Dangerous Trump will destroy American credibility. Fascism is Trumpziism

Opinion echo column published in the Los Angeles Times: Trump 1.0 made some world leaders laugh. Trump 2.0 terrifies them. By Jackie Calmes. 

Not a joke, as President Joe Biden might say. I’m talking about our country: America is no joke, no matter how many times Donald Trump claims it is.

One sign of international trepidation over a second Trump administration: an effigy of the former president, with an American flag swastika, decorated a float in a parade in Germany in February.

One of his most obnoxious lies at every rally and in most interviews is his contention that, with Biden as president, a disrespectful world is laughing at us. 

Trump was at it again last week, at his most recent rally in Green Bay, Wis., claiming the United States is a global laughingstock.

Obviously Trumpzi has a short term memorydisorder because he has been laughed at for over a decade.  

“Joe Biden is not respected and Joe Biden is not feared” among the world’s nations, he told his fawning crowd. But once he, Trump, is reelected, “America will soon be respected again, very quickly respected, like never before.”

Like virtually all Trumpisms, this one is demonstrably false.

“Throughout Donald Trump’s presidency, publics around the world held the United States in low regard,” the Pew Research Center reported soon after he left office. Its 2020 survey found that among 13 allied nations, the share of people who had a favorable view of America was the lowest it had been in the two decades since Pew began asking the question. Good feelings toward the United States rebounded after Biden took office and remained favorable by a 2-to-1 ratio last year.

It’s almost laughable, Trump’s projection of his own unpopularity onto Biden. Except that too many Americans believe him.

As for foreign leaders, they’re not laughing at the United States or Trump. They’re openly fretting that the pro-authoritarian neo-isolationist whose crude credo is “America First” could return to power. Their agita is pretty astounding, really.

They don’t respect Trump at all, though they do fear him — the way you’d fear a madman at the nuclear button. President Nixon sought leverage by making foreign counterparts think he was unstable; Trump actually is unstable. Foreign diplomats and some leaders don’t even mask their anxiety. They mostly speak anonymously, in case he actually regains power, but they speak nonetheless, ignoring norms against opining about another country’s election.

Trump’s former national security advisor John Bolton has said repeatedly that even the autocrats Trump admires — Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, Kim Jong Un, among others — “think he’s a laughing fool.”

The Japanese have a phrase for their Trump trepidation, the Washington Post reported ahead of this week’s state visit by Prime Minister Fumio Kishida. “ ‘Moshi-tora,’ ” according to the Post reporter in Tokyo, “encapsulates the mild panic brewing here. … It’s a shorthand for: What if Donald Trump wins?”

“It makes us nervous,” former Japanese lawmaker Mieko Nakabayashi told the Post. “We have to start thinking. That is the true purpose of ‘moshi-tora’: alarming ourselves to think about the unthinkable.”

Americans know the feeling.

Meanwhile, the Japanese edition of Newsweek had a cover drawing of Trump as a bloody, frightening apparition, calling to mind either villain or vampire.

On the sidelines at NATO’s 75th birthday commemoration last week in Brussels, attendees commiserated about a potential Trump 2.0, and talked about “Trump-proofing” the alliance generally and support for Ukraine specifically. How could they not after Trump crowed at a MAGA rally in February that he would encourage the Russians “to do whatever the hell they want” to NATO-member countries that in his view aren’t spending enough on their own defense?

Trump’s claim that the world is laughing at us isn’t unique to Biden’s era. He’s been babbling that for years, since the administration of Republicans’ sainted Ronald Reagan. But he gets the target wrong. When the world has laughed at our expense, it was laughing, literally, at Trump.

Cue the blooper reels. In 2018, then-President Trump was the joke at the United Nations General Assembly when he began his address by boasting that he’d achieved more in two years than any president in U.S. history. The delegates burst into guffaws.😁😅😆 In 2019, the leaders of Britain, France, Canada and the Netherlands, along with Britain’s Princess Anne, were captured on a hot mic mocking Trump over cocktails during a NATO summit. Trump packed up and flew home — in time, had he wanted, to see the “Saturday Night Live” skit lampooning him as the goofball shunned by the cool kids in the NATO cafeteria.

Such yuks at Trump’s expense were easier then — before January 6, Ukraine  and his many former advisors’ post-presidency alarms about the danger he poses should he get back in the White House. Experience is a teacher: Trump is no longer a laughing matter.
Friendly nations, including Japan, reliant for more than seven decades on a rules-based system of alliances led by the United States, justifiably worry that a reelected Trump will succeed at breaking those alliances. They fear a trade war and economic tremors from his promised tariffs. They expect he’d abandon Ukraine, demanding that it cede Crimea and the Donbas region to Russia and thereby encouraging Putin’s expansionism in Europe. 

They sweat his odd affinity for Xi in China and Kim in North Korea, as the two men threaten neighbors who count on the United States to be a counterweight.

Gun violence makes all Americans less safe- Red Flag Laws Now!

In most of the world, going to the wrong house is not a deadly risk.
Echo opinion by Nickolas Kristof in The New York Times:

Delusional to Think Having a Gun in the Home Makes Us Safer

But in the United States it is, because we’re awash in an estimated 450 million guns and suffer from a mass delusion that a gun in the home makes us safer.

We’re caught in a spiral in which perceptions of rising crime lead more people to purchase firearms — about 60 million guns have been sold in the United States just since 2020 — and this in turn leads to more gun violence, which leads to more fear and gun purchases …. You get the idea.

So we have recent tragedies:

— In Kansas City, Mo., a Black 16-year-old was shot twice, in the forehead and an arm, when he went to the wrong house to pick up his younger brothers; he is recovering from a traumatic brain injury. The 84-year-old white man who, according to the prosecutor, shot him through a glass front door has been charged with first-degree assault; the man said he thought the boy was breaking into his home.

— In upstate New York, a 20-year-old woman was killed when she and several friends drove to the wrong address. As their car was turning around to leave, the homeowner allegedly fired his gun and struck her.

— In Texas, two cheerleaders were shot after one of them mistakenly got into the wrong car in a parking lot. One of the girls, age 18, was hit in the back and a leg and taken by helicopter to a hospital; she was initially reported to be in critical condition.

Elsewhere, brutes send their victims to the E.R.; in America, they send them to their graves.

Foreigners admire our popular culture, our technology, our lifestyle, but are bewildered by our refusal to rein in guns.

In the 1990s when I was Tokyo bureau chief of The Times, Japanese people regularly spoke to me about a 1992 incident in which a 16-year-old Japanese exchange student, Yoshihiro Hattori, was shot dead in Louisiana after knocking on the wrong door. The homeowner said he thought the boy was a burglar and ordered him to “freeze”; Hattori perhaps didn’t understand “freeze” or misheard the man as saying “please.” In any case, the boy moved, and the man shot him with a .44 magnum.

In Japan, where fewer people are murdered with guns in a typical year than sometimes in a single mass shooting in America, the government later prepared a booklet for Japanese people traveling to the United States with helpful English travel phrases like “freeze” and “hands in the air.”

“We are more civilized,” a Japanese professor told The Times after the incident, and she had a point.

We’re not going to ban guns or eliminate gun deaths in America. But I’ve argued in a longer essay that common-sense gun measures could plausibly reduce the toll of gun deaths by one-third or more.

We can adopt universal background checks, safe storage requirements, a minimum age of 21 for private gun sales and an enforced ban on possession of guns by people with a history of stalking or violent misdemeanors. 

All states should adopt California’s successful experiment with background checks for buying ammunition- and, 

having instituted a number of smart gun measures, California now has a gun death rate 38 percent below the national average.

As I write this, I happen to be in Mississippi, which has a much more rigorous process to adopt a dog than to acquire a gun. Should it really be easier to buy an AR-15-style rifle than to adopt a Chihuahua?

Above all, we must challenge the misperception that a gun in the home makes people safer. Yes, on rare occasions, a gun can avert a crime. But researchers have found repeatedly that a gun in the house makes people more likely to be murdered, not less. “People living in homes with firearms have higher risks for dying by homicide,” according to a 2022 study in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

People may choose to have firearms for hunting or target practice or to protect livestock from predators (I live on a farm with guns), but given the elevated risk, personal safety is not a good reason to acquire a gun.

We might encourage homeowners who feel unsafe to get bear spray instead of a gun. As a backpacker, I carry bear spray in grizzly country because it’s more effective than a handgun at stopping one of these bears if it charges; the same may be true of stopping a home invader, and certainly the consequences of a mistake aren’t deadly.
Because of our complacency, the leading cause of death for children and teenagers in the United States is now gun violence, eclipsing vehicle crashes. In 2020, more than 4,300 young people died in America from firearms; the figure in the Netherlands for 2019 was two. At this rate, it will take a couple of millenniums for the Netherlands to lose as many kids to guns as we do annually.

We accept inconveniences when driving vehicles — seatbelts, infant seats, no one in the back of pickup trucks — because these can help us save lives. Why aren’t we similarly willing to accept safe storage or universal background checks for ammunition for the same reason?

I think of these young people shot simply because they went to the wrong place, and I think: If only we loved our children as much as we love our guns.

Donald Trump - speeches are regressive exercises

"...first (Trump) address to the United Nations General Assembly...called both 'terrifying' and 'delusional' by experts."

Obviously, Donald Trump speaks in abrupt 140 character Tweets. Regardless of how much he's advised against his use of Twitter, Donald Trump continues to provoke the media and to malign people with whom he disagrees, via "Tweets".  

For whatever period of time his misuse of power is allowed to continue, the legacy he leaves will forever be tainted by immaturely constructed Tweets.

Donald Trump's  incendiary speeches are failures

Yet, Trump's ineffective attempts to give statesman quality speeches are even more regressive than his tirades of juvenile Tweets.  Although Trump's campaign rallies ramble to his right wing extremist base, by using repetitive headline grabbing slogans, he is unable to rise to the challenge of giving a major leadership address. Indeed, Donald Trump's failed leadership is painfully evident when he vainly tries to communicate lofty concepts or to summon visionary ideals. 

Rather than advance his leadership goals, Donald Trump's speeches are regressive statements, whereby he painfully reveals how unprepared he is to unify allies or to inspire the human condition.

For example, following his speech to the United Nations, the headline "take-away" was this: "Trump says many portions of the world are going to hell".  This stupid statement is a waste of human energy.  It's something like a drunkard would say at 1 AM, while holding on to the closing bar.

Donald Trump gave his first address to the United Nations General Assembly, pushing for “sovereignty” in what has been called both “terrifying” and “delusional” by experts.

The President, sticking to prepared remarks as he spoke in front of the signature green marble of the UN Headquarters in New York, spoke primarily on his “America First” doctrine, North Korea, and Iran.

He said this emphasis of “sovereignty” was the basis for the international cooperation upon which the UN was founded and what made former President Woodrow Wilson and Truman's Marshall Plan - that aided reconstruction of Western Europe in the wake of World War II - a success.

Although all the experts The Independent spoke with agreed that it was a consistently Trump-esque speech - “it was more rhetorically repetitious than intellectually coherent” according to UN expert at the European Council of Foreign Relations Richard Gowan.

The words “sovereign” or “sovereignty” were mentioned at least 18 times in the nearly 40 minute speech as delivered.

His main message to member countries gathered also addressed his core base: “I will always put America first, just like you as the leaders of your countries will always - and should always - put your countries first.”

Mr Gowan said the speech was more catered toward appeasing the President’s base of supporters who have stuck to Mr Trump’s repeated campaign and early term remarks that the UN is full of elitists and “just a good time “just a club for people to get together, talk and have a good time”.

TJ Pempel, a political science professor at the University of California-Berkeley, echoed that statement, adding that the speech was “good for headlines” but not much else in terms of reducing global threats.

Anjali Dayal, an international security professor at Fordham University, said the speech was "terrifying" since it was such a drastic break from past US presidents, despite the fact that sovereignty is still a “cornerstone” of the UN.

She said the main difference is interpreting what respecting that sovereignty means.

“I don't think it was a standard hawkish Republican foreign policy speech, even though much of what Trump said called back to the John Bolton era at the UN,” referring to the controversial US representative under George W. Bush’s administration.
Mr Trump spoke extensively on two particular countries: North Korea and Iran, calling them a “depraved regime” and a “murderous regime,” respectively.

Ms Dayal said: “it's hard to square the idea of sovereignty as non-interference with his language on North Korea, Iran, and Venezuela.”

After North Korea conducted its sixth nuclear weapons test recently, developed a hydrogen bomb, and fired test missiles over Hokkaido, Japan - the Security Council unanimously voted to place the strictest-ever sanctions on the hermit kingdom.

Today Mr Trump said that should Pyongyang not cease with developing its nuclear arsenal or attacks a US territory or ally the US would have “no choice but to destroy North Korea”.

He said, referring to the mercurial Kim Jong-un, that “Rocket Man is on a suicide mission”.

