1
   

Hiroshima Anniversary

 
 
Acquiunk
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Aug, 2005 09:18 am
Tico

Interesting, well written, and thoughtful article. Thanks for posting it.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Aug, 2005 11:02 am
BBB
bm
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Aug, 2005 07:00 pm
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
PDiddie wrote:
mysteryman wrote:

Should the President be required to make a public statement on the anniversary of any major event in world history?


Nah.

Maaaaaybe just the ones where the government of the United States was responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent civilians.

If it doesn't cause a big interruption in his brush-clearing or bike-riding or nap-taking.


not ducking your question MM, just saw no need in redundance.

A statement like, "Regardless of the circumstances we pause to honor the thousands of Japanese civilians whose lives were cut short and we would hope that ANYONE with nuclear capability will think long and hard on the lessons of Hiroshima and Nagasaki before ever unleashing this sort of power again. We value our relationship with a strong and friendly Japan today and hope to remain allies always.

You know, something politically astute that would have meaning to a proud people.

George Bush. Politically astute. Same paragraph. What the f**k am I smoking? Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing


The question should never be what are you smoking; it should be how much have you smoked! Laughing

I don't think any thing needs to be said. Making a statement like the one you would like to hear would only make it seem like we would never use nukes again and I don't think that is a good idea. If they are used on us then we will use them on them.

I was wondering if Clinton ever said anything about the bombs being dropped?
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Aug, 2005 07:04 pm
Baldimo wrote:
Quote:
don't think any thing needs to be said. Making a statement like the one you would like to hear would only make it seem like we would never use nukes again and I don't think that is a good idea. If they are used on us then we will use them on them.


I didn't now, until now, that Baldimo was a spokesman for the American government Shocked
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Aug, 2005 07:23 pm
Quote:
I was wondering if Clinton ever said anything about the bombs being dropped?


To the best of my knowledge,neither Clinton or Gore ever made any public comments on the anniversary of the bombs being dropped.

But that was ok,because they are Dems.
Bush is evil for not saying anything about it.

Does "double standard" ring a bell with anyone?
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Aug, 2005 07:59 pm
Ah, Baldimo...as a dog returns to it's own vomit... you can't resist... if Clinton said nothing it legitimizes and excuses your master bush.... guess what slick, clinton has been out of office for five years and Gore was never president. your hero is a dick, whether any other presidents were dicks or not, and that's the subject of discussion here.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Aug, 2005 08:24 pm
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
Ah, Baldimo...as a dog returns to it's own vomit... you can't resist... if Clinton said nothing it legitimizes and excuses your master bush.... guess what slick, clinton has been out of office for five years and Gore was never president. your hero is a dick, whether any other presidents were dicks or not, and that's the subject of discussion here.


First of all I didn't say anything about Gore. Second it was proving a point. You expect things of Bush you never expected of Clinton. When Bush does things that Clinton did or didn't do you have a complaint but none for the person you supported. It's quite funny to watch and always provides minutes of entertainment.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Aug, 2005 09:19 pm
once again baldy, you assume. You have no idea what I complained about when Clinton was in office. There was no A2K then, and you were probably still in basic and waiting to be assigned in the nineties.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Aug, 2005 10:54 pm
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
once again baldy, you assume. You have no idea what I complained about when Clinton was in office. There was no A2K then, and you were probably still in basic and waiting to be assigned in the nineties.


Wrong I voted against Clinton the first time and was stupid and didn't vote the second time. I was a senior in high school at the first election and voted for Perot. Didn't join the military till about 2 years ago, went through basic at the age of 30.

Did you complain about Clinton not saying anything about the nukes being dropped on Japan? If you did then good for you. If you didn't then that makes you a hypocrite!
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 06:12 am
Baldimo wrote:
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
once again baldy, you assume. You have no idea what I complained about when Clinton was in office. There was no A2K then, and you were probably still in basic and waiting to be assigned in the nineties.


Wrong I voted against Clinton the first time and was stupid and didn't vote the second time. I was a senior in high school at the first election and voted for Perot. Didn't join the military till about 2 years ago, went through basic at the age of 30.

Did you complain about Clinton not saying anything about the nukes being dropped on Japan? If you did then good for you. If you didn't then that makes you a hypocrite!


ah baldy, you've already assumed that I gave clinton a free ride on everything which might make me a hypocrite but ABSOLUTELY makes you..... well, who and what you are, let's just say that. Have a nice day in SgtFuryland, that comic book hero place you seem to want to live.
Us regular folks will be over here anxiously awaiting your next psychic pronouncement about how we think and feel. Laughing
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 12:25 pm
Even at 60: Nagasaki Is the 'Forgotten A-Bomb City'
I can understand the need to bomb Hiroshima, but I have strong doubts about bombing Nagasaki so soon after the first bomb. Would Japan have surrendered after the Hiroshima bombing if given a little more time to make a decision? I wonder. ---BBB

Even at 60: Nagasaki Is the 'Forgotten A-Bomb City'
By Greg Mitchell
Editors and Publishers
August 08, 2005 11:00 PM ET

NEW YORKAlthough press coverage of the atomic anniversary this year did not come close to what transpired in 1995, Hiroshima did get a fair share of attention. But if history is any guide (and it usually is), Nagasaki will barely make a ripple on its day, August 9. For Nagasaki is, as a sociologist in that city once told me, "the inferior A-bomb city."

Few journalists bother to visit Nagasaki, which was half-destroyed by an American bomb 60 years ago today. It remains the Second City and "Fat Man" the forgotten bomb. No one ever wrote a bestselling book called "Nagasaki," or made a film titled "Nagasaki, Mon Amour." Yet in some ways, Nagasaki is the modern A-bomb city. For one thing, when the plutonium bomb exploded above Nagasaki it made the uranium-type bomb dropped on Hiroshima obsolete.

A beautiful city dotted with palms built on a hill surrounding a deep harbor (it's the San Francisco of Japan), Nagasaki has a rich, bloody history, as any reader of Shogun knows. Three centuries before Commodore Perry came to Japan, Nagasaki was the country's gateway to the West. The Portuguese and Dutch settled there in the 1500s, and Urakami, a suburb of Nagasaki, became the country's Catholic center. Thomas Glover, one of the first English traders there, supplied the rifles that helped defeat the Tokugawa Shogunate in the 19th century.

Glover's life served as a model for the story of "Madame Butterfly." In Puccini's opera, Madame Butterfly, standing on the veranda of Glover's home overlooking the harbor, sings, "One fine day, we'll see a thread of smoke arising ..." If she could have looked north from Glover's mansion, now Nagasaki's top tourist attraction, on Aug. 9, 1945, she would have seen, two miles in the distance, a thread of smoke with a mushroom cap.

By 1945, Nagasaki had become a Mitsubishi company town, turning out ships and armaments for Japan's increasingly desperate war effort. It was still the Christian center in the country, with more than 10,000 Catholics among its 250,000 residents. Most of them lived in the outlying Urakami district. At 11:02 a.m. on Aug. 9, 1945, "Fat Man" was detonated more than a mile off target, almost directly over the Urakami Cathedral, which was nearly leveled, killing dozens of worshippers waiting for confession. Concrete roads in the valley literally melted.

While Urakami suffered, the rest of the city caught a break. The bomb's blast boomed up the valley destroying everything in its path but didn't quite reach the congested harbor or scale the high ridge to the Nakashima valley. Some 45,000 perished instantly, with another 50,000 fated to die afterwards. The plutonium bomb hit with the force of 22 kilotons, almost double the uranium bomb's blast in Hiroshima. If the bomb had exploded as planned, directly over the Mitsubishi shipyards, the death toll in Nagasaki would have made Hiroshima, in at least one important sense, the Second City.

In the days after the bombing, U.S. officials referred to Nagasaki as a "military city." But few Japanese soldiers were stationed here, and only about 250 of them would perish in the atomic bombing (slightly fewer than the Allied prisoners of war who died that day. A U.S. soldier who would occupy Nagasaki later testified that the bomb fell on "women and children," not military installations, adding "that is something this country is going to have to live with for eternity."

There is something especially deep and troubling about Nagasaki, stemming from its tropical beauty and European influences, its second-class status as an A-bomb city, and the fact that many Americans who support the use of the bomb against Hiroshima find the attack on Nagasaki questionable, even gratuitous. If Hiroshima suggested how cheap life had become in the atomic age, Nagasaki showed that it could be judged to have no value whatsoever.

"The rights and wrongs of Hiroshima are debatable," Telford Taylor, the chief prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials, once observed, "but I have never heard a plausible justification of Nagasaki" which he labeled a war crime.

Criticism of the attack on Nagasaki has centered on the issue of why Truman did not step in and stop the second bomb after the success of the first to allow Japan a few more days to contemplate surrender before targeting another city for extinction. In addition, the U.S. knew that its ally, the Soviet Union, was about to join the war, as previously agreed, and that the entrance of Japan's most hated enemy, perhaps more than the Hiroshima bomb, would likely speed the surrender. If that happened, however, it might cost the U.S. in a wider Soviet claim on Japanese conquests in Asia, or even on Japan itself.

So there was much to gain by getting the war over before the Russians advanced. Some historians have gone so far as to state that the Nagasaki bomb was not the last shot of World War II but the first blow of the Cold War.

In one further irony, Nagasaki was not even on the original target list for A-bombs but was added after Secretary of War Henry Stimson objected to Kyoto. He had visited Kyoto himself and felt that destroying Japan's cultural capital would turn the citizens against America in the aftermath. Just like that, tens of thousands in one city were spared and tens of thousands of others elsewhere were marked for death.

When they'd learned of the Hiroshima attack, the scientists at Los Alamos generally expressed satisfaction that their project had paid off. But most of them took Nagasaki quite badly. Some would later use the words "sick" or "nausea" to describe their reaction. After hearing of the attack on Nagasaki, Truman quickly ordered that no further bombs be used without his express permission, to give Japan a reasonable chance to surrender -- one bomb, one city, and 70,000 deaths too late.

As weeks, and then months and years passed, few Americans denounced as a moral wrong the targeting of entire cities for extermination. Yet in the hours after Nagasaki, when the crime was still fresh, a few brave souls saw the matter clearly. Conservative columnist David Lawrence lashed out at the "so-called civilized side" for dropping bombs on cities that kill hundreds of thousands of civilians. However much we rejoice in victory, he wrote, "we shall not soon purge ourselves of the feeling of guilt which prevails among us. ... What a precedent for the future we have furnished to other nations even less concerned than we with scruples or ideals! Surely we cannot be proud of what we have done. If we state our inner thoughts honestly, we are ashamed of it."

The biologist Jacob Bronowski later revealed that his classic study "Science and Human Values" was born the day he arrived in Nagasaki in November 1945. He observed that nothing happened in August 1945 "except that we changed the scale of our indifference to man." He called it, memorably, "civilization face to face with its own implications."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Greg Mitchell ([email protected]) is editor of E&P and co-author of "Hiroshima in America."

Links referenced within this article

Hiroshima Film Cover-up Exposed
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001001583
Newspaper Photog Took the Only Pictures in Hiroshima 60 Years Ago
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001010843
The Embedded 'New York Times' Reporter Who Brought Us the 'Atomic Age'
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/search/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000980524
'A Warning to the World'
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/search/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000965825
A Great Nuclear-Age Mystery Solved
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/search/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000963439
War Photos We Must Never See Again
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/search/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000913455
[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]

Find this article at:
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001011396
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 12:45 pm
Re: Even at 60: Nagasaki Is the 'Forgotten A-Bomb City'
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
I can understand the need to bomb Hiroshima, but I have strong doubts about bombing Nagasaki so soon after the first bomb. Would Japan have surrendered after the Hiroshima bombing if given a little more time to make a decision? I wonder. ---BBB


I'm convinced waiting wouldn't have helped. Check out this time line:

"Japanese historians uncovered another key element of the story. After Hiroshima (August 6), Soviet entry into the war against Japan (August 8), and Nagasaki (August 9), the emperor intervened to break a deadlock within the government and decide that Japan must surrender in the early hours of August 10. The Japanese Foreign Ministry dispatched a message to the United States that day stating that Japan would accept the Potsdam Declaration, "with the understanding that the said declaration does not comprise any demand which prejudices the prerogatives of His Majesty as a Sovereign Ruler."

This was not, as critics later asserted, merely a humble request that the emperor retain a modest figurehead role. As Japanese historians writing decades after the war emphasized, the demand that there be no compromise of the "prerogatives of His Majesty as a Sovereign Ruler" as a precondition for the surrender was a demand that the United States grant the emperor veto power over occupation reforms and continue the rule of the old order in Japan.

Fortunately, Japan specialists in the State Department immediately realized the actual purpose of this language and briefed Secretary of State James Byrnes, who insisted properly that this maneuver must be defeated. The maneuver further underscores the fact that right to the very end, the Japanese pursued twin goals: not only the preservation of the imperial system, but also preservation of the old order in Japan that had launched a war of aggression that killed 17 million."
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 05:10 pm
Right.... AND Nagasaki. I should ammend my thread to include it too.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/15/2024 at 11:15:39