national

Seventy years on, few Americans regret Enola Gay's mission

107 Comments

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

© 2015 AFP

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

107 Comments
Login to comment

Few Americans regret it, because we were taught that Japan would've never surrendered without the bombs. But the reality was that they were already considering it with the Russians already at their doorsteps. Fighting in far off battles was one thing, but they weren't going to allow an invasion on their own soil. Especially since they probably knew what invading armies were like from their own invading experience...

@JapanGal

Not sure if serious...

-6 ( +11 / -16 )

How many of you out there are FOOLISH ENOUGH to believe that Japan would NOT have used one, if they HAD IT? Get REAL.

26 ( +32 / -8 )

The American meta narrative on this is that it was 'necessary' to end the war and prevent the loss of further American lives.

An alternate reading is that it was the first shot fired in the Cold war and a big shot across the Russian bow just as they declared war on Japan. I have heard it said that the bombing of Hiroshima made virtually no difference to the Japanese military at the time as the Americans had already laid waste to 50 odd cities in Japan, and Hiroshima was just another to add to the list. Japan was completely disabled and capitulation bound regardless of the A Bombs. Meaning they were cruel and unnecessary.

Plus they set the world on a horrible and terrible Nuclear trajectory which has threatened us ever since. Nothing good came from them.

8 ( +19 / -12 )

wow the victim card is especially thick this year for the 70th anniversary, have posted this before and will again. you hardly ever see anything relating to WW2 outside of Japan, WW2 was so much bigger than the Abombs, 20 times as many people died outside of Japan (60million+, Japan lost around 3 million) this was more than the total population of Japan at the time. The Abombs killed a total of about 250,000 both during the detonations and the years after. Europe and Asia had the same fatalities as the Abombs in about 8 days!. Yes that equals about 30,000 people everyday for the total six years of the war. Japan wants so desperately for the world to look at them as a main victim of WW2, but the truth is many other countries suffered on a much larger scale, Jews, Soviets, Chinese etc they deserve as much recognition if not more for there sacrifices, and they arent tarnished by being the aggressors that started and caused much of this slaughter, 2/3 of which were civilians. The A bomb to almost all gaijin signifies the end of WW2, the vast majority would only view Japan as a victim of its own actions.

11 ( +21 / -8 )

Anyone who thinks dropping the atomic bombs was the right thing to do needs a serious slap in the face, including the Enola Gay pilots if they have not said they regret it. There is absolutely NOTHING good that comes from the killing of hundreds of thousands of people, and the easily accepted lie to justify it that 'thousands of American lives were saved' is utter BS. It cannot be proven that a SINGLE life more would have been lost if the US did NOT drop the bombs. Easily among the worst war crimes in history. Americans should be willing to admit this, but I can understand how a lot of people, even though morally depraved, would want to suggest it was 'right'. How else could they live with themselves?

I doubt you'll find ANY Japanese who think it was right, although their playing up of victimhood in regards to war in general and denial of their own atrocities (and many who rightfully feel the bombings were heinous are also people who deny Nanking, sex slaves, etc.) warrants them (those who deny) a serious slap in the face as well.

-12 ( +12 / -25 )

SmithIJ,

I usually agree with a lot of what you post however I strongly disagree with your above post

There is absolutely NOTHING good that comes from the killing of hundreds of thousands of people, and the easily accepted lie to justify it that 'thousands of American lives were saved' is utter BS

The undeniable truth is WWII ended VERY soon after Nagasaki, THAT was VERY GOOD NEWS! And for the entire world, including Japan.

The really sad thing in all this is the J-govt at the time & IJA so willingly led their own people to slaughter, THATS where the real blame lies not with the yanks.

Were the 2 bombs horrible, of course, but they got the job done, end of story

13 ( +21 / -7 )

SIJ and GW. You both have valid points. My thinking is pretty much along thse lines

1 ( +4 / -3 )

This is an unending debate that is almost impossible to correctly argue. Obviously nuclear weapons are a terrible thing. But then again humans deem it alright to do terrible things to terrible people (death penalty, eye for eye justice, etc). If someone killed my family my perspective would probably change and I'd be out for blood and vengeance. I just wish most of all that we never opened up this can of worms (nuclear bombs) to begin with.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

They were considering surrender. They who? Japan's government was a collection of factions, some stronger than others. A faction was feeling out a negotiated peace deal, an ipso facto surrender, but their power was weak. The strongest factions were the Army and Navy. The Navy was particularly adamant about fighting on until either the Allies got tired or Japan "shattered like a jewel." They were prepared for mass suicide, excluding the emperor and the aristocracy who were forbidden by edict to commit suicide. Hirohito had one monomaniacal war strategy: never retreat, always attack. Did the A-bombs convince Hirohito to surrender? He mentions them in his surrender speech (which does not directly mention surrender). Was he using the A-bombs as an excuse or was he truly scared witless? Probably both. Members of the military factions attempted a coup which nearly succeeded.

Was there an alternative to the A-bombs? Maybe. If we had bombed the Imperial Palace (which would also get the Army and Navy headquarters a few blocks) maybe the A-bomb would not need be used.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

Japan always is the victim. How come they never teach history outside of how they were victimized? They never teach their people how their country victimized other countries.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

No one can know what would have happened if the bombs weren't dropped. Japan may babe gone on to win the war, and take over Asia to disasterous results. Or maybe they would have surrendered or maybe any of an infinite number of other possibilities.

All we know is that the bombs were dropped, which resulted in the war ending. So they were a bad thing with a good result. End of story.

-5 ( +3 / -9 )

Using the atomic bomb, developed amid utmost secrecy, was hugely popular with war-weary Americans at the time — and 70 years on, a majority today still think it was the right thing to do.

Fifty-six percent of Americans surveyed by the Pew Research Center in February said using the atomic bomb on Japanese cities was justified, compared to 79 percent of Japanese respondents who said it was not.

Simply supports why dropping the bombs was "necessary" in the minds of America. As is the case now, Japan never really understood the psyche of the American people. While I believe America is one of the most forgiving and charitable countries, by the same token, if you pick a fight with us, we are going to finish it -- on our terms. And after things like the Bataan Death March, and many other atrocities by the Japanese that were widely publisized in the U.S., the mentality of the country was a100% in favor of an unconditional surrender. Like it or not, the Japanese did not understand the old "en eye for an eye" mentality still prevalent in this country.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Japan always is the victim. How come they never teach history outside of how they were victimized? They never teach their people how their country victimized other countries.

You make a valid point

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

Of course, Americans approve of the bombs. They saved American lives. And not just the inevitable "if the Allies invaded Japan, xxx thousands of soldiers would have died" type. Each day the war continued, soldiers died. They died of diseases, they died in kamikaze raids, they died during air raids, POWs died horribly in Japanese POW camps.

As others have said, hindsight is always 20/20, especially when viewed through the lens of 21st century morality. At the time, there were no other viable options that would have worked faster.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

As an American who loves Japan and lives in Japan, the bombs were terrible. But the other option was MUCH worse for everyone. Japan was NOT about to surrender. They were to fight to the very end. Civilians were expected to commit suicide if the Americans took their region, and if they didn't commit suicide, they were killed by soldiers. The battle on Honshu would have been devastating to both sides, with countless millions killed. Additionally, with the USSR declaring war on Japan, invading from the north, what do you think would have happened to Japan? Look at Europe and Korea for your answer. The bombs were awful; but necessary in the face of such evil.

9 ( +13 / -5 )

"Additionally, with the USSR declaring war on Japan, invading from the north, what do you think would have happened to Japan?"

I guess Hokkaido would be Russian territory.

11 ( +11 / -1 )

If the US didn't drop the bomb and Japan didn't surrender, what would have happened, Japan?

The US would have landed in Japan, helped by the Russians who took the northern islands. You would have had to fight both the US in the mainland and the Russians in the north. And you would have suffered the same faith that Korea and Germany suffered, when their countries got divided between US and Communist Russia.

And Japan would not have become an economic superpower when competing with its two hands tied, spending billions of defence and battling border skirmishes between divided free Japan in the south, and unfree Communist Japan to the north.

So Japanese should be grateful to the United States for once which gave you democracy, gave you your constitution, economic aid, and a generous open market to sell your products while you closed your own consumer market. Without the US, Japan would not even be having this discussion.

0 ( +9 / -9 )

I know this is going to get a lot of downvotes..but consider that it took a second bomb at all before Japan surrendered. And consider that the Japanese military attempted a coup on the Emperor to continue fighting. Finally, also consider that the Japanese were ordering the killing of their own civilians at this time.

From America's point of view at that time, it seemed that Japan was not going to go down without swinging and while they might have surrendered...they might not have either. We honestly can't say what would have been. For all we know, it could have become a long drawn out ground war with even more Japanese civilians forced to jump off cliffs. We simply can't say.

Heck if Russia did get the chance to invade, Japan might have become divided up between USSR and the allies a la Germany... not exactly a dream situation there right?

Again...it's all speculation.

7 ( +9 / -3 )

There was a VERY good reason why we chose to drop the atomic bomb on Japan: the Battle of Okinawa.

Over 12,000 American soldiers dead, possibly 100,000 Japanese soldiers dead and possibly 100,000+ civilians dead made the War Department planners blanch at the very idea of a physical invasion of Japan--an invasion that could have killed over 1 million American soldiers, 10 million Japanese soldiers and possibly 15-20 million Japanese civilians, based on the analysis of the Japanese resistance on Okinawa. Already war-weary, the Americans wanted a quick way to end the war--and the atomic bomb proved to be that solution.

3 ( +10 / -6 )

Asakaze, it was to the America's generosity and mercy that they didn't drop the big one on Tokyo, killing the entire Japanese government including the emperor. The US took it extremely easy on Japan after Japan surrendered. The US could have done to Japan what they did to Germany, and tried all the German military leaders as war criminals. Instead the US, let Japan keep your emperor, and left all the Japanese leaders who were responsible for all the war crimes and sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, completely off the hook. Sure, some of the Japanese leaders like Gen. Tojo got tried and hanged, but much of Japan's leaders were completely left off the hook. I'm saying the US could have been much much harsher to the defeated Japan, but they did not behave that way. Hindsight is 20/20 when Japan after getting all that support and help from the US, is complaining about the atomic bombs, refusing to honestly look at the things that benefited Japan when the war was ended quickly with two bombs.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

I guess Hokkaido would be Russian territory.

Yup, not much of a question about that. The Russians were mobilizing for that invasion after taking back Sakhalin and the Northern Territories when the end of the war forced them to consolidate.

Given the fury that many Japanese cast at Russia over their occupation of those small islands, the Northern Territories, it is difficult to imagine how outraged they would be over Russian control of Hokkaido. That is what the final victims of the war staved off, and most Japanese, who refrain from overt criticism of America, recognize this.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Anytime innocent lives are taken, whether our own or another should be felt with regret. War is not a football game where the team that loses goes home and comes back. In each war millions of family trees are severed because of the agenda of a few. If that was indeed the only way to end the war then feel regret for the bystanders that had to pay with their life, it doesn't matter who's side anyone was on, life was still taken against it's will..

4 ( +5 / -1 )

One thing the Japanese did not want was to face the vengeance of the Red Army on home islands. The Russians would not have spared the Imperial Family - Hirohito would have swung from a Kuro Matsu in Chiyoda and the already decimated country would have been sent back to the middle ages. The United States did not want that either and Fat Man and Little Boy ensured it didn't happen.

5 ( +5 / -1 )

The nuclear bombing of Hiiroshima and Nagasaki is a big, ugly scar on the American face that no amount of makeup can hide.

The Americans have been making up all kinds of myths to justify the bombings because they cannot come to grips with the fact that they are genocidal murderers.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

But the US public is very different as I can see. Mass killing of civilians, without meaningful military objective, just "kill as much as possible, make them suffer" approach is louded as something commendable and even glorious.

Of course. @ Pearl H. We (USA) were humiliated by (an inferior) enemy. Just because Japan defeated the Russians roughly 40 years prior to Pearl, it was Japan who thought themselves invincible. Of course, we (USA) think of victory in the pacific as, "glorious."

What was the point of the Tokyo air raid?

Are you serious? The point was to destroy the enemy's will to fight. Obviously, it didn't work. Thus, Hiroshima / Nagasaki were made "examples" of. Those 2 bombs achieved the mission- Japans unconditional surrender.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Were it not for the atomic bomb, many Americans contend, thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of American soldiers would have died in a U.S,-led invasion of the Japanese mainland.

This paragraph is an exaggeration and thus highly controversial. It it were right, why haven't Americans used one in the Middle East?

1 ( +5 / -4 )

The really sad thing in all this is the J-govt at the time & IJA so willingly led their own people to slaughter, THATS where the real blame lies not with the yanks

Really. That's a bit like saying that all those Chinese deaths were the fault of the Chinese. They weren't really strong enough to win (despite their numbers), and so instead of having a war that's killing them by the million they could have conceded to Japanese demands. Marco Polo Bridge would have been a local incident if the Chinese took the "low road".

And while I don't want to defend the IJA too much, I think that the above viewpoint is based way too much either on hindsight or on blind faith in Allied morality. At that time, NO ONE in Japan can be sure what will happen if they unconditionally surrendered. In the worst case, Japan might have gone the way of Carthage, and the fact that the Americans are actively bombing Japanese cities with mass firebomb attacks even before the nukes only lends weight to any argument that surrender may well be the worse option, even for the Japanese people.

@KabukiloverAUG. 05, 2015 - 08:23PM JST I'll give you an alternative. IF being humane and avoiding un-necessary civilian deaths (especially by your own hand) were the priority, one option that quickly gets overshadowed by Olympic or starvation submarine campaign scenarios is for the Allies to simply settle for something other than unconditional surrender. The Japanese plan had always been for some kind of negotiated peace, and given 1945, it seems quite reasonable that if the Americans say they'd let them have peace if they withdrew from everything they grabbed since 1931, well peace would probably have been tomorrow.

Yeah, I know, unconditional surrender is what they pledged in some meeting two years before but if that's the basis that's putting one's pride over about 100,000 lives which does not seem extremely moral.

@Raymond ChuangAUG. 05, 2015 - 09:59PM JST Your statement is a sign of America's successful propaganda effort. By presenting the A-bomb as superior (in terms of casualties) to 1-2 options, the average person's eyes are blinded to the simple idea that Americans might have gotten what they wanted if they did not introduce that completely new concept known as "unconditional surrender."

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

it was to the America's generosity and mercy that they didn't drop the big one on Tokyo, killing the entire Japanese government including the emperor. The US took it extremely easy on Japan after Japan surrendered

@ Papi2013

Generosity had nothing to do with it, only political expediency. New reality - the US urgently needed a Pacific ally against USSR in the Cold war that had just started.

One thing the Japanese did not want was to face the vengeance of the Red Army on home islands. The Russians would not have spared the Imperial Family

@Tamarama

Vengeance for what? And why are so sure about the Imperial Family?

Are you serious? The point was to destroy the enemy's will to fight

@Wc626

Seriously, I know that. Then my serious question: if you consider mass killing of civilians normal to destroy the enemy's will to fight. then what's the difference between the US and ISIS or other terrorists, who also kill civilians to destroy enemy's will to fight? My answer: only numbers, the US killed much, much more.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

US history books teach that the US of A did Japan a good turn by dropping Atom Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And many Americans believe it.

This is why history books need to present BOTH sides of the story.

Abe, please take note.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Maybe there are details somewhere, but wasn't the atomic destruction of Hiroshima enough to convince Hirohito and others who supported the idea of surrender? Was it necessary to plan to drop a second bomb only three days later on Kokura? A bomb that eventually was dropped on Nagasaki due to overcast weather conditions near the Shimonoseki straits. How quickly was a surrender likely to be made? Did the US consider this beforehand? Most probably. Even after the second bomb it took six days, so I suspect there may have been an intention to drop the second bomb before the Japanese Government had a chance to surrender. Details of meetings must exist and maybe they are declassified by now. Or maybe not.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

This is because all Americans just care about winning. It doesn't matter if you have to murder children in their sleep, as long as you win. You worship capitalism which is built upon slavery which exists in a much greater form today than it ever did before slavery was abolished. The atomic bomb was the most evil thing to every be created, but America doesn't care about who they kill, as long as they can act like it was self-defence or for the greater good. That's why they can kill a million Arabs and blow up their entire country and kill everyone they know, and then call them the terrorists when they blow up a train. Unbelievable people, I can't believe they are still allowed to use the words 'freedom' or 'justice'. Should be god-damn ashamed if over half think that winning is more important than having a soul.

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

The A-bombs were horrible, but I also think that it might have been the only way Japan would surrender. The country in general still believes it is more honorable to commit suicide than to admit your mistakes. But I wish the powers of the U.S. had found a different solution, so I would never check the 'I don't regret it' box if given this survey.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

“Just how many Japs did we kill?”

Not many. It was estimated that around 80 million Japanese survived the war on the eve of their surrender. If over-population in the Japanese home islands was the main reason for the country' aggressive land grabbing antics in China and the Pacific, the US denied Japan's ambition to rid itself of hungry mouths to feed, in bulk, even on the path to defeat.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

While the idea of lives being saved keeps being mentioned it occurred to me that if those attacked in the first place surrendered, millions of lives would have been saved.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The Japanese Navy was destroyed. The Army was intact in the Main Land. Not only we did our self a favor. We did them a favor as well.War they started instantly ended.It seems the staff of in charge of the article must be a bunch of Lefty Intellectual Liberals.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

@clamenza

Do you think there are any valid criticism of the USA's foreign policies?

"Few Americans regret it" because it has been central to a continuum of "manufacturing consent" design to allow the self-serving elite to war imperial wars on all continents of the world and be able to exploit the American people to do so.

The young soldiers were serving the corporations rather than nation.

From Pearl Harbor to the use of the atomic bombs leading to the construction, at vast cost to the people and to great profit to the corporations, the nuclear arsenal.

It's all one big scam where the bullets go in one direction, and the profits go in the other.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

@Asakaze: I'm a bit late on this, but there were several reasons as to "why choose Hiroshima and Nagasaki"

I'm not saying these are admirable things or that I agree with the logic..but it is what it is:

1) They wanted a "live test" on an actual city to "impress" the Russians. It wasn't about taking lives as it was doing total annihilation of an urban center. Leaflets were dropped telling civilians to get outta town asap. Again it was about structural damage / shock and awe.

2) Hiroshima and Nagasaki were (are?) important sea ports / harbors for both military and commercial reasons. Destroying them would be similar to destroying railways in Germany.

3) As said above, other cities were considered, but specifically Kyoto and Tokyo were avoided due to perceived cultural or governmental value.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

As WWII vet Kurt Vonnegut stated, "The most racist, nastiest act by The United States, after human slavery, was the bombing of Nagasaki."

Truman`s religious delusions and creepy racism were certainly a factor in the nuking. Here is a quote from Harry S Truman on Japanese people:

"One man is just as good as another so long as he's honest and decent and not a NIG ER or a Chinaman…. the Lord made a white man from dust, a NIG ER from mud, and then threw what was left and it came down a Chinaman. He does hate Chinese and Japs. So do I."

-Harry S Truman

The depravity and racism of the US government and military is also apparent from Harry Truman`s demented giggling prior to his announcement of the mass murders at Hiroshima:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d42dMSAltnQ

See Kermit Beahan gloat as he claims responsibility for nuking the women and children of Nagasaki:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdJyOBriLTI

0 ( +7 / -7 )

U.S. recognizes Japan has special interest in China and American counsels in China supported the coming of Japanese troops. There is an exchange of negotiation talk of Japan taking of China and U.S. taking of Southern Asia (read tin, rubber and oil). Only that Japan gets more greedy, U.S. puts into place an embargo, Japan dived into Pearl Harbour and both countries went into war. It's a quarrel among imperial club members and there is no moral on both sides. Regretting dropping atomic bombs? As a country I don't think so. Nobody can tell U.S. to behave, unlike to Japan, that's why we have Vietnam or Iraq.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

You are right. It just uses napalm or drones to erase them from existence altogether.

I suppose it kinder by one set of standards, but you have to ask, what is the greater purpose of the US's expansionism? And what has it got to do with the American people?

As soon as you feel yourself getting suck into an "us and them" football team type mentality, you should recognize that you've been suckered and lost that overview.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

@JapanGa; "My opinion, personally is that Okinawa should have been nuked first, and the war would have ended fast with much less casualties over all.

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

You need to be acquainted with mainland Japanese or learn psycho and their views of Okinawa. Okinawa attack did not influence Military Govt. Please learn about Japan and Okinawa history

2 ( +3 / -1 )

I think the question of regret is wrong. Americans certainly wish it never happened but also know had Japan not spent a couple decades colonizing Korea, starting their part in ww2 and doing what the imperial military did, there never would have been a bombing. The regret question implies America was the aggressor, running around attacking hapless countries. since that isn't the case, no regret, Japan didn't have to invade others. On the other hand, feeling horrified by the individual japanese people who we're killed is also a feeling Americans have but instead,of regret it would be anger the Japanese government put their own people and America in the situation.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

As soon as you feel yourself getting suck into an "us and them"

It is what it is. 70 yrs ago Allies vs germany, italy & japan. Call it whatever you'd like.

You are right. It just uses napalm or drones to erase them from existence altogether.

You forgot Nuclear Bombs, yes whatever it takes to achieve a desired result- an Unconditional Surrender to the Allied Nations. Thus, peace at last!

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

@kaynide

Thank you for your opinion, particularly for 1). Some people still do not believe that the real reason for nuclear bombing were the wish to test the new weapon on live human guinea pigs and Truman's desire to show Stalin who is the boss on the planet.

But I do not agree with you why Tokyo was excluded from the list of targets. After the great raid in March 1945 Tokyo was a great deserted rubble with no political or any other value. US needed a fresh, juicy target with plenty of casualties.

@Wc626

So, to put a man in cage and to burn him alive is barbarism, but intentionally burn alive thousands of women and children with nukes is a lawful way to break enemy morale? Wonderful logic. As one clever man said, "death of one person is a tragedy, death of millions is just statistics". You've just confirmed the correctness ot this phrase. Congrats, or something.

Lastly, the US doesn't capture women to rape

Seriously?? I've heard a lot what US soldiers did in Japan after the war, and at Okinawa even in 50s and 60s, before the island returned to Japan. If you make a little research, you are for a really big nasty surprise.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Were it not for the atomic bomb, many Americans contend, thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of American soldiers would have died in a U.S,-led invasion of the Japanese mainland.

With all the classified documents being declassified and released to the public to see, it simply amazes me that people in U.S. still believe this narrative.

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

The "victim" card, well America uses it every year Sept 11 to take away more and more of their citizens rights. Japan Gal really nuke Okinawa? There was really nothing there to promote the war. To the others so you (Americans) want the people of Japan to thank you for killing 250,000 people. Then you need to add the injured, the complete destruction and the health effects that have affected their descendants. I read about the 12,000 American dead in the Steel Typhoon but think about the over 200,000 Okinawan civilians and over 100,000 Japanese defenders dead. I read and interpret that the Americans are saying that Japan should thank the Americans for their "kindness" over 10,000,000 Japanese dead in the war. 5,000,000 of these were civilians and a ruined country. My home is still under American military occupation. After reading the comments I am so very angry at Americans. Now the very destroyers of Japan want us to help defend them. Do not count on it! Insert rude gesture

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

@yuri,, 10million LOL Japan didnt lose anywhere near that number, it most certainly would have if the US /Soviets invaded Japan. the vast majority of deaths in WW2 were from soldiers attaching civilians, which is why the death toll in Europe, Asia was so high, majoirty of the civilian deaths were at the hands of the Nazis/ IJA. Before WW2 America was the 17th largest economy and had the 5th largest military, After WW2 it had the largest economy and military, so indirectly Japan created the monster that is the USA today. 30,000people died every day for the total 6 yrs of WW2 outside, 60million + All of WW2 was shocking but for Japan to say it was a major victim of WW2 is totally false. If you want my personal opinion on the most shocking it would be the 6 million jews most of which were children/women, left die slowly from starvation or gased to death in the gas chambers. there hair, gold teeth removed all the luggage, money, belongings taken away to be use in the Nazi war machine.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

The reality was that if not A bombs, entire Japan was rubbished. Tokyo Rose was used to propaganda to US GI (NHK)

GHQ was not like Japanese military Govt. When GHQ planned to destroy Yasukuni to create Horse Race gambling arena, Pope protested against it/ Then we found GHQ listened to. So, southern women decided to appeal to GHQ to stop Japanese custom of northern poor farmers selling baby daughters to south (mainly prostitute houses) and went to GHQ. It worked and J Govt made law to prohibit daughter sales. .We middle school students learned female voting and we had to tutor older women who suddenly received voting right.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

With all the classified documents being declassified and released to the public to see, it simply amazes me that people in U.S. still believe this narrative.

Doesn't natter. The ultimate objective was short & sweet surrender. Why put more american GI's life in harms way when two bombings could make a clear & concise point to the enemy.

Why nickle and dime these tensions? Back then, better to drob the nukes and end it quickly.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Doesn't natter.

I know. U.S. wants to keep it that way, it seems.

Why nickle and dime these tensions? Back then, better to drob the nukes and end it quickly.

That's the point. The atomic bombing had very little to do with Japan's decision to surrender.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

I think it important to point out that one can, in retrospect, view the two atomic attacks on Japan as both necessary and regrettable.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

What about the other 4 million who were not Jews wtfJapan? They too were women and children. Jews were targets but Slavic people suffered in greater numbers. It wasn't hitler against the Jews only.

All one needs to do is look at the island hopping campaign. In 1945 the world was tired of the death and destruction. The pacific battles raged for 3 years with casualty rates extreemly heavy with Japanese. Their loyalty and honor to serve and die was unseen in such numbers prior to 1942. Come 1945 Okinawa when civilians chose death over 'capture' in the advancing US troops. Kamikazes, holdouts after island surrenders, and death before surrender the USA had few choices. Okinawa reassured Truman invading Japan mainland would be very costly in lives.

