Monday, May 4, 2009

What we did in Japan draws a line...............

Watch this video.

I had breakfast Friday with a liberal girlfriend who's recently been to Japan. The look I got when she said they went to a museum in memory of our bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima told me exactly how she felt about the dreadful subject: "America was so wrong........" She loves this country but finds that most of what we do is wrong....until about the last 100 days, of course.

This video link from PajamasTV is well worth watching if, for nothing else, you're on the fence about what we did in Japan. Or, if you're completely uninformed like Jon Stewart obviously is. It's 17 minutes long, but you only need to watch about 3 minutes to get it, really. I encourage you to. Have you always felt, deep down, that we shouldn't have bombed? Really, how could you not? Could anyone think that killing that many people is a good idea?

But, really, there's a very important delineates a lot of how we think. Is anything righteous? This subject draws a line in the sand, I think. It makes one think about if one side of an issue like this is ever totally wrong or right. It makes one wonder if thousands of people should be killed for aggression by their government. Would we ever have the nerve to save ourselves by doing something like this again? What do you think?



IMHO said...

"What do I think"

I'll tell you what..

I’m going to say just like the asswipes on the liberal blogs say, and call for the Impeachment of the sitting President, who we all can see now is an idiot. Lets run down his idiot-ness (is that a word?) and see how well he’s done in his first 100 days in office…

The Europeans, who were all lining up to take turns kissing up to the Messiah sucking up to him like a vintage Hoover vacuum cleaner have had an epiphany, and now are convinced that he’s an utter moron who doesn’t know his ass from his elbow about economics, foreign policy, domestic policy, etc, etc, etc, and is also completely clueless on how to properly treat a visiting head of state or foreign dignitary with the decorum that the position deserves. Us conservatives pointed out that he was a complete bumbling idiot, but the liberals wouldn’t listen, and accused us conservatives of trying to *steal* the election by scaring the world into thinking that he would ruin their economies. I guess we were right, but its rather a moot point, because the idiot got elected.
He has spent more, in the first 100 days of the presidency, than all of the other presidents COMBINED have spent in their first FULL YEAR in office. That’s impressive, only because we were told that it would be impossible to spend that much money in that short of a period because it would bankrupt the country, so all of us conservatives were told that we were just *being alarmists* and trying to win an election with our own moron by scaring the beJesus out of the population in order to *steal* the election from the Messiah. I guess we were right, but its rather a moot point, because the idiot got elected.
We conservatives pointed out that he couldn’t cobble together a coherent sentence on his own without the help of a staff of writers, and Teleprompters placed in a grid-like pattern in a radius of 50 feet, spaced two feet apart in any direction form the next available Teleprompter, so as to make sure the idiot wouldn’t stumble over the words, or forget his place. And even with all that, the idiot *lost* his place on the scrolling Teleprompter, and just babbled for 5 minutes while the staff tried to scroll the text back so that he could stop making an idiot of himself. Again, I guess we were right, but its rather a moot point, because the idiot got elected. Pretty impressive isn’t it!
He wouldn’t know an un-corrupt politician if said politician dropped to his knees and bowed to him... . His is the first presidency in history where the amount of overall appointments is running neck and neck with the amount of tax cheats he’s appointed. Us conservatives pointed out that OBambi was nothing more than a corrupt Chicago asswipe. I guess we were right, but its rather a moot point, because the idiot got elected.
We pointed out that he’s a gun-grabber, and he even turned the spotlight onto himself with the *clinging to religion and guns* statement he made, but the panty-wetters at the Brady Outhouse to Prevent you from Exercising your Second Amendment Right got their titty-nipples tied into knots and claimed that we were trying to scare the law-abiding citizens into not voting for him, in effect trying to steal the election by spreading false and vicious rumors. I guess we were right, but its rather a moot point, because the idiot got elected.

The list of stuff goes on, but I’m not going to bore the readership with the more mundane things that prove, beyond a doubt, that he’s a complete bozo, and an idiot who couldn’t find his behind with both hands and a map, a moron who demeans the office of the Presidency by going on late-night talk shows and yucks it up, laughing as he talks about how much money he’s going to be spending in order to *fix* the broken government that he *inherited*

And you Libs thought Bush was stupid? This guy is infantile. He’s way out of his league, and he may very well be impeached after the 2010 election by the wave of conservatives that will no doubt be swept into office.

Ducky's here said...

Errol Morris's "Fog of War" may be the best criticism of the act that I know of but it is only partially convincing.

Once the U.S. censors left, Japanese film makers became extremely critical of Japans actions in the war and the bushido code in general. I think their reaction is more interesting and relevant. If you aren't familiar with Japanese film of the mid 50's and 60's give them a look. It's some of the best film making ever and rather critical of their war time record.

The Burmese Harp


Seven Samurai

The Human Condition (finally restored and to be released in July, magnificent epic)

Fires on the Plain

Under the Flag of the Rising Sun

... warning, these guys are all leftists but they don't shrink from looking at a serious flaw that was (is?) deep in the culture.

Always On Watch said...

I'm waiting for the video to cue up. I hope that it will play for me!

Have you always felt, deep down, that we shouldn't have bombed?Actually, no. Japan clearly wasn't willing to sing kumbaya.

And remember Bataan?

Would we ever have the nerve to save ourselves by doing something like this again?Maybe. But it would take the deaths of 10 million Americans here in the homeland for there to be support of such an action.

Democracy Lover said...

I heard Stewart's subsequent apology for his "war criminal" remark about President Truman. It was quite unfortunate.

Terrorism is defined as violence or the threat of violence against civilians to achieve political ends. By that standard definition (coming originally from a U.S. Army Field Manual), Truman was a terrorist and guilty of a war crime. What he decided was that a few hundred thousand dead Japanese civilians was nothing compared to the possible deaths of a few hundred more Americans.

As Manhattan Project physicist Leo Szilard said,

"Let me say only this much to the moral issue involved: Suppose Germany had developed two bombs before we had any bombs. And suppose Germany had dropped one bomb, say, on Rochester and the other on Buffalo, and then having run out of bombs she would have lost the war. Can anyone doubt that we would then have defined the dropping of atomic bombs on cities as a war crime, and that we would have sentenced the Germans who were guilty of this crime to death at Nuremberg and hanged them?""

Anonymous said...

I would only advise your friend to do some external research before damning our use of atomic weapons in 1945. She should begin with understanding a series of cause-effect relationships that began with the Meiji Restoration, no more competent than the rule of Shoguns (which it eventually returned to). A new Japan enthralled by western technology, suddenly confronted with the fact that Japan was devoid of natural resources, embarked upon a campaign to subjugate other Asian nations. Over-confident from gains against China in the late 1890s, their defeat of the Russian fleet (1904-1905), led them to inflict horrific suffering upon the people of Korea, China, Vietnam, Malaysia, Thailand, and Burma beginning in the 1930s. A global depression only encouraged them to strike while the iron was hot.

But the fact is that Japan began losing the Pacific War after the battle of Midway. Militarily, Japan was profoundly over-extended. It could not maintain America’s industrial pace. It could not replace its men, its aircraft, or its carrier fleet. In spite of that, the Japanese were (and still are) an extraordinarily stubborn, prideful people. The battle of Okinawa was the longest major engagement in the entire war; it was in a word, brutal. Okinawa demonstrated the stubborn tenacity of the Japanese people, including civilians if necessary, and it painted a bleak picture for war-planners who understood that an invasion of the mainland would result in millions more American casualties over two or more years of vicious fighting.

Was the atomic bombing a tragedy of the first order? Yes, it was. But if your friend is appalled by the number of civilian casualties that resulted from these bombs, she should try to imagine how many civilians would have been killed had the United States (and we presume Russia) invaded the mainland in 1945. The bombings saved millions of American and Japanese lives; that should count for something. The mind is like a parachute; it only works well when fully deployed.

Ducky's here said...

What he decided was that a few hundred thousand dead Japanese civilians was nothing compared to the possible deaths of a few hundred more Americans.


If Japan had continued the war, which there was a high probability it would, then the number of Japanese deaths would have been enormous.
The bombs saved quite a large number of lives on both sides.

Z said...

Dem. Lover, America was not the aggressor.

Thanks for all the comments, everyone, they're very interesting and back up my thoughts; I've struggled with this but not after I heard so many more would have died had Japan continued in their aggression.

I wonder if we'd have the nerve to do something now..except most of our enemies today know they're safe because they're 'everywhere'....after another 9/11 or worse, would we dare hit, for example, kabul? I know, we have diplomatic situations, too, which might prevent that....just curious

Anonymous said...

I wonder if we'd have the nerve to do something now..I don't think "nerve" is the issue. In the modern sense, our question should be whether atomic weapons might be necessary, (there are several scenarios that suggest this), and whether the American people have the will to use "whatever means" to win a major conflict. Our policy, which prohibits "first use," and MAD, was an effective deterrent against the USSR ... although I'm not sure that MAD will work very well with Iran. This is why we need "star wars" technology as a defense against ICBMs, no matter where they might originate.

Z said...

Mustang, "will" is a far better word than "nerve"....absolutely. As I see this government err on the side of our enemy (gitmo,Palestinians moved here on our tax dollars,appeasing and apologizing), I believe this government does not have the will.

it's a frightening thought....I would hope we'd assess the situation carefully (with real experts in the field, not the Harvard elitist basketball buddies) and put more weight on how America fares than how the world feels about that.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, but since my Unle Hank died on the beaches of Iwo Jima from Japanese bullets, leading to my father graduating high school and immediately enlisting, and then dragging my family around the world with him over the next 25 years (including a sting as US Occupation Forces - Japan), you can say that I'm NOT even remotely sympathetic to the Japanese cause.

shoprat said...

I'm glad I wasn't in Truman's shoes that day, but he made the best possible choice, which is all you can do when there is no right choice. Letting Japan know what we could do, and equally important, what we would do, probably saved hundreds of thousands of lives in the long run. There was no right choice, but war, like politics, is often the lesser of two evils.

Z said...

If teens were taught the truth of this story, I think this would be a real eye opener. This video should be required viewing but, from what I hear from so many people over the years, most Americans don't see that this was the right thing to do, not at ALL, and I believe it's just another reason they mistrust and even have distaste for our country......

I'd be very eager to hear what Obama would say on the subject. I'm quite sure each of us could write a teleprompter speech for him on it.

What do you all think he'd say?

Ducky's here said...

If teens are interested in the issue, which I doubt they are, then there is plenty of material available to allow them to make a decision.

You simply aren't ever going to get consensus on the issue. I would be suspicious of the brain washing that has taken place in any culture which believes strictly one way on this.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

FJ said...
"Sorry, but since my Unle Hank died on the beaches of Iwo Jima from Japanese bullets, leading to my father graduating high school and immediately enlisting, and then dragging my family around the world with him over the next 25 years (including a sting as US Occupation Forces - Japan), you can say that I'm NOT even remotely sympathetic to the Japanese cause'
I'm extremely sorry about the loss of your Uncle, believe me I really am.
But, It's a whole new world out there now with a whole new generation of people. In Japan as well as in Germany.
I had relatives lost in that war as well. And I also lost family and friends in Vietnam and Korea.
In fact I had a uncle that was a Colonel under Gen. Patten and is buried right next to him in Luxembourg.
But today the Japanese are our friends and the new generation of Japanese had nothing to do with all that.
Just as I had nothing to do with Slavery. These people are our friends and really do like us. And having been there many times, I feel the same about them.
Like they say, "Time heals all wounds"
We can't stay mad at the whole world forever.

That being said, I don’t think that we were wrong about what we did in Japan. And I’d say to do it again if the same situation ever arose anywhere. We had to put an immediate end to the war. It made Japan surrender very quickly thus saving the lives of over 100,000 American soldiers and perhaps as many as 1,000,000 Japanese who would have died if we had invaded Japan. . Imagine if one of the dead had been your or my relatives, would you be very tolerant that the President didn't use the bomb? It was a very hard decision that had to be made. And President Truman was very brave in making it. .
Just my two cents

Anonymous said...

It seems to me, when you are engaged in battle, it's a rather uncomplicated decision to choose a side. You either choose the side of the enemy, or your own.

There is no middle ground when you are in the heat of battle. For me, the lives of our own, are worth more than the lives of the enemy. Furthermore, if you choose to fight and defend yourself, you do not entertain the possibility of defeat, only victory.

That's why there's no such thing as an exit plan btw. That used to be called surrender or at best, retreat.

For an army which had been fighting on two fronts, and having the wherewithall to end the war with Japan in victory and survival, while a weighty decision to be sure, dropping the bomb was deemed necessary to save more bloodshed in the long run and a chance to end the war with finality.

It was done. The war was over. Thank God. Those now who have 20/20 hindsight have the luxury of intellectualizing about how awful that decision was, and how America was at fault.

How convenient. Most who blame America, know only the history of WWII, they weren't around then. They didn't live it. They didn't fight it, or have a loved one fighting it. And as far as I'm concerned they have no right to judge our actions then.

They have benefitted from that action and had a future of freedom and prosperity which was possible because of that action.

We shouldn't be surprised at your friend Z, how many have already allowed 9-11 to fade into nothing more than an unpleasant memory. How many have forgotten their resolve during those weeks and months after 9-11?

Now, those same people who wanted our leaders to fight and win against the barbarians, are less certain, even apologetic and engage in questioning the very policies which have kept us safe.

How must the few WWII veterans who are left feel when they hear this tripe? How many of them would have died if not for President Truman?

They are heroes, and fought for their country and won. They have the right to live what years they may have left, in peace, and always, with honor, no questions asked.


Anonymous said...

I think that DD2 said it best.. As he always does.
The answer is not that simple but as Americans we can say that it was. To many of us it was not. But we were not the president at the time. And I'm sure that the people that has sons fighting there at the time were all for it. I am not saying that I am upset with dropping the bomb because I'm not. If I were there at the time, I would be all for it.
But like DD2 said, it was a long time ago and Japan has a whole new and friendlier generation.
We simply can not hold the past against people that had nothing to do with it. If we did, we would be mad at the whole world forever. We have millions of very peaceful and VERY productive Japanese people living here in America today. .

EDGE said...

Such a shame that we have to even discuss "were we right?"... I just can't debate anyone about this without totally f-----g losing it.

Anonymous said...


Don't get me wrong, I've got nothing against the Japanese people. I DO, however, have problems with people second guessing Truman's decision to drop the bomb. I lost my uncle because of the was, and there's a good chance I would have lost my Dad, had we opted for invasion vice dropping the bomb. I'm here today largely because of what Truman did. And those who would question his decision should ask themselves if it meant THEIR parents dying on the beaches whether they'd view the subject any differently.

The war was a defining event for my father and our family. And those who would play so casually with American lives need to have their heads examined.

Anonymous said...

I hate war and I especially hate civilian casualties, but that is the nature of man. Ironically, war is the only way to keep the peace and collateral damage is going to happen in any war. I cringe at the thought of how many innocents died those days, but it unquestionably saved more lives than it took.

Z said...

Ducky, which culture do you mean? Most Americans have been taught this was a terrible thing to do; just another of the many in a list of hate-America-first indoctrinations.

I hope you've all watched the video, I think it was compelling and that information would wake people up to the truth.

Thanks, Pris, I didn't mean to suggest I was surprised at my friend; I know what people learn here.

American Girl, I hope nobody gave the impression anybody dislikes the japanese. I know we all have Japanese friends we admire and, in my case, even cherish.

Elmers Brother said...

I read a book recently about the flyboys who were captured on Chichi Jima...(George H. W. Bush nearly being one of them) the resultant executions, inluding Japanese officers eating the livers of the pilots...this book explained in detail the Bushido code. After reading this book I found myself thinking that the atomic bombs were a necessary way of saving lives. Considering the code by which Japan's military lived by.

Z said...

Elbro, MAN, is THAT brutal. Adds a lot to the conversation.
That eating of organs reminds me of the islamists who will go to ANY length to kill us infidels, yet, our left does more to support and excuse islam than it does standing up for America's Judeo Christian faith.

Elmers Brother said...

The book Flyboys tends to try and excuse the Japanese by suggesting it wasn't any different than European imperialism.

It's written by the same man who wrote Flags of Our Fathers and Letters from Iwo Jima.

It discusses in detail the firebombings of Japan by American forces etc.

It's an interesting book, but I came away thinking that the dropping of the atomic bombs was justified.

Like FJ I had a relative serving during WWII, my grandfather. Instead of invading Japan he was in Tokyo Bay when the Japanese surrendered. I think it's too easy for some to second guess a lot that went on during that time because few of us lived through it, nor had to make the tough decisions our leaders had to make at the time.

I wouldn't have wanted to be in their shoes.

Z said...

Elbro, it seems like so many Americans second guess and make US the bad guy, don't you think?
I'll take blame where blame's due, but you're right; we can't KNOW, we weren't there.

We had a dinner party years ago with a few older Germans...the conversation got a tad heated because a USC history major was spouting off about NAZIS and the war, etc etc. Suddenly, a VERY soft spoken dear German friend spoke up from the end of the table:

"you can't know if you weren't there." I've never forgotten that.

David Wyatt said...

Wow, amazing Z. I hope I'm not opening a can of worms, but I must say that I believe there is a connection between this & the issue of how God sometimes called for the destruction of entire nations of people in the OT. Of course, the US is not Israel, & we are certainly not perfect ourselves. Yet we must also remember the fact that God never did this until He had first given these brutal & wicked nations many hundreds of years to repent & they would not. Often these nations practiced such atrocities as we could not imagine. Nineveh is a good example. He sent Jonah & reluctantly he preached & the nation repented & God forgave. Of course, years later they drifted back into their wickedness & the account of God's destruction of them is found in the prophecy of Nahum. The point is, that these wicked nations had to be judged because the gracious God who called for their repentance & gave them years to do it, & who saw their hearts, knew that if they were not judged, their sin & wickedness would spread & cause the destruction of multitudes more. Though judgment is God's "strange act" (Is.28:21) He does it ultimately due to His real & dazzlingly holy love. If we doubt His love, we have only to look to Calvary. God Bless.

Z said...

David, if that's opening a can of worms, it's an interesting can of worms and I thank you for it.

You know, the argument of many is that Jesus doesn't want us to fight......yet the whole Old Testament is God prompting armies to go and die for a righteous cause.
Yes, perhaps all of the things we see these days...even obama's election...are God's bidding...for reasons only He knows, that's for sure. I know wonderful Japanese Christians these days...

All I know is that, with what's happening today, if we didn't have God/faith, we'd be some pretty darned hysterical people!

psi bond said...

I get such remarkable vibes at this site. Everyone, or nearly everyone, here loves his/her Japanese Christian friends, whom they would not falter at reducing to ashes if they felt it would save the life of an American soldier. God must be for that, huh? If you didn’t believe such stuff, surely you’d go nuts, no? That’s right, isn’t it?

As we know, feelings are not supposed to be logical.

Z said...

I urge you all to watch the video before responding...

psi bond said...

Rational people know it cannot be the case that a touted video (available at a rightwing website) is the last word on this continuing controversy, or that those who are unconvinced of its indubitableness are just awfully dumb.

The plain truth is that whether or not it is right for a nation to drop nuclear bombs on populous foreign cities is not a factual question, or a simple one.

I recommend John Hersey’s 1946 book Hiroshima.

Anonymous said...

It is PERFECTLY RIGHT to end a war in the MOST BRUTAL, HORRIBLE, and FRIGHTENING and DESTRUCTIVE means possible. Why? Because it ENDS it and SAVES MILLIONS OF LIVES in the long run.

You must convince your enemy to STOP. Nothing says STOP like a hundred thousand people being disintegrated at once. We gave them no CHOICE. And that IS WHAT WAR is for, it's the ultimate arbiter of all conflicts. It is NOT something anyone should enter into lightly.

As Sherman once said:

Every attempt to make war easy and safe will result in humiliation and disaster. I would make this war as severe as possible, and show no symptoms of tiring till the South begs for mercy. If the people raise a great howl against my barbarity and cruelty, I will answer that war is war, and not popularity seeking. My aim then was to whip the rebels, to humble their pride, to follow them to their inmost recesses, and make them fear and dread us. This war differs from other wars, in this particular. We are not fighting armies but a hostile people, and must make old and young, rich and poor, feel the hard hand of war. War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over. War is the remedy that our enemies have chosen, and I say let us give them all they want. War is hell.

Elmers Brother said...


the only loser in the video was the left wing comedian who didn't know his history

Anonymous said...

You have to be stunted in some way to not see the reasoning behind the bombings. Honestly, some people think the world is like a video game or something, where you can do one thing and if it doesn't work, you can just stop restart and trying something else.

David Wyatt said...

Yes, Z, I know & work with wonderful Japanese believers. Of course, I know that our Lord in this day calls us to love all people enough to get the Gospel of Christ's death & resurrection for them. We as believers work together to do just that, that is the reason I mentioned that we are not Israel, & are certainly not perfect ourselves, far from it. We are in need of the Gospel in this country as much as any lost person in the world. God Bless.

psi bond said...

FJ: It is PERFECTLY RIGHT to end a war in the MOST BRUTAL, HORRIBLE, and FRIGHTENING and DESTRUCTIVE means possible. Why? Because it ENDS it and SAVES MILLIONS OF LIVES in the long run. Given your quote, one must suppose that your idol Gen. Sherman, had he access to the most destructive weapons of today, would have nuked Atlanta and other cities of the South without blinking to save soldiers’ lives. (After all, according to him, war is hell, and the civilians on the other side of it are the enemy, period.) That is, assuming his John Wayne style attitude toward war were unaffected by the modern ethos. Of course, nowadays, modern rules of war and respect for civilian communities must be extremely disturbing to arm-chair John Waynes.

Bush sacrificed thousands of American lives and hundreds of billions of our dollars to re-engeineer Iraq during almost six years, when he had an ample supply of nukes at the ready on his command. So Bush, by Sherman’s standards, is a war criminal.

Can anything be stupider than that a man has the right to kill me because he lives on the other side of a river and his ruler has a quarrel with mine, though I have not quarrelled with him?— Blaise Pascal

psi bond said...

Elmers Brother: hmmmm the only loser in the video was the left wing comedian who didn't know his history.Ummmmmm, whether it is right is not a question of some version of history but of moral judgment.

Z said...

naa, psi bond..he was scared of you lefties making a big fuss. He could have bombed and been done with it. He couldn't have been hated more, could he, anyway?
And, of course, the geopolitical situation is far different.

psi bond said...

haa, Z. That’s funny. Bush was held in check by a decent respect to the opinions of mankind. Thank God!

Not only the geopolitical situation is different now. So are the ethos and the knowledge of the destructiveness of nuclear bombs that the public and politicians share.

Z said...

Ya, and maybe less of OUR KIDS would have died. HAHA to you, psi.

psi bond said...

Ahhh, Z, it seems you would you prefer that Bush had said: “Damn the critics–––unleash nuclear hell”? “Baghdad, Kabul, Islamabad, Tehran, wipe them off my maps!”

Is that not what you’d like, Z?

Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.— Hermann Goering

Elmers Brother said...

Elmers Brother: hmmmm the only loser in the video was the left wing comedian who didn't know his history.Ummmmmm, whether it is right is not a question of some version of history but of moral judgment.but the dumbass lefty comedians morality it based on his flawed view of history.

Elmers Brother said...

for e.g. Stewart felt Truman a war criminal (a moral judgement) because he thought there was no warning.

psi bond said...

Elmers Brother: but the dumbass lefty comedians morality it based on his flawed view of history.

What is a flawed version of history? That high-handed decree represents one’s personal interpretation of someone else’s view of history.

psi bond said...

Elmers Brother: for e.g. Stewart felt Truman a war criminal (a moral judgement) because he thought there was no warning.

Thanks for explaining yourself, but it may not be so simple. Was the purported warning adequate? Did it explain that bomb shelters, ducking and covering, and firebreaks would be of no avail against the atomic bomb Little Boy that was about to be dropped on Hiroshima? Were the people warned of when the attack would take place so as to have adequate time to evacuate a large city? Jon Stewart could be correct insofar as the people may have been given a proper warning for an unprecedented atomic attack. Nonetheless, regardless of whether the alleged warning was considered sufficient, Stewart may have been right in his moral judgment if the definition of a war criminal is understood to be one who wreaks or is responsible for immense deadly harm in wartime on a defenseless civilian population.

The hisrorical fact is that, in a meeting held June 1, 1945. the Interim Committee, a secret high-level group created in May 1945 by Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson with the approval of Truman, which was tasked with making recommendations concerning the use of the atomic bomb, the view that the Japanese should not be given prior warning of an atomic attack was adopted.

Wikipedia states: “Although the United States had previously dropped leaflets warning civilians of air raids on twelve other Japanese cities, the residents of Hiroshima were given no notice of the atomic bomb.”

Elmers Brother said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Elmers Brother said...

but Stewart doesn't ask if the warning was adequate he doesn't realize there was a warning at all.

psi bond said...

Elmers Brother: but Stewart doesn't ask if the warning was adequate he doesn't realize there was a warning at all.

It’s likely the reason “he doesn't realize there was a warning” is that the documented fact is it was decided at the highest level that no warning should be given to the Japanese. But, if contrary to what we know, prior warning of an atomic attack had been authorized, it most likely would have been inadequate to the unprecedented weapon faced by the people of Hiroshima (as well as Nagasaki).

Z said...

Damn, I wish we'd had a warning at Pearl much more humane.

By the way, there is good information on both sides of the issue; very substantial information pro and con the atom bomb on Nagasaki.

I say it's pathetic to choose to err on ....another's side. Again.


psi bond said...

Were you caught by surprise at Pearl Harbor in 1941?

Evidence exists that there were prior indications of an attack by the Japanese on our military forces there. But, contrary to what rightwing sites may tell you, the hard evidence is that no warning was given before the atomic bombing of the city of Hiroshima.

The evidence used to support nuking Nagasaki is easily refuted.

You might say the Japanese had plenty of warning because the atomic bomb was described and predicted by H.G. Wells in a novel published in 1914.

However, three things should be understood:

1) Even if contrary to fact proper prior warning had been given, the position that dropping atomic bombs on cities is an immoral act, is nonetheless tenable.

2) One immoral act does not excuse another. (bin Laden tried to use what we did to Hiroshima and Nagasaki to excuse 9/11.)

3) Moral judgment is personal opinion not logical deduction from any set of empirical facts.

I say it’s patriotic to not betray America’s ideals and values. Upholding them, we do not err.

Thanks (for not deleting my dissenting comments).