Fwd: Truth is the First Casualty of War

[Michael Hoover]

> >>  What "concessions on China"? And why doesn't Akira Iriye's _Origins
> >>  of the Second World War in Asia and the Pacific_ agree?
> >>  Brad DeLong
> >
> >2nd question 1st: can't say, haven't read book, but you apparently have
> >so maybe you can say (which you might have done in previous post, of
> >course, it might have taken more time than multiple 1-2 sentence blather
> >that you incessantly send to list).
> 
> This "agreement" seems to have been readily attainable by unilateral 
> Japanese action: Japan could have withdrawn all military forces from 
> China, restored Chinese geographical boundaries, and turned power in 
> occupied areas over to the Chiang Kai-Shek government any time it 
> wished.
> So what was to have been in the "agreement"? What actions was the 
> United States to have undertaken?
> Brad DeLong

oh, you haven't read book that you flippantly raised question about so you 
can't say why author doesn't agree about 'concessions' on China...

as for above, you answer them and I'll tell you whether or not you are 
correct, seems reasonable if we're gonna play questions...

or if you prefer, you can take stab at these questions:
1) who was your favorite Beatle?
2) who played 3rd base in infield featuring Tinker to Evers to Chance

   double play combination?
3) why was Jonathon Kozol fired from his first teaching job?
4) why is January 17, 1893 a 'date which will live in infamy'?

btw, did you ever post any comments after reviewing Michael Parenti's 
article on Zachary Taylor's death, you were so eager to disparage P 
without having read the piece...

lbo-chatt(er)ing really is fun....toodles, Michael Hoover