national

Hiroshima marks anniversary of atomic bombing

89 Comments

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

© 2014 AFP

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

89 Comments
Login to comment

The lead photo - unintentionally, of course, resembles a mushroom cloud.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Today we just remember and hope it never happens again!

18 ( +21 / -3 )

It's time to look towards the future.

It's unfortunate but this had to be done. There are some things that happened in history that should not be repeated but I can't say the same for nuclear weapons.

Japan never again attack American soil. Hawaii is part of America. I would gladly support the use of such weapons if any nation threatens to kill countless Americans.

-29 ( +7 / -36 )

Today we just remember and hope it never happens again!

We better do a hell of a lot more than that. Its obvious that plenty of people here think killing innocent civilians is perfectly fine if you have an end game in mind.

10 ( +15 / -5 )

Not judging the past but there is no justification to use a nuclear bomb, too many innocent casualties. Let's hope we will never have to witness it again.

10 ( +13 / -3 )

I hope no other cities anywhere ever get nuked, and I also hope that all Japanese thoroughly understand what led up to the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atom-bombings, Japanese Imperial Army aggression and atrocities.

3 ( +13 / -10 )

Democracies do not go to war against each other. let us hope the spread of democracy continues in the world, and war can become a thing of the past.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Very sad indeed, catch 22, more human life would have died should they not dropped the bombs but then again who wants to see this type of destruction.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

I recommend everyone take the opportunity to visit Hiroshima. There really is no substitute for seeing that building with your own eyes. The experience was much more powerful than I expected.

10 ( +12 / -2 )

In that video I can see at least 18 people in the room for the meeting to "discuss" this, we are talking about 116 cases of stupid people that how to carry or hold babies?

How many babies have died from not being in a car seat since 2009?

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Those who were in Nagasaki and Hiroshima when the bombs were dropped were the victims of the war of aggression launched by the Imperial Japanese Army and also the first victims in the Cold War era. The pictures of dead women and children in Hiroshima affect me as deeply as any other human being, but the Japanese have learned that to use aggression and to risk all out war is unacceptable. And the possibility of such destruction after Hiroshima and Nagasaki is what stopped the world from engaging in such foolish endeavors again. In war, nothing is sacred and this is the lesson everyone must learn.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

@Crush Them

We better do a hell of a lot more than that. Its obvious that plenty of people here think killing innocent civilians is perfectly fine if you have an end game in mind.

Today is just for remembering the rest of the time we can do more!

9 ( +11 / -2 )

FPSRussia, your comment is vulgar and immoral. It was incredibly wrong for the americans to do that back then and cowardice too. They killed thousands of innocent people too in the process and the Japanese suffered long-term after the bombing. The american's had no right to use an atomic bomb on them. They didn't dare try that with the Germans so why with the Japanese?? The German's were a bigger threat.

1 ( +10 / -9 )

Today is just for remembering the rest of the time we can do more!

But it should also be about educating future generations so this horrific event doesn't happen again.

Anyone else have to listen to black vans all day?

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

bass4funk, so when anyone attacks America it's acceptable for America to respond with an atomic bomb? Don't try to excuse the use of a nuclear weapons, even if it was in the past. It was wrong to be used then. They could have had war with the Japanese the old fashion way like they did with the Germans until they surrendered.

0 ( +9 / -9 )

@kaal

so when anyone attacks America it's acceptable for America to respond with an atomic bomb?

In the worst case scenario and it got to the point where that would be the final option for the very survival of the nation, then so be it.

Don't try to excuse the use of a nuclear weapons, even if it was in the past.

I look at it as a good and bad thing. I'm not the kind of person that would make an excuse, just telling you straight.

It was wrong to be used then.

As it was wrong for Japan to have attacked the US. We both agree on something.

They could have had war with the Japanese the old fashion way like they did with the Germans until they surrendered.

Apparently, you really don't understand how wars are fought. You fight to win by any means necessary and if the shoe were on the other foot, don't think for a second the Japanese would not have done the same. Kaal, please, keep it real.

-3 ( +8 / -11 )

Abe said there will be a war with China. If there is a war, there is the possible to use A-bomb.

And China and Japan are accumulating hates againest each other.

Another question is why the USA dropped the two A-bombs? and why the pilots that worked for the mission said they never regret for having done this?

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

bass4funk, you're no military expert lol if countless innocent people that have nothing to do with a war are killed in the process then it is a problem. In your case, if world war 3 occurred every country has the right to attack every other with nuclear weapons (which will eventually result in the extinction of humans, no doubt about that). I think you need to think more realistically about the consequence of nuclear weapons. It's not a last resort, more like submitting to weakness of skill and strategy and taking the dumbest barbaric action possible and putting innocent people in harms way.

1 ( +8 / -7 )

ch3cho,

Perhaps you ought to check as to WHY the Yanks put the asset freeze in place, hint it wasn't done for no reason at all

5 ( +7 / -2 )

People are judging the bombings by today's moral standards. Standards that have been influenced by seeing the results of the use of atomic weapons. When Truman made the decision to use the weapons he was not thinking about how the action would be viewed in the future; he was concerned with the numbers of Allied casualties, which by conservative estimates would have run around a million. Estimates of Japanese civilian deaths ran as high as TEN MILLION. Now, after having read that do you still think Truman was wrong? Neither choice was good. As horrible as the bombings were they were the lesser of two great evils.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

Both the Germans with their Uranverein, and the Japanese Army and Navy were trying to develop their own nuclear weapons; the Navy with its F-Go project at Kyoto, and the Navy with its own Ni-Go project at Riken, with uranium mining ironically near the site of the present nuclear disaster in Fukushima. Do people think the Japanese Military would have hesitated to use a nuclear bomb against the Allies, as their situation got more and more desperate? They were certainly happy to engage in biological and chemical warfare against civilians.

They were also willing to sacrifice a lot of their own civilian population through fighting with bamboo spears and suicide attacks with grenades and explosives, to defend their homeland against the Allies' Operations Olympic and Coronet, the planned campaigns for the invasion of Japan, which predicted Allied casualties of 1~4 million, and 5~10 million Japanese.