This is not much of a change in policy as Dr Stephen Saideman, an expert at Canada’s Carleton University, pointed out.

However, what worried Human Rights Watch’s UN Deputy Director Akshaya Kumar was that he said it at the UN.

War with North Korea would be an “incredibly disproportionate response to punish innocent civilians for the [North Korean regime’s] actions,” Ms Kumar told The Independent.

Neil Bhatiya, a researcher at the Center for a New American Security, told The Independent that Mr Trump’s rhetoric today ignored the “necessity of cooperating with Beijing on sanctions against Pyongyang”.

Mr Trump’s comments do not appear to take into the account the ripple effect of his apparently fatalistic view towards military action, according to Mr Pempel.

“The new sanctions authorities granted to the President have to potential to incur significant financial costs for China-based firms, which could have wider effects for the global economy if, for example, U.S. sanctions target certain large Chinese banks,” noted Mr Bhatiya.

Any implementation will have to be done in coordination with major players like China.

At the same time, Mr Pempel said this speech was “good for headlines” but not really serving the grander purpose of actually reducing a North Korea threat.

He argued that Mr Trump’s language does not do anything to help encourage more cooperation from Russia and China - who joined the world to vote in the Security Council for the strictest-ever sanctions on Pyongyang.

“This is the time for…encouraging China...and sending quiet messages to North Korea about a willingness to talk.”

Instead, Mr Pempel said the speech helped Japan, who worries that the US will abandon them and get “too close” to China, but also puts ally South Korea in a “tough” position of wanting more dialogue along the lines of President Moon Jae-in’s “sunshine policy” and realizing the real need for a militarized Seoul.

Despite what seems like a fatalistic attitude towards using military action to quell the threat of the isolated and mercurial North Korean leadership, Mr Pempel thinks Defence Secretary James Mattis had very little to do with the speech.

“He is usually reluctant to start with, and stay with, comments about military action. He keeps it quietly in the background but emphasizes diplomacy,” Mr Pempel said of the President’s trusted military adviser.

Trump says the US will "totally destroy" North Korea, if necessary, in UN speech

Mr Gowan argued that despite the threat of using American military might against Pyongyang, he appeared to still want to talk it through with China and Russia, as evidenced by US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley’s continued work.

The most “disturbing” part of Mr Trump’s speech for Mr Gowan was about Iran.

Mr Trump said that the Iran nuclear deal, signed in 2015 to redesign and reduce the country’s nuclear framework, was an “embarrassment” for the US.

Elizabeth Rosenberg, a Senior Fellow at the Center for New American Security, said that, at the very least, Trump’s words on Iran were “consistent” because it “reinforced the impression that he plans to take action to undermine the deal.” (MaineWriter: Another regressive statement, because Donald Trump has yet to deliver on his bellicose threats. Even his wasted bombing of the Syrian air field, to retaliate against Assad's assault on his own people, was merely a waste of time. Rather, it was a discharge of expensive old Tomahawk missiles.)

Ahead of the speech, a senior White House official said the goal was to separate the suffering of the Iranian people from the regime of Iran.

Mr Gowan said that “the idea that the Iranian people are going to rise up against their government because Trump gave a hectoring speech at the UN is delusional.”

Mr Trump “mixing the accusations towards the "murderous regime", its behaviour in the region, with what should be deemed a technical agreement the international community negotiated over more than 12 years” shows that this administration does not really separate the two, Dr Aniseh Bassiri Tabrizi, a Research Fellow at the Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies, told The Independent.Trump's America First doctrine will destroy the United Nations
North Korea diplomacy ‘exhausted’, says top US official

In Mr Trump also calling it "one of the worst" international pacts ever made, Ms Tabrizi said the administration undermines all the partners who worked on the deal during both the Bush and Obama administrations as well as “ignor[ing] the wishes of the Iranian people, who elected the current president twice because they believed a nuclear deal...was the best way to improve their living standards” since it lifted sanctions.

His rhetoric about the “rogue state” that has a “false guise of democracy” may be welcomed by his base, but ultimately does not aid in getting a better deal according to Ms Rosenberg.

It is “tremendously unhelpful with expanding arms controls of Iran” since there is less ally consensus on Iran’s non-nuclear activities.

Overall, several world leaders (except for Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu who was full of praise), agreed with Swedish Foreign Minister Margot Wallstrom who said to the BBC: 

"It was the wrong speech, at the wrong time, to the wrong audience.”

(MaineWriter- Donald Trump's "failed leadership" is painfully exposed in his failed speeches.)

Hiroshima remembered and memorialized

Nuclear football never far from US president, even in Hiroshima
Rachel Maddow explains what the nuclear football is, and its corresponding "biscuit" and notes that when President Barack Obama makes his historic visit to Hiroshima, Japan, the nuclear football will not be far from hand. Excellent commentary at this link:  http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/nuclear-football-never-far-from-us-president-693905987804

The Hiroshima Peace Memorial (Genbaku Dome) was the only structure left standing in the area where the first atomic bomb exploded on 6 August 1945. Through the efforts of many people, including those of the city of Hiroshima, it has been preserved in the same state as immediately after the bombing. Not only is it a stark and powerful symbol of the most destructive force ever created by humankind; it also expresses the hope for world peace and the ultimate elimination of all nuclear weapons.

Hiroshima (CNN)- Barack Obama, on Friday, became the first sitting U.S. president to visit Hiroshima, where he called for a "world without nuclear weapons" during his remarks at the city's Peace Memorial Park.

Obama said that "71 years ago on a bright, cloudless morning, death fell from the sky and the world was changed."

"A flash of light and a wall of fire destroyed a city, and demonstrated that mankind possessed the means to destroy itself," the President added during his address at the site of the first nuclear bombing.

Obama was not expected to apologize for the U.S. action to hasten the end of World War II and he did not during his 20-minute-long remarks.

"Why do we come to this place, to Hiroshima? We come to ponder the terrible forces unleashed in the not so distant past. We come to mourn the dead ... their souls speak to us and ask us to look inward. 

To take stock of who we are and what we might become."
In the Hiroshima museum's guest book before his speech, the President wrote that he hoped the world will "find the courage, together, to spread peace, and pursue a world without nuclear weapons.‎"

(We can only pray for this courage to prevail.)

History:  The United States with the consent of .....

The United States, with the consent of the United Kingdom as laid down in the Quebec Agreement, dropped nuclear weaponson the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, during the final stage of World War II. The two bombings, which killed at least 129,000 people, remain the only use of nuclear weapons for warfare in history.

In the final year of the war, the Allies prepared for what was anticipated to be a very costly invasion of the Japanese mainland. 

This was preceded by a U.S. firebombing campaign that obliterated many Japanese cities. 

The war in Europe had concluded when Nazi Germany signed its instrument of surrender on May 8, 1945. 

The Japanese, facing the same fate, refused to accept the Allies' demands for unconditional surrender and the Pacific War continued. Together with the United Kingdom andChina, the United States called for the unconditional surrender of the Japanese armed forces in the Potsdam Declaration on July 26, 1945—the alternative being "prompt and utter destruction". The Japanese response to this ultimatum was to ignore it.

In July 1945, the Allied Manhattan Project successfully detonated an atomic bomb in the New Mexico desert and by August had produced atomic weapons based on two alternate designs. 

The 509th Composite Group of the United States Army Air Forces was equipped with the specialized Silverplate version of the Boeing B-29 Superfortress, that could deliver them from Tinian in the Mariana Islands.

On August 6, the U.S. dropped a uranium gun-type atomic bomb (Little Boy) on the city of Hiroshima. American President Harry S. Truman called for Japan's surrender 16 hours later, warning them to "expect a rain of ruin from the air, the like of which has never been seen on this earth". Three days later, on August 9, the U.S. dropped a plutonium implosion-type bomb (Fat Man) on the city of Nagasaki. Within the first two to four months of the bombings, the acute effects of the atomic bombings killed 90,000–146,000 people in Hiroshima and 39,000–80,000 in Nagasaki; roughly half of the deaths in each city occurred on the first day. During the following months, large numbers died from the effect of burns, radiation sickness, and other injuries, compounded by illness and malnutrition. In both cities, most of the dead were civilians, although Hiroshima had a sizable military garrison.

On August 15, six days after the bombing of Nagasaki and the Soviet Union's declaration of war, Japan announced its surrender to the Allies. On September 2, it signed the instrument of surrender, effectively ending World War II. The bombings' role in Japan's surrender and their ethical justification are still debated.

World leaders worry about erratic Donald Trump ignorance at G7 in Japan

Donald Trump cannot lead the free world when the international community is concerned about his difficult and erratic behavior.

