When I'm 64

[jehovah]

Not one mention, until now, that it was 64 years ago today that America dropped an atom bomb on a formerly pristine Japanese town called Hiroshima and killed, instantly, thousands of people, men women and children. Many still suffer from injuries suffered on that day and since.

Two days later they dropped another on Nagasaki, also not an industrial target, with the same loss of life.

The largest and worst war crime of all time.

History channel tonight at 9.

[Mutley]

The largest and worst war crime of all time.

 

Paging Rog...

 

/Pulls up chair

[bluemonday]

It could be argued that the bombs brought the war to an end and avoided a prolonged conventional invasion of Japan along with the resultant great loss of life on both sides.

 

Targeting of civilians was deemed acceptable by both sides.

 

Not a justification to the act but a counterpoint to the 'war crime' issue.

 

ETA

 

Also would the Germans or the Japanese have shown such reticence to deploy similar weapons if they had them?

I think not.

 

Hard times, hard decisions.

 

You can't rewrite the past and what was done, only learn the lessons of history.

[manshimajin]

The Hiroshima 'Peace Site'

 

It maybe timely that this is the day that Harry Patch was buried:

The anti-war song Where Have All The Flowers Gone was sung by 15-year-old Folasade-Nelleke Lapido, head chorister at Wells Cathedral. The song was chosen by Mr Patch's family to reflect his feelings on the futility of war.

Having lived and worked in Japan I have very mixed views about this.

 

WW II was particularly savage and cruel in Asia and the Pacific (mind you what war isn't?).

 

These awful events need to placed alongside the Rape of Nanking, the horrific atrocities in Manila, comfort women, treatment of POWs, fire bombing raids on Japanese cities that killed more people than the A bombs, the intention of some Japanese army officer to stage a coup d'etat to continue the war, the failure by the Allies to take many Japanese prisoners etc etc...

 

Many Japanese I know acknowledge that successive Japanese governments have avoided acceptance of any responsibility and feel shamed by this and by the lack of any apology to their victims. They are also concerned by the very selective nature of history books used in schools - and the physical attacks on authors who have attempted to write histories that include any comment that Japan might have some responsibility for what happened.

 

It is natural to judge decisions with the benefit of hindsight. I am sure that President Truman saw dropping the bombs as the lesser of two evils and felt that it would end the war and overall save lives.

 

I also feel that as always it is the individual people who suffer - and continue to suffer - not those who were in power (though as in Germany a number of Japanese war criminals were executed after the war).

 

No easy answer, but Hiroshima and Nagasaki were part of a whole chapter of horrors inflicted by both sides on each other. IMO they should be viewed in that context.

[P.K.]

You have to put it in perspective although it can only really be estimated. Japanese civilians killed in total amounted to about the same as the Chinese civilians killed in just the infamous Rape of Nanking alone. Never mind the millions of other Chinese civilians murdered by the Japanese. Total Japanese losses were about 2 million with Russia losing about ten times that number.

 

I find it very strange that anyone could possibly think that the US use of atomic weapons could be anything other than common sense. The Japanese attacked the US so why should the US suffer appalling casualties in a ground assault when they didn't have to? A war crime - you've got to be having a laugh!

[gazza]

The largest and worst war crime of all time.

 

so u woulden call Auschwitz that then

[jehovah]

The largest and worst war crime of all time.

 

so u woulden call Auschwitz that then

Obviously not, and anyone with any concept of evil and unexplainable vengeance would understand why.

Is it just coincidence that Russia declared war on Japan on the very same day the second experimental bomb was dropped on Nagasaki?

Who is it that writes the history?

 

(Auschwitz was a small facility compared to some other camps, so no prizes there)

[Gilligan]

With the first fleeting thought, I would think that America is an asshole for droping such a huge bomb, but listening to reason, and weighing up the points, it would seem that the bomb was the best option.

[Albert Tatlock]

I think Japan would have fought to the last man, woman and child. The bomb was the least worst option IMO, and I think, saved many allied lives.

 

You also have to think that Hirshima and Nagasaki serve as reminders as to what the bombs can actually do. I think this has greatly added to the deterrent effect i.e. if they had not been used and had those visible and memorable consequences, some fuckwit politician would have by now ordered their use somewhere else.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

With the first fleeting thought, I would think that America is an asshole for droping such a huge bomb, but listening to reason, and weighing up the points, it would seem that the bomb was the best option.

