Fullerene

Joined up writing isn’t for everyone.

FTFY

The Japanese government had elements that wanted peace and were looking at ways to end the war and it had elements that wanted to continue the war at all costs. It was blindingly obvious that Japan had lost the war, it had run out of fuel, the naval blockade stopped any supplies getting through, the Americans had total control of the skies over Japan and yet Japan would not surrender. I can easily imagine the Americans getting totally frustrated by it all. Maybe more should have been done through diplomacy (such as letting the Japanese keep the Emperor ) but failing that - when the bomb became available - it also became the only military option the Americans were focused on.

There is also the point that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki only killed people in these two cities. None of the American air crew came to any harm. For the Japanese, the question was how do you fight a war to the death when suddenly it is only your side that is dying.

It is easy to regard the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as barbaric but that is to judge it by today's standards. Looking back the key question is: why would America have the bomb and then decide not to use it on Japan? The obvious answer would be to save the lives of hundreds of thousands of Japanese men, women and children. However, that is to assume the Americans placed any value on Japanese lives. For a lot of Americans, it seemed like this: Japan attacked America in 1941 and started a war it could never win. Japan had demonstrated tremendous cruelty throughout the war (as did other countries) By the start of 1945, it was obvious that Japan was going to lose the war. Conventional bombing was already killing hundreds of thousands of Japanese. Several times in battle, the Japanese would not surrender - even when it was obvious they could not win. When defeated, Japanese civilians committed suicide rather than be captured by the Americans. American propaganda portrayed the Japanese as subhuman - the Pacific War was far more racist than the war in Europe. The Japanese resorted to Kamikaze pilots and other suicide fighters - suggesting they did not value their own lives that highly. There was every suggestion the Japanese were prepared to fight to the last man to protect the home islands. Under these circumstances, it is difficult to see how an American President could risk the lives of any American soldiers simply to save the lives of some Japanese. Yes, the Americans were aware that the next battle would be with the Soviets but they was primarily concerned with ending the current war first. Had the Japanese been offered the chance to keep the Emperor sooner, then the bombs could have been avoided - but that was not to be.

In some countries, the opposition to the government can be harassed, poisoned, imprisoned and even executed. This opposition might be politicians, businessmen, journalists or anyone really. Not surprisingly, in these countries a lot of people who do not want to be shot, choose to be compliant to whoever is in charge. Most people elsewhere would describe these leaders as tyrants. On the other hand, Donald Trump seems to regard them as tough, resilient and totally in control. He seems to admire them. "Very talented" - yeah. That Kim Jong Un knows what needs to be done.

According to Google, the USA has about 6,600 nuclear weapons - so yes you are right. North Korea might have only have 15. All the same, if they dropped one on Glasgow - would you say "hey - is that all you've got.

Right. Name one nuclear power where the leader is so paranoid he has his half-brother assassinated? Next. Name one nuclear power where the leader is so paranoid he has his uncle assassinated? Next. Name one nuclear power where anyone who questions the decision of the leader will be sent to the gulag along with all his or her family including grandchildren? Next. Name one nuclear power where almost nobody in that country has any idea of what is happening in the rest of the world? Maybe that might suggest why the rest of the world is concerned about that country and not just the USA.

I remember being taught something at school that was referred to as "the birds and the bees" although it wasn't really about either of them. "The birds and the bats?" Sounds like a variation that I don't really want to know about.

Struggling to find a thread or a restaurant? You're not being very helpful. I recall a friend of a friend who mentioned a restaurant somewhere that was quite nice. If anybody wants to know more, I will see what I can do.

After Brexit, we don't need to bother with the world stage. We can have our own stage.

It is probably some EU directive that stops us sending children up chimneys nowadays. Interfering foreigners - be gone with you.

In addition to which, if you buy your components from a supplier that is also based in the EU, then the components will comply with EU regulations. If you buy a component from the UK, it might not comply and that could cause problems. Being outside the EU will create more red tape when dealing with the EU - not less.

Recently watched that film "Castaway" with Tom Hanks - although I have seen it before. Without wanting to give too much away, he finds himself on an island, nobody knows he is there and he endures a lot of hardship. The thing is - it could all have been solved so quickly and easily if he had just thought about it. He could simply have had a vote to leave - "I vote to leave this island, any objections" - and that would it - job done. .. or am I missing something?

The people of Korea have been the victims of the power politics of bigger countries. They talk about forums such as 4+2 meaning North Korea and South Korea, as well as Japan, Russia, America and China. I can easily imagine Koreans describing that as Korea and the four b*****ds for the simple reason that these are four countries responsible for where Korea is now. If it was not for these four countries - Korea - North or South - would probably be a place you would see mentioned in the Travel section of the newspapers and seldom anywhere else. (Such as other places like Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia where the situation was worse than it is now.) There is no doubt in my mind that North Korea is a pretty horrible place and I have read plenty of books of people who have escaped, as well as disillusioned foregigners who were curious to see what it was like but quickly discovered it was not that great. I can't see an instant solution because those in charge don't want to give a comfortable for a prison cell in The Hague. Obviously, the real solution will require somebody of vision who really wants to make life better for all the Korean people. That certainly isn't true of anyone in the North Korean leadership or China or Russia and you would simply have to be out of your mind to think it might be Donald Trump - who is just playing to his own support.

A compromise

True. I recall explaining to someone that "Fit like loon" is just somebody asking how you are. To which, I was then asked "And how should you reply?" I think that bi-lingual signs should be used to reflect that a place was bi-lingual - even if it is less so now. If that meant English and some other language - then the sign should be that other language. Places like Peterhead, Fraserburgh, Pitsligo, Gardenstown and elsewhere in the North East all have Doric names that have been used in the past and possibly in the present. It makes more sense to use those authentic names and not Gaelic names that the natives have never used.

I am sure there have been some tourists who wanted a taxi to the airport. "Which one?" "Port Adhair. I think I saw a sign. Yes. That's the one we want."

I think there is a point having Gaelic signs in those parts of Scotland where historically people spoke Gaelic. However, that is not everywhere. It would make more sense to have the Doric name for places in the North East where Doric was more commonly spoken than Gaelic.

A lot of mountains have Gaelic names but often these translate to big hill, small hill, speckled hill and so on. I recall one OS map that seemed to have 27 mountains that were called Beinn Bhreac. I was told a story of one mapmaker going to Skye and asking the locals in the pub what the Gaelic name was for some of the mountains nearby. Apparently some of the answers were fairly obscene but he was not to know. Needless to say the published map became a limited first edition. Not sure if this story is true but it sounds good.

We should also appreciate that the Royal Family is responsible for lots of tourists coming here. After all, France does not have a king or queen and does Paris get lots of tourists - I ask you. Uh oh. Maybe somebody can explain this better than me.

Does that mean we can all do the same? "Prince of Pyongyang" or "Czar of Chicago" sound pretty good - unless they have already been taken.

"Air Miles Andy". Are you referring to the Earl of Inverness? I bet there are people in Dumbarton who are feeling equally miserable now!

.. and yet they do a splendid job as ambassadors to the world encouraging other countries to buy British. Come on, wouldn't you be sorely tempted to buy half a dozen British made fighter jets if a member of the Royal Family suggested that you should?

Oh shit. The recorder didn't record anything. I missed the whole thing. Did anything happen?