Hiroshima remembers atomic bomb

The Japanese city of Hiroshima is marking the anniversary of the moment an atomic bomb exploded above the city 60 years ago.
<snip>
Around 140,000 people were killed by the bomb and its aftermath.
<snip>
{Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro) Mr Koizumi said that after the bomb, the city had relentlessly pursued peace.

The Atomic Dome is seen in the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park
The dome was one of the few buildings to survive the blast

"The citizens of Hiroshima are the witness of global peace, we hope that Hiroshima will continue to be the symbol of global peace," he said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4748027.stm

And welcome to the DU!

so strongly about it.

How bads diesel? Dad was a local trucker, even bought a diesel pick up.

Stay safe out there.

V

:toast: :hi:

On Saturday at 7pm central, they're showing _Original Child Bomb_, a documentary developed from formerly classified footage taken of Hiroshima in the days and weeks after the blast.

http://www.sundancechannel.com/popup/?ixFilmID=6238

a war in which they raped and pillaged and totally screwed over almost the entire world.

They have yet to admit what they did, much less come to terms of what they did.

Call me when they do - maybe then I'll have some sympathy to this "poor innocent victumized nation".

Tell it to the Koreans, Chinese and Philipinos they murdered and raped.

Cry me a river.

to end it.

"They have yet to admit what they did, much less come to terms of what they did."

they have repeatedly expressed regret for their actions during the war, but what does that have to do with OUR decision?

peace

and much of the country can't find peace with that. The presidential address concerning Hiroshima was an out and out lie. He said we bombed a military base.

Because we could, because we felt the need...well we did. Basically, we were afraid of them, truth to tell. There is no getting around that fact.

We bombed a civilian populace base. Maybe some are comfortable with that exchange. I am not.

I'm not "comfortable" with nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But we did, we most certainly did. We were afraid, we wanted to stop the war. So we did. Did it "stop" the war? I don't know. It may or may not have already been over. Bad days, bad times. War is hell. Survivors from Iraq, Saigon, and Vicksburg can tell you that better than I.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4271977&mesg_id=4271977

fyi: NO military leader in theater at that time thought it was necessary, as they were already defeated and suing for PEACE and all recommended we accept their 1 condition sooner in order to SAVE LIVES.

more...
http://www.doug-long.com/ga1.htm

we decided we needed to SHOCK-n-AWE world opinion which only rushed us into the cold war and the arms race and put us on the brink ever since.

peace

That's why they were chosen along with the other 6 targets should these not pan out due to weather, etc.

Nice try at revisionist history, tho.

that is the LARGER issue, though indiscriminately killing civilians is always wrong, imho, too.

fyi

peace

They didn't even open up communications until August 10, 1945.

What's so important about that date? It was the day AFTER Nagasaki was obliterated.

That's why they were chosen along with the other 6 targets should these not pan out due to weather, etc.

Nice try at revisionist history, tho.

legitimate targets for the nuclear weapons.

That's why Truman used the atomic bomb. To make sure Stalin didn't take ALL of Europe.

And who cares in racist amerika, from the U.S. point of view, they weren't white...they were japs...

Honolulu, Pearl Harbor, really frightened the American people in 1941. It brought us, most precipitously, into the war, an ongoing war that many Americans had already joined the Brits in fighting. Americans were also in Spain in the 30's fighting the fascists. The German's were doing a little experimenting there at Guernica.

We didn't bomb Japan to "warn" the Soviets. That's just too gross.

It was a tragedy, would you or I have ordered that? Hmmm... we weren't Truman so... how can we say? Bombing population centers, well, in war they have always, always..., been at risk. And I live in a city that is at high risk. War is very different. That is why we, well, most of us, think it of a last resort. War is to win, not to lose. That is just the way it is. So sad to say.

* In his memoirs Admiral William D. Leahy, the President's Chief of Staff--and the top official who presided over meetings of both the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Combined U.S.-U.K. Chiefs of Staff--minced few words:

(T)he use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender. . . .

(I)n being the first to use it, we . . . 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. (THE DECISION, p. 3.)

more...
http://www.doug-long.com/ga1.htm

psst... pass the word :hi:

peace

Thanks for the insights, guys. :)

Most historians disagree with the bullshit that's been being spewed against America over the bomb.

PROVE that most historians believe as you say. Also, post that most historians believe in the need for Japanese internment while you're at it.

and educational to see the various viewpoints. Way back when I was in high school the the very idea that Roosevelt may have let Pearl Harbor happen on purpose was quite the shocker. We may be still too close in time for a better understanding of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we may never really know. History is like that a lot of the time. And the few folks who get all worked up about it...well, I prefer a more reasoned discussion. A clearer understanding can be reached even on the most murky and speculative subjects, if we can just step back a bit and not feel so invested in the "right" answer. Researching history is, as is working with people, a very messy and inexact business.


Thanks for the heads up.:hi:

hundreds of thousands of other americans.

This is standard stuff. Truman and the rest were rabidly anti-communist.

This is standard real-politik maneuvering. When the bombs were dropped, there were already back channel peace talks going on with the Japanese.

The American people in 1941 did not make the decision to incinerate hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians in 1945, Truman did while knowing damn well the war was all but over.

And what Truman knew in 1945 is somewhat less than completely documented. What the American people felt, well talk to the 80 some year olds who remember hearing about Pearl Harbor on the radio on December 7, 1941. Never the less, I'm not excusing what happened. It just happened. War is a bitch from hell. It is crazy making. Read my sig line... I stand with Wesley Clark. If you have to go to war, do it, do it well, and end it.

And if you think avoiding war is always possible, no, not with our conflicting national interests. And bombing Japan, I don't excuse it, I try to understand it, so we can perhaps avoid such extreme perceived necessity in future. Placing angry blame in such historical retrospect can be counter productive. We need to be better than we were, and understand who we were.

And, on edit, George, doesn't care to be better, to avoid previous mistakes. He has a goal and he is bound, one way or another, to get there. And he will damn us all to make it happen.

By the time the allied leaders met at Potsdam, they were already going their separate ways. The USA and UK knew Stalin wanted Czechoslovakia and Poland outright and neither that demand nor the Soviet claim to greater Eastern Europe was ever contested. However, the Soviets were not trusted. The mass murder committed under Stalin in that had come to light in countries under Nazi occupation was consciously dismissed as Nazi wartime propaganda, but intelligence supported the claims that the mass graves contained bodies killed by Stalin prior to the Nazi invasion.

You are wrong if you think that the allied commanders did not see through "Uncle Joe."

The prospect that Stalin would not be satisfied with his tanks remaining in Eastern Europe was not implausible.

You win a prize!!! :bounce:

The bomb dropped on Hiroshima was dropped on the Second General Army Headquarters responsible for defending southern Japan. Nevermind the fact that there were plenty of civilians around the place, but we did bomb a military base.

The bomb dropped on Nagasaki was supposed to hit the industrial district where they built ships, equipment, and ordnance. The bomb missed by over a mile, though.

when they were already DEFEATED & SUING for PEACE.

peace

They did not open communications with the allies until August 10,1945, the day AFTER Nagasaki was bombed.

and i have read - and posted - many quotes from men who where THERE at the time that suggest that we KNEW about their looking for peace much earlier than Aug 45, so excuse me if i choose to go with them then some anonymous internet poster full of strong opinions with no sources to back him up or refute authoritative sources already posted.

peace

And whom do you wish to blame? Truman, one of the best of the presidents in past history? Get a grip!

I am a baby boomer! How many more Americans would have died if we would have to have invaded Japan? This is not a liberal/conservative issue this was war and it saved my father and his brothers and sisters!

Blessings, Robo12

in Asia; check the "Rape of Nanking" for starters...they mutilated, raped and then murdered 370,000 in one city alone.

Because we murdered, raped, pillaged and stole from many many many peoples. Hell, we're still doing it! And after all, according to you, before we do any sort of memorial we should "look in the mirror".

Not only that, here is what was said at the memorial:

http://go.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=814596§ion=news&src=rss/uk/topNews

"We made a mistake in choosing our path in Asia and followed a road to war," said Kono, known for his dovish stance. He was referring to the words: "Rest in peace for we will not repeat the mistake", engraved on the monument honouring the Hiroshima dead.

"We took away the independence of Korea and we intervened in China using the military ... one of the results of fighting against the international community was the dropping of the atomic bomb."

... all those children in Nagazaki and Hiroshima deserved it?

So why not apply the concept to Bush's Iraq and say all Americans (sorry children) are responsible for the death of so many innocent Iraqis? After all the stated reasons for the action in Iraq, ie WMD and it would be hours before they came for us (code red), were wrong (so can't extend collective guilt to Iraqis in this case).

After all, the US is guilty of all the things you listed, and the WTC were legitimate military targets.

So do you think that those 3,000 people deserved to die for the actions of their govt, just like the Japanese people who were killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

I was responding to another post - and don't buy the concept of collective guilt.

That was for Tank. Sorry about that. (I think we agree)

Do you think we shouldn't have fought Japan and Germany?

The fact that they hid behind their own women and children doesn't cut it with me.

THEY were butchers and murderers and worse.

THEY were the ones who were set on world domination.

WE didn't want to fight but were forced into it when THEY attacked US.

WE finished it.

I hate apologists for criminals.

who were already defeated and suing for peace :puke:

our military leaders in theater suggested we accept their 1 condition EARLIER to SAVE LIVES.

I agree with them.

peace

They were victims of war...

And world domination, my arse! Take a look at the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere and explain since when Greater East Asia has been the world...

I despise the incredible lack of human compassion of those who get enraged at the thought of the cities that were bombed actually daring to commemorate the event...

Violet...

I suppose you feel that 9/11 was justified? And actually, considering that for Japan's atrocities you feel 200,000+ were justified in dying, I guess we have more coming to us, huh?

You are correct

I am glad for the bomb. I might have never been born.

Blessings, Robo12

Dropping the atomic bombs on Japan had NOTHING to do with the final end of WW II...

PRIME Minister Junichiro Koizumi has offered "deep remorse and heartfelt apology" for Japan's past aggressions in an attempt to placate China and salvage his attempt to gain a permanent seat in an expanded UN Security Council.

Australian veterans yesterday welcomed the apology, which goes further than the nation's previous attempts to placate residual Asian anger over the invasions and wars of 60 years ago.
"In the past, Japan, through its colonial rule and aggression, caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations," Mr Koizumi yesterday told the Jakarta summit of Asia-Africa leaders.

"Japan squarely faces these facts of history in a spirit of humility with feelings of deep remorse and heartfelt apology always engraved in mind."

Mr Koizumi's wording follows former prime minister Tomiichi Murayama's ground-breaking apology on the 50th anniversary of the ending of World War II in 1995. At least one previous leader has apologised to an ASEAN leaders' meeting but never before in these terms to an Asia-wide summit.


http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,15057845-38196,00.html

Personally, I'd rather the bomb not have been dropped and many people exist today who aren't here because of it than one person who uses a lame 'if...' argument to support their own glee over the deaths of many thousands of innocent men, women and children...

Violet....

Witnesses of the aftermath describe how the skin of some of those who were close to the blast but unlucky enough to survive hung off their bodies and dripped with blood like wet rags. If they were able to walk they walked with their arms in front of them to keep the loose skin from scraping painfully against their torso.

The worst criminals of the war were treated with infinitely more humanity.

Is it worth making even one person suffer that or any of the other varieties of gruesome deaths experienced by the victims of the bombs if there were any possible way to end the war without using them?

Believe me, I am as anti war as possible, but from the history I've learned we had limited options to defeat Japan. Japan was a proud country who would have fought to the bitter end. Countless American soldiers would have lost their lives invading Japan. Dropping the bombs supposedly saved thousands of American lives. In a war, that Japan started, American lives are "worth" more than Japanese lives. I may sound harsh when I say that, but it's how I feel.

I just hope the world learned a lesson.....a lesson Bushco must have missed in history class.

I'm not second guessing the decision and those that made it some 60 years ago. I feel it appropriate to mark the event from its source so we don't forget. Nuclear bombs have only been used once, we note where they were used, we should also note who used them.

Like the rape of Nanking.

Pearl Harbor (conveniently forget about all those innocent Hawai'ian civilians who were killed there, don't you).

Phillipines.

Korean "comfort" women.

They can go first - After all, THEY didn't hesitate to GO FIRST when THEY STARTE the goddamn war, did they?

different light, independent of theirs or our atrocities. I even agree with its use, my Dad was on his way over there from Europe when the war ended and it may have saved his life. I just think its an important human milestone, on its own scale (1 bomb, 140,000 lost), that doesn't need to be brushed aside.......neither should Pearl Harbor. I'll leave their memorials up to them.

Give `em hell Tank!

Basically what started off as a balanced and nuanced exhibit was turned by political pressure into a sophomoric, grunt-grunt, We Are Good! USA! USA!!! piece of nonsense...


From the fifthieth anniversary of Hiroshima: Unconditional Surrender at the Smithsonian by John W. Dower....

------------------------------------------------------

The fifthieth anniversary of the end of World War II in Asia has become especially contentious. Why is this so, when presumably we are commemorating victory over an enemy generally regarded as aggressive, atrocious, and fanatical? The answer, of course, is that defeating Japan ultimately entailed incinerating and irradiating tens of thousands of men, women and children with a weapon more terrible than any previously known or imagined.

Unfortunately, Americans have been denied a rare opportunity to use the fiftieth anniversary of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to reflect more deeply about these world-changing developments. This opportunity was lost early this year when the Smithsonian Institution, bowing to political pressure, agreed to drastically scale back a proposed exhibit at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington depicting the development of the atomic bombs and their use against Japan.


As initially envisioned by the Smithsonian's curators, the exhibition would have taken viewers through a succession of rooms that introduced, in turn, the ferocity of the last year of the war in Asia, the development of the bomb, the unfolding imperatives behind the U.S. decision to use the weapon against Japan, preparation for the Enola Gay mission that dropped the first bomb on Hiroshima (with the fuselage of the Enola Gay itself being the centerpiece of the exhibition), the human consequences of the bombs in the two target cities, and the nuclear legacy to the post-war world. Occasional placards were to have summarized controversies that have emerged in scholarship and public discourse on these matters over the past decades.

This ambitious proposed exhibit proved to be politically unacceptable. The Senate unanimously denounced the original draft script as being "revisionist and offensive to many World War II veterans." It was grossly misleading and morally obtuse, the critics declared, to focus the exhibit so intensely on questions about the bombs, and on the Japanese suffering in Hiroshima and Nagasake, without comparable portrayal of Japanese atrocities that extended from Nanking to Pearl Harbor to Bataan to Manila. The chief historian of the Air Force (who had privately praised the original draft) asked publicly how the Smithsonian had managed to make a hash of such a "morally unambiguous" subject as the use of the bombs.

Confronted by such criticism, the Smithsonian - like Japan 50 years earlier - surrendered unconditionally. Visitors to the Air and Space Museum will encounter a small exhibit featuring the fuselage of the Enola Gay and a brief commentary explaining that this was the plane that dropped the first atom bomb, following which, nine days later, Japan surrendered. The artifact, it is now argued, speaks for itself.

Artifacts do not speak for themselves, and the decision to scrap original plans for an ambitious and nuanced exhibition represents the triumph of patriotic orthodoxy over serious historical reflection and reconstruction. No one denies that the Smithsonian's original script had problems and needed revisions (the curators themselves readily circulated their first draft for critical comments). The benign and minimalistic exhibit we have ended up with, however, is a travesty - an appallingly simplistic and nationalistic way of representing one of the most momentous and destructive developments of the twentieth century. Instead of using the fiftieth anniversary of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to reflect on the confluence of triumph and tragedy that occurred in August 1945, we have turned into another occasion to perpetuate a heroic national myth.

:eyes:

I will never understand why for some reason people continue to see this is white vs. black, good vs. evil.

and I don't mean it as a slam to the US back then (or now). Just the use of the device. Analogous to my daughter asking me who the Beatles were and what was Viet Nam. In the 60s-70s everybody knew both. She should always know what mankind did to itself regardless of when she grew up.

Didn't expect this to be a popular idea, just a thought. Didn't know that about the 50th anniversary, Thanks!

The man followed Bush into war in defiance of most of his country.

The citizens of Hiroshima do understand the realities of war, and to their credit do champion peace.

the role of the Japanese "Self-Defense Forces" deployed in Samara is one of civil engineering. They have very strict rules on when they can fire their weapons which amounts to them being in a defensive posture.

I was very upset that PM Koizumi and his right-wing party pushed for this deployment but since troop numbers are likely to decrease in that part of Iraq we can probably look forward to the Japanese leaving their high-tech superfortress in Samara next year.

The Japanese killed 300,000 civilians alone when they savaged Nanking. That is just part of the 10 to 30 million Chinese they killed during the occupation starting in 1931. They have the blood on their hands.

fyi FALLUJAH = our NANKING would that, or our illegal occupation, justify iraq or OBL, or anyone else for that matter, nuking two of our own cities, even after we were defeated & suing for peace?



think about it...

peace

It's just a reminder to the Japanese that while remembering their dark day, should also admit their murders. It would be cathartic experience for them.

and the japanese DO admit their crimes and regret what they done during wwII you just never hear about it, blame the MEDIA.

welcome to DU, you'll learn a LOT hear :hi:

peace

They need to take a look in the mirror; I suggested they should have staged their die-in in Nanking and other places in China and Asia. They did some of the biggest mass murdering in the 20th century

see below

Millions died in our proxy wars in the poorest parts of the world in the 20th century. We killed millions of civilians alone in Vietnam.

It will be cathartic for us.


By the way, here are some of the words said at the memorial for the 60th anniversary of Hiroshima:

"We made a mistake in choosing our path in Asia and followed a road to war," said Kono, known for his dovish stance. He was referring to the words: "Rest in peace for we will not repeat the mistake", engraved on the monument honouring the Hiroshima dead.

"We took away the independence of Korea and we intervened in China using the military ... one of the results of fighting against the international community was the dropping of the atomic bomb."

http://go.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=814596§ion=news&src=rss/uk/topNews

Welcome to Hollywood.

"Bring 'm on"

The night of March 9th of '45 saw the biggest air raid in history to that date, 279 B-29s turned Tokyo into a solar flare. Temperatures as high as 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit turned buildings into blast furnaces, cars simply melted and civilians disappeared. This single bombing raid burned sixteen square miles of Tokyo, 80,000-100,000 Japanese died, 40,000 Japanese burned and a million left homeless.

we were slaughtering civilians way before we dropped Little Boy

KILLING long after the initial SHOCK-n-AWE reaching right up into the womb and across generations to KILL.

not to mention that our military leaders in theater at that time suggested we accept their 1 condition sooner in order to SAVE LIVES.

those are the points that make it VERY different than tokyo, though i would also dissent to any indiscriminate bombing of cities, but this was TERRORISM on the most horrific scale.

more...
http://www.doug-long.com/ga1.htm

peace

to stop killing civilians

yes Little Boy was wrong ~ yes Fire bombing was wrong

I am not comparing just stating that we kill civilians in war

that more than a few don't get, apparently :hi:

peace

It is imperative to the American psyche that it continue with its mythical mirage of cultural and militaristic superiority.

Hiroshima as "necessary" and WW 2 as "the good war" fit into this pathological cant.

Civilian casualities HAVE NEVER been a consideration with the well manicured barbarians who have their fingers on the buttons.

These are hair trigger times.

More than any one aspect of this horrific war crime it was The US War Departments' lust to "put the thing in action in a real life situation". The "It will save more lives in the long run" was the PR portion of the program.

78% Yes, 22% No.

I mean, I'm not surprised, considering, but...78%?

Yello monkey’s life aint worth *. (Just like rug heads). The discussion about who stated the war and whose fault “thing” bores me. Americans are extraordinarily uneducated and dreadfully arrogant.

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=domesticNews&summit=&storyid=2005-08-05T213227Z_01_N05238852_RTRIDST_0_USREPORT-JAPAN-HIROSHIMA-USA-DC.XML

The telephone poll showed that 57 percent approved of the use of the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, while 38 percent said they disapproved. Gallup said the new poll numbers changed only slightly from 1995, when 59 percent said they approved and 38 percent voiced disapproval.

I am so sorry!

Please, souls of those departed killed by my government in the passion of war, forgive us their ancestors of the sins of our forebears!


Om Tara Tutare Ture Soha!

May Tara richly bless and protect you.

why is it ok to kill the wielders of weapons but not the makers of weapons? The entire Japanese population was mobilized to support the war effort - how could the US destroy Japans warmaking ability without killing civilians?

So...are we all targets then?

be a legitimate target is the better question.

And not only targets, but criminals!