The passing of another American Hero

[David Jamieson]

Hard truths are doubly hard to swallow, and triple hard for those who have never faced anything even close to the horrors of global conflict.

The a-bomb is both saving and shameful. It killed on a vast scale, but it also saved many lives through it's use.

If nothing else it has shown us our own face. It is important that each of us look at our face and accept it.

The Japanese, like many nations then and now, had atrocities all their own.

War brings much loss of innocence and even greater understanding of the truth of who and what we really are.

[Mr Punch]

Agreed. The US has gone so much further in terms of honesty over Hiroshima (and things like Vietnam) than the Japanese ever have over their actions.

But I would still like people to see that the reasons they dropped the bomb were not the ones they'd stated. Why? Because I can't stand govt propoganda of any colour, and it p!sses me off to think that people accept this rewriting of history.

[kwaichang]

The Japanese here in America during that time were put in internment camps how many germans were treated the same way none that I know of. America knew of the bombing at Pearl Harbor we just needed new ships and allowed it to happen to help us through an old depression to rebuilt our society as a power.
I often wonder if the Japanese did not look different from the stereotype American if they would have been bombed why didnt they bomb Germany ??? Because they LOOK LIKE "US". thats why. Do some more research. Its all about the cold war in Europe post WWII they didnt want to contaminate the area and destroy the heritage of alot of Americans. Down right Prejudice. KC

[David Jamieson]

Reasons as printed and dolled to us are not the reasons why things occur.

But I think most of us understand that...hence our discussion here.

[David Jamieson]

The Japanese here in America during that time were put in internment camps how many germans were treated the same way none that I know of. America knew of the bombing at Pearl Harbor we just needed new ships and allowed it to happen to help us through an old depression to rebuilt our society as a power.
I often wonder if the Japanese did not look different from the stereotype American if they would have been bombed why didnt they bomb Germany ??? Because they LOOK LIKE "US". thats why. Do some more research. Its all about the cold war in Europe post WWII they didnt want to contaminate the area and destroy the heritage of alot of Americans. Down right Prejudice. KC

Uh, you have heard of Dresden right? Berlin? Dusseldorf? Frankfurt?

You do realize that Germany was bombed into dust and that they had already surrendered while the war in the pacific was still raging for almost another year?

It's probably important that one reads a timeline of history at least on this subject.

as for the interment camps, we did that in Canada as well and yes it had everything to do with what people looked like. But do you think the interment camps were the horror stories that the eastern euro jewery had to endure under the ss in their camps?

anyway, that's a whole other argument.

[kwaichang]

Conventional Bombs are Local A Bombs are not the cities in Europe though innocent were killed not to the level in Japan. There is no comparison to Nagasaki and Hiroshima I have met those that were there and in Germany no comparison. The timeline was irrevelant and has nothing to do with internment camps in america. It was because they looked different good ole PREJUDICE. The American way. Bomb those who look different or think different
Get a JOB KC

[kwaichang]

May 8, 1945 - V-E (Victory in Europe) Day
Bombing of Japan Aug 6 1945 whew so much time so few to try a new bomb on .
KC

[David Jamieson]

Conventional Bombs are Local A Bombs are not the cities in Europe though innocent were killed not to the level in Japan. There is no comparison to Nagasaki and Hiroshima I have met those that were there and in Germany no comparison. The timeline was irrevelant and has nothing to do with internment camps in america. It was because they looked different good ole PREJUDICE. The American way. Bomb those who look different or think different
Get a JOB KC

Conventional bombing started firestorms that wreaked more damage than any a-bomb. Again, I would say that you have fallen short on your own understanding. Really, you should at least read about Dresden.

And yes Prejudice, and the fact that the Japanese had affirmed spies embedded in the North American populace led to the internment camps.

I would ask that you perhaps read up on how those camps were run as compared to how the nazis ran theirs. Your eyes may open a little wider.

As for the levels of people killed in europe weighed against those in the pacific wars...I am not sure what you are getting at. Millions died on a global scale from virtually all nations.

Do you think the Japanese let anyone but Japanese roam about their territories? Do you think the Japanese were right in their actions during world war 2?

The fact is, the A-bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and nagasaki ended the conflict that could've ended us all had they not been used. they had to be used. It is a sad truth of humanity. That's the lesson, not the reflecting on who said what or did what. It is simple enough that it was done and that for the generation then and the next couple that followed there was understanding.

My concern is when we do not remember and discuss these things and we allow our apathy to become complacency. It is this other nature of being human that lets me say with some fair certainty that there will be another great war and it will be the most devestating. It will occur because in only one or two generations, there will be no more memory from true experience. All the experiential memory will be gone with teh people who die and take it with them.

[kwaichang]

The Japanese were starving I dont think those who are weak and starving can fight too well but what the He// lets destroy them anyway. 6 months and the war would have been over in the pacific no Bomb necessary I think you should open your eyes You said Timeline earlier I thought I would post one for you see last post by me. 3 months in case you cant count not a year. as amatter of fact the place for the bomb was discussed while at war with both Germany to my knowledge was never mentioned.
Also we are not comparing SS camps to free america and also there were many german spies as well or did you choose to ignore that info. KC

[David Jamieson]

The Japanese were starving I dont think those who are weak and starving can fight too well but what the He// lets destroy them anyway. 6 months and the war would have been over in the pacific no Bomb necessary I think you should open your eyes You said Timeline earlier I thought I would post one for you see last post by me. 3 months in case you cant count not a year. as amatter of fact the place for the bomb was discussed while at war with both Germany to my knowledge was never mentioned.
Also we are not comparing SS camps to free america and also there were many german spies as well or did you choose to ignore that info. KC

ok...then...*backs away avoiding eye contact*

I can see there is not much point in discussing this with ya.
cheers.

[Mr Punch]

KC, you're ranting. And what a fine rant it is too!

While you may be right about one of the reasons the Japanese were bombed was because they look different I very much doubt it. If you want to sensibly discuss racial factors it would be more pertinent to point out:

1) German Americans have been the biggest ethnic group in the States since before the wars: to round them up would have been impossible. Plus, where do you think guys like Eisenhower got his name?
2) Some of the monied German-American families still had close links to Germany and Nazi money so there's no way the internment would have taken place.

The reasons why Japan was chosen over Germany were:

1) The Germans were already working on nukes. Given that there was no guarantee the bombs would go off, the US didn't want to leave such an important piece of ordnance in the hands of German scientists in the case of failure.
2) There were no cities left unbombed of the size required to complete a significant scientific test of the bombs in Germany.
3) Although the effects of fallout weren't known the potential effect on surrounding countries was a concern. Japan is an island.
4) There had been way more PoWs in Germany.
5) It was suspected the Germans would surrender/be beaten earlier, so the window of opportunity would close, as would the chance to use the 'fight-till-the-last-man' excuse they had with the 'fanatic' Japanese.

Do carry on.

[1bad65]

Conventional bombing started firestorms that wreaked more damage than any a-bomb. Again, I would say that you have fallen short on your own understanding. Really, you should at least read about Dresden.

Tokyo was firebombed in 1944. More people were killed, wounded, and rendered homeless there than either of the A-bombs did.

[1bad65]

Agreed. The US has gone so much further in terms of honesty over Hiroshima (and things like Vietnam) than the Japanese ever have over their actions.

In some ways the Japanese were worse than the Germans. A German diplomat who saw the 'Rape of Nanking' was stunned. The Japanese were known to use POWs, women and children for bayonet practice. They also used Chinese civilians for testing chemical and biological weapons on them. The Japanese also used POWs as guinea pigs for surgeons in training. They would wound the POW to give the surgeon actual experience treating battle wounds without anasthetic. And don't forget the 'comfort women' either. If you were a Nazi prisoner of war from Britain, America, Australia, New Zealand or Canada (but not Russia) you faced a 4% chance of not surviving the war; [by comparison] the death rate for Allied POWs held by the Japanese was nearly 30%. To be honest, the A-bomb was humane compared to those animals' atrocities.

Bottom line, had they not bombed Pearl Harbor they would not have been nuked. You mess with the bull, you get the horns.

[Mr Punch]

Tokyo was firebombed in 1944. More people were killed, wounded, and rendered homeless there than either of the A-bombs did.

Actually, estimates of the numbers vary, but the descriptions are as hellish, and in some cases more so given the slower deaths. But what's your point? The guy in charge (forget his name) said that had we lost the war he'd have been hung as a war criminal, so it obviously wasn't sitting very well with him.

But anyway, that's beside the point. I don't see the bomb-droppersas heroes, barely any more than any other guy following unconscionable orders. OTOH I don't blame them either.

I just want it recognised for what it was:

1) To justify the millions of dollars research budget to the cash-starved American people. A cynical financial gimmick and fireshow.
2) To test the effects of a plutonium bomb and a uranium one specifically on a built-up civilian area. An inhuman cynical scientific experiment.
3) To warn off the Russians
Empire building (empire defending? Fair enough but at what price...?)

[Mr Punch]

In some ways the Japanese were worse than the Germans. A German diplomat who saw the 'Rape of Nanking' was stunned. The Japanese were known to use POWs, women and children for bayonet practice. They also used Chinese civilians for testing chemical and biological weapons on them. The Japanese also used POWs as guinea pigs for surgeons in training. They would wound the POW to give the surgeon actual experience treating battle wounds without anasthetic. And don't forget the 'comfort women' either. If you were a Nazi prisoner of war from Britain, America, Australia, New Zealand or Canada (but not Russia) you faced a 4% chance of not surviving the war; [by comparison] the death rate for Allied POWs held by the Japanese was nearly 30%. To be honest, the A-bomb was humane compared to those animals' atrocities.

This is all irrelevant. Sure, if somebody wanted to be honest and say one of the reasons for the live A-bomb tests was revenge for atrocities - that's all very human, and far more condonable. It wasn't. It was a cold calculated scientific atrocity on a largely civilian population.

Bottom line, had they not bombed Pearl Harbor they would not have been nuked. You mess with the bull, you get the horns.

Nah, that's only the bottom line for people with hindsight who don't want to accept that the real reasons were way more inhuman.