Skip to comments.WSJ: Hiroshima - Nuclear weapons, then and now.
Posted on 08/05/2005 5:08:42 AM PDT by OESY
Today--or August 6 in Japan--is the 60th anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, which killed outright an estimated 80,000 Japanese and hastened World War II to its conclusion on August 15. Those of us who belong to the postwar generations tend to regard the occasion as a somber, even shameful, one. But that's not how the generation of Americans who actually fought the war saw it. And if we're going to reflect seriously about the bomb, we ought first to think about it as they did.
...No surprise, then, that when news of the bomb reached Lt. Fussell and his men, they had no misgivings about its use: "...We were going to live."...
What about Japanese lives?... Since the ratio of Japanese to American combat fatalities ran about four to one, a mainland invasion could have resulted in millions of Japanese deaths--and that's not counting civilians....
Also true is that the threat nuclear weapons pose today is probably greater than ever before. That's not because they're more plentiful--thanks to the 2002 Moscow Treaty (negotiated by John Bolton), U.S. and Russian arsenals are being cut to levels not seen in 40 years. It's because nuclear know-how and technology have fallen into the hands of men such as A.Q. Khan and Kim Jong Il, and they, in turn, are but one degree of separation away from the jihadists who may someday detonate a bomb in Times or Trafalgar Square....
Looking back after 60 years, who cannot be grateful that it was Truman who had the bomb, and not Hitler or Tojo or Stalin? And looking forward, who can seriously doubt the need for might always to remain in the hands of right? That is the enduring lesson of Hiroshima, and it is one we ignore at our peril.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
no point arguing with good logic.
My dad fought in the Phillipines. His next orders were to invade Japan. He would've been cannon fodder!
It would take roughly 5 seconds to find someone at DU to argue that Hitler, Stalin, or Tojo should have had the bomb first.
Such is the depth of America-hating in this world.
He makes it sound like we should have invaded.
I cringe to think liberals would rather have our own soldiers die than us dropping the bomb on the Japanese. Its war. Kill or be killed.
>>What about Japanese lives?... Since the ratio of Japanese to American combat fatalities ran about four to one, a mainland invasion could have resulted in millions of Japanese deaths--and that's not counting civilians....
Don't believe the numbers. Remember, people are claiming 100,000 Iraqi civilians are dead.
Don't believe the conservatives who have a "humanistic manifesto" about the bomb.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were crimes against humanity......
And we should have used one in Korean War & the Viet Nam War and one more Muslim 9/11 type terrorist attack in America and we should use one on Mecca.
You sit fat, dumb and safe in your comfortable little seat, separated by 60 years from the worst war in history, and make such a sactimonious and mindless pronouncement!
How does it feel to join the ranks of those referred to by Lenin as "Useful Idiots"?
My grandfather was a Forward Air Controller in the 7th Marine division. They were on ships, at sea, en route to the invasion of Japan. Estimates were 1 million allied casualties to conquer the home islands. Thank God for the bomb.
There were over 100,000 Japanese civilian casualties in fire bombing raids of Tokyo. Conventional weapons wreaked far more casualties than those two bombs.
Somber? Yes. Also sad and terrifying and one of the most horrifying events in history. Also necessary.
We pray that such an event will never be repeated.
But anyone who regards the occasion as shameful is both ignorant and stupid. This includes the author of this "editorial".
Ignorance can be corrected through careful and honest study, but there's no cure for stupidity.
In the early '90s there was a story that was told by a Japanese Grandmother who was a young teenager in the Summer of 1945. She was training with a bamboo spear and was told that whe would be part of the first wave to charge down the beach to meet the invading Americans. She was told that the Kamikazee tactic would work. The invasion would be repelled because the sight of girls attacking would cause the Americans soldiers to pause. In that moment of hesitation the Emporer would have his way. I read Truman's autobiography and he was not ashamed with his decision.
I have concluded, and I'm not being sarcastic, that there is now a political party for dreamers, anarchists, the perpetually irresponsible, lunatics, and those who insist on living in denial. There is a political party for misfits and malcontents and deconstructionists and life haters and death lovers. They have taken over the Democratic Party. They have a new front man in Howard Dean, who rouses, gives voice to, and capitalizes for his own presumably grandiose ego satisfaction, thier refusal to accept reality; their insistance on fomenting unreality.
These are not insults. This group needs to be seen for what it is -- irrational. They need to be contained.
Not so minor, in the sense of commies having a nuclear capability before we did.
Imagine the total lack of handwringing, reflection, or regret from an Atomic Stalin using his weapons.
think about it.
Had there been a viable alternative, I might agree with you. There was not, so I don't.
I disagree. Torturing and beheading people, starting wars to enslave other countries, and fanaticism to the point where people would rather jump off a cliff than accept that they are human beings with faults like everyone else is not humanity. Hence, the bombs are the opposite of what you are saying. I just don't understand how you can be precisely 180 degrees away from reality. Must take a lot of effort.
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.