Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Nuclear Remembrance, Reflection, and Resistance
We remember the horrors of the past so that we may learn from them and they will not be repeated in the future. If we ignore or distort the past and fail to learn from it, we are opening the door to repetition of history’s horrors.
In August, we remember the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which took place on August 6 and 9, 1945, respectively. Both were illegal attacks on civilian populations, violating long-standing rules of customary international humanitarian law prohibiting the use of indiscriminate weapons (as between combatants and non-combatants) and weapons that cause unnecessary suffering.
In a just world, those who were responsible for these attacks, in violation of the laws of war, would have been held to account and punished accordingly. They were not. Rather, they were celebrated, as the atomic bombs themselves were celebrated, in the false belief that they brought World War II to an end.
The historical record is clear about these facts: First, at the time Hiroshima and Nagasaki were leveled, each with a single atomic bomb, Japan had been trying to surrender. Second, the US had broken the Japanese codes and knew that Japan had been trying to surrender. Third, prior to the use of the atomic bombs, the only term of surrender offered to Japan by the US was “unconditional surrender,” a term that left the Emperor’s fate in US hands. Fourth, the precipitating factor to Japan’s actual surrender, as indicated by Japanese wartime cabinet records, was not the US atomic bombs, but the Soviet Union’s entry into the war against them. Fifth, when Japan did surrender, after the atomic bombings, it did so contingent upon retaining the Emperor, and the US accepted this condition.
The US drew a self-serving causal link from the bombings, which was: we dropped the bombs and won the war. In doing so, we reinforced the US belief that it can violate international law at times and places of its choosing and that US leaders can attack civilians with impunity.
Following the victory in Europe, the Allied powers held the Nazi leaders to account at the Nuremberg Tribunals for crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity. The Charter creating the Nuremberg Tribunals was signed by the US on August 8, 1945, two days after it had dropped an atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima. One day after signing the Charter, the US would drop a second atomic bomb on the city of Nagasaki. Both atomic bombings were war crimes that, if they had been committed by Nazi leaders, most certainly would have been universally denounced and punished at Nuremberg.
Upon reflection, we must come to understand Hiroshima and Nagasaki as war crimes, if such crimes are not to be repeated. We must resist the double standard that makes crimes committed by our enemies punishable under international law, while the same crimes committed by our leaders are deemed to be acceptable. We must resist nuclear weapons themselves. They are city-destroying weapons whose possession should be considered prima facie evidence of criminal intent.
It has been two-thirds of a century since Hiroshima and Nagasaki were destroyed by atomic bombs. There remain over 20,000 nuclear weapons in the world. We must resist the tendency to normalize these weapons and consign them to the background of our lives. They reflect our technological skills turned to massively destructive ends and our failed responsibility to ourselves and to future generations.
Looking back at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, General Eisenhower said that the bombings were not necessary because Japan was already defeated; and Admiral William Leahy, Truman’s chief of staff, compared us to barbarians of the Dark Ages and said that he was not taught to make war by destroying women and children. Einstein said that, looking forward, we must change our modes of thinking or face unparalleled catastrophe. Changing our modes of thinking begins with remembrance, reflection and resistance.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
73 Comments so far
Show AllContinued for GwNorth.
Your prior comments GwNorth which concern Japan offering to surrender unconditionally and General MacArthur sending such terms to President Truman and Truman refused it are a false story... Truman could not have accepted a surrender from Japan without the full approval of China and Great Britian.
In July of 1945 President Truman was locked into the terms and agreements of the US, Great Britian and China at the Postdam Conference in regards to the surrender terms of Japan. Japan flatly refused to surrender until after the bombing of Nagasaki, even though the terms were altered to allow the Emperor to maintain his status.
Japan had the opportunity to surrender and they refused, they could have prevented the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and many of the fire bombings of Tokyo and other cities.
The stories that Japan tried to surrender and were ignored are false, they were offered the following surrender terms prior to our use of the atomic bombs and they would not accept the terms.
Here is a brief portion of the Postdam Conference agreements. number 5 is of great importance.
Proclamation Defining Terms for Japanese Surrender, July 26, 1945
(1) We-The President of the United States, the President of the National Government of the Republic of China, and the Prime Minister of Great Britain, representing the hundreds of millions of our countrymen, have conferred and agree that Japan shall be given an opportunity to end this war.