However, the sea blockade of Japan cutting off its oil and other essential supplies would probably have led to their inability to fight after a few more months, rendering the bombings unnecessary, but there was a larger threat on the horizon, Russia, who went from being a WW2 ally to a Cold War enemy quickly, while Japan became the US's friend and unsinkable aircraft carrier in the East, like the UK in the West.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

The annual moaning from Japan begins. Funny how it's okay to play victim here, but what about covering up the Nanking massacre and comfort women issue? What's good for the goose....

1 ( +12 / -11 )

Just be happy the original target, Kyoto, wasn't used. Truman didn't want a holy war so Hiroshima was selected instead. Unfortunately it would take another until Japan surrendered. On that anniversary we can celebrate the end of Fascist Japan and the birth of Pacifist Japan.

Sadly there was a reason the bombs were dropped. Delve into the why, and why I cannot condone the loss of life, I can understand the times, and move on

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

"Don't try to excuse the use of a nuclear weapons, even if it was in the past. It was wrong to be used then. They could have had war with the Japanese the old fashion way like they did with the Germans until they surrendered."

Sure, hundreds of thousands more American soldiers killed in an invasion of Honshu...

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

SerranoAug. 06, 2014 - 10:04PM JST

"Don't try to excuse the use of a nuclear weapons, even if it was in the past. It was wrong to be used then. They could have had war with the Japanese the old fashion way like they did with the Germans until they surrendered."

Sure, hundreds of thousands more American soldiers killed in an invasion of Honshu...

most of the dead people weren't japanese at all , and the atomic bomb was requested by the emperor himself

the tokyo bombing was a blunder move by american diplomacy , but american have paid a big chunk of money , you absorbed the idea of hating america( communist ) from stalin and mao , many secret things are hidden and better not to open it

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

@onagagamo The covering up or outright denial of Nanking is done by the rubbish of Japanese society. This is a memorial of many innocents killed and I'm sure not all of those who were present have insanitary views. Please don't lump the decent people in with such rubbish.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Maybe nothing should be memory, no ceremony is needed for this.

It has past 60 years ago, and we ask the Chinese and Korea to forget by the reason of 60 years past. If Japan can't forget how could they forget?

3 ( +7 / -4 )

'Maybe nothing should be memory, no ceremony is needed for this.

It has past 60 years ago, and we ask the Chinese and Korea to forget by the reason of 60 years past. If Japan can't forget how could they forget?'

I think the deaths of tens of thousands in the world's only nuclear attacks is worth commemorating. Part of the significance of this ceremony is to remind people all over the world of the horrors of nuclear weapons, not just the people of Japan. It is certainly worth preserving. Part of the commemoration of WW1 this week in my country of the UK is the recognition of the foul disregard for human life held by those in power who sent boys to be mowed down by machine gun fire in a disgusting bloodbath. Some things are most certainly worth reminding people of.

7 ( +10 / -3 )

Such a terrible day for Japan and her people and one the world should never forget. Here's to a world without nuclear weapons.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Japan bombed Pearl Harbor and a very bloody war began. Many terrible, immoral things happened as it was a major war. In fact, war is basically terrible and immoral. The USA developed a powerful weapon and used it, during war time, to end the war. Both sides wanted to win. The USA dropped the two win bombs just for that reason. To win. Without a doubt,Japan would have done the same if it had developed the A-bomb first, and probably on a bigger scale. The atomic bombs detonated over Hiroshima and Nagasaki were a terrible thing, but in the end, saved many lives, both Allied and Japanese. Plus, if they weren't dropped, everyone in Japan would be speaking Russian today. Here's hoping Japan can hold on to its peaceful, pacifist constitution.

1 ( +8 / -7 )

B.B.Q.DemonAug. 06, 2014 - 10:57PM JST

Japan bombed Pearl Harbor and a very bloody war began. Many terrible, immoral things happened as it was a major war. In fact, war is basically terrible and immoral. The USA developed a powerful weapon and used it, during war time, to end the war. Both sides wanted to win. The USA dropped the two win bombs just for that reason. To win. Without a doubt,Japan would have done the same if it had developed the A-bomb first, and probably on a bigger scale. The atomic bombs detonated over Hiroshima and Nagasaki were a terrible thing, but in the end, saved many lives, both Allied and Japanese. Plus, if they weren't dropped, everyone in Japan would be speaking Russian today. Here's hoping Japan can hold on to its peaceful, pacifist constitution.

stupid , the soviet union has no attention of invading japan , that was a japanese and russian propaganda to hide many things , japanese could have completed the war

it was well known that the Soviet invasion of Hokkaido was unlikely as they lacked the capability to invade the Japanese home islands, let alone to capture Hokkaido

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall#Soviet_intentions

stalin made a relation behind the closed door , america tried to disrupt it , but they failed, many leaked document about that fact will be spilled out soon

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

The reason Japan attacked Pearl Harbor was that US cut food and oil supply. It was a desperate move for Japan. Japan did not have food and oil when the war started with USA.It was obvious Japan lose.

This ceremony does not meant to criticize anybody. Japan never criticized or demand for apology or anything. Why are Americans keep criticizing Japan? What kind of ceremony a nation does is a simply sovereignty matter.

5 ( +10 / -5 )

tinawatanabeAug. 06, 2014 - 11:18PM JST

The reason Japan attacked Pearl Harbor was that US cut food and oil supply. It was a desperate move for Japan. Japan did not have food and oil when the war started with USA.It was obvious Japan lose.

This ceremony does not meant to criticize anybody. Japan never criticized or demand for apology or anything. Why are Americans keep criticizing Japan? What kind of ceremony a nation does is a simply sovereignty matter.

maybe the american was wrong in some point , but japan did horrible things also . anyway if you studied science , the white people character sense of apology differs from japan , for example when they shot Iran airlines , they paid compensation , passed through iran airspace as a remorse express

japan should have more wisdom than that right tinawatanabe

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

Japan did a right thing for not blaming anyone else during its 69th anniversary of atomic bombing, which was one of the worst tragedes in human history.

My prayers go to those innocent civilians perished.

Hopefully, J-govt as well as Japanese people ,through remembrance of cruelty and inhumane of the war, would pursue peace vigorously with its neighbors, learning the painful lessons during WW II.

It's world be a wised-up measure to seek peace via dialogs instead of believing arm-race.

3 ( +3 / -1 )

This ceremony does not meant to criticize anybody. Japan never criticized or demand for apology or anything. Why are Americans keep criticizing Japan?

