Skip to comments.Anti-War Hiroshima A-Bomb Book Caught With Multiple Fictions
Posted on 03/02/2010 10:03:59 AM PST by Mobile Vulgus
click here to read article
They are doing a big movie about Hiroshima soon. I am looking forward to seeing it. Schools do not teach anything about it except that we bombed Japan because of the Arizona sinking.
Who’s this dude think he is? Michael Bellesiles?
The left goes bonkers about Hiroshima yet barely, if ever, mentions Dresden or Hamburg. Fascinating!
I thought that it was because of Xenophobic bigotry displayed by George Bush and a number of other Republicans.
Perhaps BO made a lone stand in speaking truth to power against using the the bomb, but was ultimately overruled by John McNamara and Dick Cheney.
Or something like that. /sarc
In all seriousness, My Grandfather was overjoyed when they dropped the big one because it meant that he could head home and see my father for the first time, rather than head to Japan. Big difference in opinion between those who actually lived through the history, and those who are playing Monday Morning QB, with all the benefit of hindsight.
Lol...Fake but accurate...
LOL. I was just getting ready to ping you to this thread.
Then again, there’s the “loud enough, long enough” aspect of lies.
What a shame. Another fraud. Here is an (5 page) excerpt: The Last Train From Hiroshima
By CHARLES PELLEGRINO
Published: January 19, 2010
Chapter 1: The Killing Star http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/20/books/excerpt-last-train-from-hiroshima.html
How about London? The Germans started targeting civilian population centers, The RAF just gave back what they got from the Luftwaffe, V1 buzz bombs, and V2 ballistic missiles.
I brought up the two German cities as their death toll approached that of Hiroshima. Nothing intended against the Brits.
After my father passed away last year, I talked to a man who had been in Army basic training with him. They were in basic when Japan surrendered. They too were overjoyed, because they were training to go to Japan. They both ended up in occupied Germany instead. Without "the big one" neither I nor my siblings, our children or grandchildren might be here. While none of us might be especially famous or well-known, I like to think the world is a bit better off with us than without us.
Further evidence that the Left simply cannot advance its agendas without lies.
I thought the first German bombing of London was a complete mistake? A navigation error accompanied with the mis-identification of the lights of London.
Both sides had somewhat of a “gentlemen’s agreement” about bombing London or Berlin.
My uncle saw the bombing of Hiroshima.
He was unable to check it out because he was doing forced labor in a Japanese mine at the time.
When stirring the emotions of the lunatic left, facts are irrelevant. I’m not being facetious; this is something I’ve heard them freely admit.
My uncle Lee was a Marine in WWII. He told me that he was sharpening a bayonet and getting ready to board a troop ship in San Francisco, or San Diego (can’t remember which) heading, he assumed, for Japan when he heard about the bomb. He said that was the first time in three years he allowed himself to think he might survive the war.
For the anti-war libs, the only thing necessary for them to hold the views they do is an ignorance of history.
Roger that !
THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO HIROSHIMA IF THERE HAD BEEN NO PEARL HARBOR
(not shouting at you naps.)
John Batchelor has been promoting this book endlessly. He’s had the author on almost nightly—first because Amazon was censoring it. Last night they discussed the non-member of one of the plane crews, who they said has been lying for sixty years.
I haven’t had the sense that it’s a peacenik book at all. The author seems to give the military command and the crews considerable credit for doing everything they could to minimize civilian casualties. They could have dropped the bombs on the same cities, and killed many more civilians than they did with a slight change in targetting.
BTW: It was mass murder. So were Tokyo, Dresden, etc., etc. It was terror-bombing, not military bombing.
You are either against murder, or you are not against murder. Circumstances are not relevant when you are discussing deliberate murder.
It is murder if you kill civilians AS A MEANS of achieving some other objective. It is not murder if you kill civilians unavoidably in the course of achieving some other legitimate objective.
The moral illiteracy that cannot make this distinction is very dangerous and deadly. The majority of our population is morally illiterate, and is unable to resist killing babies as a result.
Yes they actually surpassed the atomic bomb casualties as did the conventional incendiary raid on Tokyo on the night of March 9-10, 1945. Three hundred thirty four B-29s attacked the city with incendiary weapons (magnesium/thermite & napalm). Seventeen square miles were reduced to ashes and the fires could be seen from 150 miles away. Estimates of the number killed range between 80,000 and 200,000, a higher death toll than that produced by the dropping of the atomic bombs six months later.
That's left to the Paultards and Buchananites.
Which is precisely why the Germans lost the Battle of Britain. After Berlin was bombed, Hitler wanted to focus on bombing civilians instead of strategic military facilities, it was the breather the British needed.
First time I've heard that although I understand that Hitler had a grudging respect for the British. However he had no such compunctions about any of the other European nations.
What??? Just because the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor???
I guess it depends on your definition of “unavoidable.”
BTW: the concept of “just war,” as I have read it, is crap. Its just a way to guarantee that the barbarians (who don’t fight according to ANY rules) win.
he’s on a roll.
i just finished 4 books on DOWNFALL, the proposed invasion of japan. casualties would have passed 500,000 for the allies and the japanese would have lost millions. a blockade instead of invasion would also have killed millions of japanese. the anti-bombing, truman lied about casuallties people throw out figures that were estimates. these estimates increased as more became known about the japanese defenses.
I believe he thinks he is the male counterpart to Rigoberta Menchu, except I don’t see a Peace Prize in his future.
BTW: It was mass murder. So were Tokyo, Dresden, etc., etc. It was terror-bombing, not military bombing.What foolish nonsense. We expected at least half a million casualties of OUR troops with an invasion of Japan. Likely the death toll of Japanese would have been three times that.
WAR, my friend, is not a dinner party. It means KILLING the enemy and the Japanese people supported their war effort with all their hearts. THEY were the enemy and not one American should feel any sadness over the deaths at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. None.
You have missed the point. Murder is always wrong, no matter how desirable some of its effects are.
Is it okay for a wife to poison her husband if she stands to inherit $10, or $10,000, or $100,000,000,000? Is it okay to kill a baby if it means being able to go to the prom, or to finish college, or to win a beauty contest?
Once you say that you can murder people if the purpose is good enough, then the decision about WHEN the purpose is good enough is entirely up to the murderer and nobody else.
If you argue that dropping the bombs on Japan saved a few million Americans and Japanese, I can say that dropping the bombs established the principle by which both the Japanese and Americans have murdered tens of millions of their own babies. And we would both be right.
No, you miss the point. Murder is not properly used for defining the sort of deaths in war that we are talking about. Your use of murder is false and your examples are a false dichotomy. Apples and oranges as they say.
When soldiers deliberately kill civilians they are charged with...wait for it...wait for it...wait for it...murder!
To put it another way: The distinction is PRECISELY between killing that is murder and killing that is not murder.
When civilians are targeted and killed deliberately, they have been murdered, whether the killing was done by a soldier or pilot contrary to orders, or in obedience to orders. If done in obedience to orders, the guilty include those who initiated the orders, no matter how far up the chain of command.
In WWII, American officers were in constant battle with British officers about terror bombing. The distinction was precisely between bombing military assets and bombing civilians for purposes of terror. The objections raised by the Americans were based PRECISELY on the assertion that targeting civilians was murder.
The notion that in war you can just slaughter people is a barbaric macho attitude that has no place in the American military, and never has.
The deliberate killing of civilians in WWII, including the dropping of the atomic bombs, was a descent into barbarism. It is perfectly understandable, given the demented, psychotic barbarity of the Japanese, but it was still murder.
Well worth the read.
It was the primary Naval base of the Empire.
Nagasaki was not targeted by accident.
It was the primary Maritime shipping port of the Empire.
The notion that in war you can just slaughter people is a barbaric macho attitude that has no place in the American military,...It really is a redherring to say that carpet bombing in a world war is murder. It's insane, actually. You have no basis to argue that war at ALL is "legitimate" killing using your abstruse distinctions.
Nice assertion, prove it! That they were 'civilian'.
What - no day passes available?
“Fake but accurate.” It’s a liberal way of life.
More ‘just war’ bs.
More just war bs.
.... curious, xone, could you elaborate what you mean? Are you saying no war is just or right?
After the bombing , a little later they just left the gates unguarded and everyone walked out. He is of the firm opinion that if there had been an invasion he and all his buddies would have been killed.
If not for Hiroshima, a lot of Americans would have died. And probably more Japanese than died even in the blast.
You originally scoffed at the notion that murder could be committed during war. I was responding to that.
Who was a civilian in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? That’s a distinct question.
Looks like I have more to add to my chapter in “48 Liberal Lies” on Hiroshima.
Hardly, I was taking offense to your blanket breezy assertion that all the participants in the bombing of those targets and by extension any similar ones were and are guilty of 1st degree murder.
The attempt to lay guilt where none exists is typical of the left and so the rise of 'just war' theory only serves to minimize the resolve and maximize the angst of those serving today.
It is a cowardly exercise to engage in today, but those men and women in harm's way can at least be counseled. Your shameless attack on the military of WWII is frankly no different than John 'vietnam' Kerry's equating Viet Nam vets with Genghis Khan's horde.
Separating civilians from military objectives is the responsibility of the one who controls them. In this way the Japs were no different than Saddam.
A lot more Japanese.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.