And to the post shaming the Enola Gay crew, shame on you! These fellas were following orders. These guys need to cope with what they were commanded to do. Do you think they shoul have lived the remainder of their lives in sorrow? To cope you must accept.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

tunned by the backlash, the Smithsonian reconceived its planned exhibition, titled “The Crossroads: The End of World War II, the Atomic Bomb and the Cold War”

Presumably they mean the Pacific war, rather than World War 2?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I wonder what will the Americans and Japanese say if the situation is reversed. Japan dropping the A Bomb in two of US states killing many CIVILIANS by the thousands that is trying to survive to live their normal lives but sandwhich in between countries at war.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

because so many americans are used to their wars killing mostly civilians and they are always told by the teachers in the schools and the people who lead them that the U.S.A. is always in the right. The America Love it or Leave it attitude is to blame and anyone who has never lived anywhere else or spent much time outside of that country believes it without question. The Atomic Bomb saved American lives rather than killed countless innocents is what so many have been taught

0 ( +2 / -2 )

MarkG "only following orders" was what got the Nazi hung. I will NEVER accept that it was required to drop the two atomic bombs. WTF Japan so many Japanese were killed but the other cities bombed and just by being by targets. There was no effort made to spare the civilians. Now the USA wants Japan to help defend them and again it will not happen. We need our weapons to defend Japan. Then there is the American bases which make Japan a target and do not protect Japan. Really Japan can protect itself. I would like to see the current treaty with the USA canceled and the one year countdown to American exit started. Tell them no to the "nuclear umbrella" which is a threat to Japan. The radioactive fallout will kill millions of Japanese. So again and again the more you try to justify the American war crimes, the more you alienate the people of Japan. Again the purpose of the SDF is to defend Japan and only one country has used atomic weapons the United States of America.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

The Japanese people have only their government to blame for all those deaths.

Japan shot first. USA ended it.

Sorry. Don't start no trouble and there won't be no trouble.

War is ugly. Fighting a reserved war never works. We've seen that in the later "actions" - Korea, Vietnam, Iraq-1, Iraq-2, Afghanistan, ISIS. Either you are all in with everything you have or you will loose, especially for evenly matched opponents. Politically, the leadership of America didn't have any choice except to use these weapons. Back home in the USA the deaths of sons and fathers needed to be answered. I was taught in a US college history course that Japan would never have surrendered - even if their people were left with farm tools, they would fight until dead. On some of the islands held by Japan, that level of ferocity was seen.

Until the Japanese government had ZERO hope of continuing to fight, there was no way they'd stop. The military leaders there wouldn't allow it.

Whether any of this is true or not - doesn't matter. All we can do to day is learn, teach, and try to make certain no conflict anywhere in our world gets to that point again. Weapons are the tools of small minded people.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

@bajhista65AUG. 06, 2015 - 03:48AM JST I wonder what will the Americans and Japanese say if the situation is reversed. Japan dropping the A Bomb in two of US states killing many CIVILIANS by the thousands that is trying to survive to live their normal lives but sandwhich in between countries at war.

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

So far there is no none fiction writers interested. Not even in Hollywood. Keep your imagination in yourself.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The atomic bombing had very little to do with Japan's decision to surrender.

What was the main reason?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Oh - almost forgot - who killed 10,000,000-20,00,000 of the Chinese people in WW2? It wasn't the USA or Germany or Russia. 12M Chinese civilian deaths is the number from multiple sources.

2.5M Koreans dead too.

Who should have answered for those lives? What would have been an "appropriate" response for all those dead people? How should any country willing to do that much killing be treated?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

What was the main reason?

Soviet's engagement against Japan.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/05/30/the-bomb-didnt-beat-japan-stalin-did/

To be exact, it was 18 minutes after Japanese authroity was informed that the Soviets attacked Manchuria.

http://www.sankei.com/life/news/140909/lif1409090011-n1.html

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

@Papi2013AUG. 05, 2015 - 08:25PM JST Japan always is the victim.

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

Japan used to be proud of aggresser. And went all over Examples

China Tairiku Seiha

East Asia Daitoa Kyoeiken

USA Amerika shinryaku

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Oh - almost forgot - who killed 10,000,000-20,00,000 of the Chinese people in WW2? It wasn't the USA or Germany or Russia. 12M Chinese civilian deaths is the number from multiple sources.

theFu, even the Chinese don't claim such a big number. They were in civil war at that time.

Japan never demanded any apology, why do Americans keep criticizing Japan as if US were angel state?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

My dad was in Europe in the army in the spring of 1945. A good chance he would have been shipped to Asia to fight. If the Japanese killed him there, I wouldn't be here, nor the rest of my family line.

So drop the bomb, and get the war over with early, I say, so many, many, many more people can live. The Allies offered Japan surrender in late July 1945 in the Potsdsam Declaration. Japan ignored it. The US made the right decision.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Americans who try to justify mass murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children so invading soldiers can mass rape and conquer are little different than the Nazis who tried to justify the gassing of Jews. The regret question implies America was not the aggressor, running around attacking hapless countries. As the Philippine Genocide and America`s brutal invasion of China to steal resources on behalf of corporations such as Standard Oil proves, that isn't the case. America didn't have to invade others. It is also noted that by 1945, Americans had started live human experimentation on women and children in the Guatemala Syphilis Experiment and Hiroshima.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

After finally Japan lost war, history articles in Japan mwntionws Rooaebelt Daitouryou MacCarthur Gensui,etc and Truman. wiithout official title; Sorry for Truman but that was the way Japanese felt then.

The rumor that Gen Mac and Truman had argument to hang Emperor did noy help Japanese people's feeling agaist Truman. Hitorians still write just Truman saually even now

2 ( +3 / -1 )

In a biography about Harry S. Truman, the author commented that nobody really knew what Truman was thinking and his reasons for using the A-bombs. However, once when Truman was giving a speech at an American university after his presidency, an angry student confronted Truman and shouted at him about using atomic weapons against Japan. Truman, who never went into specificities publicly about why he ordered the dropping the A-bombs on Japan, let his guard down and shot back, "When you go into a gunfight, you use the biggest gun you've got!" Now, was that really what he was thinking? Who knows? But it's one possibility. It's simple and direct but it fits Truman's character.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The Japanese Navy was destroyed. The Army was intact in the Main Land. Not only we did our self a favor. We did them a favor as well.War they started instantly ended .

1 ( +5 / -4 )

an angry student confronted Truman and shouted at him about using atomic weapons against Japan.

The 1st lib speaks up. Would he have confront / shouted @ Tojo in such a manner, if he ever reached ameican shores?

When you go into a gunfight, you use the biggest gun you've got!" Now, was that really what he was thinking? Who knows? But it's one possibility. It's simple and direct but it fits Truman's character.

What a spot on retort. @ stormcrow, thanks for that post.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

@toshiko "so far there is non fiction writers interested".

Then why many Americans use 'would, could' in their arguments? Such as typical 'If Japanese had A-bombs they would bomb the USA' ? Or 'If A-bombs had not been dropped, many American lives would have lost in result' ?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

nigelboyAUG. 06, 2015 - 02:14AM JST Doesn't natter.I know. U.S. wants to keep it that way, it seems. Why nickle and dime these tensions? Back then, better to drob the nukes and end it quickly. That's the point. The atomic bombing had very little to do with Japan's decision to surrender.

Good point! Typical Japanese arrogance and the custom of sacrificing all else to save face. I mean, it took two bombs and even several days of pondering it over for Japan to wave the white flag. Just think of how many lives could have been spared.

At least the Americans dropped pamphlets before they dropped the bombs (but the Japanese propaganda machine deceived their own folks and told the people there was nothing two worry about.) unlike the Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.

Look! Japan started the war in bully-like fashion and they got their butts handed to them plain and simple. Americans have no reason to feel any regret. They should in fact rejoice that Japan didn't get a hold of a nuke first, which they might have done if the Germans had not been so busy exterminating all their Jews and intellectuals; many of who were prominent scientists who fled to the states and actually built the bomb.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Good point! Typical Japanese arrogance and the custom of sacrificing all else to save face. I mean, it took two bombs and even several days of pondering it over for Japan to wave the white flag. Just think of how many lives could have been spared.

Like I stated, the two bombs had very little do with the surrender. Please follow.

Is this how bad U.S. people are still brainwashed? Fellow Americans. Please tell me Mr. Noidall is an exception and not the norm??

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Like I stated, the two bombs had very little do with the surrender. Please follow.

Hehehe! You're the one that can't follow. And I'm not brainwashed because I'm not hung up on the need for moral justification of the bombing. I'm fine with it. Japan sucker punched the U.S. and in turn got the worse beatdown ever handed to them. So much so that they're still hung up on it seventy years later. I mean in the U.S. No one really bats an eye on December 7th save for those in Hawaii.

The "victim" card, well America uses it every year Sept 11 to take away more and more of their citizens rights. Japan Gal really nuke Okinawa? There was really nothing there to promote the war. To the others so you (Americans) want the people of Japan to thank you for killing 250,000 people. Then you need to add the injured, the complete destruction and the health effects that have affected their descendants. I read about the 12,000 American dead in the Steel Typhoon but think about the over 200,000 Okinawan civilians and over 100,000 Japanese defenders dead. I read and interpret that the Americans are saying that Japan should thank the Americans for their "kindness" over 10,000,000 Japanese dead in the war. 5,000,000 of these were civilians and a ruined country. My home is still under American military occupation. After reading the comments I am so very angry at Americans. Now the very destroyers of Japan want us to help defend them. Do not count on it! Insert rude gesture

You have your own people and government to thank for what happened including the subsequent subjugation of Okinawa. Have you ever asked yourself what would Okinawa be like now if the Japanese had never subjugated the Ryukuans; if they had never went on a killing spree across Asia; if they had never murdered, raped, and subjugated hundreds of thousands in China; if they had never stormed out of the League of Nations because of international condemnation of their actions and because their request to be considered "honorary whites/ Europeans" and not Asians was denied; if they had never cowardly attacked Pearl Harbor while the sailors were sleeping. Have you ever asked yourself that? And yes, you should say thanks. The Americans could've decimated more cities including cultural icons like Kyoto. But they deliberately spared Kyoto and the emperor. God knows that if Japan had one the war, all of its colonies would be cut off from their culture, language and heritage to this day. And the U.S. President would've been hung and put on public display. So yes! Just a little thanks and recognition for Japan's role in it all.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Hehehe! You're the one that can't follow. And I'm not brainwashed because I'm not hung up on the need for moral justification of the bombing. I'm fine with it. Japan sucker punched the U.S. and in turn got the worse beatdown ever handed to them. So much so that they're still hung up on it seventy years later. I mean in the U.S. No one really bats an eye on December 7th save for those in Hawaii.

That's fine. I was merely commenting on the 'justifications' that Americans apparently still use today.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Regardless of which view of the events surrounding the bombings.

Using atomic weapons on humans by humans is surely the equal to the lowest point in human history to date.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

So many poor judgment from people here, both Japanese and others. It is a pity. Learn that:

the reasoning of the strongest is always the rightest. No matter what you think. japanese were and still are completely sheepish people. Very very very little contradiction between them (at every level) any decision of importance is weighted by assessing pros and cons: list takes long time to establish and final choice is never happy choice for any true leaders. If you can't understand the above like vast majority of Europeans now do, then you are going for war again one day.

Thanks for the comments all prior to mine, and wish peace, keep memories living and admit nukes were at a given time the best solution. Among all, there is no real order in violence/brutality, so no need to look for the "winner of the day" about who was worse country.

Keep faith in wisdom, not beliefs.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@Mr. NoidallAUG. 06, 2015 - 12:33PM JST

And I'm not brainwashed because I'm not hung up on the need for moral justification of the bombing. I'm fine with it.

For someone who is fine with it, you are writing a lot which in essence is trying to shove the blame to the other side.

It is pretty optimistic to believe there would have been a happy ending under that scenario. Do remember that "honorary white" status is in that timeframe a way of saying "equal". So you've just agreed that the world's developed nations at that time refused to accept Japanese as "equals". The concept that Japan would have necessarily done well just sitting there seems a bit optimistic at best and naive at worst.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

GW: "The really sad thing in all this is the J-govt at the time & IJA so willingly led their own people to slaughter, THATS where the real blame lies not with the yanks. "

Yes, EXCEPT the decision to use the bombs; that waste hooch of the US, and not because they refused to surrender. It was political and experimental.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

It's definitely a tough question: civilians the world over were being deliberately targeted by all sides, and I bet we wouldn't be having this discussion if the US firebombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki and killed the same number of people as the A-bombs did.

I think the real question is whether A-bombs should have been used against civilian (though with some military), rather than purely tactical targets. In that way it's easy to think that the decision to drop them against innocents was unjustified

1 ( +1 / -0 )

While no one nation is 100% good or evil, Japan and Germany were on the dark side and needed to be stopped by any means necessary. Mission was accomplished and the 'peace loving' and prosperous Japan of today can thank the U.S. for showing them the error of their ways.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Were it not for the atomic bomb, many Americans contend, thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of American soldiers would have died in a U.S,-led invasion of the Japanese mainland.

US nukes have nothing to do with final surrender of Japan.

You should remember that in August 1945 most of Japanese cities were burned by USAF

The funny thing with these super- bombs - it was very hard to find good target in fully destroyed Japan.

2 more burned cities - what's new ?

6th and 9th of August Hiroshima&Nagasaki ... But 9 th of August Russian tanks rushed toward Korea......

Before Japan think - Russia can be used as neutral mediator...

Russian air bases were quite near Japan... Russian Army was excellent and ready to fight not only on continent but on islands also....

Nobody in Moscow was afraid of relatively weak, undersupplied and old fashioned Japanese Army

Josef Stalin planned to occupied Hokkaido without any help and very quick

It was THE END...

For US it was very important to demonstrate new weapon to the rest of the world...

1 ( +4 / -3 )

@Nigelboy: you are not really going to like this, but mosAmericans don't really care that deeply about the bombs. Its not something that is heavily discussed outside of history or ethics. It is just nit something that enters regular conversation.

Moreover, most Americans are rather proud of having nukes- you can see it in many TV movies being referred to as our ultimate weapon.

It is not that we are brainwashed or whatever... It is just that it is a historical happening, nothing more. It just simply isnt a topic of discussion beyond academic situations.

Actually what surprises me is that people are still talking about it here but neglect to compare it to Tokyo. The firebombing of Tokyo killed more civilians than either individual bomb. Why is there no deep discussion or rancor for that? If people are truly angry over the loss of life, why is that not the focus of discussion instead of the nukes?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Asakaze

Love the name.

Vengeance for what? And why are so sure about the Imperial Family?

The Russian/Japanese war.

The Russians were quite fond of taking down Imperial Families. Nicholas II??

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The firebombing of Tokyo killed more civilians than either individual bomb. Why is there no deep discussion or rancor for that?

Probably due to the relative ease of dropping a nuke as opposed to constant fire bombing. I agree that killing people in general should be condemned, but some methods like biological weapons just seem worse than others.

The necessity of the bombs is something that even scholars debate, so I don't think it will be resolved in the JT comments section. I will say though, that looking at the behind-the-scenes of the US decision shows strong motivations other than ending the war quickly. It's pretty clear that Truman's advisers wanted to show the world (mainly Russia) who was going to lead the post-war era with Britain and most of Europe (the previous empire builders) in rubbles.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@yamashi: supposition is not none fiction novels. If any such novele you know write name. I am sure Sony Entertainment in USA will be interested.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

there are different types of WMD.

On April 22, 1915, German forces shock Allied soldiers along the western front by firing more than 150 tons of lethal chlorine gas against two French colonial divisions at Ypres, Belgium. This was the first major gas attack by the Germans, and it devastated the Allied line.

But as a rule nobody called this attack - crime.

It was made against army - not civilians.

Poisoning gas as a nukes - weapon of muss destruction.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

"It is well that war is so terrible, otherwise we should grow too fond of it." Robert E. Lee during the American Civil War (1861-1865) The obvious horror of THE BOMB likely resulted in a Cold War standoff (remember MAD?: Mutual Assured Destruction) in contrast to the opened Pandora's Box of the Post Cold War extremist wars and lone wolf terrorist strikes all over the world now.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Amazing, you are proof war time propaganda sticks even 70 years later Melonbarmonster.

There's an old Cold War joke that goes, "the big difference between the Russia people and the American people was that the Russian people knew they were being fed propaganda".

Reading comment after comment of "they shot first" etc etc etc, it's really clear that too many Americans still don't realize that and are still at the Kool Aid.

Rather than use the title "few American regret", I'd suggest "most Americans still duped and just as racist towards non whites as ever". Add into that the Koreans etc and these topic seem spiral quickly into a nasty insanity.

Don't people realize, the reason why the Hiroshima and Nagasaki debate is being kept alive and justified, is to justify a continued equally barbarous responses that have been going on since the Korean right up to the Middle East and Afghanistan today?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Actually what surprises me is that people are still talking about it here but neglect to compare it to Tokyo. The firebombing of Tokyo killed more civilians than either individual bomb. Why is there no deep discussion or rancor for that? If people are truly angry over the loss of life, why is that not the focus of discussion instead of the nukes?

kaynide

Good question. It's the deadliest two day even in modern history but never gets even a footnote in the U.S. textbook.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@kaynide AUG. 06, 2015 - 04:51PM JST

Actually what surprises me is that people are still talking about it here but neglect to compare it to Tokyo. The firebombing of Tokyo killed more civilians than either individual bomb. Why is there no deep discussion or rancor for that? If people are truly angry over the loss of life, why is that not the focus of discussion instead of the nukes?

Well, there is something special about killing 100,000 with ONE bomb and spewing everlasting radiation everywhere.

It is not that we are brainwashed or whatever... It is just that it is a historical happening, nothing more. It just simply isnt a topic of discussion beyond academic situations.

Are you sure? Because your position is right where the American government needs it to be. Not a big part of your identity, but that limited part is positive, and that translates to a positive image of atom bombs. Which is nice because the US is the strongest nuclear power :-)

If you need a brainwash check, look at this:

From America's point of view at that time, it seemed that Japan was not going to go down without swinging and while they might have surrendered...they might not have either. We honestly can't say what would have been. For all we know, it could have become a long drawn out ground war with even more Japanese civilians forced to jump off cliffs. We simply can't say. Heck if Russia did get the chance to invade, Japan might have become divided up between USSR and the allies a la Germany... not exactly a dream situation there right?

That's essentially the stereotypical American narrative - that the bombs are the least bad option to end the war.

But, consider. If the priorities are: A) getting Japan out of all those territories they occupied since 1931 B) not giving Russia a piece of Japan, because that's not good for America C) without conducting mass killings of civilians by America's hand (Americans are good guys, after all) D) without incurring casualties in invading Japan proper

Then an option that would meet all these necessities would be to offer peace, say sometime after Leyte, which is basically when the Japanese Navy (what they'll need for aggression) got knocked back to being effectively a coastal defence force. Think if they offer peace in exchange for getting out of everywhere but Korea and Taiwan (since the West nodded at these, it is actually a bit hypocritical to change their minds). Since they hadn't really bombed Japan yet, there is still plenty of industry left to squeeze a suitable amount of war reparations from.

That's a path that wasn't tried, and while there may be negatives (other than to the pride), I've yet to hear of them because this path is so rarely discussed. It is completely blotted out of popular discussion. Interesting how thi happened, no?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Asakaze Love the name.

Vengeance for what? And why are so sure about the Imperial Family?

The Russian/Japanese war.

The Russians were quite fond of taking down Imperial Families. Nicholas II??

@Tamarama

Thank you! It is a destroyer's name, I like warships. lol

The war of 1904-05 was a genlemen's war, no hurt feelings. And the Soviets were satisfied with trophys of 1945 - Kurile islands and Sakhalin, for them the case of retribution was closed.

Nicholas II.... Well, it was Russian Civil war. To foreign monarchs the Soviets were not so bloodthirsty. In 1944 they invaded Rumania (Germany's ally during WWII), and did not touch Rumanian king at that time, he was very cozy with them.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I am really astonished in reading some comments here. Why some americans are still thinking that their fight and their victory is morally right, and that other countries are not right ? If now, arab fighters put an atomic bomb on an american city, killing 60000 people, because they want to stop the Us/anglosax policy in arab countries and middle east, would you think this bomb was a good issue to end war ? Would you think it was necessary ?

Hiroshima's bomb was an imperialist act ( Us imperialism ), and the war could have been ended without this mass killing. One country have Weapons mass destruction and this country is USA, not Iraq as they pretended. Please, Us citizens, admit your governement did bad things too. See your history without closing your eyes. Be more honest than japan who still cannot admit the mass killings of the "great asia" dream.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

"Why some americans are still thinking their fight and their victory is morally right, and that other countries are not right?"

because it was morally right. The bombing -- and then the US military occupation -- established Japan's postwar era. The country has since enjoyed freedom, prosperity, equality and peace like never before in its otherwise grim and intolerant history.

-2 ( +2 / -5 )

@JeffLee"The country has since enjoyed freedom"

It belongs to nature of Japan, to Japanese people and Americans have nothing to do with it.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

"Americans have nothing to do with it."

Americans wrote Japan's Constitution, which specifies and guarantees the freedoms that exist today in Japan.

1 ( +2 / -2 )

Getting back to the headline: why should Americans regret the Enola Gay? You have to remember: if there was no Pearl Harbor then there would be no Hiroshima and Nagasaki. There are no rules in war! If you initiate trouble then you have to be ready for whatever comes at you. In a war someone has to die, and I'd rather it be your people than mine. It's so disgusting to watch people debate morality in the face of war. I mean, come on! Really?

-1 ( +1 / -3 )

Err, JeffLee, which alternative reality do you come from?

Have you ever heard of Edo Period.

250 years of peace and, arguably, the most refine society and certainly the most sustainable society of it's time. Possibly all time.

@Mr. Noidall

If there was no USA pouring in millions of dollars worths of arms and supply thousands of military advisors to the Chinese, there would have been no Pearl Harbor.

If there was no Perry and the Black Ships, there would have been no Meiji Japan.

If there was no Manifest Destiny and Asian expansion, there would have been no conflict between the USA and Japan.

Where do you draw the starting line?

Folks, please get it into your heads for once and for all, the USA was already in the war before Pearl Harbor.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

@Mr.Noidall "There are no rules in war!"

Only rotten cowards could bomb women and children instead of fighting armed forces. Period.

-3 ( +1 / -3 )

Strangerland...you said it so clear above. Re "it was a bad thing with a good result". End of debate.

1 ( +1 / -1 )

Harldly.

It was a bad thing that resulted in more bad things for more Asian nations. Japan was just a stepping stone on USA, Inc's march into Asia.

The USA had no right whatsoever to be on the Asian side of the Pacific. Hawaii and Guam, the Philippines, then Japan ... Asians would have suffered far less if the USA had just kept its self-serving meddling out of Asia.

That is the reason for all the so called "patriotic" distraction and why Pearl Harbor etc is so hyped up. The elite needs a cover for what was really going on and, sadly, many Americans are just too intellectually lazy to look deeper into what was going on.

-3 ( +1 / -3 )

American can justify anything

1 ( +2 / -1 )

GEE, saving the world from turning into a evil nightmare, why not! And let's not forget those wonderful Russians and Yugoslavians who help stop the evil nightmare. Some of you people are so vacant.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

In a war, the first and foremost priority is the lives of their own side - they're the ones who have to explain to the mothers back home why more of their sons and daughters have to die to lessen the deaths on the other side.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@JeffLeeAUG. 08, 2015 - 09:03AM JST

The country has since enjoyed freedom, prosperity, equality and peace like never before in its otherwise grim and intolerant history.

I don't know, Jeff, I've been told the Taisho era wasn't bad either.

It is actually an interesting problem of what Japan and East Asia would be like if they somehow managed to get a peace around the end of 1944.

While there is a debate on how much of the Japanese Constitution America wrote, it is indisputable that the current Constitution was beyond the zeitgeist of the Japanese political elite, so it is impossible to see Japan putting it in place on their own. However, in terms of the actual rights and freedoms of modern Japanese people, it is constructible from the old Meiji with the correct interpretations.

If anything, one problem with the Japanese Constitution is that it is too good for Japan. Many would agree that the Japanese elite do not fully fulfill the Constitution, and part of it (the other part being every elite's silent wish to take away the common's rights) because their zeitgeist isn't there. The alternative of them "sapping" up to a better position rather than it being installed and then incompletely fulfilled is interesting.

One thing that is very likely to happen is that the rights of the military would be greatly restricted. It is interesting how in fact, Japan's defense % of GNP is a very healthy <3% all the way up to 1937. With the inevitable reparations, the cut will obviously come from the military. With a failure and without wars to fight, militaries (unlike Fascism) cannot legitimately demand powers.

As for China, without one additional year of war wearying the Nationalists more than the Communists, what may have happened is a Nationalist victory or some kind of N/S split. Either would actually be favorable to the US. No N/S Korea, no Taiwan problem.

There is actually quite a bit to be optimistic about in this scenario.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

War is war, if Japan had the bomb I feel 100% sure Japan would have use it against their enemies. If you look at all of the atrocities that Japan committed during that time the mind set was kill or be killed. Just as many Japanese here want to point fingers at Americans and of course we point fingers back but remember if you start something don't expect to just walk away easy. Why should America apologize to Japan if anything Japan should be thanking the U.S. Because Russia was ready to end life there and turn the Japanese peninsula into ruble worse than what the U.S. Done by dropping the Bomb so get over it Yuri and Tina W. With that rude finger pointing back at you.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Why should America apologize to Japan if anything Japan should be thanking the U.S. Because Russia was ready to end life there and turn the Japanese peninsula into ruble worse than what the U.S.

@misunderstood

What is this, sick joke? After more then 100 civilians casually killed in one night (Tokyo air raid), after nukes Japan should be thanking US? After almost all cities in Japan were destroyed? And don't bring "Russians were worse" theme. After Americans nothing could be worse, even a plague outbreak.

By the way, Japan is not a peninsular. Geography is definitely not your strong point, just like conscience. And whom my rude finger pointing at, what do you think?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

After the war, the Iron Curtain would had been worse since it would had stunted Japan's economic growth for more decades, instead of Japan Inc. rising from the ashes from the 1960s onwards.

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