@tinawatanabe It helps Americans with their denial. If they stop criticizing Japan, they might take too hard a look at what the U.S. government and military did to innocent children with atomic bombs. Americans are afraid to stop yelling. If they do that they might hear the voice of justice.

What kind of ceremony a nation does is a simply sovereignty matter.

No. It depends. This ceremony is fine as its as neutral as is possible and does not glorify war nor call for revenge.

However when it comes to things done at Yasukuni the world is rightly concerned.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Babies born from mother who affected by A-Bomb were also affected and after they were born, they grew in A-bomb hospitals. They were named pika-don babies and they grew in A-bomb hospital for entire their life. We knew entirely different bombs would be dropped on Hiroshima. BBC warned on radio. So, my family used two eyes telescopes and watched Hiroshima area skies. Mushroom crowd one crowd up then another crowd push up, then another 5 crowds vertically after large pika sounds. After nagasaki bombing, our school stopped air raid evacuation practice and decided to resume summer vacation.

There was one Japanese politician who preached anti A-bomb in the world and he received Nobel Peace Prize. He is grand uncle of current prime minister Abe. He was 3 time Prime Minister in Japan

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

What the article does not mention is that about a thousand people came out to protest against Abe. Good on those people.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

@Sir-Edgar: I checked various sources and people who attended for Peace but could not find any protest against Abe there of 1,000 people. They went to pray for soul of A-Bomb victims. Following is the closest disapproval of Abe. Unlike other country people, Japanese people are not used to organize 1,000 people and travel to protest, it seems. They did not disturb people who went to pray for souls of victims.

The number of surviving victims, known as "hibakusha,""was just more than 190,000 this year. Their average age is 79, and many of the attendants at the ceremony were their younger relatives and descendants. Hiroshima officials said 5,507 survivors died over the past year.

The anniversary comes as Japan is divided over Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's recent Cabinet decision to allow the country's military to defend foreign countries and play greater roles overseas. To achieve the goal, Abe's Cabinet revised its interpretation of Japan's post-WWII pacifist constitution.

Abe said at the event that as the sole country to suffer nuclear attacks, Japan has the duty to seek to eliminate nuclear weapons. But he did not mention his push for a more assertive defense posture.

Public polls show more than half of the Japanese are opposed to the decision, mainly because of sensitivity over Japan's wartime past.

Matsui did not directly refer to Abe's recent change. But he said the pacifist constitution is what has kept Japan out of war for 69 years.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

"There was one Japanese politician who preached anti A-bomb in the world and he received Nobel Peace Prize. He is grand uncle of current prime minister Abe. He was 3 time Prime Minister in Japan"

Interesting, so does Abe favor his grand uncle' s views or position on such issues?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I lived in Iwakuni in 1980-81, which is less than an hour by train from Hiroshima. I bet I visted the city about two dozen times, although I did not visit within a week on either side of August 6th. As a history buff, I have researched and read about this in both American books and Japanese books translated to English. My father was in the US Navy in August of 1945 and would surely have been involved in the action planned for later that year. There is no clear winning side to take on this argument of should the bomb have been dropped, at least for me. The only thing I can say is, it happened. That can not be changed. The Human Race needs to learn from that experience and move forward.

I visited Hiroshima again last year, and the A-bomb museum has expanded quite a bit since I had last seen it, and it is even more a sobering place than before. What was so special for me this time was visiting it with my adult children and discussing their response to it. Shortly after the bomb was dropped, a rumor spread that Hiroshima would be so full of radiation, it would be uninhabitable for at least 75 years. I am glad that was not true, as its a beautiful city which still pulls on me to this day.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

@kaal

you're no military expert lol if countless innocent people that have nothing to do with a war are killed in the process then it is a problem.

But you are the military expert, aren't you? I forgot about that.

In your case, if world war 3 occurred every country has the right to attack every other with nuclear weapons (which will eventually result in the extinction of humans, no doubt about that). I think you need to think more realistically about the consequence of nuclear weapons.

I don't need to think anything, I don't have a problem having nuclear weapons, it's what kept us safe after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The cold war between the US and the then Soviet Union where we both sign the Mutual assured Destruction or MAD treaty is what kept both sides from blowing each other out of existence.

It's not a last RESORT, more like submitting to weakness of skill and strategy and taking the dumbest barbaric action possible and putting innocent people in harms way.

It is the very last resort and because both sides aren't that crazy of being turned to ash, neither side up until now didn't need to use them.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

@pelicanwooman: Did you enjoy walking on Kintai Briddge? It is near to Hiroshima. The ancestor of Kikkawa clans created Iwakuni castle, too. They were scared of radiation. Hiroshima people sure rebuilt the city. It was early morning. After 5 mush cloud stuck on top of Hiroshima, the sky there became dark.

@Yokota: Don;t forget Abe is rooted from Yamaguchiken where people have their own mind and women there are more outspoken than males. In Japan's history, about 20 % or 96 PM were from Yamaguchi-ken rooted people. Often they have tight lips that you don;t know what they think. Ditto with Abe who is also related to Takayoshi Kido, distantly with Yosuke Matsuoka, Abe family in western Yamaguchi-ken. Your question is like asking Japanese if we all agree with Japanese atrocity during WW II.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

The idea that dropping those two A-bombs on civilians was morally justifiable because it saved many American lives is pure racial bias. It is based on the idea that American lives are more valuable than Asian lives. But someone said, other times, other moral standards right? After all, American society was segregated at the time.

The second idea being circulated that it has made the world a safer place is incredibly short-sighted. As much as many see it as retribution for the crimes perpetrated by the Imperial Army of Japan, we have only taken perpetrated the cycle of destruction by unleashing the most evil weapon of mass destruction in the world. It not only killed civilians than, it affected their children and their grandchildren. It's amazing how this article mentions the effects of radiation only in the context of Fukushima but not for Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

For those who think this is the end of it, just ponder this: a nuclear physicist friend of mine said the technology is now over 60 years old. It's a matter of time before a "rogue" regime like Iran gets a hold of it. As someone said, payback is a "bitch".

4 ( +7 / -3 )

@yokota: There was one Japanese politician who preached anti A-bomb in the world and he received Nobel Peace Prize. He is grand uncle of current prime minister Abe. He was 3 time Prime Minister in Japan" Interesting, so does Abe favor his grand uncle' s views or position on such issues?

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

I don;t know. I just wrote fact.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

It is very important by the japanese government to remember and to honour those civilians who were innocent killed during the Hiroshima bombing of Japan.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Some folks ask why the A-bomb was not dropped on Germany. Simple, the bomb didn't exist until after the war in Europe ended. Even if it had existed, it probably wouldn't have been used because of the successes the allied forces were having in defeating Germany. Also, no one seem to want to place any blame on the Japanese wartime government for the bombs being dropped. Prior to the Hiroshima bombing, it was clear Japan had lost the war and Japan was asked to surrender.. However, the militaristic government refused to surrender. Even after Hiroshima was bombed, there was no apparent indication Japan would surrender. When Nagasaki was bombed, calmer heads seemed to have prevailed and the decision was made to surrender. Even then, there were factions in the Japanese military that attempted to prevent NHK from broadcasting the Emperor's recording which announced Japan's surrender. At the time, like most Americans, I cheered the end of the war. With 2020 hindsight, however, there are lots of things which could have been done differently. Dropping the A-bombs seemed to be the right thing to do at the time, they were dropped, and it can't be undone.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

“‘Water, please.’

I'll bet you the thousands of Filipinos and American POW's who died during the Bataan Death March said the same thing.

But “people who rarely talked about the past because of their ghastly experiences are now, in old age, starting to open up,” he said.

Same can be said about the thousands of POW's held in Japanese camps who survived the war.

Let's stop all the victim-speak. It is doing a disservice to the younger generation of Japanese who will only hear one side of the issue.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

@kaal

Never forget Pearl Harbor when the Japanese murdered Americans in cold blood, which started this horrible war. Or the Chinese civilians who were butchered and raped in the millions by the Japanese. Or Western POW's, who were worked to death in the 100,000's by the Japanese. Or the victims of medical experiments the Japanese tried out on people.or the Bataan Death March. Remember Japan started this war the US knew what they had and those with the MOST AND BEST TOYS WIN!!! The Japanese were told to surrender or else...they chose else. The blame is all on the government of Japan during that time in history, something that some of the Japanese people and sympathizers apparently need to be reminded of. Those of you who have not visited Pearl Harbor maybe you should and then you too can see and feel the same affects war is war and during that time people use what they had to their advantage regardless of man kind!

I just hope you folks did not forget that those 14 "Class-A" war criminals in the Yasukuni Shrine ordered the attack on Pearl Harbor. Today, those Japanese Right-Wing Fascist still honor those 14 "Class-A" war criminals as hero and still denies that Japan has done nothing wrong during WWII. You just don't know how brutal the Japanese was toward to the U.S., the Netherlands, Australia, China, Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia, Philippine and other Asian nations. My grandfather was killed by the Japanese during WWII and I hope you understand why everyone in Asia hated and distrusted the Japanese even today. The U.S. has instituted "Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution" after the surrender of Japan to prevent this will ever happens again but the Japanese Prime Minister Abe is trying to undo the Constitution so Japan can regain and rebuilt their glorious past military aggression. So ask yourself by his undoing will this ignorance redo history past?

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

jerseyboyAug. 07, 2014 - 06:21AM JST “‘Water, please.’ I'll bet you the thousands of Filipinos and American POW's who died during the Bataan Death March said the same >thing.

You've reached the bottom of low taste, Comparing bombed civilians, children no less to soldiers.

Same can be said about the thousands of POW's held in Japanese camps who survived the war.

Many of whom were killed and brutalized by Korean guards, The Bataan Death March, treatment of POWs were all prosecuted and tried at the Tokyo Trials. But I haven't noticed anyone being tried for bombing civilians. Have you? While I happen to support my country's use of the A-Bombs at the time and under the circumstances, as a necessary evil, in retrospect it was a horrible thing that must never be repeated.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

@LeChat

The idea that dropping those two A-bombs on civilians was morally justifiable because it saved many American lives is pure racial bias.

Get off of it! Why don't you flip it around what you just said. So you think having a ground invasion would have been more appropriate? Sending close to half a million Americans into Japan would have been a slaughter for both sides, like Hamas, the Japanese would have instructed both women and children that could fight to pick up any weapon and to kill every American they see, that would have meant thousands would have died on both sides. Either way, the result is casualties. Japan was NOT going to surrender. I don't care what propaganda you read, they weren't. Both bombs were dropped and Japan surrendered. That's it. It's very simple, it's what happened and no amount of historical white washing will change that. It has nothing to do with being proud or shoving it in the Japanese face, but to try and twist history as if Japanese were the victims and that America for NO reason attacked it, is completely and utterly ludicrous!

It is based on the idea that American lives are more valuable than Asian lives. But someone said, other times, other moral standards right? After all, American society was segregated at the time.

If you're talking about racism towards the Japanese, everyone was racist in those days. The Japanese were equally as racist towards anyone that wasn't Japanese, anyone. Therefore, they felt that, they had every reason to dominate, take over and expand their empire across the Pacific.

The second idea being circulated that it has made the world a safer place is incredibly short-sighted. As much as many see it as retribution for the crimes perpetrated by the Imperial Army of Japan, we have only taken perpetrated the cycle of destruction by unleashing the most evil weapon of mass destruction in the world. It not only killed civilians than, it affected their children and their grandchildren. It's amazing how this article mentions the effects of radiation only in the context of Fukushima but not for Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

If that were true, then the Earth would have been destroyed with the arsenal that the US and Russia posses, it did actually make everyone safe, because neither side wants to be obliterated.

For those who think this is the end of it, just ponder this: a nuclear physicist friend of mine said the technology is now over 60 years old. It's a matter of time before a "rogue" regime like Iran gets a hold of it. As someone said, payback is a "bitch".

And you won't be able to stop Iran, that is because of bad political foreign policy. Now the only thing we can do is pray and hope for a different outcome and also, we have to stop these rouge nations that actually want to use the bomb to fulfill a prophecy and that is looking forward to death and destruction.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

What's with the infatuation with Bataan Death March with the Americans?

