Japan Today Get your ticket to GaijinPot Expo 2024
national

Tears, warnings after Japan atomic survivors group win Nobel Peace Prize

42 Comments
By Mathias CENA, Natsuko FUKUE and Tomohiro OSAKI

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

© 2024 AFP

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

42 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Those group being appreciated outside Japan rather inside Japan, well done Japan.

-7 ( +9 / -16 )

Palestinian militant group Hamas sparked the Gaza war by attacking Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1,206 people, according to an AFP tally of official Israeli figures.

If I wrote the above sentence, contained in this article, in a comment about Nihon Hidankyo winning the Nobel Peace Prize "for its efforts to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons and for demonstrating through witness testimony that nuclear weapons must never be used again,” I am certain my comment would be considered “off-topic.”

Seems like the journalists really wanted to link nuclear weapons with Gaza.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

I hope this will encourage the Japanese government to sign up to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons which came into force in 2021.

-2 ( +7 / -9 )

As far as I am aware, no nation possessing nuclear weapons has ever been successfully invaded.

Mutually Assured Destruction has seen no nukes dropped in almost 80 years.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

Not just abolition of nukes but to stop war. It should also be noted that Japan still isn't a signatory to the TPNW, nor did Abe or Kishida meet with ICAN after they received the Nobel Peace Prize. So much for Japan's leadership stance on nukes.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

dbsaiyaToday 08:15 am JST

Not just abolition of nukes but to stop war. It should also be noted that Japan still isn't a signatory to the TPNW, nor did Abe or Kishida meet with ICAN after they received the Nobel Peace Prize. So much for Japan's leadership stance on nukes.

That's a good point: the Nobel committee has done this nonsense before. Maybe the list of actual peacemakers is pretty short.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

I would say that it's about time. A group like this, one I had never heard of, deserves it. There are so few people or organizations around today that actually advocate for peace. The recent poll here on JT showed just how few entities could even be considered.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

To clarify, the article has the order of bombings incorrect. It was Hiroshima first on August 6, 1945 followed by Nagasaki 3 days later on August 9, 1945

2 ( +3 / -1 )

It's a worthwhile anti-nuclear bomb group but I don't see any connections with what is happening in the Middle East.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

It's so sad that Obama's legacy of raining death from above on families and children taints this prize.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

Mike_OxlongToday 09:34 am JST

It's so sad that Obama's legacy of raining death from above on families and children taints this prize.

I guess Kissinger and Arafat winning the award was fine with you.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

I hope this will encourage the Japanese government to sign up to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons which came into force in 2021.

I hope they don't do so until they arm themselves with nuclear weapons like their hostile neighbors Russia, China and North Korea have, otherwise they'll be sitting ducks should any conflict break out in the region. Let's not pretend that's not possible.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

A well-deserved and belated recognition to the victims of the biggest and most cowardly war crime in history and to those who seek peace..

Well done Japan..

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

the ambassadors of the United States and Britain boycotted the event in protest.

Of. Course

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Mixed feelings. I do appreciate the idea of everyone holding hands and working for peace, but the real world does not work that way. Nukes is an strong deterrent for an opposing party considering invasion. Would Russia have invaded Ukraine if they had nukes pointed towards Moscow?

So to say that working towards a world without nukes to create peace is laughable, and against what the supposed "Peace" price should be about. Removing all nukes is possible, if all Western states destroyed their nuclear capabilities, China, Russia and North Korea would never. It’s just making ourselves weak for attack by those rogue nations.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Saw the breaking news yesterday morning on the BBC and the speech live.

It was a surprise to me but I was very pleased. The world need not forget the reality of nuclear weapons.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Russia won't use tactical warheads in Ukraine. Their armed forces have Kyiv on the ropes.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

This report goes far to mention the Middle East (in a distorted manner), but it does not mention the fact that Iran has recently conducted its first nuclear detonation.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

JJEToday 01:59 pm JST

Russia won't use tactical warheads in Ukraine.

That's good because NATO is perfectly capable of clearing that route to Crimea people have been going on about.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

When discussing noclear weaponry, its role and implications, it should also be noted that the existence of the USSR ended thanks to the warning that nuclear weaponry would be applied.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Russia won't use tactical warheads in Ukraine.

That's good because NATO is perfectly capable of clearing that route to Crimea people have been going on about.

Yeah, that ain't happening, sorry.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

burgers and beersToday 03:20 pm JST

Russia won't use tactical warheads in Ukraine.

That's good because NATO is perfectly capable of clearing that route to Crimea people have been going on about.

Yeah, that ain't happening, sorry.

Only because Putin is wisely deterred by NATO conventional capabilities.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Russia won't use tactical warheads in Ukraine. Their armed forces have Kyiv on the ropes.

Yawn...as they have for the last two years, right?

It's a good job you only get paid for the volume of your posts, not the effort you put into them.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

“Japan’s brutal rampage in Asia “ is a very primitive way to describe the Pacific War

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

“Japan’s brutal rampage in Asia “ is a very primitive way to describe the Pacific War

Sounds accurate to me - how would you describe it?

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

This group has a purpose and wholehearted congratulations go out to them. Unfortunately, no nuclear-armed country or entity will ever give up that weapon. It's an ace in the hole and is THE major deterrent to a lot of wider conflicts.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The bombings, the only times nuclear weapons have been used in history, brought to an end to World War II and with it to imperial Japan's brutal rampage across Asia.

Japan's brutal rampage across Asia indeed happened, but the trigger for it was the behavior of America towards Japan in the 19th century. Nuclear weapons were very close to be usen in the cold war, but eventually they were not used because the USSR surrendered and dismantles itself. However, Nuclear weapons will soon be used in the Middle East.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Makes a change from US presidents or CIA assets receiving this so-called prize.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

As I wrote above, nuclear weapons played a central role in the cold war. The USSR decided to surrender and dismantle itself, because it did not want to be hit by thermo-nuclear weaponry. However, few people are aware about the circumstances of the surrender. A secret surrender ceremony took place aboard an American warship that was docking at Malta port, in the Mediterranean Sea. It was agreed that the Soviets would not be required to tell their people about the surrender, but instead tell to their people that the USSR decided, from its own will, to perform a rearrangement. In Russian, this rearrangement was known as "Perestroyka".

2 ( +2 / -0 )

As I wrote above, nuclear weapons played a central role in the cold war. The USSR decided to surrender and dismantle itself, because it did not want to be hit by thermo-nuclear weaponry. However, few people are aware about the circumstances of the surrender. A secret surrender ceremony took place aboard an American warship that was docking at Malta port, in the Mediterranean Sea. It was agreed that the Soviets would not be required to tell their people about the surrender, but instead tell to their people that the USSR decided, from its own will, to perform a rearrangement. In Russian, this rearrangement was known as "Perestroyka".

Your knowledge makes the hair stand on end. Obviously, you were present at the " secret ceremony ":) God only knows. God and you:)))

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Primusinter, you can read about the surrender ceremony in the book At the Abyss by the cold war man Thomas Reed (Random House 2004). Reed was an eminent aide to the POTUS at that time, though he preferred to stay in the dark. The name of the POTUS between 1981 and 1989 was Ronny Reagan.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Primusinter, you can read about the surrender ceremony in the book At the Abyss by the cold war man Thomas Reed (Random House 2004). Reed was an eminent aide to the POTUS at that time, though he preferred to stay in the dark. The name of the POTUS between 1981 and 1989 was Ronny Reagan.

If you have read this book, please tell me who signed the surrender on the Russian side.

I'm going to tell it to Russians now....otherwise they're sitting there and know nothing. Oh, my God!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

please tell me who signed the surrender on the Russian side

The Soviet leader who decided to surrender, in order to save his own people, as well as the American people, from perhishing in the thermo-nuclear inferno, was Mikhail Gorbachev.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The Soviet leader who decided to surrender, in order to save his own people, as well as the American people, from perhishing in the thermo-nuclear inferno, was Mikhail Gorbachev.

If to be serious....Gorbachev, and then Yeltsin, made too many treacherous mistakes, betrayals against their country. I understand that, firstly, they had no experience of acting in such a crisis-turning period, and secondly, they were insidiously deceived by Western leaders. They were too trusting. In Russia, they are both cursed. Well.... Now Putin, with the support of his people, is correcting the mistakes of those two traitors...So, do what you have to do, and come what may..

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Primusinter, Gorbachev did right when he surrendered. However, it was promised that no avenge will come in order to pay for the Soviet epoch. It was also promised that NATO will not continue to expand. The recent presidents (Barack Obama, Joe Biden) have retreated from this promise. This in turn has evoked the wrath of Vladimir Putin, who invaded Ukraine. The Nuclear peril is here again, in East Europe, in East Asia and in the Middle East.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

NBOct. 12 09:05 pm JST

As I wrote above, nuclear weapons played a central role in the cold war. The USSR decided to surrender and dismantle itself, because it did not want to be hit by thermo-nuclear weaponry. However, few people are aware about the circumstances of the surrender. A secret surrender ceremony took place aboard an American warship that was docking at Malta port, in the Mediterranean Sea. It was agreed that the Soviets would not be required to tell their people about the surrender, but instead tell to their people that the USSR decided, from its own will, to perform a rearrangement. In Russian, this rearrangement was known as "Perestroyka".

Is this from the Fiction section?

Japan's brutal rampage across Asia indeed happened, but the trigger for it was the behavior of America towards Japan in the 19th century.

A likely story. Somehow that whole invasion of China happened.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

NB, look, explain what it means " he surrendered" . After all it is not a hot war. They could continue information games and the arms race. In Russia, they do not say who won or lost the Cold War. In Russia, they say "the Cold War is over." What was the surrender? I can understand a mutual concession agreement. If Russia surrendered, then it was threatened? What was the threat? Nuclear war?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

PrimusinterToday 01:25 am JST

If to be serious....Gorbachev, and then Yeltsin, made too many treacherous mistakes, betrayals against their country. I understand that, firstly, they had no experience of acting in such a crisis-turning period, and secondly, they were insidiously deceived by Western leaders. They were too trusting. In Russia, they are both cursed. Well.... Now Putin, with the support of his people, is correcting the mistakes of those two traitors...So, do what you have to do, and come what may..

Figures that Russia's last patriots would be reviled in favor of a return to bloodthirsty maniacs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Primusinter, the objective that the Ronny and Reed have set was to end the Russian socialism. They accomplished this objective fully, and celebrated their victory. From their point of view they achieved a resounding victory. The objective of Biden and co is also to subdue the Russians as a nation, and ruin their culture. They feel that the socialist epoch in Russia grew up on the soil of the Russian culture.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

What was the threat? Nuclear war?

Of course. Ronny intended to exterminate the Russian nation using thermo-nuclear weaponry if the socialist system does not come to an end. He was also very willing to pay with the total thermo-nuclear extermination of the American nation. This is all stated clearly and explicitly in Thomas Reed's 2004 book.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

NB, thanks for the comprehensive information, to speak so, "from the other side." Now I understand your point of view. Chapeau!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

NBToday 02:40 am JST

Who would have thought Biden would be such a die hard anti-Communist?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites