national

A-bomb victim's paper crane donated to WWII air base in Utah

8 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

8 Comments
Login to comment

I saw those paper cranes recently which is exibited in Hiroshima Peace Memorial Dome.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm sorry but i dont consider Japan a victim. We were at war and they were a lawful target. As inhumane as the weapon is, it was acceptable during that time. I dont want to get into a debate whether this weapon was justified or not, my only point is Japan wasnt a victim. Just two nations at war, one won and the other lost.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Japan itself was not a victim, the state got hijacked by retardieu military, the nation and not-so-smart majority blindly accepted it, guilty as charged. The victims were the innocent and not so civilians, who had to answer in tens thousands for what hundreds criminals were responsible for. There surely were soldiers amongst the victims, but most of them were children, mothers, old people who were diligently building the cities that were demolished. Dropping bomb on them without a doubt did speed up capitulation, but for-ever (or at least for the current century) justly stigmatized United States of America as a mass murderer, not only a soldier fighting for freedom of other nations. They, in two days, lowered themselves to the level of Japanese Nanking criminals and nazism-preaching occupants. Apologetic rhetoric of war crimes can go in circles, but civilians lost their lives when they did not have to. Justifying murder in any way is a crime. That was not self-defense either. Instead of trying to white-wash their pride as either American or Japanese, people are supposed to stand up to any attempt of repeating the history, not feel offended by what sins their grandfather did, but focused on preserving peace.

First World War was armies fighting armies. Second World War was nations eliminating nations.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Very touching. And another attempt at playing the sympathy-victimization card and attempting to make the U.S. feel guilty about using the atomic bomb. The focus is entirely on the horrible atomic bomb effects and not on the circumstances at the time, i.e., Japan and U.S. were at WAR at the time and nations will use whatever weapons available to WIN the war. There is compelling evidence that Japan was also pursuing an atomic bomb program and no doubt would have used it against the U.S. had they were successful in building it.

But let's not forget the root cause of the Pacific War that began with Japan waging an undeclared war throughout Asia, invading Manchuria in 1931, expanded their military territorial expansion throughout the mid-1930s, invaded China in 1937, culminating to attack on U.S. Pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor in 1941, thus bringing the U.S. into the Pacific war.

Another thing: The atomic bomb, despite the anti-U.S. revisionists claims, was NOT developed to be originally used against Japan. In 1939, Albert Einstein wrote a letter to then-President Franklin Roosevelt warning that Nazi Germany was making advances in nuclear research and could potentially develop a very, very powerful bomb that could destroy a city. Thus, Roosevelt authorized the Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb before Germany developed the atomic bomb and use it against Nazi Germany. But Germany surrendered in May 1945 before the U.S. atomic bomb was ready for testing in July 1945. At that time, the Pacific war was still raging with Japan showing no signs or willingness to surrender.

The reality is that the seeds of war are everywhere, the conflicts of interests are real and deep and will not be resolved with pious platitudes and paper cranes. The best we can hope for is a precarious balance of power among nations capable of waging total war while smaller wars (fought with conventional weapons) break out here and there, hopefully not escalating to full-scale global war.

In actuality, nuclear weapons have made it possible to avoid another World War between the U.S., Soviet Union and China and encouraged World Peace by making such a war unthinkable, unfightable and unwinnable. Abolishing nuclear weapons will once again place reliance on conventional weapons, i.e., non-nuclear, and will have the opposite effect in making Total War thinkable once again.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Absolutely she was a viciim: Of Japan’s folly.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

In war, there are no winners. There is only tragedy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I won't debate as I don't know enough on the subject, and this period of history is way complicated. But I don't think anything during WWII was justifiable, including what was done to the losing side. Anyway, we can't remake history, just learn from it.

@Halwick

I don't agree with what you wrote last : there has been countless wars in history, a lot of small conflicts and big ones in the middle. What changed is just the technology.

And I don't think at all that we are safer now because of atomic bombs : it just takes one crazy person to make the decision.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@Bintaro, et al,

I agree with you that there has been countless wars in history. What most fail to realize is those wars have been fought with conventional non-nuclear weapons and those same conventional weapons make war thinkable and allowable.

Now I ask you, why has there NEVER been a total all out war between the U.S., Russia and China after 1945? Why have they never risked attacking one another?

Russia, China and U.S have nuclear weapons and those nuclear weapons have made total war or even the threat of military action against each other unthinkable. Russia, China and the U.S. will not risk attacking each other or else face mutually assured destruction. That's how "World Peace" between those countries have been maintained these past 72 years.

So let North Korea and Iran have their ICBMs and nuclear weapons. If they dares threaten to use them, hopefully U.S., Russia and China will simultaneously unleash their nuclear weapons against them. That should make them reconsider. If not, then their destruction is justified.

So you think nothing in WWII was justifiable? What's your solution to handling dictators like Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin and Tojo? Appeasement and surrender? Should Japan, South Korea and U.S. surrender and appease to North Korea's demands in order to avoid a war? Have we become frightened rabbits that we won't stand up to tin-plated dictators with evil and malicious ambitions?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites