Originally posted by Bombardy
According to Macnamara, Lemay said "if we had lost the war, we would be tried as war criminals"
even Lemay was aware that there is a another side to the "justification" coin.
Like the guy said, I'd give zero credibility to anything that comes out of McNamara's mouth.
One more thing. No one tries the winner of a war for war crimes, everyone tries the losers. So what LeMay said was just being realistic, not an acknowledgement of guilt.
By 1943, there were any number of possible outcomes for Japan, none of them good. They lost, most of them (those who knew strategy) knew they had lost before they attacked Pearl Harbor. The only thing to be decided was how badly they'd get mauled. The longer Japan fought, and the more ferociously they fought, the worse they'd get mauled.
The truth is, compared to what might have happened, the atomic bombs, despite their horrifying results, were close to merciful. Imagine the destruction of Japan had there been a reasonably long period of bombardment leading up to an invasion. With the B-29s dropping incendiaries by the ton on Japanese cities, Japan would have been a smoldering ruin with millions dead and millions homeless by November, even at the rate the bombing was going in mid 1945. No doubt, the bombing campaign would have been ramped up dramatically in preperation for the invasion.
War is horrible, it is ugly, it is the greatest atrocity man commits on his fellow man. No one escapes war unscathed, it touches everyone living, those it kills, and those yet to be born. if truth is the first casualty of war, civilians are the second, and it is a close race, nearer a tie.