted most of the larger target cities to pieces. From the U.P. report --"Gen. Henry H. Arnold last month predicted that the Superfortresses -- soon to be augmented by Gen. James H. Doolittle’s U.S. Eighth Air Force of European fame -- would destroy Japan industrially by fall. Already in the stepped-up campaign which started last March, they have burned and gutted huge sections of 22 Japanese cities, with Tokyo, Nagoya, Yokohama, Kobe, and Kawasaki written off as primary targets."Another U.P. dispatch brings home just how devastating the air war has been over the last six months. Tokyo, the third largest city in the world with a population of seven million, has ordered all but 200,000 of its citizens to leave. A broadcast from Tokyo radio says that "every resident whose presence is not indispensable" must quit the capital. I’m not sure what they have to worry about -- the U.P. cites American air officers as saying Tokyo will no longer be a top priority target "until the Japanese rebuilt something worthwhile in the way of an objective." The same thing goes for five other major Japanese cities. We’d be wasting our time bombing ‘em until they put up something worth bombing.One can wish that the devastatingly successful air war would make Hirohito and the Japanese militarists come to their senses and accept the Allies’ surrender terms. But surely that’s not in the cards. We saw how a successful air campaign against Hitler’s empire did little to make the Nazis more conciliatory. We can take the Japanese equally at their word when they proclaim their intention to fight to the last breath. posted by Michael 8:05:00 AM . . .
WE’RE JUST WILD ABOUT HARRY. It’s official -- President Truman is now more popular than President Roosevelt ever was. The newest survey by Dr. Gallup and his polling teams shows President Truman with an approval rating of 87 percent, a full three percent above F.D.R.’s post-Pearl Harbor rating. Democrats and Republicans equally love the Missourian, and Dr. Gallup points out one huge advantage the President has over his predecessor --"While President Roosevelt enjoyed almost universal support for his foreign policy, there were always sharp differences of opinion among voters on the Roosevelt domestic policies. In Mr. Truman’s case, however, no such difference has apparently arisen as yet. It is clear from the survey figures that the new President has thus far not taken any stand which has dissatisfied any large number of voters."But there’s more to President Truman’s popularity than his avoiding controversy, as Mark Sullivan points out in his latest column. It’s his steadfastness --"When a public figure has made a certain kind of impression on the public, it is important that the impression remain constant. People like to think that the public figure they admire will remain always the same, for in remaining the same there is a kind of integrity of personality, equivalent to intellectual integrity, and this gives the public a sense of confidence. . . . There is very little likelihood of Mr. Truman changing. The very fact that simplicity is his most conspicuous characteristic makes change unlikely. Probably the only risk Mr. Truman runs, and in his case it is not much of a risk, is that someone may try to persuade him, on one occasion or another, to be different from what he is. . . . Anyone who would suggest to Mr. Truman that he put on a show probably would be moved by recalling President Roosevelt and the immense popularity he had. But to be dramatic was an essential part of Roosevelt’s personality and the public enjoyed the performances he gave, thought of him as a master showman and liked him for what he was."Assuming President Truman stays the way he is, it probably wouldn’t be too early to call the 1948 presidential election for him -- assuming he wants a full term of his own. posted by Michael 8:01:00 AM . . .
TALK ABOUT A LOOOOOONG SHOT. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Stirling, Scotland, four bridge players were each simultaneously dealt the same 13 cards twice on the same night (2nd and 18th hands). Odds against it: 85,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to one." posted by Michael 7:57:00 AM . . .