In any case, one of the most overused argument is that if the A-bomb wasn't used, Americans would had to engage in a full mainland attack. OK. Why is that necessary? They'll respond and argue that unconditional surrender was a must. OK. Then why on God's earth did U.S. accept the conditional surrender (which U.S. knew beforehand Japan would accept prior to the bomb) afterwards when Japan at that time had absolutely no bargainng power since they surrendered?

With many classified documents being released, the story of "A-bomb" ended the war is simply far fetched for the Soviet's entrance had more weight in Japan's decision to surrender.

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

@Kaal

I'm only agreeing with the brightest minds of that time. These were top military tacticians who made the decision to use this weapon.

Might I remind you that some of the greatest scientists that ever lived were involved in The Manhattan Project and none of them were put to work against their will.

There was an evil....a cruel malice that coursed through the veins of Japanese society at that time. How Japanese viewed foreigners as demons or devils.

Such stories are documented in books like Shusaku Endo's Silence and The Samurai.

The world perceived Japan's malice as an evil that required raw energy to obliterate it. War itself is evil and it constantly feeds into itself like your Toyota Prius. It had to be obliterated.

Japan at that time should have rose up against it's emperor. One man cannot have absolute power!!

With that said, no one was innocent. Inaction IS action. Be part of the solution, not the problem. We ALL have to make decisions. We all have to be active. To prevent another WW it's going to require that we shut down this nation for a cause that is bigger than what we are as individuals.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

"What's with the infatuation with Bataan Death March with the Americans?" - Nigelboy

What's with the infatuation with the Bushido nonsense with today's Japanese politicians and them dressing up with the Kamikaze bandanas screeching "Bonzai" from the loud speaker trucks? What's with the infatuation with same Japanese politicians refusing to even admit Japan committed war crimes against not only Chinese and Koreans but starving Vietnamese to feed the Japanese stationed there. Throwing babies up into the air and catching them on bayonets in the Philippines and Burma. And the crimes against humanity anywhere the Imperial military found itself.

So what the US dropped two atomic bombs on a city that produced the very arms and bombs that killed their service men and women. Hiroshima had two of the largest arms plants and weapons holding facilities in Japan. Nagasaki was a main port of exit and entry for the Imperial navy. Like it or not they were military associated towns. And for those whining about the US being racist against the Japanese, yeah and the Japanese saw even fellow Asians as human? Come out of your ivory towers. War is not pretty and never has been.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

War is not pretty and never has been.

Then why does USA go along with SK and China ciriticizng Japan recently?

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

bass4funk

I know the prevalent "theory" in the US is that a land invasion would have been much bloodier. I believe you're aware that opposing theories say that the Japanese were more than aware they couldn't go on forever against the US industrial strength and were already looking for a way out. We can go on with the "what if"s forever but no one really knows what would have happened either way.

If that were true, then the Earth would have been destroyed with the arsenal that the US and Russia posses, it did actually make everyone safe, because neither side wants to be obliterated.'

And you won't be able to stop Iran, that is because of bad political foreign policy. Now the only thing we can do is pray and hope for a different outcome and also

Aren't you contradicting yourself here? What you're saying is that the bomb kept us saved us from going to war with the USSR (which is true) but won't save us from the next one who comes. I'm afraid praying won't do us any good the next time around...

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

And for those whining about the US being racist against the Japanese, yeah and the Japanese saw even fellow Asians as human. Come out of your ivory towers. War is not pretty and never has been.

I never pretended otherwise. This is not about black and white or even right and wrong. But if you say that in war, everything is allowed, including killing hundreds of thousand of civilians, then why invoke higher principles of universal Human Rights when complaining about the killings in Nanjing? Or even the treatment of POWs? Weren't the Geneva conventions, that define the rules of engagement, prohibiting the killing of civilians? You know, the ones that dictate humane treatment of POWs?

Double standards much?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Couldn't the Allies have forgotten about the bombs and the invasion, and just blockaded the country into starvation?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Even if it had existed, it probably wouldn't have been used because of the successes the allied forces were having in defeating Germany.

@Toshiyori At the time it was used on Japan, Japan was beaten all the way back home, even booted from Okinawa. The Japanese were running out of fuel and food. They had no significant defenses left. Bombers flew over Japan with near impunity. Tokyo was burned to a cinder fully 5 months previous to the A-bombs by firebombs. American bombers were flying with full impunity by August if not before, highlighted by the fact that the Enola Gay flew unescorted in broad daylight.

Also, no one seem to want to place any blame on the Japanese wartime government for the bombs being dropped.

You cannot say the other guy force you to commit a war crime!

Prior to the Hiroshima bombing, it was clear Japan had lost the war and Japan was asked to surrender.. However, the militaristic government refused to surrender.

Not quite true. It was demanded they surrender unconditionally, and that made all the difference. The Japanese were well known to have one condition, and that was preservation of the emperor. Had that condition been granted, surrender would have happened long before the A-bombs. This was known even more clearly in July by intercepted messages between FM Molotov and Ambassador Sato.

It is true that some in the leadership still did not want to surrender, but given terms they may well have consented or at least been over-ridden. Surely trying was better than murdering babies in their cribs.

Even after Hiroshima was bombed, there was no apparent indication Japan would surrender.

Three before Nagasaki. Its not enough time. Not that I would expect the Japanese to surrender anyway. They lost more people just as terribly in the firebombing of Tokyo!

When Nagasaki was bombed, calmer heads seemed to have prevailed and the decision was made to surrender.

Six days it took for surrender to be announced. And I don't think it was calmer heads. It was the emperor realizing that he would be toast if the Soviets got him. They entered the war the same day as Nagasaki was bombed. And no, after Tokyo and Kobe being razed, I don't think Nagasaki and Hiroshima being razed changed their minds. It was the Soviets.

Dropping the A-bombs seemed to be the right thing to do at the time, ...

General MacArthur and Admirals Leahy and Nimitz didn't think so. Two thirds of the Manhattan Project's scientists appealed for a "show bombing" of Baron Island to show Japan the power of the bomb. They didn't think it was right either.

In closing, American history classes are full of lies, especially lies of omission. I sat through them from elementary school all the way through college. I know.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

I know the prevalent "theory" in the US is that a land invasion would have been much bloodier. I believe you're aware that opposing theories say that the Japanese were more than aware they couldn't go on forever against the US industrial strength and were already looking for a way out. We can go on with the "what if"s forever but no one really knows what would have happened either way.

Fair enough.

Aren't you contradicting yourself here? What you're saying is that the bomb kept us saved us from going to war with the USSR (which is true) but won't save us from the next one who comes. I'm afraid praying won't do us any good the next time around...

Not a contradiction. Meaning the Jihadists don't have ANY moral conviction whatsoever, following a prophecy, thinking it's God's will that his enemies will all be destroyed, therefore, they see it as their destiny to use a Nuclear bomb.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

bass4funk

Not a contradiction. Meaning the Jihadists don't have ANY moral conviction whatsoever, following a prophecy, thinking it's God's will that his enemies will all be destroyed, therefore, they see it as their destiny to use a Nuclear bomb

So I think we agree. My point being, it was never going to stop with the USSR. We've been obsessively hunting weapons of mass destruction in those "unfriendly" states ever since.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bass4funk That's right!!! We can stop with the what if's. History has proven America right in it's decision. The proof is the iPhone in your hand or the Big Mac in your mouth. Americans are true gentlemen in victory. We were not interested in a land grab and over the decades have done our best to help rebuild Japan.

If only MacArthur could drive down Route 16 today. Japan is a safer place now. The people are without swords and guns and prosperity is here to stay. He'd turn on InterFM while driving and he'd realize that the A-Bomb decision, although painful, was the right thing to do.

[Chorus:] Because I'm happy

Clap along if you feel like a room without a roof

Because I'm happy

Clap along if you feel like happiness is the truth

Because I'm happy

Clap along if you know what happiness is to you

Because I'm happy

Clap along if you feel like that's what you wanna do

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

We can go on with the "what if"s forever but no one really knows what would have happened either way.

You have "what ifs" confused with known facts of the time being used to discredit excuse for a war crime. I doubt its the first time you got your definitions confused.

And current prosperity does not justify the intentional slaughter of children. And bombing a city knowing its full of children does not make it unintentional slaughter of children by stating "I wish they were not there".

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@crush

You have "what ifs" confused with known facts of the time being used to discredit excuse for a war crime. I doubt its the first time you got your definitions confused.

No, sorry, No confusion. I think more like you libs just have a difficult time dealing with reality.

And current prosperity does not justify the intentional slaughter of children. And bombing a city knowing its full of children does not make it unintentional slaughter of children by stating "I wish they were not there".

That's war, you can't pick and choose. You are thinking in theoretical and hypotheticals. I have seen war up close, it's ugly, sad and depressing, but when you have a war, children sadly will be killed, that's the reality.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

The atrocities' by the Japanese were a big part of the reasoning.Japan, then, needs to explain and justify the Bataan Death March, Cabanatuan, the rape of Nanking, the bombing of Pearl Harbor, etc., etc., etc. The two atomic bombs dropped on Japan ended the war and saved about 1 million Japanese and about 500,000 American lives. It doesn't matter how people die in war, they just die. A raid on Tokyo with conventional fire bombs killed more people in one night than both of the A bombs. If anyone needs to apologize, it is the Japanese for starting the war in the first place.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The cold war between the US and the then Soviet Union where we both sign the Mutual assured Destruction or MAD treaty is what kept both sides from blowing each other out of existence.

Robert McNamara expressed a very different view on that in The Fog of War. With the difference that he was right.

So does this article, which is far less reassuring about the peacekeeping benefits of nuclear weapons, and makes important points about the risks - which were always played down.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/oct/15/cuban-missile-crisis-russian-roulette

This one looks at accidents involving nuclear weapons:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/14/nuclear-weapons-accident-waiting-to-happen

And this one reports on possibly the most interesting incident - as so many people seem unaware of it - which brought us so close the edge that Margaret Thatcher, a nuclear hardliner who had had no problem with treasonously allowing the US to station first-strike weapons on British soil, was horrified when she realized the potential for the Soviets to misread NATO intentions and launch an attack: she subsequently pushed the Americans to take steps to ensure this couldn't happen.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/02/nato-war-game-nuclear-disaster

So as far as keeping the peace is concerned, I would say that with nuclear weapons, we have instead been engaged in an extended gamble, and come very close to losing on a number of occasions.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

You've reached the bottom of low taste, Comparing bombed civilians, children no less to soldiers.

Ossan -- horse feathers, and you know it. A human life is a human life and all have the same value and deserve the same respect. Japan showed no regard for POW's under their protection:

In June 2001, U.S. Congressional Representative Dana Rohrabacher described and tried to explain the horrors and brutality the prisoners experienced on the march:

They were beaten, and they were starved as they marched. Those who fell were bayoneted. Some of those who fell were beheaded by Japanese officers who were practicing with their samurai swords from horseback. The Japanese culture at that time reflected the view that any warrior who surrendered had no honor; thus was not to be treated like a human being. Thus they were not committing crimes against human beings.[...] The Japanese soldiers at that time [...] felt they were dealing with subhumans and animals.[9]

Don't try to "victomize" Japan, when their own soldiers set the bar with respect to morality and how they valued human life.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

@ tinawatanabe

Then why does USA go along with SK and China criticizing Japan recently?

That's your opinion, would you say the same if the US went along with Japan in criticizing China and SK. It is what it is!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

U.S. Ambassador to Japan Caroline Kennedy today attended a memorial ceremony for victims of the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima, returning to a city she visited in 1978 with her uncle, then Senator Edward Kennedy.

Kennedy, 56, wore a plastic raincoat and was seated among dignitaries including Prime Minister Shinzo Abe at the ceremony, NHK public television showed. The commemoration is held every year to honor the 140,000 people killed in the 1945 U.S. nuclear attack on the city.

She visited Nagasaki and met Okinawan anti base activists. There were big placards carried by anti-Abe people. It says anti collective SDF, Anti war, Anti Abe eatc. Since Kennedy read Japanese books (even old books and poems), she got messages of Japanese people. Anti A-bomb, she will give message to Obama just like she supported Save Dolphin people.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

So the Americans "worship" the war criminals that drop the bombs. The Americans killed two million Japanese in their raids upon Japan. They killed at least 250,000 in the two atomic attacks. The Americans killed 200,000 in Okinawa alone. Then think about all of the air raids like the firebombing of Japanese cities. It was not just Tokyo but most of the cities of Japan. Then add the fighter raids from their carriers upon the helpless civilians. The Americans shot up trains loaded with civilians. So tell me again how "kind" the US was to Japan. Japan was willing to surrender with the exception of giving up the Emperor.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

@Yuri

Japan has freedom, democratic, you have the right to vote, live where you want, be who who you and and since the war, Japan has become a pacifist nation. Those are all good things that came out of it. You take the good, you take the bad. It all goes with the territory and Japan is a better nation as a result.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Because A-bombs were dropped other Japanese survived, I am not going to be disrespectful to A-bomb victims in writing my feeling that time. Just we were glad war would be over. Better American occupied than had to perform seppuku that then govt ordered with slogan 'Ichi-oku Gyoku-sui'. After surrender. GHQ taught us freedom of speech and democracy. In school, Social Study was added. So we learned how to vote and we coached older women how to fill voting application forms. GHQ tried to make Japanese colleges co-ed. So, public univ decided to add one girl in Economic Major only. I remember GHQ asked then Japanese Govt to stop Northern poor farm families to sell their young girls to Southern Japanese brothels and it became illegal of such practice. A-bombs were horrible but it it were not A bombs, all of Japanese would be dead with forced Ichi-oku Gyoku-sui. We just call Truman while we call General ,,,, President .... to other American dignitaries because of A-bombs. It was war and soldiers were not responsible of decision. It many be wrong but we knew Truman ordered,

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Kaimychal, US is recently criticizing Japan over something related to the war Japan lost long time ago. That's not fair for the war winner country to endlessly beat the war lost country.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Historians have long been at odds over whether the twin attacks brought a speedier end to the war by forcing Japan’s surrender

Well, that was true. Until Frank wrote Downfall.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

At 12:00 noon Japan standard time on August 15, the Emperor's recorded speech to the nation, reading the Imperial Rescript on the Termination of the War, was broadcast:

Figure if A bombs expedited surrender or not. Military rebels killed govt officials and failed to kill Emperor's top aides and failed to seize recorded Emperor's voice.

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

At 12:00 noon Japan standard time on August 15, the Emperor's recorded speech to the nation, reading the Imperial Rescript on the Termination of the War, was broadcast:

... Despite the best that has been done by everyone--he gallant fighting of the military and naval forces, the diligence and assiduity of Our servants of the State, and the devoted service of Our one hundred million people--he war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage, while the general trends of the world have all turned against her interest.

Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should we continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization.

Such being the case, how are We to save the millions of Our subjects, or to atone Ourselves before the hallowed spirits of Our Imperial Ancestors? This is the reason why We have ordered the acceptance of the provisions of the Joint Declaration of the Powers....

The hardships and sufferings to which Our nation is to be subjected hereafter will be certainly great. We are keenly aware of the inmost feelings of all of you, Our subjects. However, it is according to the dictates of time and fate that We have resolved to pave the way for a grand peace for all the generations to come by enduring the unendurable and suffering what is unsufferable.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Well, that was true. Until Frank wrote Downfall.

Frank on "Why Truman dropped the Bomb", three pages including, including discussion of full 1995 release of US-intercepted Japanese diplomatic transmissions, of failed Japanese negotiation missions to Europe and Russia, of Japanese military's resolve with numbers for the buildup on Kyushu, US Joint Staff meetings to decide on land invasion, etc.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/894mnyyl.asp

Why Truman dropped the Bomb

Richard B. Frank, Weekly Standard, August 8, 2005

... But the release of the complete (unredacted) "Magic" Far East Summary, supplementing the Diplomatic Summary, in the 1990s revealed that the diplomatic messages amounted to a mere trickle by comparison with the torrent of military intercepts. The intercepts of Japanese Imperial Army and Navy messages disclosed without exception that Japan's armed forces were determined to fight a final Armageddon battle in the homeland against an Allied invasion. The Japanese called this strategy Ketsu Go (Operation Decisive). It was founded on the premise that American morale was brittle and could be shattered by heavy losses in the initial invasion. American politicians would then gladly negotiate an end to the war far more generous than unconditional surrender. ... Intercepts demonstrated that the Japanese had correctly anticipated precisely where U.S. forces intended to land on Southern Kyushu in November 1945 (Operation Olympic). American planning for the Kyushu assault reflected adherence to the military rule of thumb that the attacker should outnumber the defender at least three to one to assure success at a reasonable cost. ... From mid-July onwards, Ultra intercepts exposed a huge military buildup on Kyushu. Japanese ground forces exceeded prior estimates by a factor of four. ... One intelligence officer commented that the Japanese defenses threatened "to grow to [the] point where we attack on a ratio of one (1) to one (1) which is not the recipe for victory." ...

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

toshiko are you asking me to thank the Americans for killing so many of my family? You can make excuses for anything. Japan was a defeated country when the atomic bombs were dropped. If the USA had made it clear the Emperor could stay there might of been a surrender as early as May. The Americans are two face complaining about all of the US civilians killed which were fewer than 1000. Then responding to the bombing of Japan which killed over a million Japanese civilians.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

@Yuri: What you are talking??? I just pasted the Emperor's announcement translation. Is this another one of your Toshiko attack comments????

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

YuriOtani Aug. 09, 2014 - 06:59AM JST If the USA had made it clear the Emperor could stay there might of been a surrender as early as May.

U.S. made it clear: "Unconditional Surrender". And Japan refused.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

The Potsdam Declaration agreement was unconditional surrender. sfjp is right. Japan refused. Then A-bombs. And finally Japan surrendered.

It was decided to issue a statement, the Potsdam Declaration, defining "Unconditional Surrender" and clarifying what it meant for the position of the emperor and for Hirohito personally. The American and British governments strongly disagreed on this point--The United States wanted to abolish the position and possibly try him as a war criminal, while the British wanted to retain the position, perhaps with Hirohito still reigning. The Potsdam Declaration went through many drafts until a version acceptable to all was found.

On July 26, the United States, Britain and China released the Potsdam Declaration announcing the terms for Japan''s surrender, with the warning, "We will not deviate from them. There are no alternatives. We shall brook no delay. For Japan, the terms of the declaration specified:

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@yuri

toshiko are you asking me to thank the Americans for killing so many of my family? You can make excuses for anything. Japan was a defeated country when the atomic bombs were dropped. If the USA had made it clear the Emperor could stay there might of been a surrender as early as May. The Americans are two face complaining about all of the US civilians killed which were fewer than 1000. Then responding to the bombing of Japan which killed over a million Japanese civilians.

And you really actually believe that? Wow!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

sfip330 and toshiko yet that "Unconditional Surrender" did not happen and the Showa Tenno was not put on trial or even lose his position. True his duties changed but the point is this could of been offered before the atomic bombs. Also the US made 3 atomic bombs gadget, little boy and fat man. There were no more bombs to drop on Japan. There was nothing more the Allies could do but accept a conditional surrender. Am sure if the Allies would of hung the Emperor the conflict would of gone underground. Oh the peace afterwards came from the people of Japan and not the Allies efforts. The Emperor ordered the people to surrender and they followed his orders. The truth is hundreds of thousands died who should of lived. This number includes Allied airmen, soldiers and sailors.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

This is not my opinion. Just cut and paste;

On July 26, the United States, Britain, and China released the Potsdam Declaration announcing the terms for Japan's surrender, with the warning, “We will not deviate from them. There are no alternatives. We shall brook no delay.+ For Japan, the terms of the declaration specified: the elimination “for all time (of) the authority and influence of those who have deceived and misled the people of Japan into embarking on world conquest" the occupation of "points in Japanese territory to be designated by the Allies” that the "Japanese sovereignty shall be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku, and such minor islands as we determine,” as had been announced in the Cairo Declaration in 1943. that “the Japanese military forces, after being completely disarmed, shall be permitted to return to their homes with the opportunity to lead peaceful and productive lives." that “we do not intend that the Japanese shall be enslaved as a race or destroyed as a nation, but stern justice shall be meted out to all war criminals, including those who have visited cruelties upon our prisoners.” On the other hand, the declaration offered that: “The Japanese Government shall remove all obstacles to the revival and strengthening of democratic tendencies among the Japanese people. Freedom of speech, of religion, and of thought, as well as respect for the fundamental human rights shall be established." “Japan shall be permitted to maintain such industries as will sustain her economy and permit the exaction of just reparations in kind, but not those which would enable her to rearm for war. To this end, access to, as distinguished from control of, raw materials shall be permitted. Eventual Japanese participation in world trade relations shall be permitted." "The occupying forces of the Allies shall be withdrawn from Japan as soon as these objectives have been accomplished and there has been established, in accordance with the freely expressed will of the Japanese people, a peacefully inclined and responsible government."” The only mention of “unconditional surrender” came at the end of the declaration: "We call upon the government of Japan to proclaim now the unconditional surrender of all Japanese armed forces, and to provide proper and adequate assurances of their good faith in such action. The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction." Contrary to what had been intended at its conception, disenfranchising the Japanese leadership so the people would accept a mediated transition, the declaration made no direct mention of the Emperor at all. It did, however, insist that "the authority and influence of those who have deceived and misled the people of Japan into embarking on world conquest must be eliminated for all time". Allied intentions on issues of utmost importance to the Japanese, including whether Hirohito was to be regarded as one of those who had "misled the people of Japan" or even a war criminal, or alternatively whether the Emperor might potentially become part of a “peacefully inclined and responsible government” were thus left unstated.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Potsdam Declaration does not have anything about punishing Emperor. The final version stated that Unconditional surrender. I pasted Potsdam Declaration but JT deleted because it is not related to this thread,I think. It is obvious Emperor decided to listen to Marquis Kido;s suggestion to surrender after Nagasaki bombing. That was why Aug 15 he announced. . And Japanese people learned democracy. Female learned to speak up.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@FPSRussiaAUG. 07, 2014 - 10:40AM JST

History has proven America right in it's decision.

If it was so, other countries would use small nuclear shells in local wars here and there., killing millions of civilians by so-called "collateral damage".

The proof is the iPhone in your hand or the Big Mac in your mouth.

Sorry, it proves nothing.

Americans are true gentlemen in victory.

Gentlemen prefer to join Army and fight other Armies as soldiers. Gentlemen never fight elderly, women and children.

We were not interested in a land grab and over the decades have done our best to help rebuild Japan.

The USA was founded on a land, stolen from Natives.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

toshiko

I pasted Potsdam Declaration but JT deleted because it is not related to this thread,I think.

Probably it just got eaten by the posting app. The app seems a bit weird. If moderators had deleted it, the whole post probably would've been deleted, not just everything after "For Japan, the terms of the declaration specified:".

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@YuriOtaniAUG. 08, 2014 - 11:30AM JST

So the Americans "worship" the war criminals that drop the bombs. The Americans killed two million Japanese in their raids upon Japan. They killed at least 250,000 in the two atomic attacks. The Americans killed 200,000 in Okinawa alone. Then think about all of the air raids like the firebombing of Japanese cities. It was not just Tokyo but most of the cities of Japan.

Needless to say, almost all victims were civilians, non-combatants.....

2 ( +3 / -1 )

@noghtknight

If it was so, other countries would use small nuclear shells in local wars here and there., killing millions of civilians by so-called "collateral damage".

Has nothing to do with the statement.

Gentlemen prefer to join Army and fight other Armies as soldiers. Gentlemen never fight elderly, women and children.

Being in war, doesn't discriminate between men, women, children, gentlemen or vagabonds. It's all relative to whatever the fighting conditions are.

The USA was founded on a land, stolen from Natives.

As many other countries were. So what's your actual point.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Hiroshima and Kokura were the target but weather visibility changed from Kokura to Nagasaki. When C Kennedy came to Japan after she was appointed as ambassador, she visited Nagasaki, talked with grown-up A-bomb (pika-don) children who were infected while they were in their mothers' womb. American doctors worked in A-bomb hospitals, too. Duke Univ published Children of Atomic Bomb written by an American Physician, The A-Bomb infected children of Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Marshal Islands.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

For the people that hate the past usage of the bomb, you better be in favor of getting the US, Russia, and China to give up their weapons. These are the main warmongers of today. And none of them will get rid of their weapons without the others. Of course the rest will also have to get rid of them, but these three are especially bad. And before someone says "what about Isreal", them too, but at least they don't have conflicts with other great powers.

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