(2) The prodigious land, sea and air forces of the United States, the British Empire and of China, many times reinforced by their armies and air fleets from the west, are poised to strike the final blows upon Japan. This military power is sustained and inspired by the determination of all the Allied Nations to prosecute the war against Japan until she ceases to resist.
(3) The result of the futile and senseless German resistance to the might of the aroused free peoples of the world stands forth in awful clarity as an example to the people of Japan. The might that now converges on Japan is immeasurably greater than that which, when applied to the resisting Nazis, necessarily laid waste to the lands, the industry and the method of life of the whole German people. The full application of our military power, backed by our resolve, All mean the inevitable and complete destruction of the Japanese armed forces and just as inevitably the utter devastation of the Japanese homeland.
(4) The time has come for Japan to decide whether she will continue to be controlled by those self-willed militaristic advisers whose unintelligent calculations have brought the Empire of Japan to the threshold of annihilation, or whether she will follow the path of reason.
(5) (*Following are our terms. We will not deviate from them*). There are no alternatives. We shall brook no delay.
(6) There must be eliminated for all time the authority and influence of those who have deceived and misled the people of Japan into embarking on world conquest, for we insist that a new order of peace security and justice will be impossible until irresponsible militarism is driven from the world.
(7) Until such a new order is established and until there is convincing proof that Japan's war-making power is destroyed, points in Japanese territory to be designated by the Allies shall be occupied to secure the achievement of the basic objectives we are here setting forth.
(8) The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out and Japanese sovereignty shall be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and such minor islands as we determine.
(9) The Japanese military forces, after being completely disarmed, shall be permitted to return to their homes with the opportunity to lead peaceful and productive lives.
(10) We do not intend that the Japanese shall be enslaved as a race or destroyed as a nation, but stern justice shall be meted out to all war criminals, including those who have visited cruelties upon our prisoners. The Japanese Government shall remove all obstacles to the revival and strengthening of democratic tendencies among the Japanese people. Freedom of speech, of religion, and of thought, as well as respect for the fundamental human rights shall be established.
(11) Japan shall be permitted to maintain such industries as will sustain her economy and permit the exaction of just reparations in kind, but not those [industries] which would enable her to re-arm for war. To this end, access to, as distinguished from control of, raw materials shall be permitted. Eventual Japanese participation in world trade relations shall be permitted.
(12) The occupying forces of the Allies shall be withdrawn from Japan as soon as these objectives have been accomplished and there has been established in accordance with the freely expressed will of the Japanese people a peacefully inclined and responsible government.
(13) We call upon the government of Japan to proclaim now the unconditional surrender of all Japanese armed forces, and to provide proper and adequate assurances of their good faith in such action. The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction.
Those surrender terms were offered to the Japanese government and they refused to accept them.... The atomic bombs were dropped,, an invasion was not necessary, the fire bombings stopped, the killing stopped and World War Three ended, and the Cold war soon began as Russia had the Japanese nuclear bomb facility in North Korea.
Truman and General Marshall had intended to convince the leaders of the nations of the world to outlaw atomic weaponry after they saw what the result was at Hiroshima and Nagasaki... Stalin refused to discuss that suggestion. . .
It appears that after the last Ice Age humanity gradually developed a global civilization, where the majority of the population enjoyed relatively high levels of nutrition, life expectancy and personal freedoms. Eventually, under the combined burdens of overpopulation, overconsumption, warfare and lack of true leadership, this civilization so badly damaged its environment that its agricultural, political and economic systems collapsed. It is conceivable that Homo sapiens as a species could have survived, first in small bands and then eventually rebuilding a new civilization over time, if it had not been for the legacy of radioactive waste that began erupting with increasing frequency during and after the collapse, eventually poisoning the planetary surface for all but the most resilient of lower life forms.
Hi ~~crow~~,,, Is it safe for me to "assume" that well worded post will be cast in bronze and left in a pyramid tomb as a warning for possible space travelers to decipher, who someday may arrive here to visit this once beautiful water world we have managed to destroy?
And for the author of this article ~~David Krieger ~~~ You wrote,,,("First, at the time Hiroshima and Nagasaki were leveled, each with a single atomic bomb, Japan had been trying to surrender."),,, To write the Japanese were trying to surrender is not so Mr. Krieger and you should know it is not so.
The surrender agreement for Japan, which was very carefully penned by the leaders of China, Great Britian and the United States at the Potsdam Conference in Germany in July of 1945, leaders of countries who had been unjustly attacked, their citizens treated with inhuman atrocities and forced to war with the nation of Japan, was the one and only surrender agreement acceptable by the ones who were finally totally in command of the conflict.
It was a fair and just surrender agreement and the leaders of Japan refused to accept the terms of that agreement... If the Japanese had been trying to surrender, they were not to be allowed to surrender under THEIR terms... The Japanese by their own volition had started a World Wide War and they lost... They would surrender only to the terms of the countries who had defeated them and either accept those fair and just tems of surrender, or face the consequences and possible total ruin.
So to say the Japanese were "trying to surrender" is wrong and mis-leading, or to be more blunt and honest, to say so is a lie... The Japanese had an opportunity to surrender to the terms of the mations of China, Great Britian and the United States of America before the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and they refuesed to surrender in a timely and reasonable manner... That was Japan's choice and they suffered the consequences.
Should you write such an article in the future, I suggest that you should not spoil your credibility with such type of mis-information and attempt to deceive anyone as you have with this article, for it is very important for all of humanity to understand that nuclear weapons, including the use of depleted uranium ammunition, should be oulawed,,, forever.
I do hope that you would accept this sugggestion from an old feellow who is only trying to help you with your serious and meaningful mission, or in other words, don't tell any more lies.
WayneWR, I have read your various asinine comments here and mostly managed to resist responding. Please do not bother responding to this because I have no interest in discussing this matter with you. I understand that you want be right. You are not, and although you believe in what you are saying, because you believe in your country, and the history you were taught, you are in fact quite mistaken.
Nothing, absolutely nothing, you write or say or think you know can or will ever justify the horror and criminality of the US using nuclear weapons on Japan.
On a personal note, I hope for your sake you learn two things in what is left of your life so as to make it better for yourself and for the rest of the world. Firstly, you must learn compassion, and secondly, when to shut-up.
“People go crazy in wars, wanting to kill the enemy. If Japan had owned an A-bomb we might have used it. Arguing about the past is nonsense. Now we have to co-operate to abolish all nukes.” - Keijiro Matsushima- Hiroshima resident and survivor.
Well a person who does not want a reply from me to his/her replies to me has stated that my comments are all wrong,,, but the person failed to say why they are wrong or give any evidence that they are wrong.
My many comments on this thread were (mostly) in reply to others who had replied to me and if my comments about the subject of the false stories that Japan was not being allowed to surrender and finally surrendering but not doing so before December 6,1945 are wrong, no one, none, have shown why my comments are wrong. That is because they cannot do so..
The facts of the case are written and set in concrete. The Potsdam Conference papers are available to all to read and understand and I posted the portion of that Conference papers here in respect to Japan's surrender terms for any to read and understand. .
This person also accuses me of a lack of compassion which is a false (assumption) and an unfounded opinion,,, as I have a great deal of compassion for ALL life as any who care to check my posts here at CD can easily see is so. My job during my USAF career was flying search and rescue missions and we put our asses on the line many times helping both military and civilians and saving lives.
I have also stated here on this thread at least twice that I do not agree to war, The Vietnam and Bush Jr wars and others were illegal I deplore the use of atomic weapons and DU use and any killing
I also have explained exactly why Truman made his decisions and have asked many who disagee with his decisions what they would have done if they had been the president and knew what Prtesident Truman knew and none have answered that fair question.
It boils down to this: (1)... The allied forces, China, Great Britian and the US offered the Japanese a very fair surrender agreement in July of 1945, and allowed the Japanese Emperor to maintain his status ... The Japanese refused to accept it and refused to surrender...(2) Japan finally surrendered and agreed to that surrender agreement (after) the atomic bombs were used and Russia declared war on Japan. Whether Russia's act had any influence upon the Japaanese decision is unknown to me, but I would guess it did have some. (3)... All the Japanese had to do was accept the fair and just surrender agreement prior to December 6th and the atomic bombs would never have been used. Col Tibbets was briefed that he may be called to abort the mission if the Japanese did surrender prior to the drop, as Was the crew of Boxcar on Dec 9th.
It is a damn shame the atomic bombs were used, It is a damn shame the Japanese chose war instead of trade, it is a damn shame anyone ever attempted to split atoms, create U-235 and plutonium, but that was done and done by Germany and Japan before the US did it... We will all pay dearly for that horrible error of advanced science and physics and that,,, too late,,, was also the opinion of Albert Einstein.
But there were other scientists who would figured it out eventually.
You make it difficult for people to have patience. I and perhaps some others on this forum only want you to understand the truth that the American government's deliberate obfuscation in understanding both meaning and intent in Japanese attempts to surrender prior to the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima.... only to accept the single condition required after the fact.
Please listen to this video .......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPnBadImnVQ
..and understand that there is no doubt that the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were dropped for secondary or even tertiary reasons, but certainly not because America was not aware that Japan was totally defeated already and of Japan's sincere determination to surrender on terms acceptable to America.
I and some others here have tried to enlighten you. You obviously want to "believe" in something else. No serious historian gives credence to a developed Japanese atomic weapons program at their research facilities in Korea.
You may have served it in good faith, you may believe in its good intentions, but your government lied to the American people and to you. It is a fact of history.
Hiroshima was a war crime, a viscous vindictive demonstration of mass murder of civilians, a crime that contributed absolutely nothing to ending the war, and Nagasaki was if anything a worse crime given the knowledge that the USA had.
~~ Lucitanian~ I see you do wish to continue after all, but I don't need any of your lessons... The facts that are the facts is what I have posted... Anyone can make a video, ayone can say or write anything, like GwNoth has done here.
The {facts} are thus, they are facts and are well documented facts and proven facts not opinions or assumptions.... The Japanese military was not going to surrender, EVER, even if their Emporert desired a surrender.... Even when Hirohito attempted to surrender there was a military coup planned to prevent him from broadcasting the surrender, luckily the coup failed ... Do you deny those facts?
Any surrender offer the Japanese may have presented prior to the Potsdam Conference would have had to be ignored by President Truman, he was not the only world leader involved in that war and he or no other of the allies were going to accept any surrender terms of the Japanese, nor should they have... Do you deny those facts?
The ONLY surrender offer which the allies would accept from Japan was the surrender offer written at the Potsdam Conference... I have posted that docuent here on this thread; have you bothered to read and understand it?... Those surrender terms were firm and could not be debated or argued by the Japanese government, that was their ONLY choice and it was very fair and just surrender terms, especially after what the Japanese military had done... That surrender option was sent to the Japanese in July of 1945, (before) the atomic bombs were used and the Japanese ignored them, refused them... They ignored them after the first atomic bomb was used... Do you deny any of that?
If the Japanese had accepted the surrender terms (prior) to August 6, the bombs would never had been dropped... Do you deny that?__ I'm pretty sure you would... The Japanese finally did accept the terms,,, a bit late however, but that was strictly their choice.
Those are the (facts) and they are undeniable by any honest or reasonable person.
Did we have to use the atomic bombs? __ No!__ Truman could have prevented doing it. We could have invaded... We could have allowed General LeMay to continue the fire bombings and wipe out Hiroshima and Nagasaki and kill many thousands more civilians than were killed by the atomic bombs... If there is a bright side to those additional deaths, it would be there would have been no radioactive poisons released... The other only two major Japanese cities which had not been almost totally burned down, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians, were also on LeMay's hit list.
The Japanese had more than a thousand Kamakazi aircraft hidden in underground caves and runways, we found them after the surrender during the occupation, in fact ahunderd were discovered in 1959 near Tachikawa, many were the rocket powered Baka aircraft which were near impossible to stop, they had devisted our fleet at Okinawa which was several hundred miles distant
We may have had at least a million allied troops killed and millions more wounded and most likely several million Japanese civilians and military killed and their country in total ruins with a strong possibility of then Russia having control of up to half of Japan after the shooting stopped... Stalin would likely have demanded that and he got half of Korea... Would all of that suit you? __ A yes or no answer is suffecient for me, or you could just shut up as you advised me to do.
None of that suited Truman and in addition he had the knowledge that the Japanese MAY have atomic bombs or have them before the invasion began... He chose to use the atomic bombs and the Japanese chose to ignore the surrender terms.
That's how it was and still is and you and others can argue the facts till doomsday,,, attempt to alter the facts and spew out bull,,, but your arguments will not change the facts.
Lucitanian___ You also wrote,,, ("No serious historian gives credence to a developed Japanese atomic weapons program at their research facilities in Korea.").... That also is false... You dont care what you say.
The Japanese purchased equipnment needed to build an atomic bomb from the University of California,, Berkley in 1937... Germany was shipping enriched uranium to Japan and Truman knew of those things, he knew of the I-400 class submarines which were the size of a destroyer, eight stories high and 400 feet long and had a submerged unrefueld range of 37,000 miles and could launch three very effective very fast, high altitude, long range bombers.... How could he gamble the Japanese were not successful as we were? __ He couldn't and he didn't. You ignore those very important facts.
I have posted a credible article on this thread which states the Japanese successfully tested an atomic bomb on Dec 12, 1945. Wherther they did or didn't Truman only knew it was possible they had atomic bombs and if so could and would use them on any invasion fleet and or any of our cities.... The fact Truman knew those possible things and very few others did is undeniable... Google: (Japanese I-400 submarines), or just ignore or deny it and do your thing.
Why were several Japanese nuclear scientists on the I-400 sub that at their Emporer's order surrendered near our coast in the Pacific? __ Why? Google: (naval commaner Thomas O Paine). His report on that submarine was required reading by all US Annapolis cadets. His report of what was found on that sub is still so highly classified it is available to nobody... Wonder why?
You may have your own opinion but I know which way I would go with this one. Either you are a delusional idiot or you are better informed and more capable of rational decision than the following U.S. military officers who were part of the decision process at the time and who disagreed with the necessity of the bombings include General of the Army Douglas MacArthur, Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy (the Chief of Staff to the President), Brigadier General Carter Clarke (the military intelligence officer who prepared intercepted Japanese cables for U.S. officials), and Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet.
"The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in the defeat of Japan." Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet.
"The use of [the atomic bombs] at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons... The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children." Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Truman.[quoted from Wikipedia]
So you know better, but one can only conclude that the use of the nuclear weapons was political decision and had no real effect on ending the war according to the people in charge of fighting it and before you rush to suggest, as you did fire-bombing as per Tokyo as a conventional alternative to the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, perhaps you should actually read the pertinent international laws to which the USA was a bound party, the Hague Regulations on Land Warfare of 1907 and the Hague Draft Rules of Air Warfare of 1922–1923.
So all your speculative assumptions based on dickey unsubstantiated history even if accepted on face value cannot detract from the fact that a war crime cannot be justified under any circumstances. Read the law and understand the USA committed war crimes and crimes against humanity by dropping these bombs. That is the only point I have held here and that you have done nothing to dispute. Rather you have merely tried to justify the unjustifiable.
You are wrong again Lucitanian... MacArthur, Leahy, LeMay and most other generals were totally unaware of the atomic bombs until the first one was used at Hiroshema.... General Marshall was aware as was General Arnold and they didn't argue their use, you like GwNorth here do not know what you are talking about and that is clearly obvious. ... Quote a credible reference for your story please.
Japan had sued for peace?__ No they had not "sued for peace". They had tried to negotiate a surrender with other countries hoping they would forward their terms... As I have repeatedily stated such a surrender opton (was not possible)... In addition, the Japanese military had no intention of surrendering, NONE, even after the bombing of Hiroshima and after Nagasaki and after Russia had declared war on them.... Hirohito wanted to surrender and he very luckily managed to escape from his quarters and reach the radio station and broadcast the surrender... You still neglect to acknowledge the FACT that the Japanese military was not going to allow the Emperor to ever surrender... They preferred to die fighting to the bitter end and they did not care how many other Japanese died with them.
Japan had written surrender agreements but (you still don't get it)... The allies, China, Great Britian and the US, were not going to accept any surrender terms written by the Japanese, nor should they have... Have you ever read the Japanese surrender terms? Russia was not involved with the surrender terms as they were not at war with Japan,,, until after Dec 6, 1945... Once again,,, the only surrender terms acceptable were those written at the Potsdam Conference, which were very fair and just terms and written by the victors, not the losers and Japan refused to accept them which was not Truman's fault.
Now if Japan (actually) wanted to surrender, sue for peace as you and many others have claimed,,, please do tell us, why the Japanese did not accept those surrender terms (as soon) as they recieved them (in July of 1945)? __ You continue to ignore the FACT that Japan refused to do so.. You cannot possibly be that stupid... You obviously can be extremely obtuse and ignorant and one who flat out refuses to accept the facts.
Just answer that one question... Why shouldn't the Japanese have accepted the surrender terms in July of 1945 and surrendered? __ They accepted them in August... Can you answer that fair question? __ You can,,, but you most likely will not... The Emperor not knowing what his status would be is not a credible argument as he finally accepted the terms as written and surrendered
Speaking of General MacArthur, when China entered the Korea War and drove our troops out of North Korea, MacArthur publically demanded that his Commander, President Truman, authorize the use use of at least 50 atomic bombs against China and a full scale war with China... Truman denied that and fired MacArthur because of his public outbursts to the press saying Truman was tying his hands with the Korean War... Do you deny that,,, or are you unaware of it?
So you would have accepted Japan's surrender terms, IF, if both China and Great Britian had agreed to that, which you should realize they would not ever have... Or; you would have invaded Japan and gambled the Japanese did not have any atomic weapons to use on the invasion fleet, and realize millions of civilians would die along with perhaps a million or more allied troops during the landing and the total destruction of Japan, etc. etc, even if no atomic weapons had ever been used again... You would have done that. ...Hmmm... And you insult me because I have a different opinion than yours' and you call me an idiot... My opinions are based upon the facts of that time... Yours' are based upon lies, assumptions and POLITICAL poropaganda which has been published since the war ended.
I'll answer that one question for you... The Japanese military had no intention of surrendering. NONE, and they controlled the issue. Once Hirohito did manage to broadcast the surrender it was over... Their Emporer was God to the Japanese public, not to the military leaders of Japan however.
I agree with you on one thing, the fire bombings of cities, targeting civilians were a war crime and except for the atomic poisons, were far, far worse than the two atomic bombs... There were only four major Japanese cities left standing and many smaller cities entirely burned down with ALL their people burned alive. I am very thankful that stopped. General LeMay and others, including Lehey should have been tried for war crimes,,, Lehey who was extremely pleased with the results of the fire bombings and encouraged LeMay to continue. The losers are tried for war crimes, never the winners.
I have never denied bombing civilians was a war crime and the use of atomc bombs on civilians was a war crime... My arguments are Truman either used them or continued the war as was being done, he chose to attempt to end it and based upon the intelligence provided, Truman justifiably feared Japan may have had atomic bombs to use on our troops, the landing fleet and or our cities. He tried to end it. whether the bombs did the trick or not is an unknown argument. If they had not been used would Russia have declared war on Japan? No one will ever know. The Japanese surrendered after they were used, Hirohito also wanted it to stop.
I do believe it is time for us to stop arguing as we are getting nowhere and it's a waste of time for both of us... Do you agree to that? __ Cheerio.
.
Yeah; that's a shame.... It's too bad that we can't have a friendly, intelligent, adult debate and argue facts instead of someone saying things like MacArthur tried to stop the use of the atomic bombs, when most should be fully aware that MacArthur and almost all other generals including members of the JC of Staff were unawre of the Manhatten Project or the atomic bombs. Vice President Truman was unawre of it until Roosevelt died.
The fire bombing of Japan were horrific with hundreds of thousands of civilians woman, children, babies burned to death or died due to a lack of oxygen. The actual number of deaths will never be known as there never was a official tally of names.
And a person says Lehey said he was against killing woman and children... Is that a fact because it is published in Wiki? He and Admiral Nimitz loved General LeMay's success with the fire bombings.
One tragic thing was when atrosities are done by either side, that seems to make it acceptable to do likewise, thinking and saying, "they asked for it, they started it, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, Karma."
Things the Japnaese military did in China, the Phillipines, Korea, the Battan Death March, beheading prisoners of war, etc... Before Pearl Harbor Americans saw photographs and Movietne News in theatres of gleeful laughing Japanese soldiers in Hanjing, China, holding Chinese babies up in the air who were impaled on bayonets... The Japanese were despised by most Americans at that time in our history... "Japs" as they were called, were not considered to be humans... And I often wonder how we are thought of now by many, after Vietnam and Bush Jr's wars, our use of cluster bombs and DU ammo.
