30-strong Japan A-bomb delegation to collect Nobel Peace Prize

The two Atomic bombing of civilian is an eternal shame on the USA. The war was already lost for Japan at that time.

The recognition for the Japanese group has come late, but is a reminder of how savage we humans can be. Next year's Nobel Peace Prize is already in the bag and gift-wrapped with a yellow ribbon by Biden. Trump's ego won't be able to refuse this opportunity to grab the ultimate "deal-maker's" award. All that stands between him and Nobel "glory" is a single phone-call demanding, er, asking for a "favor". If Obama got one, so can Trump is surely all he wants for Christmas 2025.

Wasabi

The war was already lost for Japan at that time.

If you believe that then you've never talked to WWII era Japanese soldiers and civilians (including students) throughout the country who expected and were prepared to fight to the death against any Allied forces who invaded the main land. Operation Downfall, the final invasion, would have resulted in hundreds of thousands of Allied forces' lives and millions of Japanese military and civilian lives lost, all spared because the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs forced an unconditional surrender before Operation Downfall was executed. This alone makes the a-bombs a sensible, tactical, and life-saving choice, made for the greater good. I myself may not have existed as my mother was one of those youths trained in naginata and other weapons ready to fight invading Americans. I'm not at all saying that the introduction of atomic weapons was a good thing and their long-term impacts desirable, but because they were an option under the circumstances of August 1945 in a total war, their use was justified. To claim that a surrender in accordance with the Allies' demands was imminent is ludicrous and misinformed.

Well stated@USN. Over the years I have heard from several Japanese sources that the use of atomic weapons by the US gave Japan a face-saving way to end the war, which it would not have had if the war had continued using conventional armaments. This was of course alluded to in Emperor Showa's August 15 gyokuon hoso, when he specifically referred to a "cruel new bomb" being utilized by the enemy.

President Truman never could have survived as a politician if it had become known that he had the means of preventing US casualties -- tens of thousands projected for the planned landings on Kyushu and Honshu -- and not made use of it.

Never forget the biggest war crime in history..

TokyoLiving

Never forget the biggest war crime in history..

I am strongly against current American proxy wars and military adventures all over the globe, but at the same time I am not on board with the "war crime" claim about the nuclear bombings. Civilian areas were bombed all over the place by all participants (do Rotterdam, Manila, or Dresden ring any bell at all? Or Tokyo for that matter?).

This was a new technology, and while the Americans had the industrial muscle to actually build and deliver the device, the axis powers knew the physics and had similar projects running. Does anybody have any doubt that Hitler or the Japanese high command would have used the technology if had had it?

And about the claim of Japanese surrender, there was no indication at the time. The weapon was seen as war-ending, which it actually did. The people who with 20/20 hindsight today claim that Japan would have surrendered anyway are simply speculating.

There were plenty of war crimes committed, but this is not it.

Hidankyo should be preaching to their own government over the ratification of TPNW and having the LDP government recognize ICAN who also received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2017.

USNinJapan2, we all know that history is written by the winner and also it's help you sleep better at night. Keep telling you that the two nuclear bombs to civilian population was to end the war. Nothing can justified killing innocent and their children.

Winner writes the history so no war crime.

Wasabi

...we all know that history is written by the winner and also it's help you sleep better at night. Keep telling you that the two nuclear bombs to civilian population was to end the war. Nothing can justified killing innocent and their children.

Say what you will it's not propaganda when it's supported by the losing side. Go ask any Japanese who lived through the war whether they thought surrender was imminent in August 1945.

The survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have every right to demand a world without nuclear weapons, but in the face of today’s geopolitical realities, Japan must ask itself a tough question: Can it continue to rely solely on the U.S. for protection forever? For over 80 years, Japan has depended on the U.S. nuclear umbrella and restrained its own military potential under Article 9 of the constitution. While this was understandable post-WWII, the world has changed, and Japan’s position is more precarious than ever.

Russia, China, and North Korea—all nuclear-armed states—are increasingly hostile toward Japan. Russia regularly flexes its military in the Northern Territories, North Korea launches missiles over Japanese airspace, and China aggressively asserts claims over the Senkaku Islands while increasing its military presence in the region. These nations do not respect international law, and Japan can no longer afford to hide behind an idealistic constitutional clause.

Revoking Article 9 and building a robust self-defense force, including considering nuclear armament, isn’t about warmongering—it’s about ensuring Japan is never a victim again. No one wants another Hiroshima or Nagasaki, but nuclear weapons have become a deterrent against precisely that kind of devastation. Japan needs to face the reality that possessing a strong deterrent would not only protect its own sovereignty but also strengthen its role as a proactive ally to the U.S. in countering authoritarian regimes in the region.

The world is watching Japan, and it’s time to step out from the shadow of post-war constraints. By rewriting its constitution, Japan can finally become a true equal partner in securing peace and stability in East Asia. This isn’t about abandoning the lessons of history—it’s about making sure those lessons are never repeated.

Wasabi

Nothing can justified killing innocent and their children.

"Nothing can justified" this by any means, from clubs to knives to firebombs. Many more civilians were killed in WW2 by other means than the nuclear bombs.

"Nothing can justified" this by any means, from clubs to knives to firebombs. Many more civilians were killed in WW2 by other means than the nuclear bombs.

It doesn't even have to be during war

The Soviet Union's Great Purges and China's Cultural Revolution killed tens of millions - events that both countries keep trying to hide from

It's warcrime that just didn't happen during war

The argument or discussion about 'victors writing the history books' is an old cliche and doesn't apply to the atomic bombings. How about us in Japan rewriting out history books and playing the victim while conveniently ignoring the deaths of millions at the hands of our grandfathers then? Oh no, don't talk about that. Just focus on 4 days of the war. Anything before that doesn't count.

The two Atomic bombing of civilian is an eternal shame on the USA. The war was already lost for Japan at that time.

This is a completely ahistorical take that is totally contradicted by the Japanese high command at the time. The entire late war Japanese strategy relied on trying to inflict as many casualties on the American invasion force as possible in order to force favorable peace terms for Imperial Japan. Even looking at some of the most basic facts proves you wrong:

-If Japan had already thought the war lost, why didn’t they respond at all to the Potsdam Declaration?

-If Japan had already thought the war lost, why did they amass over 900,000 troops in Kyushu in preparation for the U.S. invasion

-If Japan had already thought the war lost why did Hirohito admit in both his surrender speech to then Japanese public and privately to Togo (according to his own testimony) that the deployment of the atomic bombs made the war un-winnable

You won’t be able to answer any of these questions because your entire premise isn’t based in any type of historical fact

Keep telling you that the two nuclear bombs to civilian population was to end the war. Nothing can justified killing innocent and their children.

Even within your own moral framework you’re contradicting yourself. You’re placing civilian lives as the upmost important thing to protect while simultaneously arguing the method of ending the war with the fewest amount of civilian casualties (the bombs) as immoral. An invasion, blockade, and any other means of forcing a surrender would have resulted in more civilian deaths than the bombs. You do realize the Japanese themselves dubbed the home island defense campaign as “the glorious death of 100,000,000”, right?

Life is a precious gift. Working for peace is a challenge second to none.

JboneInTheZone

You do realize the Japanese themselves dubbed the home island defense campaign as “the glorious death of 100,000,000”, right?

I did not know this, but it sounds believable. Very similar to Hitlers determination to take the whole country down with him.

The whole nuclear bombing story is an ethical paradox, to which there there is no perfect solution-