Welcome to The Square Inch, a Friday newsletter on Christianity, culture, and all of the many-varied “square inches” of God’s domain. This is a paid subscription feature with a preview before hitting the paywall. Please consider subscribing to enjoy this weekly missive along with an occasional “Off The Shelf” feature about books, a frequent Pipe & Dram feature of little monologues/conversations in my study, and Wednesday’s “The Quarter Inch,” a quick(er) commentary on current events.
Dear Friends,
Welcome to the 208th edition of The Square Inch Newsletter, which marks its fourth anniversary. For two hundred and eight straight weeks, every Friday, this has landed in your inbox. Okay, that is technically not accurate. There were two missed Fridays mixed in there somewhere, and on a couple of occasions I didn’t get it out until Saturday. But why quibble? Aside from that I didn’t take a break or vacation. This thing has pretty much been like the U.S. Postal Service: delivered rain, sleet, or snow.
That is not a prelude to informing you that I am taking a break. Why stop now when I’m on a roll? What began as a weekly newsletter has evolved into a publication with a number of different features: Off The Shelf, which has become perhaps more occasional than I’d like; The Quarter Inch, the Wednesday current events roundup; and Pipe & Dram, little monologues in my study geared toward more scholarly pursuits. That’s a lot of output and I hope you don’t feel overwhelmed by it all. Just a reminder: there is no “falling behind” because you don’t have to read everything. The Square Inch will be there when you’re looking to read something interesting.
Today, while I’m not exactly taking a break, I’d like to take it easy. Let’s do some commentary on a grab-bag of a few random items:
There’s been a little brush fire on social media sparked by Tucker Carlson trashing America for dropping the atomic bomb on Japan to end World War II. That’s been a moral debate hashed and rehashed for many decades, and I don’t really feel the need to try to resolve it right now. I am inclined to think that the bombing was an appropriate use of force consistent with the Christian principle of jus in bello. Many good-faith people disagree, including Tucker, apparently. Although I do not really include him in the category of “good faith.” He’s been on a knee-jerk anti-American kick for some time now.
But here is a curious thing that has always bothered me about the anti-nuke caucus. One of the main arguments is that there were morally less-fraught options available to us to bring the war to its conclusion. Things like, Drop the bomb offshore as a display of power. Offer a negotiated settlement. Stronger Diplomacy. That kind of thing. But they ignore one inescapable fact that proves, and in retrospect confirms and vindicates the prior judgment that there were no other available means by which the Allies could get the Japanese to surrender. It is this:
We had to drop two bombs.
That’s right. After we obliterated the entire city of Hiroshima, the Japanese still did not surrender. We had to obliterate Nagasaki, too. If that doesn’t speak to the intractability and belligerence of the Japanese high command and their fanatical ideology, I don’t know what would. Drop the bomb on the ocean as a show of force? We dropped it on them and it didn’t work.
After bloodlettings at places like Tarawa and Iwo Jima, we knew what an invasion of Japan would look like, for Americans and Japanese both. I have a very hard time morally condemning Harry Truman from this far vantage point. I know it’s a tough moral question, but ending a conflict as swiftly and decisively as possible is also in the spirit of Just War Theory.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to The Square Inch to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.