Here is one link for the fire bombings of Japanese cities and a short story from a Japanese who survived it.
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/fire_raids_on_japan.htm
From a Japanese survivor of the fire bombings... (“Stacked up corpses were being hauled away on lorries. Everywhere there was the stench of the dead and of smoke. I saw the places on the pavement where people had been roasted to death. At last I comprehended first-hand what an air-raid meant. I turned back, sick and scared. Later I learned that 40% of Tokyo was burned that night, that there had been 100,000 casualties and 375,000 left homeless.”
“A month after the March raid, while I was on a visit to Honjo on a particularly beautiful cherry-blossom day, I saw bloated and charred corpses surfacing in the Sumida River. I felt nauseated and even more scared than before.”
“We ourselves were burned out in the fire raid of May 25th 1945. As I ran I kept my eyes on the sky. It was like a fireworks display as the incendiaries exploded. People were aflame, rolling and writhing in agony, screaming piteously for help, but beyond all mortal assistance.”
Fusako Sasaki
From the article >>> ("The Americans believed that the massive damage done to Tokyo by the fire raids would have persuaded Japan’s leaders to surrender but they did not. Instead, the B-29 bomber would be needed for another raid – an atomic one").
The Japanese had the oppurtunity to surrender before August 6,1945 and they refused, that is the bottom line... If they had surrendered before then,, this article would never have been published.
~~Gerald~~ you wrote,,, ("Sorry, you assumed incorrectly") ___ I didn't assume anything ~~Gerald~~,,,, I didn't know whom you were referring to nor did I care.
You also wrote,,, ("I support more of what Lucitanian said, and that you're not interested in considering likely facts -- for example how "MacArthur tried to stop the use of the atomic bombs.")
There you show your total ignorance about the subject as much as Lucitanian has done Gerald, who made the same false claim, so I'm not at all surprised you support him/her... Check it out before you display your ignorance.
General MacArthur didn't know anything whatsoever about the Atomic bombs until August 6, 1945, niether did Nemitz, Lehey, Eisenhower, LeMay, Halsey, etc,,, so none of those generals could possibly have attempted to stop the atomic bombs from being used.
You say many tried to prevent it, name them. Einstien wrote a letter of such to President Roosevelt but Truman never saw it and Einstein or Roosevelt never talked or wrote to Truman about it.
There were only four American military generals/admirals and one full colonel, Paul Tibbets who were aware of the atomic bombs and or in in any command in the Pacific theatre prior to December 6, 1945...They were Generals' Arnold, Groves, Marshall and Admiral King... Vice president Truman was not told about the Manhatten Project (until after) President Roosevelt died and Truman became the President.
None of those military commanders ever attempted to prevent the use of the atomic bombs...Some generals said later they didn't approve, including MacArthur. It didn't take long for MacArthur to change his mind however.
As I have previously stated, General MacArthur demanded the authority to use at least 50 atomic bombs on China and have a (full scale war) with China in 1950- 51 after China entered the Korean War and General LeMay supported MacArthur on the use of atomic bombs.
Truman denied MacArthur's repeated demands for that war with China...Check that out too, those are all FACTS not assumptions or rumors or propaganda.... You are wrong and you do not know what you are talking about ,,, Like you said,,, "sorry".
I'm always amazed at how ignorant some are on importnat issued and still spout off and display their ignorance for all to witness. Be thankful this thread was off the front page when you posted your faulty uneducated commments Gerald.
After Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed, Hirohito had a meeting with the three leading Japanese military generals and the three Japanese senior civilian officials... The six men voted on whether to surrender,,, the vote was three/three. Dradlocked, NO surrender! __ Hirohito was then asked for his opinion and he stated Japan should immediately surrender... HIrohito was almost denied doing so by the military, but their coup failed... Those are FACTS Gerald.
Show me one single fact I posted that is incorrect,,, and not with opinons or assumptions.. Pick some and say where I was incorrect and why I was. Show your good stuff... LMAO.
This is cute. From Truthdig:
http://www.truthdig.com/cartoon/item/atoms_rib_20110811/