 

And I suppose it was, in the sense that this is a war of nation states, of governments and elites who act 'selfishly' to further or protect their own interests. What is better from the American point of view? Many thousands of American dead or many thousands of Japanese? What costs more? Who comes out best in the end?

 

To murder thousands of civilians and allow many more to suffer long-term illnesses is disgusting. The only 'right' thing in this war was that the consequences of defeating these countries was that Nazi, Italian fascist, and Japanism militarism was ended.

 

But what of the Soviet Regime? That regime was just as bad as Nazi Germany, yet they this country was applauded as a valued ally throughout the war and sometime afterwards.

 

I think it is a little difficult to talk of the morality when it is considered what actions ALL the belligerents took against their 'own' people and others.

[gazza]

With the first fleeting thought, I would think that America is an asshole for droping such a huge bomb, but listening to reason, and weighing up the points, it would seem that the bomb was the best option.

 

And I suppose it was, in the sense that this is a war of nation states, of governments and elites who act 'selfishly' to further or protect their own interests. What is better from the American point of view? Many thousands of American dead or many thousands of Japanese? What costs more? Who comes out best in the end?

 

 

not to forget to protect us as well,

 

japen brought it on them selfs,

thay diden have to enter the war, but thay thought thay could take advantage of the usa at that time

[manshimajin]

Skyped a Japanese friend last night and discussed this. She is still concerned about the right wing there who are blind to what happened in the war.

 

Her hope is that people will learn lessons from the dropping of the bombs - in particular the lesson that suffering doesn't end for many ordinary people with the bomb exploding. Many people who were children at the time are still dying each year from cancer caused by the atomic radiation caused by the blasts.

 

She is one of my friends who wish that Japan had a more open discussion about its role in WW II and its impact on other countries. She also agrees with Albert that the military would have pursued the war relentlessly as they thought that they could win the land war in Japan if it had happened - irrespective of casualties. In her view the bomb forced the Emperor to end the war - and that it was only his word that could do it.

[Vulgarian]

The largest and worst war crime of all time.

 

No, on the scale of destructive acts commited in war time, the atomic bombings rate fairly low in terms of deaths.

 

No easy answer, but Hiroshima and Nagasaki were part of a whole chapter of horrors inflicted by both sides on each other. IMO they should be viewed in that context.

 

Yeah, that's the important thing to remember. From an absolute perspective the whole business was deplorable, but relative to other things it was probably the least destructive of the possible outcomes.

 

But what of the Soviet Regime? That regime was just as bad as Nazi Germany, yet they this country was applauded as a valued ally throughout the war and sometime afterwards.

 

Britain and America were aware that the Soviet regime was far from ideal, but they formed an alliance out of necessity more than anything else. During the war the soviets were valuable in fighting the nazis, and afterwards all sides were too exhausted to fight. It was an uneasy alliance a the best of times, and that carried over into the Cold War.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

not to forget to protect us as well,

 

Well yes, this was true in WW2

 

japen brought it on them selfs,

thay diden have to enter the war, but thay thought thay could take advantage of the usa at that time

 

Yes they did bring it on themselves, but they didn't really enter the war, they started their own. The 'Pacific War' was quite distinct from that in Europe.

 

Britain and America were aware that the Soviet regime was far from ideal, but they formed an alliance out of necessity more than anything else. During the war the soviets were valuable in fighting the nazis, and afterwards all sides were too exhausted to fight. It was an uneasy alliance a the best of times, and that carried over into the Cold War.

 

Oh I quite understand the basis of the alliance. But in mentioning the Soviet Union being far from ideal, I am specifically talking about deportations, GUlags, and aggression that the Soviet Union displayed which almost equals that of the Nazi Germany. If comparisons are important.

[Vulgarian]

Oh I quite understand the basis of the alliance. But in mentioning the Soviet Union being far from ideal, I am specifically talking about deportations, GUlags, and aggression that the Soviet Union displayed which almost equals that of the Nazi Germany. If comparisons are important.

 

If we're making comparisons, i'd actually say that soviet Russia under stalin was worse than the nazi regime for those reasons.