Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pat Buchanan: Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and Christian Morality ^ | August 10, 2005 | Pat Buchanan

Posted on 08/10/2005 6:32:47 PM PDT by F14 Pilot

On the 40th, 50th and 60th anniversaries of D-Day, Presidents Reagan, Clinton and George W. Bush traveled to Normandy to lead us in tribute to the bravery of the Greatest Generation of Americans, who had liberated Europe. Always a deeply moving occasion.

The 40th, 50th and 60th anniversaries of the dropping of the atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, however, were not times of celebration or warm remembrance. Angry arguments for and against the dropping of the bombs roil the airwaves and fill the press.

And the reason is obvious. While World War II was a just war against enemies whose crimes, from Nanking to Auschwitz, will live in infamy, the means we used must trouble any Christian conscience.

That good came out of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is undeniable. In a week, Japan surrendered, World War II ended and, across the Japanese empire, soldiers laid down their arms. Thousands of U.S. soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Japanese who would have perished in an invasion of Japan survived, as did Allied POWs who might have been executed on the orders of Japanese commanders when we landed.

But were the means used -- the destruction in seconds of two cities, inflicting instant death on 120,000 men, women and children, and an agonizing death from burns and radiation on scores of thousands more -- moral?

Truman's defenders argue that by using the bomb, he saved more lives than were lost in those cities. Only the atom bombs, they contend, could have shocked Japan's warlords into surrender.

But if terrorism is the massacre of innocents to break the will of rulers, were not Hiroshima and Nagasaki terrorism on a colossal scale?

Churchill did not deny what the Allied air war was about. Before departing for Yalta, he ordered Operation Thunderclap, a campaign to "de-house" civilians to clog roads so German soldiers could not move to stop the offensive of the Red Army. British Air Marshal "Bomber" Harris put Dresden, a jewel of a city and haven for hundreds of thousands of terrified refugees, on the target list.

On the first night, 770 Lancasters arrived around 10:00. In two waves, 650,000 incendiary bombs rained down, along with 1,474 tons of high explosives. The next morning, 500 B-17s arrived in two waves, with 300 fighter escorts to strafe fleeing survivors.

Estimates of the dead in the Dresden firestorm range from 35,000 to 250,000. Wrote The Associated Press, "Allied war chiefs have made the long-awaited decision to adopt deliberate terror bombing of German populated centers as a ruthless expedient to hasten Hitler's doom."

In a memo to his air chiefs, Churchill revealed what Dresden had been about, "It seems to me that the moment has come when the question of bombing of German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror, though under other pretexts, should be reviewed."

Gens. MacArthur, Eisenhower, "Hap" Arnold and Curtis LeMay reportedly felt the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was unnecessary. But recent documents have surfaced to show the Japanese warlords were far more determined to fight on to a bloody finish in the home islands than previously known.

Yet, whatever the mindset of Japan's warlords in August 1945, the moral question remains. In a just war against an evil enemy, is the deliberate slaughter of his women and children in the thousands justified to break his will to fight? Traditionally, the Christian's answer has been no.

Truman's defenders argue that the number of U.S. dead in any invasion would have been not 46,000, as one military estimate predicted, but 500,000. Others contend the cities were military targets.

But with Japan naked to our B-29s, her surface navy at the bottom of the Pacific, the home islands blockaded, what was the need to invade at all? On his island-hopping campaign back to the Philippines, MacArthur routinely bypassed Japanese strongholds like Rabaul, cut them off and left them to "rot on the vine."

And if Truman considered Hiroshima and Nagasaki military targets, why, in the Cabinet meeting of Aug. 10, as historian Ralph Raico relates, did he explain his reluctance to drop a third bomb thus: "The thought of wiping out another 100,000 people was too horrible," he said. He didn't like the idea of killing "all those kids."

Of Truman's decision, his own chief of staff, Adm. William Leahy, wrote: "This use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make wars in that fashion ..."

TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: abledanger; allies; asia; atomic; axis; b29; bomb; buchanan; bush; christian; clinton; ethics; europe; germany; hiroshima; japan; military; nagasaki; nuke; patbuchanan; reagan; truman; uk; usa; wwii
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 last
To: elbucko

"Obviously not, but since you don't check on the accuracy of the facts - either strategic or political history - that use in your posts, I didn't think it mattered"

The point of my post was that Curtis Lemay did not fit the sterotype of the rabid leftist press that hounded him while he was running for VP.

A thousand apologies for confusing his running mate with one southern conservative for another.

To tell you the truth, my memory for that particular election is a bit skewed as I was involved in the campaign of my father's first cousin who ran for Pres that year.

No offense intended to you and your great posts.

Keep up the good work!

41 posted on 08/18/2005 2:50:41 PM PDT by spanalot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: spanalot
No offense intended to you and your great posts.

My apologies, I inverted the meaning of your post. I stand humbly corrected.

42 posted on 08/19/2005 8:20:54 AM PDT by elbucko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

Comment #43 Removed by Moderator

Comment #44 Removed by Moderator

To: F14 Pilot

Once again, Pat gives evidence of his second rate mind.

He never got promoted above "white house speechwriter." Never got elevated to policy-making rank.

No doubt the Presidents observed a mind not worthy of serious analysis and decision making responsibility.

So he writes and talks, ever since. He runs for President twice, reaching 0.5 percent in a goofy party with a goofy running mate.

He now talks for the last-place cable news network.

45 posted on 04/29/2006 5:16:47 PM PDT by truth_seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F14 Pilot
LOL! First pat opines over the slaughter of innocent Pakistani women and children, and conveniently forgets to mention that they were unfortunate victims of our successful raid to take out senior terrorist leadership, and now he whines about our having to drop the second bomb.

What a slimy POS he's become.

46 posted on 04/29/2006 5:20:28 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson