Millions of lives were saved by not having ti invade Japan...

Go ahead...Flame me

SnowWolf,

Prove it. Prove how the killing of tens of thousands of people in a country that was already defeated and trying to surrender saved lives.

Only on the most blinded ideological stance could you make such an absurd comment.

Japan was trying to surrender months before the bombings on one condition: the emperor stayed in place. We rejected and said it should be "unconditional." Then we dropped the bombs and when they surrendered unconditionally we sadistically allowed the emperor to stay in place.

So what you need to do is prove how million of lives were saved by ending tens of thousands of lives in a country that was already trying to surrender.

Good luck with that!

The first bomb was for Japan, the second one was for Russia. Japan was already accepting surrender terms when we dropped the 2nd bomb. We needed to show Russia that we could and would use this new weapon, without blinking an eye.

All of America's sins should be on the back of America's consciousness but it's not. We compromised our collective soul on this date some sixty three years ago. Boooom! And the Japanese people said, "What the fuck was that," and the journey into a hell had only been continued.

Genocide

Slavery

Atomic bombings

Torture

How are we morally superior to others past, present and future?

How do we stand apart from a Genghis Khan?

Where is the moral compass?

Where is the Prince of Peace?

Excuses, excuses, excuses for that which cannot be excused.

What is the point of a god?

Turnoff, you got that right.

A personal experience:
-----------------------------------
THERE MUST BE NO "DAY"
by
Stephen M. Osborn

Where does one begin, in responding to "The Day After"? For me, it can have many beginnings. I remember, as a seven or eight year old boy, looking with awe at the Bikini battered ships at the Bremerton Navy Yard. Then, I grew up in the cold war rhetoric of the late- forties and fifties.

In 1956, as a young navy man, I was at the thermonuclear tests at Bikini, code named Operation Redwing. The first bomb exploded was, we were told, a twenty megaton plus thermonuclear device, to be detonated at an altitude of twenty thousand feet. Our observation point was to be aboard ship at a distance of thirty miles from ground zero. That is a long way; about as far as the doctor was from Kansas City when the first bomb went off in the movie [The Day After, 1983, TV]. It is not far enough.

Most of the crew was ranged on deck, wearing blast goggles and facing aft, away from the blast. I was not on deck as there were not enough goggles to go around. Instead, I picked a spot in a passageway, about thirty feet forward of a light well. Any light coming in would have to come from the direction away from the blast, down about a twenty foot well, then penetrate the passageway. I had my back to the well. During the final countdown, I wrapped both arms across my eyes, one over the other. I could hear the voice on the ship's intercom; 5...4...3...2...1...ZERO.
Suddenly, I could see light, right through my arms! The heat was intense, as though I had my back to an opened furnace door. The silence was deafening. After what seemed like minutes, but was probably a few seconds, the light began to fade. As it grew dark, I eased one arm away from the other and the light was back, but again fading. When it was gone, I moved my other arm. The light through my clenched eyelids was painful, but it continued to fade and I gradually opened my eyes and began backing toward the light well. As the light continued to decrease, it finally got to the point where I could squint up the light well at the sky. The light was brilliant, the sky an intense blue. I climbed out of the well and peeked forward around the shelter of the conning tower, directly at the cloud and the, now fading, fireball.

My first impression was of a weird beauty. The cloud was sharply defined, like a thunderhead, and had a fluorescent amethyst colored glow, which tinged toward a dark red. It is impossible to communicate the scale of the cloud. We were thirty miles away, yet the feeling was similar to when one stands beneath a huge redwood, watching the trunk taper away above you, to be surmounted by a crown of spreading branches far overhead. At thirty miles, it was as though we were right at the base of the cloud looking up, rather than out, at it.

We stood there in silence, looking at the cloud and quietly commenting on the colors. On the right side, close to the cloud, we could see two bright, stationary lights. They were visible for a short while, then they faded.

Over two minutes had passed, then the voice on the intercom began the countdown for the shock wave. 5...4...3...2...1...Zero. The pressure wave at that distance was not violent; there was an increase of about one atmosphere, enough to make your ears pop; the sound was a long low rumble lasting about thirty seconds.

The sun began to rise, lighting the outside of the cloud and overpowering the internal glow. The cloud was identifiable for much of the day, with the. top being slowly torn to rags by the jet stream.

We steamed back to the atoll, rather sobered by the experience. We were quite curious about the mysterious lights we saw beside the cloud. About a week or so after the shot, I was speaking to one of the scientists that had been aboard. He said they also had been puzzled by the appearance of the lights. They finally concluded that what we saw were two bright stars, essentially as we would have seen them from outer space. Apparently, the heat of the explosion was so great that it literally burned away the atmosphere around the fireball. As soon as the temperature dropped sufficiently, the air collapsed back around the envelope, the starlight was attenuated and they disappeared.

We spent, if memory serves, about six months at Bikini. Every so often, we would steam out for a shot. Frequently, we would go out, muster on deck in the pre-dawn, the countdown would proceed, then, "The shot for today has been canceled," and we would steam back to the anchorage to try again the next morning. This might go on for ten days or more before they would finally set it off.

Once, the wind shifted after a shot and we were battened below in the stifling heat while the ship tried to run from under the fallout. Personnel that had to go topside were decontaminated and their clothes were taken for disposal. After a couple of days, we headed for Kwajalein, some four hundred miles away, until it was "safe" to return to the atoll.

Following one, either underwater or surface burst, the cleanup crews told of fish falling out of the coconut palms. The swimming float that had been anchored with huge concrete blocks in the lagoon was found floating at sea. Two of the blocks were found in the middle of the island.

The final shot of the series found us eighteen miles from ground zero. The heat was incredible; though this was a much smaller bomb, possibly a tactical warhead. The shockwave jolted the whole ship backwards several inches. It felt as though my whole body was struck by a sledge hammer. The sound was one sharp crack, as though a rifle or firecracker was fired off next to my ear.

After a few days spent dismantling the establishment on Nan Island, Bikini Atoll, we steamed for home.

In later years, I had nightmares of the bombs going off, where I would be standing, crying, realizing that some SOB had finally pushed the button and it was the end of all things. I would wake up covered with sweat, pulse racing and face wet with tears. Gradually, that dream receded, until I saw the rockets blasting out of their silos in The Day After. I was sitting with my arm around my son's shoulder. Suddenly, I began to shake and my eyes filled with tears. Each time another took off, it got worse. I knew what was going to happen, I had been there!

Since the program, it has been continually on my mind. Watching that reptilian Buckley, "Megadeath" Scowcroft and Kissinger sit there, speaking in Orwellian doublethink, explaining that more is less and death is peacekeeping, made me wonder how long these aging, frustrated cowboys are going to be allowed to determine how much youth and innocence is to die for this "ism" or that one, Weisel, Sagan, even McNamara, made sense. This is one fragile green and blue planet.

Buckley and company brought to mind the lectures we got from some Bircher neighbors, when taking our children trick-or-treating. We shouldn't trick-or-treat for UNICEF because UNICEF gave milk to "commie babies!"

There are no "commie babies" or "free world babies." There are just babies and children and youths and adults, all with their hopes and dreams. The man in the street in Moscow, London, Paris or Athens is no different from the one in New York or in Mill Valley. We are all frightened and we all simply wish to be left in peace. The Russian and the European may want it more, because they have been overrun by war at least twice this century. They know what war on the home front means, something no American has suffered on the mainland since the civil war.

Every man, woman and child on this planet must let his government and political leaders know that nuclear terror must cease. It is no longer a viable option, if it ever was. The odds of a mistake are far too great and there is no way to retrieve the error, once an attack/counter-attack has been launched.

By virtue of our alleged intelligence, we have assumed stewardship of this planet and all of the creatures upon it. We have shown great callousness and ignorance in the exploitation of earth's natural resources, the casual dumping of toxic wastes and the wholesale slaughter of entire species. With wisdom and patience, some of these blunders can be retrieved, but with the development of nuclear technology, we have met our destroyer, one way or the other, if we do not call a halt to it. We cannot dispose of spent fuel and refining waste in a safe manner. The cancer and birth deformation rate has risen enormously since we began using it, there is no defense against nuclear attack or terrorism and there have been few signs of sanity or good judgement among those entrusted to do our thinking for us. Papers discussing an acceptable number of megadeaths in a nuclear exchange are not of strategic value, they are obscene, a visible manifestation of insanity and immorality.

Mankind has always had a tendency for its technology to outstrip its moral growth, It is time we begin to slow down the technical race and begin to think, not of what is expedient, or will show the greatest short-term profit, but what will benefit the planet and ourselves in the long run. What kind of agriculture will leave the land fertile and productive for a thousand years and more? What processes can be used that will leave only biodegradable wastes? Does society's existence depend on an endless flow of gadgets and novelties, designed to fall apart almost immediately? Must everything be designed to wear out in two or three years? Is it possible to recycle our mineral resources rather than continually mining more and allowing worn out products to decay, or simply rust in storage? Can't we produce crops and see that they are distributed, rather than stored to rot? Why don't we make a major effort to harness and use wind and solar energy for power and make a greater effort to reduce energy needs?

Let us pledge to make a start by informing all world leaders that nuclear war is out. The people of this planet will take no more of fear and terror!

Then, with this as a starting point, let us, as stewards of a fragile planet, begin the process of healing and growing, individually and as a species, to the point where all of this will seem a horrible, impossible nightmare. A lesson to be forever remembered, but never repeated. It is up to us.
-30-
1840 words
-----------------------------------------------
Note: Read on the floor of the House of Representatives by then Congresswoman Barbara Boxer on Hiroshima Day 1984

This madness must end, or we will.

I can prove what ~SNOWWOLF~ posted at 11:38am, ~TRUTHADDICT~ but I'll have to return later, as I have a Doctor appt. So, throw ya later.

abolish nuclear weapons? yeah right. we need something to threaten Irans "nuclear program"! and the rest of the world!

Our equivalent of Psyops in Naval Intelligence had been trying to set up surrender talks with the Japanese government close to the Emperor. This was successful. The Japanese were desperately trying to find a neutral place to meet. All they needed was an American go-ahead. Captain (later Admiral) Zacharias was running all over Washington trying to get an OK to end the war. He couldn't figure out why the responses were all negative until he read the papers on Hiroshima Day. We didn't want peace, we wanted a demonstration. If my memory is correct, Kokura was the target for the second bomb, but they were overcast and Nagasaki was clear and the designated secondary target.

By killing a quarter million people, we shortened the war by just a few weeks, but by golly, we sure showed the Russians what we got! Hooray, hooray.

Old Jeffersonian, your explanation is homogenous and incomplete. You mention nothing of the clique of young Japanese officers willing to hold the emporer hostage in order to continue the war.

Japan was no victim. Who now in Japan wrings their hands and bemoans the fate of the victimes of the Rape of Nanking? Which Japanese politician acknowledges the atrocities of Unit 731? Who holds rallies in Japan remembering the victims who still suffer from Japanese use of germ and biological warfare in China?

A frightening perspective on American Government HYPOCRISY!!!
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/35356

By and large, the USA has failed to come to terms with its atomic legacy.

The need for a military solution is self-fulfilling.

Mass confusion between defene and offense is cleverly cultivated/exploited.

The hidden front of environmental devastation: Nuclear powered submarines and aircraft carriers, and leaky nuclear weapons plants, mines and dumps.

The seeds of a new war generation have been planted in the material benefits to the children of war industries, borrowed from the Chinese, payable with interest at a later date.

The citizen's civic duty includes maintaining laser focus of awareness on the camouflaged military offense and imperial agenda, and the peace alternative.

Conservatives kill.

All the US had to do is use the A-Bomb on one of Japan's deserted islands telling them to watch. After, telling them to surrender or their cities would be next. There was no need to kill all those innocent people!

Firstly when we speak of war crimes, that the other side commits them is immaterial. This seems a common theme of the spin doctors.."well they were worse...look what the did in Nanking"

We acknowledge there was a mass murder in Nanking. Peoples were put on trial hung.

If we subscribe to the rule of law, and what is moral we do not excuse oursleves by claiming the other side worse. If a persons daughter raped, he does not suddenly have the moral right to rape someone elses daughter.

Now the other myth is of millions of casualties as the japanese fight to the bitter end.

More nonsense. The Japanese were an Island nation, cut off from all supplies. The merchant marine destroyed. The navy was no more. They had some planes left, but no fuel to fly them . So bad off they were for planes and pilots they sent empty aircraft carriers to get blown away at Leyte.

They had been seeking a surrender for months and were continually rebuffed.

As to the "fanatical troops" of the Emperor. They surrendered en-masse in Burma to General Slim even though they outnumbered his own forces. They did not fight to the death.

Nor they did these fanatical troops fight to the death against the Soviets. They surrendered en-masse by the hundreds of thousands. Indeed Japanese Historians claim that this mass surrender of hundreds of thousands of troops was what convinced Japan to surrender. It signaled to them the soldiers would not fight any more.

Eisenhower and Nimitz both opposed the use of the bomb. Both claiming Japan already defeated.

As Noam Chomsky has pointed out, the war crimes laws as put in place for the Nuremberg trials were such that anything that both the Axis and the Allies did (for example, the bombing of civillian populations) were not considered war crimes. As well, what the Japanese did has no bearing on whether H&N were war crimes, any more than Saddam's atrocities have any bearing on the fact that the invasion of Iraq was a war crime.

The Nazis and the Japanese needed to pay for their crimes, but in many ways what we got was victor's justice.

nicnews: "All the US had to do is use the A-Bomb on one of Japan's deserted islands telling them to watch. After, telling them to surrender or their cities would be next. There was no need to kill all those innocent people!"

Exactly. One demonstration of the weapon of mass destruction would have been enough. But no. The U.S. government's cult-of-death just had to satisfy their blood lust. I wonder if they wrote insults on the bomb(s) like they always do. I thought the killing of civilians, dropping bombs on cities, was a war crime.

Umn, the question is not whether or that the US was "justified" or comitting a "crime" in using Little Boy and Fat Man.

The question is, why, since we have seen and know what these infernal devices can do there are still arsenals enough to destroy the world 30-40 times laying around in incompentent hands such as those of the President of the United States.

Against the context of the arsenals of the US, Russia, Britain, Cnina, France, Israel, India and Pakistan -- the nuke power of NK and the presumed potential of Iran don't amount to more than a fart in a bathtub.

It's my birthday by the way.

>>Japan was already accepting surrender terms when we dropped the 2nd bomb.<<

Wrong. Japan was NOT accepting surrender terms when the second bomb was dropped. It was not until 6 days after the second bomb that they surrendered. If Japan wanted peace they could have surrendered unconditionally any day before the second bomb or the first bomb for that matter. They knew that there was no possibility of a surrender of any sort unless it was unconditional. They prolonged the war, they caused their own destruction, at the time they accepted responsibility and now they are trying to weasel out of it. Japan caused the atomic bombing pure and simple.

Just an interesting (related)aside I was reading on another site...

Although Marijauna isn't a disqualifier for access to Nuclear Weapons launch keys (Bill Clinton and Obama and more than likely Bush also) Admitted Cocaine use IS..

(b) Except for the category of individuals identified in subparagraph B.2.a.(2)(a), above, or otherwise provided in this
Directive, any pre-Service use, admitted or otherwise discovered, of illicit drugs such as heroin, heroin derivatives, cocaine, "crack," phencyclidine (PCP), lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), ecstasy," or other "designer" drugs, amphetamines, barbiturates, or other narcotic drugs not prescribed by proper medical authorities, and anabolic steroids shall
render an individual ineligible for admission to or retention in PRP duties. The individual shall not be certified into the program or shall be permanently decertified, and those actions shall be made a matter of
permanent record.

What that means is if elected Obama could not legally have access to the Nuke launch codes...thats a bit embaressing isn't it..although I suspect most of you here think that would be good

>>Exactly. One demonstration of the weapon of mass destruction would have been enough. But no.<<

Wrong LillyLou. They didn't surrender after the first one killed 200,000+ people. What demented universe are you from where you think that bombing an island would have made them more able to surrender?

Also these were not innocent people, they were the enemy and they were working for the most part in war industries. Hiroshima was the home of the torpedo factory where they built the torpedos that were used at Pearl Harbor. Nagasaki was the military command post of the army group responsible for Southern Japan. Then as now, if you have your military bases and factories in cities, the cities become a target. No innocents there only enemy.

Quoting from a 2004 article by "Mickey Z," entitled "59 Years After Hiroshima; Two Traditions: WMDs and Misinformation" —

"Although hundreds of thousands of Japanese lives were lost in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the bombings are often explained away as a 'life-saving' measure - (i.e., the saving of) American lives.

"Exactly how many lives saved is, however, up for grabs. … In defense of the U.S. action, it is usually claimed that the bombs saved lives. The hypothetical body count ranges from 20,000 to 'millions.'

"In an August 9, 1945 statement to 'the men and women of the Manhattan Project,' President Truman declared the hope that 'this new weapon will result in saving thousands of American lives.'

"'The president's initial formulation of 'thousands,' however, was clearly not his final statement on the matter to say the least,' remarks historian Gar Alperovitz. In his book, 'The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb and the Architecture of an American Myth,' Alperovitz documents but a few of Truman's public estimates throughout the years:

" * December 15, 1945: 'It occurred to me that a quarter of a million of the flower of our young manhood was worth a couple of Japanese cities . . .'

" * Late 1946: 'A year less of war will mean life for three hundred thousand - maybe half a million - of America's finest youth.'

" * October 1948: 'In the long run we could save a quarter of a million young Americans from being killed, and would save an equal number of Japanese young men from being killed.'

" * April 6, 1949: 'I thought 200,000 of our young men would be saved.'

" * November 1949: Truman quotes Army Chief of Staff George S. Marshall as estimating the cost of an Allied invasion of Japan to be 'half a million casualties.'

" * January 12, 1953: Still quoting Marshall, Truman raises the estimate to 'a minimum one quarter of a million' and maybe 'as much as a million, on the American side alone, with an equal number of the enemy.'

" * Finally, on April 28, 1959, Truman concluded: 'the dropping of the bombs . . . saved millions of lives.'

"Fortunately, we are not operating without the benefit of official estimates.

"In June 1945, Truman ordered the U.S. military to calculate the cost in American lives for a planned assault on Japan. Consequently, the Joint War Plans Committee prepared a report for the Chiefs of Staff, dated June 15, 1945, thus providing the closest thing anyone has to 'accurate': 40,000 U.S. soldiers killed, 150,000 wounded, and 3,500 missing.

"While the actual casualty count remains unknowable, it was widely known at the time that Japan had been trying to surrender for months prior to the atomic bombing. A May 5, 1945 cable, intercepted and decoded by the U.S., 'dispelled any possible doubt that the Japanese were eager to sue for peace.' In fact, the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey reported shortly after the war, that Japan 'in all probability' would have surrendered before the much-discussed November 1, 1945 Allied invasion of the homeland.

"Truman himself eloquently noted in his diary that Stalin would 'be in the Jap War on August 15th. Fini (sic) Japs when that comes about.'

"Many post-Hiroshima/Nagasaki sentiments questioned the use of the bombs.

"'I thought our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives,' said General Dwight D. Eisenhower; while, not long after the Japanese surrender, New York Times military analyst Hanson Baldwin wrote, 'The enemy, in a military sense, was in a hopeless strategic position. Such then, was the situation when we wiped out Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Need we have done it? No one can, of course, be positive, but the answer is almost certainly negative.'

"Was it the cold logic of capitalism that motivated the nuking of civilians? As far back as May 1945, a Venezuelan diplomat was reporting how Assistant Secretary of State Nelson Rockefeller 'communicated to us the anxiety of the United States government about the Russian attitude.'

"U.S. Secretary of State James F. Byrnes seemed to agree when he turned the anxiety up a notch by explaining how 'our possessing and demonstrating the bomb would make Russia more manageable in the East . . . The demonstration of the bomb might impress Russia with America's military might.'

"General Leslie Groves was less cryptic: 'There was never, from about two weeks from the time I took charge of this Project, any illusion on my part but that Russia was our enemy, and the Project was conducted on that basis.'

"During the same time period, President Truman noted that Secretary of War Henry Stimson was 'at least as much concerned with the role of the atomic bomb in the shaping of history as in its capacity to shorten the war.'

"What sort of shaping Stimson had in mind might be discerned from his Sept. 11, 1945 comment to the president: 'I consider the problem of our satisfactory relations with Russia as not merely connected but as virtually dominated by the problem of the atomic bomb.'

"Stimson called the bomb a 'diplomatic weapon,' and duly explained: 'American statesmen were eager for their country to browbeat the Russians with the bomb held rather ostentatiously on our hip.'

"'The psychological effect [of Hiroshima and Nagasaki] on Stalin was twofold,' proposes historian Charles L. Mee, Jr. 'The Americans had not only used a doomsday machine; they had used it when, as Stalin knew, it was not militarily necessary. It was this last chilling fact that doubtless made the greatest impression on the Russians.'

"It also made an impression on J. Robert Oppenheimer, the scientific director at Los Alamos. After learning of the carnage wrought upon Japan, he began to harbor second thoughts and he resigned in October 1945.

"In March of the following year, Oppenheimer told Truman: 'Mr. President, I have blood on my hands.'

"Truman's reply: 'It'll come out in the wash.'

"Later, the president told an aide, 'Don't bring that fellow around again.'

"'Why did we drop [the bomb]?' pondered Studs Terkel at the time of the fiftieth anniversary of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings.

"'So little Harry could show Molotov and Stalin we've got the cards,' he explained. 'That was the phrase Truman used. We showed the goddamned Russians we've got something and they'd better behave themselves in Europe. That's why it was dropped. The evidence is overwhelming. And yet you tell that to 99 percent of Americans and they'll spit in your eye.'

Click here for the entire article — http://www.counterpunch.org/mickey08042004.html

And so atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki:

a.) to graphically demonstrate to the Soviet Union the blood and guts — the horror — that takes place when atomic bombs are dropped on large urban areas; and

b.) to show the Soviet Union that the United States is ready, willing and able to use such a horrible weapon — recklessly and unnecessarily.

This brings to mind the so-called "Christmas bombing" of North Vietnam by Richard Nixon. … This carpet-bombing of North Vietnam in 1972 was also known as the "Madman Strategy." …

That is to say, Nixon and Kissinger wanted the North Vietnamese to make certain concessions at the Paris Peace talks
– concessions the North Vietnamese were unwilling to make. And so Nixon and Kissinger carpet-bombed North Vietnam in an effort to convince the North Vietnamese that Richard Nixon had, quite literally, gone mad.

Kissinger's orders to the air force were quite simple: "Bomb anything that moves."

The "final tally" for these two mass murderers, Kissinger and Nixon, was:

-- between 2,000,000 to 3,000,000 Vietnamese dead; at least 900,000 of whom were civiilians;

-- 58,000+ American soldiers dead;

-- over 14,000,000 Indochinese either killed, wounded or made refugees.

NICNEWS & LILLULU

yeah, i wonder why they didn't do that?????? any ideas???

CHUCK CLIFF

happy birthday...........mine is on friday. something good happened on that day in 1988 = the iraq-iran war ended.

"The Lies of Hiroshima Are the Lies of Today"

Excerpt: "The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a criminal act on an epic scale. It was premeditated mass murder that unleashed a weapon of intrinsic criminality. For this reason its apologists have sought refuge in the mythology of the ultimate "good war", whose "ethical bath", as Richard Drayton called it, has allowed the west not only to expiate its bloody imperial past but to promote 60 years of rapacious war, always beneath the shadow of The Bomb.

The most enduring lie is that the atomic bomb was dropped to end the war in the Pacific and save lives. "Even without the atomic bombing attacks," concluded the United States Strategic Bombing Survey of 1946, "air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion. Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that ... Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."

The National Archives in Washington contain US government documents that chart Japanese peace overtures as early as 1943. None was pursued. A cable sent on May 5, 1945 by the German ambassador in Tokyo and intercepted by the US dispels any doubt that the Japanese were desperate to sue for peace, including "capitulation even if the terms were hard". Instead, the US secretary of war, Henry Stimson, told President Truman he was "fearful" that the US air force would have Japan so "bombed out" that the new weapon would not be able "to show its strength". He later admitted that "no effort was made, and none was seriously considered, to achieve surrender merely in order not to have to use the bomb". His foreign policy colleagues were eager "to browbeat the Russians with the bomb held rather ostentatiously on our hip". General Leslie Groves, director of the Manhattan Project that made the bomb, testified: "There was never any illusion on my part that Russia was our enemy, and that the project was conducted on that basis." The day after Hiroshima was obliterated, President Truman voiced his satisfaction with the "overwhelming success" of "the experiment".

Since 1945, the United States is believed to have been on the brink of using nuclear weapons at least three times. In waging their bogus "war on terror", the present governments in Washington and London have declared they are prepared to make "pre-emptive" nuclear strikes against non-nuclear states. With each stroke toward the midnight of a nuclear Armageddon, the lies of justification grow more outrageous. Iran is the current "threat". But Iran has no nuclear weapons and the disinformation that it is planning a nuclear arsenal comes largely from a discredited CIA-sponsored Iranian opposition group, the MEK - just as the lies about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction originated with the Iraqi National Congress, set up by Washington."
--- John Pilger
August 6, 2008

BTW, those that argue "Dropping the Bombs saved Millions of lives" will always use that logical fallcy even to Justify the use of such weapons against Iran.

I asked a person that directly wondering whether she supported a Nuclear first strike against Iran if it resulted in 3 million Iranian dead.

She indicated that she did because if such a stike not made and Iran got Nuclear wepaons, more then 3 million would die thus a preemptive strike was showing compassion and a care for human life.

That mindset can never be swayed. Its the smae that argues that had Bush not enacted massive tax cuts for the rich, the US deficit would be even higher.

Or had Bush not attacked Iraq, there would have been more terrorist attacks inside the United States.

PK

The atomic bombings were not repeat not justified either militarily or morally. The tens of thousands of Japanese victims were in fact but guinea pigs in a horrific scientific experiment to determine what the effects would be when an atomic bomb was set off above a large city. The myth that the Japanese would not have surrendered without the bombings and that a US/Russian invasion of the mainland would have been necessitated without the bombings has been proven false. General Eisenhower and Admiral Leahy repeatedly said that the bombings were not dictated by military necessity. All the Japanese wanted was that the Emperor be kept on in a figure head position after the surrender. All this and more is well documented in UMD Professor Gar Alperovitz' 800 page study "The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb: The Architecture of an American Myth, (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, NY 1995).
All we can do today is hang our heads in shame and beg forgiveness of the Japanese people.

GwNorth

Please, you're comparing apples and oranges. Comparing nuking Iran to the attacks on Japan is banal and simplistic in the extreme. Some students of history agree that Japan was a fractured society even under strict military rule, there's no real reason to believe that without the use of atomic weapons Japan would have surrendered. It's true that it was a nice display of power to the USSR, but strictly speaking, hundreds of thousands DID die at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But MILLIONS could have died in battle and of starvation.

Happy Birthday Chuck Cliff...

Many happy returns

Happy early birthday coco

Nuclear weapons and nuclear energy are likely mankinds most serious error. (Discounting Bush Sr. didn't have his tubes tied before he met Barbara.) But as to President Truman making the decision to use the atomic bomb once that genie was out of the bottle, is a seperate issue.

There were several very important factors that Truman and a handful of others were fully aware of, that were classifed ultra secret at that time in history and were still classified top secret through the 1980s, and most people by far are not aware of them to this day.

If any here were aware of those things, they may very well have a far different opinion about the reason Truman allowed the first atomic bomb to be dropped on Hiroshima. BTW, Truman did not authorize the second to be used. Our Secretary Of War made that authorization behind Truman's back, as Truman was not sure he wanted to use a second one after he saw the resuts of the first.

As to the comment that it's use saved millions of American lives? It very likely did, but it also saved the lives of far more millions of Japanese. Truman had to make that awful decision and he made it, based upon what he was fully aware of. And again, most are still totally in the dark about those important issues, which were available to Truman and a very few others in the year 1945.

Which birthday is it COCO?? ___ 29th I bet.

definite different worldviews...

I agree with revoltnow...and anything I've ever read regarding WWII said Japan was hurtin' but far from finished

we would most likely have had to invade (it was being organized right then and there)...a demonstration probably wouldn't have worked (hell...we had to drop one on Nagasaki too)....

Personally I am glad I didn't have to make the decision Truman had facing him...if you've ever wondered why Presidents look 30 years older after a couple of terms...this should make you understand

The atomic bombs are only a very small part of the horrible things the US has done. Spare me your whitewash, it doesn't work. The US has a horrible place in history. Live with that. The whole world knows, only Americans don't. It's called DENIAL.

lizard...America has freed more people in 230 years than the rest of the world has since the dawn of civilization...thats just a fact...we have flaws and we have warts but this country is far more noble than any other I know...I'm not saying My Country right or wrong but theres way more right than wrong...live with THAT

You are ignorant of some very important facts ~LIZARD~. BTW, your Canada was allied with the U.S. during WW-2. If one lives in a shit house, they smell like shit. So if you say America is a shit house, your citizens lived in it along with us.___Sniff sniff.

America is like a big dysfunctional family...and I can hit my little brother...but if YOU touch him...well now you're dealing with ALL of us...and I love that about this Country

thank you snowwolf and i wish, kem.

You're young at heart ~COCO~.

Most are unaware that Japan had a large and successful atomic weapons program located in North Korea. A country they had invaded BTW, and taken with the help of biological weaponry, "germ warfare" which they also used against the Chinese.

One of the Japanese nuclear physcists was a friend of Einsteins and Albert said the man was one of the very best nuclear wizards in the world. Japan had tons of uranium they had recieved from Germany via submarine shipments.

Japan also had the means to deliver atomic weaponts and bomb ANY city in the U.S. (or Canada ~Lizard~) and Truman was fully aware of that very credible strategic threat. The Japanese tested an atomic weapon six days after we dropped the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima. The Russians knew about that and they wanted North Korea ___ and they got it. The rest is bad history on that score.

Commemorating the conflicting violences that led to the bombing is for me very much the action of remembering as being important. To remember innocence of millions. We lose the opportunity to engage another way, to learn from that - to remember that. To remember to remember at all times.

I almost forgot. Those who might want to write a representative regarding the nuclear arsenal - here is a link to FCNL on the topic
http://capwiz.com/fconl/issues/alert/?alertid=11717776

On Armistice Day, 1948 General Omar Nelson Bradley warned, "We live in a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants, in a world that has achieved brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. We have solved the mystery of the atom and forgotten the lessons of the Sermon on The Mount. We know more about war than we know about peace, more about dying than we know about living."

"In all of earth's sixty-five-million-year history, we are living in the most dangerous of times. The fact that a bomb was dropped on Hiroshima and two hundred thousand lives were vaporized within twenty minutes has not prevented man from dreaming up more ways to fill space with weapons of mass destruction. We were not created for militarism, but to turn our swords into plowshares. We have arrived here today by no accident. We have been summoned by the universe to claim the highest common ground. As the Dali Lama said, the radicalism of our age is to be compassionate human beings. We have been called to bring love and compassion back into the equation and assist others to connect with the deepest parts of themselves. Now is the time to realize, as never before, that when any of us suffer, we all suffer. All life is interconnected, interdependent, and greatly loved by the creator, the sustainer of the universe. We are called by love, for love, and to love."

August 6, 2008: A Revolution of Love + Reflection on the 63rd Anniversary of USA Terrorism:

http://www.wearewideawake.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=989&Itemid=203

At the time we dropped the atomic bomb, Japan was finished. Even if Japan had their own bomb, and we know they didn't now, using it would have been suicidal (the Emperor was not suicidal). Their navy and airforce was decimated, and the country was heavily reliant on imported energy. They were ready to surrender, but with one condition, that the Emperor be protected. Truman knew that on July 8. Yet we still insisted on an unconditional surrender in the Potsdam resolution w/o any mention of the Emperor, which was rejected, and when they finally surrendered unconditionally after dropping 2 atomic bombs on their cities, we allowed them to keep the Emperor.

There were a couple of reasons for dropping the bomb. One, we wanted to see what it would do to a human population center, so it was an experiment of sorts. Second, we wanted to pave the way for a Cold War where the human race would have visuals for what nuclear annihilation would be like, and be duly terrorized. We rule by fear. Similar to the fear mongering on AGW. Third, we wanted to show the rest of the world how tough we were. Rule by fear works abroad as well as at home.

Myths of the Atomic Bombings:

1.Japan was trying to surrender: While its true that elements of the Japanese civilian leadership were looking for a diplomatic end to the war, Japan's military refused to even entertain the idea, and as a constitutional monarchy, Japan needed all members of the cabinet including the military to come to any decision on surrender or a cease fire to be unanimous.

2.Japan was defeated: Japan may have lost the ability to project power beyond its home islands by the end of the war, and their country was in shambles, Japans leadership had drawn up contingency plans for every able bodied civilian to fight an invasion

3.It didn't save lives: The Japanese War Ministry on August 1, 1944, ordering the disposal and execution of all Allied prisoners of war, numbering over 100,000, if an invasion of the Japanese mainland took place.

4.The Soviets entry into the war caused Japan to surrender: The Soviets would have needed at least 18-30 months to launch an invasion on Japan. While the Red Army was able to invade Manchuria, the Soviets had no logistical capability to invade any of the Japanese main islands and it would have taken a long time for them to prepare and stage for an invasion.

You are "assumng" that's why the "bomb" was used ~MIMICCS~.

Truman was fully aware of these following things by May of 1945.

(1) Japan had a nuclear weapons program and they had far more weapons grade uranium than we had been able to produce by that time. Germany had shipped supplies, including uraniun to Japan with 98 successful shipments, according to the captain of the huge cargo caarrying German sub U-234, a claim which was later verified.

http:www.ww2pacific.com/u-234.html

(2) Japan had the incredible I-400 submarine aircraft carriers and had sucessfully tested thier capability by bombing a remote area of Oregon in 1944.

(3) Truman had been advised by Oppenheimer, that the Japanese Japan could easily use "dirty" atomic weapons on any American landing forces and prevent a sucessful invasion.

You say Japan was finished, really? After the surrender, our forces discovered that the Japanese had 3,000+ aircraft, well hidden in deep caves and fully prepared to be used as suicide bombers. Hundreds were the rocket powered BACA bombers, which we had found were near impossible to stop. You ever been in a fire fight?

Do you know how many naval ships we lost at Okinawa and the Japanese pilots had to fly over 400+ miles to reach those targets. Imagine attempting to invade their home Islands?? The large majority of our sailors killed in WW-2, were killed at Okinawa. An invasion would have been a slaughter on both sides.

Oops sorry, forgot the ___ //s__ and was not allowed to edit.

http://www.ww2pacific.com/u-234.html

In the summer of 1945 I was was at Camp Wolters in Texas taking infantry training. We were scheduled to go to the Pacific theater. After the bomb was dropped it quite possibly saved my life. I am now an octogenarian and had a good life but I often think of those innocents who died on that day many much younger than I was then. We can't go back but we can and must work to eliminate Nuclear bombs from the world.

Japan was not trying to surreneder. That is a false rumor. And when their emperor was about to surrender, he was to be arrested by Japanese army officers and held in arrest in his quarters so that he could not announce a surrender to the public over the airwaves.

Luckily that military coup was screwed up by an air-raid alert and the Emperor managed to reach the boadcast station and announce the surrender. Luck is hard to beat. Either way, good or bad.

Here is a super duper link about atomic weapons dangers and nuclear power plant goof ups.

The chapter about 'LOST' atomic bombs is an eye opener. And we came within seconds of a Chernobyl at least twice, ___ so far.

http://www.lutins.org/nukes.html

We are a very sick people. We can rationalize anything - to some extent that should read, "We must rationalize ..." Terribly telling fact.

Thou shall not kill. How do you ratioalize even one death, if your truly a Christian?

Stating facts and rationalizing are not the same thing.

Kem

That's quite the list. I had an idea of the Canadian accidents. I didn't realize that there were so many overall. In 1960s our Canadian gvt pretended we were not basing nukes here, when we were. In 1980s, despite our gvt pretences to the contrary, cruise missiles made a turn left over my part of the country in their practice runs. The role of our gvt and RCMP in spying on and harassing protestors about all this is a grubby part of our history.

In 1950s my family moved to Central Canada in reach of the Toronto newspapers. At that time, Strontium 90, from atmospheric test fall out was a concern. (It got into the milk in our food chain,we were told) So, on the daily papers, with the weather, would be a Strontium 90 reading. I can't remember the exact numbers but it worked something like this:

Atomic Energy of Canada determined that a reading of 8 was risky. So each day the paper would publish the reading, 4...5...6... And then AEC would revise its info to raise the safety level to 11. So the papers would continue the daily Strontium 90 readings, 7...8...9...And then AEC raised the safety level again to 15.
Eventually the newspapers stopped giving the info on Strontium 90 in our atmosphere altogether.
(That, Kem, is why our fellow CD commentators born in the late 1950s are the way that they are...it certainly explains pet rocks.)

Each day I can look up into our light blue northern skies and see the contrails of American war planes either on their way to the Arctic, or on their way back, carrying who knows what kinds of 'assets.'