Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Jack's avatar

Pretty confident I was going to be aware of enough evidence for the presumed conclusion to read this version, so I did. I did *not* expect the 1945 army document to be so reasonably accurate. I was just curious to see what language was used. I really, really did not expect to find it so compelling to read (mainly after the first page). What a document. Damn.

Expand full comment
Jack's avatar

I know what you mean. The relative completeness of it really strikes me. Not historical completeness obviously, but that here we are 80 years later on the spot, and this little pamphlet still hits all the critical things they need to know in this moment, just add it was intended to.

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts