BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: Peace
Date: 12 Aug 05 - 01:32 AM

Undoubtedly the students of people like Osama bin Laden are thinking just that about the US right now.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Aug 05 - 01:38 PM

I'd bomb them little nippers three times over to save the lives that would have been lost in an invasion.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: Peace
Date: 11 Aug 05 - 12:52 AM

Maybe not. The hydrogen bomb--yes. So far, that is. However, the war in southeast Asia was major. The war between Nigeria and the attempted breakaway state of Biafra was major. Only millions of people, but major nevertheless. However, I would agree that MAD seemed to have served its purpose in terms of preventing a global war.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: robomatic
Date: 11 Aug 05 - 12:08 AM

McGrath if you are taking upon yourself the notion that there are things "that just aren't done" I think I can accept that is a valuable and respectable notion though in this case I do not agree with it as a valid approach to the end of a major war, in fact, the atom bomb ended all major war to date.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST,G
Date: 10 Aug 05 - 10:54 PM

While it is possible that there are "some actioms which can never be justified under any circumstances", allow us to think that there were actions that would be even more unjustifird had they not been taken.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Aug 05 - 09:10 PM

As I said, I believe there are some actions which can never be justified under any circumstances, and no matter what the consequences. Fair enough, you do not, bruce - and a lot of people agree with you, including some with whom I am sure you would disagree with on most other issues.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: podman
Date: 10 Aug 05 - 09:08 PM

Didn't the sort of mental experiment McGrath is talking about date a bit earlier, to Balzac? I think it was structured around getting rich provided a mandarin on the other side of the world fell dead?

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Aug 05 - 08:10 PM

McGrath,


So, you feel that the continued slaughter of far more innocent civilians would have been a better choice than the one made to use the bomb and try to end the war without an invasion of Japan? THAT is an ethical attitude I would not care to share.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Aug 05 - 07:01 PM

I think there is a category of actions which are never justified, no matter what the consequences. And yes, I think that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki fall into that category.

If that can be justified on a lesser evil basis (and I accept that many, perhaps most, people think that it can be), it seems to me that there can be no conceivable human action or atrocity which could not in principle be justified on that basis. I found that frightening, and in one way it is a new way of thinking for a society. In the past people have acted in accordance with this, but have tended to fight shy of claiming that such actions are ethically justifiable.

It occurs to me that the thought experiment I suggested about a situiation where peace was to be bought at the expense of publicly torturing a child to death was reminiscent of a short stoty by Ursula K. Le Guin - "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas". Well worth reading.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: robomatic
Date: 10 Aug 05 - 02:10 PM

Guest, G:

With respect, I take your point, but the effects of atomic weapons are uniquely horrible on a personal level as well, and I think there is room to include this along with the big picture. Else you're open to the charge of denying the individual experience its own validity.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST,G
Date: 10 Aug 05 - 01:56 PM

While still on the side of dropping the bombs 60 years ago, I see a disadvantage in reporting the experiences of individuals back then.

The enormity of the bombs should not be forgotten. As I said before, pray that the 3rd one is never used by anyone. However, Some of us reading and/or participating here have experienced first hand the effects of weapons that could duplicate, for the individual, what they went through back then. A thousand bomb exhibits the same concussive factor when you are "within range" The same can be said for a 500 pound bomb, such as those being used in Iraq. The use of Napalm in 'Nam also caused many to look as if they were within a mile or two of ground zero. The effects and lasting results are no different for todays victims than they were 60 years ago.

I don't mistake the effects back then. On an anecdotal basis, however, it takes away the severity of the Atom, Hydrogen and Plutonium bombs. It is a terrible method of waging war but one that was thought necessary at one time. Todays available weapons make those look mild. If you want to keep people aware of the enormous potential of WMD, keep them reminded of the big picture.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: robomatic
Date: 10 Aug 05 - 01:46 PM

GUEST directly above, there are several people on this forum with whom I disagree, but I don't recognize any of them in your comment. I think you are here to stir the pot without putting anything in.

GET LOST.

I'm gonna ignore any cowardly comments such as the above from here on in. If they don't have the guts to have a name and don't have anything to say, they are a waste of space.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Aug 05 - 12:44 PM

The Mudcat USA haters sympathize with the German and Japanese War
Machines of the 39's 40s where LITERALLY MULTIPLE MILLIONS
of civilians, adults, children, babies were slaughtered

they probably clap and holler hoorah each time an american
service man/woman is killed in iraq or afghanistan...

what sick minded individuals...

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: robomatic
Date: 10 Aug 05 - 12:40 PM

guest ar 282 was pretty much completely wrong in everything it said. I feel it has been successfully refuted by bearded bruce and will not address it unless further errors are promulgated by it.

McGrath of Harlow continues to play logical games which are essentially naval gazing as they are not related to the reality of total war waged by the great powers in 1945.

The comments about Germany and Japan working feverishly to develop atomic weapons are not really accurate. Reference the Rhodes Book (and many others). The Germans 'could' have had a head start in the late 30's, but due to the decision of certain scientists to reverse the whole psychology of their craft and NOT distribute information at the critical point of understanding fission, in 1938 or 1939, the German scientists did not have enough information without critical research on their own part, and many key scientists had emigrated. (A notable stayer on under the Nazis was Werner Heisenberg). But German research was directed from the top down, and there was not major push in atomic bomb research. The Allies were not aware of this until after the Normandy invasion and allied progress into occupied Europe and liberated Germany. A special force was sent out to gather intelligence and was titled "Operation Paperclip". It revealed in no uncertain terms that the Germans were nowhere near realistic development, for not only had they not got the idea of a the proper critical mass, they lacked moderators for the reactors they would need. A rather primitive early reactor was discovered, however. Just to be sure, the allies got several notably German scientists together, let them review documents on the allied bomb, and bugged their conversation.

As to Japan, there are records of at least one Japanese scientist with an excellent idea of what it would take to put such a bomb together, but the support he got from the government was almost worse than nothing.

The Soviets, however, WERE working on a bomb, becuase they had twigged on the 'wall of silence' that had been imposed from the allied side, and they were getting incredibly informative information from the Manhattan project itself from many inside sources. Just as the United States had been warned in 1939 but had not acted with alacrity until December 1941, Stalin was concerned that the bomb information might be a disinformation plot, and his scientists were forced to not only copy the design, but prove the experimental research as they went along. Towards the end of the war they kidnapped German scientists and engineers to speed the process.

Once again I'd like to repeat that Eisenhower's view of the situation in the Pacific is not terribly relevant. In 1945 Eisenhower was supreme commander Europe, and not privy to inside information from the tope of the US government (his boss was George Marshall whose boss was Harry Truman). Eisenhower's opinions even if accurately quoted, were third hand. Nevertheless, there were people in th e know who opposed using the bomb. The use of the bomb was determeined after a lot of discussion and debate and naturally not everyone was of one mind. That is the essence of Democratic action.

The United States was mobilizing for a land invasion of Japan, which became totally unnecessary because of the two atomic weapons.

As for the records of the Japnanese survivors, they are uniquely precious documents which deserve to be preserved and studied along with all the blissfully victorious maunderings of the triumphalists.

We must not forget what incredible destructive power lies at our fingertips. We must identify with the victims as well as the victors. We need to make sure that no one need ever write remotely similar survival epics again.

Those people were children of God just as much as we are.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST,Guy Who Thinks
Date: 10 Aug 05 - 09:24 AM

As a general observation, Wikipedia is often a less than reliable source. The more controversial a topic is, the less reliable it becomes.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: freda underhill
Date: 10 Aug 05 - 05:13 AM

Surviving Hiroshima: Keiko Ogura

Keiko Ogura was eight years old when the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. She still lives in the city.

I wanted to go to school, but my father said 'I have a very strange feeling today - you shouldn't go to school, stay with us'. That morning I was on the road near the house and all of a sudden I saw a flash of blueish white light - a magnesium-like flash and soon after a big sound with dust, and I was blown away and fell on the ground.

I found myself lying on the ground near the house. I thought the house was just in front of me but I couldn't see it because everything had become so dark and many pieces of wood and roof tiles and rubbish were falling on my head.

There was black rain falling... It smelled bad and there were many spots on my white blouse

And in the darkness there was a strong, strong wind like a typhoon. I couldn't open my eyes but tried to get back to my house and in the darkness I heard somebody was crying - my brother and sister.

I was 2.4km from the hypocentre but houses nearer the hypocentre had caught fire and were burning.

I saw long lines of refugees, just quiet, I don't know why they were so quiet. There were long lines, like ghosts.

Most of them were stretching out their arms because the skin was peeling off from the tips of their fingers. I could clearly see the hanging skin, peeling skin, and the wet red flesh and their hair was burned and smelled, the burnt hair smelled a lot.

And many people, just slowly passed by the front of my house.

All of a sudden a hand squeezed my ankle. I was so scared but they said 'get me water'. Almost all the people were just asking 'water', and 'help me'.

I rushed into my home where there was a well and brought them water. They thanked me but some of them were drinking water and vomiting blood and [then] died, stopped moving. They died in front of me. I felt regret and so scared. Maybe I killed them? Did I kill them?

And that night, 6 August, my father was so busy looking after the neighbours, but when he came back he said: 'Listen children - you shouldn't give water, some of the refugees died after drinking water. Please remember that.'

As a little girl I was so curious. I climbed up the hill, near our house... I was so astonished - all the city was flattened and demolished Then I felt so guilty, and I saw them many times in my nightmares. I thought I was a very bad girl - I didn't do what my father said - so I kept it a secret. I didn't tell anybody this story until my father died.

There was black rain falling, black rain mingling with ashes and rubbish and oil, something like that. It smelled bad and there were many spots on my white blouse - sticky, dirty rain. In the morning people were moving, brushing away flies from their skin. My house was full of injured people.

The next day some of the buildings were still burning, and the next day, and the next day, and for three or four days I climbed the hill to see what the city was like.

I have a brother-in-law. He was living almost at the centre of the city - his family was very close to the hypocentre. Until now his family members were missing and he didn't want to recognise they were all gone, so he refused to say and report the family's names to the officials and he didn't want to visit Hiroshima.

Right now, he is living far away in Tokyo, and only last year he decided to report to Hiroshima city that his family members - his mother and sister - had passed away.

And there were so many people [who saw] so many dead or dying, but actually, most of them made up their mind not to tell anyone about what they saw.


This interview is from the series 'August 1945', from 3-14 August on BBC Radio 4, at 8.55 BST Mondays-Saturday, and at 9.55 BST on Sunday.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: freda underhill
Date: 10 Aug 05 - 05:09 AM

or for something a little more "emotional"..

Surviving Nagasaki: Akiko Seitelbach

Akiko Seitelbach gave first aid to the victims
Akiko Seitelbach was 22 years old, and working at Mitsubishi Electrical as a volunteer, when the atomic bomb fell on Nagasaki.

"On 9 August 1945, I was working in the supply office. I was a little tired, so I got up to stretch my legs and walked over to the end of the office where there was a big window looking over Nagasaki harbour. The scenery was beautiful, the sun was shining brightly and I was looking across the bay. Then suddenly I saw this flash of light, above the railway station, and my boss yelled at me: 'Get away from the window!'

So I turned and tried to walk back to my desk. Then suddenly the building was hit with such force it was like a small boat in a storm - it shook. The doctor pointed out one man... his body was covered in burns. So I put some ointment on him, but I thought 'This isn't going to help' And I threw myself face down on the floor to cover my head with my hands, something we were trained to do. A shockwave came and the air was filled with acrid dust. The building kept shaking, and things were falling on my body and head. My mother had died the year before and I prayed to her.

Then after a while it stopped, so I got up and looked around. The air was still filled with yellow dust and I ran downstairs towards the air raid shelter. I ran through the factory. I felt something was very wrong - it was so bright. When I got to the shelter it was dark, as the electricity had gone, but I could feel people moving around. My boss came and found me and said: 'Oh you are safe.' He said: 'They are calling for you - you volunteered to do first aid.'   Something was coming toward me. It was a man but he didn't look like a man


So I said, 'Oh heavens I did!' I got up and went to the other end of the air raid shelter. There was a doctor, and although he was wounded, he was also trying to help other people. People were sort of dazed, their clothes torn to shreds, their bodies burned and just standing there silently.

The doctor pointed out one man. All his clothes were torn and his body was covered in burns. He was shivering and said: 'I'm cold, I'm cold'. So I put some ointment on him, but I thought: 'This isn't going to help.' Then the doctor said: 'Go and stay with that young boy on the makeshift bed.' They used high school kids as volunteers in the factories. He must have been about 15. He had a big gash on his neck. He opened his eyes and said: 'You know I'm going to die.'

I said: 'Your mother's coming, you're not going to die.' He said: 'Can't you hear my blood dripping? I know I'm going to die.' Then he was gone.

Later on, at about 5pm, my boss suggested we try to get home. I didn't know it had been an atomic explosion. We walked out of the shelter, passed the destruction and onto the road in front of our building. I knew something was very wrong, something terrible had happened.
I looked out across the bay, and Nagasaki was a big bonfire, just burning, and then I thought about Hiroshima. I thought: 'Maybe it's one of the new bombs.' But I didn't have any feelings about that. When you're shocked you don't feel anything. I wasn't even scared. We couldn't get our bearings because all the familiar landmarks had disappeared. And when we ran through the roads between houses still burning on both sides, the scorching heat nearly overwhelmed us.

I didn't see any living creatures or green plants. We ran and ran through these empty spaces.

Then suddenly I stopped.

Something was coming toward me. It was a man but he didn't look like a man. He had no hair, his face was swollen to about twice the normal size, and loose skin hung down from his arms and legs like seaweed.

He was walking towards me and I was so scared I tried to avoid him.

I heard him saying 'Water, water' as he passed me. So I turned around to go to him but he had collapsed, dead.

The next day we tried to catch a train north, but train after train was filled with burns victims and wounded.

And they told us about their experiences - the blast and the incinerating heat, and the black rain that fell from the sky. It was weird and sort of supernatural.

This interview is from the series 'August 1945', from 3-14 August on BBC Radio 4, at 8.55 BST Mondays-Saturday, and at 9.55 BST on Sunday.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: mooman
Date: 10 Aug 05 - 05:06 AM

From "The Guardian" newspaper (UK) (and well-documented elsewhere):

Nagasaki might have escaped destruction had it not been for the weather. Bock's Car, the US plane that dropped the bomb, had headed for nearby Kokura on the morning of August 9, but did not release its payload because the city was shrouded in haze.

The crew flew on to Nagasaki only to find it was covered in thick cloud, and were on the verge of abandoning their mission when an opening appeared.

A clear case of careful military planning or vagaries of the weather?

From the last post:

I have yet to see proof that it was not justified.

All the "cold hard facts" quoted about what would have happened had the bombs not been dropped are, in fact, hypothetical as they did not happen. Therefore there will and can never be "proof" on this. We are therefore left with our beliefs and ethical positions about the rights or wrongs of the matter.

Peace

moo

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: freda underhill
Date: 10 Aug 05 - 05:04 AM

General Dwight D. Eisenhower advised the Secretary of War, Henry L. Stimson, in July of 1945 that the Japanese were already essentially defeated, and therefore use of the bombs was unnecessary.

The same opinion was expressed by Fleet Admiral William Leahy (the Chief of Staff to the President), General Carl Spaatz (commander of the U.S. Strategic Air Forces in the Pacific), and Brigadier General Carter Clarke (the military intelligence officer who prepared intercepted Japanese cables for U.S. officials); Major General Curtis LeMay ; and Admiral Ernest King, U.S. Chief of Naval Operations, and Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet.

Eisenhower wrote in his memoir The White House Years, "in 1945 Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. ..I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment, was I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives"

The United States Strategic Bombing Survey, after interviewing hundreds of Japanese civilian and military leaders after Japan surrendered, reported:
"Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."

This information is all sourced from various books in Wikipedia.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST,G
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 11:11 PM

Justification comes from a combination of fact, intelligent thought and prayerful thought.

I welcome anyone who shares my thoughts with regard to the dropping od the 'bomb'. I have yet to see proof that it was not justified.

Real proof, not feeling, not emotion, not the after thoughts that accompany everything from war to a Sunday full of NFL football.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 08:12 PM

So, you feel that the continued slaughter of innocent civilians would have been a better choice than the one made to use the bomb and try to end the war without an invasion of Japan? THAT is an ethical attitude I would not care to share.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 08:02 PM

I'm not disputing the logic, bruce. I just wanted to remind people where it led.

There are two fundamental positions when it comes to ethical judgements. One is that there are some things which can never be ,no matter what the consequences. The other is that in certain circumstances, anything whatsoever can be justified.

Anyone who believes Hiroshima was justified is coming down on the latter side. Why dispute it? After all, it's a pretty widely held ethical position... You might not like some of the people who share it, but that's another matter entirely.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 04:30 PM

McGrath,

As can be seen by the links, those thousands of children were ALREADY being killed, WITHOUT stopping the war. So how can you object to the war being ended? Would you rather that the war had continued another six months, and many more children killed, so that we could say "But we didn't use the A-bomb."?

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 04:20 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo_in_World_War_II

http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/tokyo.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 04:15 PM

http://www.rense.com/general19/flame.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 04:07 PM

I stand corrected, Guy Who Thinks, unless I find other figures that I can trust.

But from the people who were there, it does seem that a far larger number would have died if the US had had to invade.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST,Guy Who Thinks
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 04:02 PM

Simply for the sake of accuracy, fewer persons died in the bombing of Dresden than in either of the atomic attacks. The fire-bombing of Tokyo resulted in 80,000 - 100,000 civilian fatalities and perhaps double that number of injured.

Unlike the atomic attacks, that level of destruction required 300 bombing planes and half a million incendiary bombs.

During the Cold War, Soviet and East German sources circulated wildly inflated estimates of the number of casualties at Dresden. These are occasionally still encountered. But careful records compiled by the Dresden police in 1945 and analyzed by German historians show that about 35,000 died, somewhat less than the 40,000 who died in the fire-bombing of Hamburg, and far less than the numbers killed at Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: Peace
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 03:50 PM

SSDD

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 03:45 PM

Clearly, McGrath, you do not feel that any death is justified in war. I envy you your certainty, but if someone tries to kill me, or my family, I will do my best to provide them with a Darwin award. Sorry if this offends your "morals"

If a country places legitement military objectives, such as industry, in an urban area, and the target is that industry, the fact that civilians are killed is the responsibility of the country placing that industry there without evacuating the civilians. Take a look at the Geneva Conventions.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 03:35 PM

A thought experiment. If taking a single child and torturing her or him to death publicly would have brought an end to the war, would it have been a justifiable thing to do? Or one hundred children? Or ten thousand?

Clearly who think that Hiroshioma and Nagasaki was justified think it would have been.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 02:53 PM

from the link that PeteBoom gave...


"For the invasion of Japan, scheduled for the autumn of 1945 and spring of 1946, both sides loaded up. Gen. Curtis LeMay, the American Army Air Corps commander whose "burn jobs" had incinerated roughly a third of urban Japan and killed nearly a million people, had 5,000 B-29 bombers ready to go. To greet a half-million American invaders, the Japanese had at least 6,000 kamikaze planes and 2,350,000 regular troops, not to mention an enormous citizen militia of some 30 million. The women were given sharpened bamboo spears and were trained to use them (some of them practiced on dummies of Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill). On July 21, a U.S. Fifth Air Force intelligence circular declared: THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF JAPAN IS A PROPER MILITARY TARGET... THERE ARE NO CIVILIANS IN JAPAN."

...

"Some citizens, too, felt disbelief and anger. During the war, Kiyoko Kano, 79, had been a farmer's daughter in a small village not far from Hiroshima. She showed her diary from those days to NEWSWEEK. It records how she had faithfully arisen at dawn some mornings for "bamboo-spear fight training," and how she struggled to accept what the emperor was saying over the village radio on Aug. 15. "It sounded as though there was a truce situation. All of us felt disappointed," she wrote after hearing the emperor's declaration of surrender, bringing peace. "We could not help but feel frustrated."

....

On the island of Guam, Pete Beninato and his Marine Corps buddies in the Third Tank Battalion had been pre-paring to invade Japan. "We weren't too anxious to go in there. The Japanese would fight to the last man—no surrender." When Beninato's men heard that America had dropped atomic bombs (on Aug. 6 and Aug. 9), destroying two entire cities, the reaction was incredulity. "We just looked at each other," Beninato recalls, amazed that so much destructive power could be concentrated in a single bomb. "Now people say we shouldn't have done it. But they weren't over there," he says. "They weren't getting shot at. They weren't expecting 80 to 85 percent casualties. I could've kissed [President] Truman."

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 02:14 PM

http://www.atomicarchive.com/Maps/HiroshimaMap.shtml \


Why do you feel it needed to make false statements about the location of the bomb? It was an airburst over the ground zero point, shown in the map above.


And we had tested one device already- we had a pretty good idea of the power of the ones we dropped. BOTH atomic bombs killed far less people than a single night of firebombing of Tokyo or Dresden- BUT ended the war (IMO), saving at least 10 times as many casualties if the US had invaded.

Cold, hard fact.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 01:56 PM

AR282,So the building at ground zero was floating on the ocean?

"The bombs were not deterrents since no one knew their power. They were made to be used and cost way too much not to use them. Two had to be made in case the first one did not detonate. But even if it does, the second must be used because it was not made for any other reason than to be used."

Still makes no sense. "MUST"? NOT a valid statement. ALL weapons are made to be used- so obviously we have had 10,000 + nuclear bombs detonated? And every single bullet has been fired. Right.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST,AR282
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 01:40 PM

>>Your statements are suspect. Hiroshima was a city, the bomb was deteonated over the city and would have been easily recovered if it did no go off.<<

No, sir. The bomb was detonated over the water next to the city.


>>The statement "The problem is, if the first one works you still have to drop the second one because that's what it was made for."
needs a lot of explaination to make sense.<<

The bombs were not deterrents since no one knew their power. They were made to be used and cost way too much not to use them. Two had to be made in case the first one did not detonate. But even if it does, the second must be used because it was not made for any other reason than to be used.

>>There were both military and industrial targets in Hiroshima. The fact is, the selection of a city was to reduce the civilian casualties, by picking a minor city rather than Tokyo or a more significant poplation center.<<

You could have picked any spot in japan if that was the case. It was dropped on a city because that was what it was made to do--to reduce cities to rubble in a flash. There is no way to know how well it works until you drop it on an unsuspecting city. There is no other way. Hiroshima wasn't even the original target so your reasoning leaves much to be desired.

>>Cold, hard fact.<<

The only cold, hard fact is the one I've pointed out. when all is said and done, we dropped the bomb on women and children. Nothing can erase that. We did it and we must own up to it like intelligent adults and not stupid kids with "Well, they were doing bad things too!!" As my mother would say, "That doesn't excuse your bad things!"

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 01:25 PM

guestar282,

Your statements are suspect. Hiroshima was a city, the bomb was deteonated over the city and would have been easily recovered if it did no go off.


The statement "The problem is, if the first one works you still have to drop the second one because that's what it was made for."
needs a lot of explaination to make sense.


There were both military and industrial targets in Hiroshima. The fact is, the selection of a city was to reduce the civilian casualties, by picking a minor city rather than Tokyo or a more significant poplation center.

Cold, hard fact.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST,ar282
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 01:12 PM

>>I really liked your post. If you get into the literature of the design of the first atomic weapons, you will learn that a lot of the seminal atomic research was done in Germany by German scientists. It was fear of Germany obtaining these weapons that called into being the magnitude of the Manhattan Project. While history isn't scientific, it's my opinion that if Germany hadn't surrendered before the weapon was ready, it would certainly have been used on Germany first. I don't think racism took a role in the decision. In fact, there are records that a cultural awareness of the Japanese was practised, in that Kyoto was taken off the target list.<<

This is patently untrue. Memos have already been released that prove that the US never had any intention of dropping the bomb on Germany.

Here was the reason: Germany is essentially land-locked. If you drop a new type of bomb over Germany and it doesn't go off, you've just handed them your most devastating weapon. With Japan, if the bomb fails to go off, it falls in the water (the bombs were detonated over the ocea not over land). They can fish it out but that takes time and that gives you time to drop your second one.

The problem is, if the first one works you still have to drop the second one because that's what it was made for.

With that said, there was no justification. Sorry, but I refuse to believe a bunch of hungry woman and children were this big threat to us big, tough Americans. If Japanese military had died in the bomb that would be one thing. We're talking mostly women and children, folks. Women and children. No amount rationalizing and patriotic chest-beating and high-fiving erases that cold, hard fact.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST,PeteBoom (still t work)
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 09:20 AM

Try this link

Yeah, I know its only "mass media pulp" or "left wing main stream media" but some of the viewpoints from those on the spot at the time are interesting...

Back to work now -

Pete

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST,G
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 07:22 AM

I can not do anything regarding what happened 60 tears ago.
I can, kowever, soften my approach and not reach an uneeded level of sarcasm with regard ro a post, case in point being Peace and my comments at Guest, G 08/9:34.
These are, after all, our opinions and comments with some being verified, others feelings with a level of passion that cannot be ignored.

Subject: RE: BS: Nagasaki 60th Anniversary
From: freda underhill
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 06:55 AM

Nagasaki marks 60th anniversary of atomic bombing
The Associated Press TUESDAY, AUGUST 9, 2005

NAGASAKI, Japan The second — and, so far, last — city ever attacked by an atomic bomb marked the 60th anniversary of its devastation Tuesday with a Catholic Mass, a moment of silence and an angry plea for a global ban on nuclear arms. About 6,000 people, including hundreds of aging bomb survivors, crowded into Nagasaki's Peace Memorial Park, just a few hundred meters (yards) from the center of the blast, for a solemn remembrance and moment of silence.

Nagasaki Mayor Iccho Itoh then had some angry words for the leaders of the nuclear powers, and especially the United States. ''We understand your anger and anxiety over the memories of the horror of the 9-11 terrorist attacks,'' he said. ''Yet, is your security enhanced by your government's policies of maintaining 10,000 nuclear weapons, of carrying out repeated sub-critical nuclear tests, and of pursuing the development of new `mini' nuclear weapons?'' Itoh also urged Japan to get out from under the U.S. ''nuclear umbrella.'' About 50,000 U.S. troops are deployed throughout Japan under a post World War II mutual security pact.

Three days after the Enola Gay dropped the ''Little Boy'' bomb on Hiroshima, killing at least 140,000 in the world's first atomic bomb attack, Bock's Car took off to deliver the second A-bomb — nicknamed ''Fat Man'' — to the city of Kokura. Kokura was hidden under a thick cover of haze. The plane circled three times, then changed course for Nagasaki, where it also encountered thick clouds.

With dwindling fuel, the pilot nearly turned around but then found a break in the clouds. Estimates of the death toll range from 60,000 to 80,000. Nagasaki officials on Tuesday used 74,000 as the death figure.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST,Have Heard It Said-
Date: 09 Aug 05 - 03:33 AM

Ignorance is Bliss. If so there is a lot of bliss in the above posts.

It is a well documented fact that both the Germans and Japanese
were working feverishly to develop the Atomic Bomb...

The Germans had already fired V1's & V2's at the English and the Japanese had plans just weeks before the Bomb was dropped to blow up
the Panama Canal and both had developed JET airplanes.

and we all know from their past histories that they

PROBABLY WOULD NOT HAVE USED THEM ON THE UNITED STATES OR ENGLAND

that in light of the fact they had both killed several million

innocent civilians. thru out Europe and Indo China and other
nations.

You are not concerned with the REAL TRUTHS, only your fantasies.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST,AR282
Date: 08 Aug 05 - 10:13 PM

Yep, no doubt about it. It brought a quicker end to the war--about two whole months with or without an invasion.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST,G
Date: 08 Aug 05 - 09:34 PM

"No doubt that radiation leads to birth defects".

No doubt, Peace, and totally agreed with.

Be it from environmental sources, X-ray treatments or even the Sun.
What is your plan to prevent it.

Why not research and explain to us why the Luekemia rate is higher today(per capita)tham it was 50 years ago. The rotation of the planet Earth is the same speed, the "tradewinds" are the same and the overall rainfall per decade has not change that much.

Could it be that space aliens plus the agressive Japanese economy have stirred things up? I really would like to know.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Aug 05 - 08:02 PM

I'm afraid I can't quite understand what your points there are, robomatic, but I think you misunderstand what I was trying to say. I'm not primarily talking about the actual decision-making process involved in the bombing, and the subjective morality of those involved, but about the ethical judgement we make about what was done, which affects how we judge other things which haven't happened yet.

And my point was that only if we follow a rigorous utilitarian logic, that sees any action as justified if it's good consequences outweigh its bad consequences, can we see Hiroshima as justifiable - and that this kind of logic lands us in some very strange company. There is an alternative view, that there are some actions which can never be justified. In theory that is the the one which underlies the concept of war crimes.
.......................

It occurred to me that perhaps an expression that sums up the whole controversy about Hiroshima is "Needs must when the devil drives."

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: Peace
Date: 08 Aug 05 - 07:21 PM

No doubt that radiation leads to birth defects.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: robomatic
Date: 08 Aug 05 - 04:33 PM

Bruce (Peace): You wrote:

Also, the US knew the destructive power of the bombs it dropped on Japan. They had tested one at Alamogordo, New Mexico. Here. Also, thsi is the first I have heard of there being a fourth bomb. My understanding is that there was the one used at the Trinity test and the two dropped on Japan. Thank you for the info.

The Trinity Test was of a "device" which means it's a proof of concept and not designed as a weapon per se. (A few years later the first hydrogen test device would weigh many many tons, notwithstanding since then specialists have been able to reduce it in size to about the size'n shape of a large dunce cap).
The 'device' at Trinity was a plutonium weapon because it requires a sophisticated system to get the plutonium to fission without coming apart first. They did not test the uranium weapon because by its nature they were sure it would work, and uranium was slightly harder to come by than plutonium, which they were beginning to produce via breeder reactor, and once you get it started, the plutonium keeps on comin'.

So: Hiroshima: Uranium Bomb
Nagasaki: Plutonium Bomb (Actually turned out to be almost the same thing as the Alamogordo device only without the instrumentation hookups and with heavy steel streamlining containing it).
Third Bomb: There was enough plutonium for the works to a third bomb, which according to the Rhodes Book: "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" was released and available to the military, but after the results of the first two over Japan, the US government had the materials returned to the US mainland and civilian 'control.'

The nuclear 'stockpile' remained at near zero levels for a flat period after the war during which a lot of back-and-forth between government, scientists, the military, and interested civilians took place. It's too complicated for me to go into without re-reading the Rhodes book, but it's interesting.

McG of Harlow, you wrote:

The argument that the bombing of Hiroshima was justified on the grounds that it is claimed that on a balance of probabilities it caused less suffering than would otherwise have occurred in a continuing war does involve a certain logic.

But it is a logic that has some very disturbing implications. It is a logic that says that, in certain circumstances, it is justifiable to do anything, without any limits whatsoever. The only thing that matters, in the last analysis, is that the ultimate good effects envisaged will outweigh the present suffering caused. And the people who have to make that judgement are those who carry the actions involved.

Before we accept that logic we should recognise that it is a logic shared with the people who engineered the atrocities associated with Al Qaeda, and even with the architects of the Holocaust.

If we believe Hiroshima was justifiable on those grounds, our argument with those kinds of people is reduced to one about weighing good and evil effects in the balance; and while that is an important argument, underlying it is a shared understanding of ethics, which is, if the sums work out right, there is absolutely nothing which is ruled out.

..................
As for Nagasaki, that wasn't anything to do with ending the war, it was essentially just a way of testing a different type of atom bomb. Even on the kind of logic I mentioned just now, it was unjustifiable, and should be recognised as a war crime in every sense.

You make an appeal to logic, then circumscribe your argument around your limited use of it, to wit:
The decision to use the bomb was made by many people, among them scientists, military leaders, and lastly, the elected civilian AND military leader of the United States, Harry Truman. It was de facto a legitimate decision, and a logical decision.

But it was not only a logical decision, nor was it made only on logic. Nor should it have been.

Your general and limited setpoint of decision which I paraphrase: "do the perceived good results outweigh the other" is not a workable generalization to make equivalent the Americans, El Qaeda, and the Nazis. You could sweep under your logical carpet the Disney Coporation, Doctors Without Borders, and the planners of the Anchorage Christmas Pageant.

As for your totally illogical comment about your perception of the cause for Nagasaki, as I've mentioned in the first secton of this response, the plutonium weapon had been tested. At the time of the Nagasaki bomb, Japan had received one nuclear strike, and had not surrendered.

Chris B, (Born Again Scouser) you wrote:

If Japan had surrendered first, would the bomb have been used to end the war against Germany? Or would it have been considered less acceptable to use it against europeans (I personally think that is quite likely)?
I really liked your post. If you get into the literature of the design of the first atomic weapons, you will learn that a lot of the seminal atomic research was done in Germany by German scientists. It was fear of Germany obtaining these weapons that called into being the magnitude of the Manhattan Project. While history isn't scientific, it's my opinion that if Germany hadn't surrendered before the weapon was ready, it would certainly have been used on Germany first. I don't think racism took a role in the decision. In fact, there are records that a cultural awareness of the Japanese was practised, in that Kyoto was taken off the target list.

dianavan, you wrote:

...Many of the children who were born after Hiroshima and Nagasaki were stillborn, including my older brother. Many of my friends that were born in '47 were actually the second child. The first child was often stillborn. My father was also in the Pacific. I've always wondered how far that radiation might have drifted.

I've tried to find the exact number of miscarriages following the bomb but have been unable to find exact statistics.

Your linkage of the use of nuclear weapons in Japan and the physical effects on allied personnel you mention is without foundation. You yourself have no statistics. The war exposed many people to many conditions, climates, and chemicals. Unless the women who delivered the stillborn were involved in the war, stillbirths are unlikely to be related. Maybe you should check out the statistics at Los Alamos, where the scientists and workers on the project experienced a baby boom that got the military authorities quite disturbed.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Aug 05 - 02:59 PM

I think that some people in here are missing the point. WAR IS WRONG!
SOMETIMES IT IS NECESSARY........BUT STILL WRONG!!!
We obviously have not learned the lesson.
If you want to argue about relative morality then you must include everything in the arguement or it will be biassed.
Which is more wrong, Hitlers genocide of Jews/Gypsies/Disabled or America's treatment of Viet Nam, or China's invasion of Tibet, or.... do I realy have to continue
It's a small Planet why cant we work togeather more?????

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 08 Aug 05 - 02:17 PM

Dropping Nuclear weapons on Japan saved lives on both sides.

Operation Downfall (The proposed invasion of Japan) was heavily studied, and the following casulty estimates were arrived at.

US Casulties.

Low estimate. 150,000
High estimate. 750,000+
Most likley. 450,000

Japanese Casulties, Civilian and Millitary.

Low estimate. 1,000,000
High estimate. 5,000,000+
Most likley. 2,500,000

Estimates for total casulties for both bombs range about 400-500,000.


The casulty figures for the invasion are the offical Pentagon figures, released when the invasion plans were declassified. The US millitary may not be a neutral source on this matter, but these figures are the best estimate available.

Bunnahabhain.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Aug 05 - 12:42 PM

Cranes Over Hiroshima
        By Fred Small


The baby blinks her eye, as the sun falls from the sky,

She feels the sting of a thousand fires, as the city around her dies.

Some sleep beneath the rubble, some wake to a different world,

From the crying babe will grow a laughing girl.

Ten summers fade to Autumn, ten winters' snows have passed,
She's a child of dreams and dances, she's a racer strong and fast.
But the headaches come ever more often, and the dizziness always returns,
And the word she hears is leukemia, and it burns.

chorus:

Cranes over Hiroshima, white and red and gold,

Flicker in the sunlight, like a million vanished souls.

I will fold the cranes of paper, to a thousand one by one.

And I'll fly away, when I am done.

Her ancestors knew the legend, if you make a thousand cranes.
From squares of colored paper, it will take away the pain.
With loving hands she folds them, 644
Till the morning her trembling hands can't fold anymore.

cho.

Her friend did not forget her, crane after crane they made,
Until they reached a thousand, and they laid them on her grave.
People from everywhere gathered, and together a prayer they said,
And they wrote the words in granite so none may forget.

This is our cry, this is our prayer, peace in the world.
This is our cry, this is our prayer, peace in the world.
This is our cry, this is our prayer, peace in the world.

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST,Not that guest, nor that one either
Date: 08 Aug 05 - 12:25 PM

"Cranes Over Hiroshima" by Fred Small

Subject: RE: BS: Hiroshima 60th Anniversary
From: GUEST,G
Date: 08 Aug 05 - 10:07 AM

Eerie thought, McGrath! I had never given it any consideration but I probably would not be here had not hitler came to power. (small 'h' intentional)
My Great Grandparents migrated to the US (or escaped) from Germany and met up with some fine English folks. Here I am.

Would I have not wanted to be if that would have changed the outcome for 8,000,000+ plus Jewish people. That is a no brainer but also ia a worthless afterthought now.

Radiation? Yes it is bad and was harmeful but we knew so little about its' after effects. Remember the Xray devices in the Childrens shoe departments as late as the mid '60s? Completely unshielded,
no lead protective vests for the child and no lead wall for the operator to duck behind. Many sterilazations came about as a result of that process. Too late to really ascertain how many deaths could be attributed to this, the same as with radiation deaths 60 years ago.