President Barack Obama explained Donald Trump as a "surprise" Republican nominee.  In fact, Republicans have a patriotic responsibility to nominate a candidate who is qualified to run for leader of the free world.

Rattling World Leaders

Ask about the reaction of world leaders to Trump, Obama said: “The world pays attention to the US elections ... I think it is fair to say that they are surprised by the Republican nominee.

“They are not sure how seriously to take some of his pronouncements, but they are rattled by him and for good reason, because a lot of the proposals that he has made display either ignorance of world affairs or a cavalier attitude or an interest in getting tweets and headlines instead of actually think through what it it that is required to keep America safe and secure and prosperous, and what’s required to keep the world on an even keel.”
JAPAN- President Barack Obama said foreign leaders are “rattled” by Donald Trump and have good reason to be, as he accused the presumptive Republican presidential nominee of ignorance about world affairs.

Weighing in on the Democratic race to replace him, Obama also downplayed concerns that the protracted fight between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders is hurting his party’s chances, brushing off their escalating attacks as the inevitable “grumpiness” of a primary campaign.

President Obama’s assessment of the presidential campaign came on the sidelines of a G7 summit in Japan, the latest world gathering to be coloured by global concerns about Trump. 

Obama said foreign leaders at the conference were “surprised by the Republican nominee” and unsure how seriously to take his pronouncements.

“They are rattled by it and for good reason,” Obama said. “Because a lot of the proposals he has made display either ignorance of world affairs, or a cavalier attitude, or an interest in getting tweets and headlines.”

In a news conference, Obama brushed off calls for Sanders and Clinton to quickly resolve the primary to allow Democrats to unite behind one candidate, arguing that unlike the Republicans, this year’s Democratic candidates were not that ideologically divided. He likened the Clinton-Sanders campaign battle to the one he waged with Clinton in 2008.

“During primaries, people get a little grumpy with each other. Somebody’s supporter pops off and there’s a certain buildup of aggravation,” Obama said. “Every little speed bump, conflict trash-talking that takes place is elevated.”

He urged both Democratic candidates to “try to stick to the issues”, adding that the grumpiness often stemmed from voters’ frustration when the campaign instead became dominated by talk about “personalities and character”.

Beautiful Country Devastated - Post Earthquake Japan

Visitors to Japan "pre" last week's horrific earthquake and resulting tsunami waves were impressed by the country's organized beauty. Guests were treated to an orderly country.  People were polite to a fault. they were graciously efficient with time, resources, transpiration and energy.

Japan is the only country in the world to endure and recover from two attacks with nuclear bombs at the end of World War II.  It is completely unfair for this nation consisting of small group of islands to undergo yet another series of catastrophic events, this time by the destructive brutal forces of earth's moving plates along the Pacific Ocean's rim.

We visited Japan as a US military family in the 1970's, traveling to Tachikowa, Tokyo and Kamakura.  Just last October 2010 we visited the old capital city of Kyoto during our month long Asian tour.  My husband and I love Japan for it's simplistic beauty and friendly people.

Obviously, I join the people of the world in praying for the Japanese who are desperate in the face of a triple disaster, the 9.0 earthquake, the resulting force of the tsunami waves and now the breakdown of the country's nuclear power plants. Triple tragedies have happened in a country best prepared to withstand the powerfully significant events, yet the compounded forces of all of them occurring at the same time are overwhelming a grieving nation.  Thankfully, the US military is among the first disaster aid teams on the scene to offer assistance to the population who are dealing with water, food and power shortages.

I'm glad to say I've had the opportunity to visit Japan before March 10, 2011.  There is no doubt the Japanese will eventually recover from the combination natural and man made nuclear disasters now demoralizing the country's people.

Unfortunately, the Japan I will remember may not be the same during my lifetime.  As for the nuclear power plants, the double edged sword of risky energy sources driving Japan's economic success, I doubt these will ever again be functional, but I'm certainly not a scientist.

Worse, the nuclear waste these plants leave behind in the wake of the meltdowns will be a pox on the sculptured Japanese landscape for at least a generation, probably longer.

Our hearts pour out to the Japanese people who are faced with challenges beyond comprehension as the world watches the events of March 10, 2011 continue to unfold.   Thank you US military for being there, helping the Japanese when you can.  Although there is no way to mitigate the destruction of the triple earthquake disasters, our US military presence is symbolic of caring Americans who pray for Japan's well being.