Posted on 08/06/2007 3:11:20 AM PDT by abb
The United States becomes the first and only nation to use atomic weaponry during wartime when it drops an atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. Though the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan marked the end of World War II, many historians argue that it also ignited the Cold War.
Since 1940, the United States had been working on developing an atomic weapon, after having been warned by Albert Einstein that Nazi Germany was already conducting research into nuclear weapons. By the time the United States conducted the first successful test (an atomic bomb was exploded in the desert in New Mexico in July 1945), Germany had already been defeated. The war against Japan in the Pacific, however, continued to rage. President Harry S. Truman, warned by some of his advisers that any attempt to invade Japan would result in horrific American casualties, ordered that the new weapon be used to bring the war to a speedy end. On August 6, 1945, the American bomber Enola Gay dropped a five-ton bomb over the Japanese city of Hiroshima. A blast equivalent to the power of 15,000 tons of TNT reduced four square miles of the city to ruins and immediately killed 80,000 people. Tens of thousands more died in the following weeks from wounds and radiation poisoning. Three days later, another bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki, killing nearly 40,000 more people. A few days later, Japan announced its surrender.
In the years since the two atomic bombs were dropped on Japan, a number of historians have suggested that the weapons had a two-pronged objective. First, of course, was to bring the war with Japan to a speedy end and spare American lives. It has been suggested that the second objective was to demonstrate the new weapon of mass destruction to the Soviet Union. By August 1945, relations between the Soviet Union and the United States had deteriorated badly. The Potsdam Conference between U.S. President Harry S. Truman, Russian leader Joseph Stalin, and Winston Churchill (before being replaced by Clement Attlee) ended just four days before the bombing of Hiroshima. The meeting was marked by recriminations and suspicion between the Americans and Soviets. Russian armies were occupying most of Eastern Europe. Truman and many of his advisers hoped that the U.S. atomic monopoly might offer diplomatic leverage with the Soviets. In this fashion, the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan can be seen as the first shot of the Cold War. If U.S. officials truly believed that they could use their atomic monopoly for diplomatic advantage, they had little time to put their plan into action. By 1949, the Soviets had developed their own atomic bomb and the nuclear arms race began.
The Japs did plenty of atrocities on their own.
(chuckle)
Are they sure they can’t blame George Bush?
Wait a few hours...as we speak, the MSM is ironing out the last few details of their version of the Time-Warp Continuum theory which shows conclusively that GW is responsible for WWII.
No, the leftwingnuts will begin ranting about Prescott Bush again....(eyes rolling)
To their credit, Japan fought an honorable war, ...
I think there are any number of veterans of the Pacific campaign who might dispute that.
Not to mention 250,000 plus that were exterminated in Nanking.....
While some of their tactics may have been considered brutal by individuals, I think when viewed through the lense of history, the sacrifices their soldiers, and country made would be considered honorable. Had they won, their campaigns would be seen as bold and courageous. To the victor goes the spoils...
An invasion of mainland Japan would have resulted in millions of casualties on both sides, particularly among the Japanese civilian population. The revisionists also seem to forget that a single fire bombing raid on Tokyo a few weeks before the Hiroshima bomb killed an estimated 100,000 people... considerably more than the total initial deaths at Hiroshima.
That has to be the understatement of the day, and its only 10:30 am EST. Although the Nuremberg trials get the most attention, there were also the Tokyo war-crimes trials which resulted in seven defendants being executed in December 1948.
That has to be the understatement of the day, and its only 10:30 am EST. Although the Nuremberg trials get the most attention, there were also the Tokyo war-crimes trials which resulted in seven defendants being executed in December 1948.
Without the U.S. possession of atomic weapons, the Russians would have quickly rolled over Europe, tossing the western "allies" into the sea. So to the extent that atomic weapons prevented an immediate Soviet take over in Europe, yes, the Cold War was the result of U.S. possession of atomic weapons. (The Russians had many more troops on the ground and much, much shorter supply lines. It would not have been a contest.)
Well, when you put it that way!
Doubt it. The Soviets were never going to have the Navy and Air Force to take any islands more than 100 miles from the coast of Asia. We let them have Sakhlin Island for a little peace in Europe.
If the Japanese had had nuclear weapons in 1941, they probably would have use them on Los Angeles on December 7, 1941 as well as Pearl Harbor.
Look, I'm not trying to defend or justify the actions of Japan. War is hell, and they used brutal tactics. Feel free to choose an adjective that describes their methods, but it should not diminish that fact that as a people, the Japanese showed many honorable traits.
BULLSHIT. Next time, think before you open your mouth and say something stupid like this.
Honorable wars observe things like the Geneva convention. Japan didn't.
Honrable warriors don't massacre millions of civilians (Nanking)
Honorable wars don't involve enslaving thousands of women for sex slaves
Honorable wars don't involve using prisoners for biological test subjects (Unit 731).
World War I was relatively honorable in it's treatment of prisoners. WWII in the Pacific was total war to the knife.
throwing babies in the air and catching them on bayonets??
What history are you talking about again??
Or do you mean the beheading contests in Nanking?
Or do you mean the Bataan Death March?
Or is it the comfort women?
I am curious, just what was honorable about the way Japanese fought WWII again??
They didn’t kill millions in Nanking, they only killed at least 300,000......< /sarc>
The atrocities committed by all branches of the Japanese military before and during World War II are well documented. If you have the stomach for it, please read Baron Russell of Liverpool's short book on the subject, The Knights of Bushido: A Short History of Japanese War Crimes.
Yuki Tanaka, a historian at the Hiroshima Peace Institute, comments in his book Hidden Horrors: Japanese War Crimes in World War II, “cannibalism was often a systematic activity conducted by whole squads and under the command of officers”. Tanaka is not alone in citing such incidents.
Here's a clipping from the London UK Times, 1945 Nov 5, with a few details and, interestingly, the comment that technically cannibalism was not prohibited as a war crime for the simple fact that no one had thought a modern army would be capable of such acts.
Officers aside from Lt. Tazaki were convicted by the various war crimes courts. Lt. Gen. Yoshio Tachibana was, I believe, the highest ranking officer so convicted. This article from Time magazine, 1946 Sep 16, described the beheadings of flyers and ritual cannibalism as acts performed by the Japanese “to buoy the troops' morale”. One of the involved officers, a Major Matoba, “boasted that enemy bombs could not hurt him because he had eaten the enemy's flesh”.
No one knows how many innocent civilians were raped, tortured, murdered, or just outright killed at Nanjing. Even Japanese researchers admit to a number between 100,000 and 200,000. (I am discounting those who claim that the massacre at Nanjing never happened. There are those in Japan and elsewhere who, like Holocaust deniers, claim that nothing happened.)
The treatment of civilians and POWs by the Japanese military was nothing short of horrific. The Burma-Siam railroad stretched only about 260 miles, yet estimates range upwards of 100,000 dead among the conscripted labor and POWs that were forced to work on it. See Clifford Kinvig's River Kwai Railway: The Story of the Burma-Siam Railroad for more information.
You say To the victor goes the spoils..., and that Had they won, their campaigns would be seen as bold and courageous, but I see nothing bold or courageous in cannibalism, rape, torture, murder, etc. Maybe you and I just have different values.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/witness/august/9/newsid_4720000/4720807.stm
The young japanese woman says : I know that the reasons why the US dropped two different kinds of bombs in two different cities was that America wanted to know the effects by examining them and to exercise its dominance and power after the war.
It was just against humanity.
Do you still think it was necessary?
umm, it couldn’t possibly have anything to do with a 50 year + cult of brutal ,merciless Japanese militarism and fanatical Emperor worship? With the 100’s of 1000’s of innocents that the Japanese murdered indiscriminately across Asia , and the way the Japanese soldier was encouraged to never surrender but fight to the death , no matter how hopeless any chance for a victory might be ?
This little girl shows that historical revisionism and seeing thru a glass darkly is still alive and well in Nihon.
Sorry disagree.......politely.
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.