View Full Version : Son of Pilot Who Dropped A-Bomb Opposes,
Plan to Send U.S. Delegation to Hiroshima Ceremony.EXCLUSIVE: The son of the U.S. Air Force pilot who dropped the first atomic bomb in the history of warfare says the Obama administration's decision to send a U.S. delegation to a ceremony in Japan to mark the 65th anniversary of the attack on Hiroshima is an "unsaid apology" and appears to be an attempt to "rewrite history."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/04/tibbets-son-disapproves-plan-send-delegation-hiroshima-ceremony/?test=faces
Raptor1
08-05-10, 06:37 AM
*grabs popcorn for the inevitable 'bomb shouldn't have been dropped' argument*
HunterICX
08-05-10, 06:49 AM
Hey...who stole my popcorn! :stare:
HunterICX
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3389/3552554059_850537ff5c.jpg
Someone want some more popcorn?
I would call that respecting the victims of World War II.
goldorak
08-05-10, 07:05 AM
Plan to Send U.S. Delegation to Hiroshima Ceremony.EXCLUSIVE: The son of the U.S. Air Force pilot who dropped the first atomic bomb in the history of warfare says the Obama administration's decision to send a U.S. delegation to a ceremony in Japan to mark the 65th anniversary of the attack on Hiroshima is an "unsaid apology" and appears to be an attempt to "rewrite history."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/04/tibbets-son-disapproves-plan-send-delegation-hiroshima-ceremony/?test=faces
Can I say what b-u-l-l-s-h-i-t ?
The drop of the 2 bombs were justified only from an economical standpoint (remember how much money the Manhattan project cost the US taxpayers ? ) a ROI if you want for the military industrial complex; and as an act of leverage against the Soviets.
All the talk about the bombing being necessary because it would have saved lives etc... is only that. Talk without substance. If the bombs were not dropped the US would have invaded Japan at the earliest by the end of 1945, and it was well known that the japanese government wanted to end the war by the time the Potsdam conference was in effect. Truman and Stalin deliberately decided to ignore the Japanese message.
The drop of the 2 bombs effectively ended the war. The reason for using them (propaganda aside, the evergreen motto "to save lives") on the other hand has nothing to do with saving lives. And history, and historical documents show this very clearly.
joegrundman
08-05-10, 07:26 AM
Every year there is a ceremony to mark the Hiroshima bombing, and every year the US sends a delegation.
Can I say what b-u-l-l-s-h-i-t ?
The drop of the 2 bombs were justified only from an economical standpoint (remember how much money the Manhattan project cost the US taxpayers ? ) a ROI if you want for the military industrial complex; and as an act of leverage against the Soviets.
All the talk about the bombing being necessary because it would have saved lives etc... is only that. Talk without substance. If the bombs were not dropped the US would have invaded Japan at the earliest by the end of 1945, and it was well known that the japanese government wanted to end the war by the time the Potsdam conference was in effect. Truman and Stalin deliberately decided to ignore the Japanese message.
The drop of the 2 bombs effectively ended the war. The reason for using them (propaganda aside, the evergreen motto "to save lives") on the other hand has nothing to do with saving lives. And history, and historical documents show this very clearly.
from foxNews and nothing else! I know well the story both before and after, and there are reasons for them strategic decision was taken during WWII,and if you have any relevance to "tread" is known as BS as above, only that it is a bad mail is not what it contains, you must be able to separate this!
TLAM Strike
08-05-10, 08:44 AM
Remember this. Every Purple Heart awarded since the end of WWII to the present day (Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and other conficts) all were minted for Operation Downfall the Allied invasion of Japan.
500,000 were made. 120,000 are still in stock.
I've met his grandson (he's a B-2 pilot), as well as General Tibbets himself. His son is right.
The japanese should thank us for the a-bombs, they saved countless JAPANESE lives.
Some goon asked General Tibbets if he had visited the Hiroshima Memorial when I saw him give a talk. He said "I've only been to Hiroshima the one time, and I didn't stop."
Everyone laughed except the hippie.
Remember this. Every Purple Heart awarded since the end of WWII to the present day (Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and other conficts) all were minted for Operation Downfall the Allied invasion of Japan.
500,000 were made. 120,000 are still in stock.
500k would not have been enough I fear.
Then there is the standing jap order to murder all POWs upon invasion. Note that in September, this would have resulted in the murder of all POWs in the CBI when the brits would have invaded Malaya. The death toll just from already ordered POW murders would have exceeded the death toll of BOTH a-bombs.
Raptor1
08-05-10, 09:00 AM
Not...this...time...
Ah, whatever.
Can I say what b-u-l-l-s-h-i-t ?
The drop of the 2 bombs were justified only from an economical standpoint (remember how much money the Manhattan project cost the US taxpayers ? ) a ROI if you want for the military industrial complex; and as an act of leverage against the Soviets.
All the talk about the bombing being necessary because it would have saved lives etc... is only that. Talk without substance. If the bombs were not dropped the US would have invaded Japan at the earliest by the end of 1945, and it was well known that the japanese government wanted to end the war by the time the Potsdam conference was in effect. Truman and Stalin deliberately decided to ignore the Japanese message.
The drop of the 2 bombs effectively ended the war. The reason for using them (propaganda aside, the evergreen motto "to save lives") on the other hand has nothing to do with saving lives. And history, and historical documents show this very clearly.
What messages were they ignoring? The Japanese government had no intention to unconditionally surrender at this point, they rather would have accepted an end to the war with some outrageous demands that included no occupation, conducting their own war crimes trials by themselves, disarming the IJN by themselves and other such blatant nonsense.
And wouldn't it have saved lives? Take a look at the buildup of forces on both sides and the estimated casualties for Operation Downfall; it's quite clear that dropping the atomic bombs would have been much preferable to an invasion on both sides.
mookiemookie
08-05-10, 09:09 AM
And wouldn't it have saved lives? Take a look at the buildup of forces on both sides and the estimated casualties for Operation Downfall; it's quite clear that dropping the atomic bombs would have been much preferable to an invasion on both sides.
10-15,000 planes held in reserve for kamikaze attacks. Massed forces on the southern end of Kyushu. Aviation fuel, ammo stockpiled. Doesn't sound like "about to surrender" to me.
SteamWake
08-05-10, 09:14 AM
Every year there is a ceremony to mark the Hiroshima bombing, and every year the US sends a delegation.
True, but this is the first year we are poised to 'apologize'.
Not...this...time...
Ah, whatever.
Bad Raptor! :nope: :haha:
...and it was well known that the japanese government wanted to end the war by the time the Potsdam conference was in effect.
Says you. IIRC that there was at least one coup attempt by Imperial Army officers to stop the surrender.
In any case how many Tokyo style firebombing raids do you think would have been mounted before the war actually ended if it had been allowed to run it's course?
You may not like it but those atomic bombs did save lives on both sides.
mookiemookie
08-05-10, 09:32 AM
Says you. IIRC that there was at least one coup attempt by Imperial Army officers to stop the surrender.
In any case how many Tokyo style firebombing raids do you think would have been mounted before the war actually ended if it had been allowed to run it's course?
You may not like it but those atomic bombs did save lives on both sides.
Mark it on your calendars, folks. August and I agree on something. :rotfl2:
joegrundman
08-05-10, 09:34 AM
True, but this is the first year we are poised to 'apologize'.
maybe i was wrong. i lived in japan for three years, and they hold the ceremony every year. i was pretty sure that on each occasion a us official was present and spoke publicly.
but if the japanese are making a big deal about it, clearly something is different. Maybe it was always in an 'unofficial capacity' before.
But if poised to apologise, as you put it, how is it an 'unsaid apology' as Tibbets jr. puts it?
In any case, although this clearly has the makings of another conservative storm in a teacup, you shouldn't worry too much about it. The commemoration is very uncontroversial, lamenting lives lost in war and wishing that the world never again finds itself using nukes on civilian centres. That sort of thing.
Mark it on your calendars, folks. August and I agree on something. :rotfl2:
http://orangeedge.com/images/experiments/explosionPlanet.jpg
frau kaleun
08-05-10, 09:59 AM
Mark it on your calendars, folks. August and I agree on something. :rotfl2:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_YAg9pGiqbQE/RprrbvWPmHI/AAAAAAAABxQ/pb36lJcMXKI/s400/HeadExplodeBig.gif
ETR3(SS)
08-05-10, 10:11 AM
So when can we expect that apology from Japan about Pearl Harbor? You know the one that they were going to give on the 50th anniversary of the attack but changed their minds on at the last minute. I mean if we can say sorry for vaporizing thousands of people in a millisecond they can surely say sorry for killing thousands over a couple of hours.
GoldenRivet
08-05-10, 10:12 AM
if they apologize for Pearl
i think we can apologize for the A-bombs
i also hold the opinion that the US Military was justified in its use of the weapon.
Sailor Steve
08-05-10, 10:35 AM
Can I say what b-u-l-l-s-h-i-t ?
No. Putting dashes between the letters to get around the censor is still against the rules.
Mark it on your calendars, folks. August and I agree on something. :rotfl2:
It's not the first time that's happened you Drama Queen! :DL
So when can we expect that apology from Japan about Pearl Harbor? You know the one that they were going to give on the 50th anniversary of the attack but changed their minds on at the last minute. I mean if we can say sorry for vaporizing thousands of people in a millisecond they can surely say sorry for killing thousands over a couple of hours.
I'd say it'll happen around about the same time they apologise to China for Nanking... :hmmm:
ETR3(SS)
08-05-10, 11:56 AM
Exactly. Japan is acting like an ostrich and burying its head in the sand about it's past.
TLAM Strike
08-05-10, 12:16 PM
10-15,000 planes held in reserve for kamikaze attacks. Massed forces on the southern end of Kyushu. Aviation fuel, ammo stockpiled. Doesn't sound like "about to surrender" to me. My history teacher had an professor at college who was in elementary school in Japan during WWII. He told him a story about how as kids they were taught to run under American tanks while gripping a satchel charge.
This story really hit home for him, see his dad was in WWII in the US Army and served in the ETO (With Patton). After VE day they put him on a ship to the Pacific. Now he was really tall (my teacher was like 5'10" and his dad was taller than him he said) so the PTB decided the first people to storm the beaches in Japan would be the tallest troops since as the Japanese of that time were short it would be intimidating they thought. But the invasion never happened.
My history teacher had an professor at college who was in elementary school in Japan during WWII. He told him a story about how as kids they were taught to run under American tanks while gripping a satchel charge.
This story really hit home for him, see his dad was in WWII in the US Army and served in the ETO (With Patton). After VE day they put him on a ship to the Pacific. Now he was really tall (my teacher was like 5'10" and his dad was taller than him he said) so the PTB decided the first people to storm the beaches in Japan would be the tallest troops since as the Japanese of that time were short it would be intimidating they thought. But the invasion never happened. in the Pacific and I heard about these stories, from the Pearl to victory in the Pacific,Unfortunately, he succumbed to the WWII,just like many other Americans did,but but the stories have been told has had an impact not only because many lost their lives at stake,but a humane approach to how people live, and hopefully learn life!
After criticism, U.S. says delegation will not offer apology at ceremony in Japan to mark the 65th anniversary of WWII
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/05/delegation-no-apology-at-hiroshima-ceremony/
Note:An updated version from the original post.
AngusJS
08-05-10, 02:23 PM
Some goon asked General Tibbets if he had visited the Hiroshima Memorial when I saw him give a talk. He said "I've only been to Hiroshima the one time, and I didn't stop."
Everyone laughed except the hippie.Killing 80,000 people, most of whom are civilians, can be fun!
:nope:
Killing 80,000 people, most of whom are civilians, can be fun!
:nope:
Actually, technically very few were civilians. By Imperial Edict, all "men" between the ages of 15 and 65 were already officially conscripted, as were all females 17-47.
So the only civilians were boys under 15, girls under 17, men over 65, and women over 47.
That Japan wanted to end the war is utter nonsense.
That old claim is based on one intercepted message from a diplomat back to Tokyo where he said they should accept. The reply—which was in a code that did not have intercepts declassified until 1996—was an unambiguous "NO." It added that the plan was to bleed the US white on the beaches, THEN sue for peace with the US body count as a negotiating point.
The a-bombs without question saved lives.
Again, all POWs and detainees (civilians) would have been executed in September. Not to mention the fact that Hiroshima and Nagasaki would have simply been firebombed had they not been nuked. The 2d Tokyo fire bomb raid killed more than EITHER a-bomb.
One of the best books dealing with the way the war ended (nitty gritty details from inside the Imperial Palace and IGHQ) is Richard Frank's excellent book, Downfall.
Biggles
08-05-10, 02:42 PM
No. Putting dashes between the letters to get around the censor is still against the rules.
The only constructive thing I've read in this thread so far. I didn't know that, but know I know! :D
(Yay, it's another "what if..?" thread...)
Zachstar
08-05-10, 03:02 PM
Ah the usual "OMG THE END OF THE WORLD BECAUSE WE APOLOGIZED FOR SOMETHING OLE GRANDPA DID!!!!!"
For some WW2 just wont end. Again I note how some people went nuts over a Admiral from the Navy of Japan saying a prayer and a saying of peace at the site of a discovered minisub that had gotten into Pearl and Fired its torpedoes.
(Yay, it's another "what if..?" thread...)[/QUOTE] for your comment :hmmm:
Ah the usual "OMG THE END OF THE WORLD BECAUSE WE APOLOGIZED FOR SOMETHING OLE GRANDPA DID!!!!!"
:up:
mookiemookie
08-05-10, 03:16 PM
Ah the usual "OMG THE END OF THE WORLD BECAUSE WE APOLOGIZED FOR SOMETHING OLE GRANDPA DID!!!!!"
I wouldn't be opposed to an apology. An apology doesn't necessarily mean that it shouldn't have happened. It can mean that we're sorry it had to happen.
I wouldn't be opposed to an apology. An apology doesn't necessarily mean that it shouldn't have happened. It can mean that we're sorry it had to happen.
Exactly.
Weiss Pinguin
08-05-10, 03:26 PM
For some WW2 just wont end. Again I note how some people went nuts over a Admiral from the Navy of Japan saying a prayer and a saying of peace at the site of a discovered minisub that had gotten into Pearl and Fired its torpedoes.
Hadn't heard about that, when did it happen?
Ducimus
08-05-10, 03:32 PM
Exactly. Japan is acting like an ostrich and burying its head in the sand about it's past.
THIS. Anytime anyone from japan insinuates they want an apology for the A Bombs, someone should mention all the war crimes they were guilty of in WW2. From "comfort women" to The rape of Nanking, to Unit 731, the list goes on, but Pearl Harbor may as well reside on that list too.
When Japan owns up to everything it had done; then, and only then, should anybody start thinking about an "apology" for Fat man and little boy.
Biggles
08-05-10, 03:51 PM
(Yay, it's another "what if..?" thread...) for your comment :hmmm:[/QUOTE]
"What if we didn't dropped the bomb". "What if we invaded Japan?"
"The bombs saved lives". "The bombs killed thousands".
This may not be the purpose of the thread but this is what I see.
That's all good to speculate but it's been done a great number of times I feel, and, quite frankly, I'm getting tired of it...it happened 65 years ago, yet people still feel it's time to debate how it was good/bad to drop the bomb, and what it would have meant not to drop it. The americans dropped the bombs, so there we are.
Interesting that so many people on the Internet knows exactly what would've happened, and exactly how many people would've died if this or that didn't happen...
Great load of historians too!
for your comment :hmmm:
"What if we didn't dropped the bomb". "What if we invaded Japan?"
"The bombs saved lives". "The bombs killed thousands".
This may not be the purpose of the thread but this is what I see.
That's all good to speculate but it's been done a great number of times I feel, and, quite frankly, I'm getting tired of it...it happened 65 years ago, yet people still feel it's time to debate how it was good/bad to drop the bomb, and what it would have meant not to drop it. The americans dropped the bombs, so there we are.
Interesting that so many people on the Internet knows exactly what would've happened, and exactly how many people would've died if this or that didn't happen...
Great load of historians too![/QUOTE] in any way, but you have good views, and perspectives! :yep:
Raptor1
08-05-10, 04:34 PM
"What if we didn't dropped the bomb". "What if we invaded Japan?"
"The bombs saved lives". "The bombs killed thousands".
This may not be the purpose of the thread but this is what I see.
That's all good to speculate but it's been done a great number of times I feel, and, quite frankly, I'm getting tired of it...it happened 65 years ago, yet people still feel it's time to debate how it was good/bad to drop the bomb, and what it would have meant not to drop it. The americans dropped the bombs, so there we are.
Interesting that so many people on the Internet knows exactly what would've happened, and exactly how many people would've died if this or that didn't happen...
Great load of historians too!
Damn that quote was messed up, fixed.
Anyway, this discussion pops up every single time a thread about this subject is started...
Takeda Shingen
08-05-10, 04:44 PM
Ah the usual "OMG THE END OF THE WORLD BECAUSE WE APOLOGIZED FOR SOMETHING OLE GRANDPA DID!!!!!"
For some WW2 just wont end. Again I note how some people went nuts over a Admiral from the Navy of Japan saying a prayer and a saying of peace at the site of a discovered minisub that had gotten into Pearl and Fired its torpedoes.
Well, it really wouldn't be such a big deal if, as Ducimus pointed out, we were dealing with a country that acknowledged it's attrocities committed against a multitude of peoples and nations.
Biggles
08-05-10, 05:07 PM
Anyway, this discussion pops up every single time a thread about this subject is started...
Yeah, that's my point! Same discussion, same arguments. And the arguments often have that air of "this is absolute, no other possible explanation exists". I'm not overly fond of this. While discussing alternative history may be fun it certainly isn't anything you can claim to be an expert of, since you're discussing things that never could happen, since they never actually happened. You can claim that something was more probable to happen, but you cannot say that it would definitely happen. Same goes for predicting the future. Imagine if every single prediction turned out to be true. Would be one messed up world...
Ducimus
08-05-10, 05:08 PM
Well, it really wouldn't be such a big deal if, as Ducimus pointed out, we were dealing with a country that acknowledged it's attrocities committed against a multitude of peoples and nations.
Here's a post i made awhie ago
Just as an aside, what got me looking more closely at japanese warcrimes was when i was doing research for the bungo pete/akikaze mod in TM.
I ran accross this page:
http://members.iinet.net.au/~gduncan/massacres_pacific.html
Primarly because an incident took place called "THE 'AKIKAZE' EXECUTIONS". Naturally it peaked my curiosity. Not wanting to take a obscure user page at face value, i started googleing some of the incidents described on that page, and they all seem to have really occured.
If all incident's listed are correct ( cursory searching leads me to think they are), Japan has a lot to answer for. Scuse me while i scoff at the idea of my country apologizing to the unapologetic.
To be honest...I do ponder if Soviet and American generals and politicians would have been so reluctant to use a nuclear weapon in action had they not used two on Japan already and seen the destruction that they caused.
The two bombs on Japan could well have prevented several being used on China during the Korean war. After all, no-one really believes in the destructive force of something until they witness it for themselves in action. :hmmm:
Platapus
08-05-10, 05:45 PM
To be honest...I do ponder if Soviet and American generals and politicians would have been so reluctant to use a nuclear weapon in action had they not used two on Japan already and seen the destruction that they caused.
The two bombs on Japan could well have prevented several being used on China during the Korean war. After all, no-one really believes in the destructive force of something until they witness it for themselves in action. :hmmm:
A most interesting comment. There was consideration for the US to "drop" the first nuclear weapon on an island as a show of capability. This was not adopted for several reasons, both logical and emotional.
1. There was not enough 235U for a second uranium device
2. Implosion construction was still pretty new and uncertain. This is why the PU device was equipped with contact single point ignition fuses as a back up so that there would be "some" explosion, and the device would be destroyed to prevent examination.
3. It would be a lot easier to over look a "dud" if it were dropped in combat, then if it were part of an advertised and witnessed "demonstration".
But your comment is most interesting to consider. Did we, in fact, destroy two cities in order to save the world? hmmmm
Unit 731.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hOIpDSWySw
And in other news: Rape of Nanking.
Etc.
Now, do the deaths and murder of those innocent people justify the deaths of yet another thousands of innocents on the Japanese side? No they don't. The death of innocent people can naturally not be "justified". But war itself is not just. I don't know war because I've never been to one, but I think it is safe to say that by its nature, it is the opposite of justice, decency, compassion and sympathy. It is when these things end, that war starts.
So, while the death of tens of thousands of people in 2 nuclear attacks is not "just" in any event, the above examples show what kind of enemy the US and Allied Forces were up against in the Pacific as well. And in light of the timid recognition of their own horrible atrocities, I would have a hard time with the Japanese demanding an apology for the nuclear attacks.
Either everybody apologizes to everybody for any wrongdoing that might have happened (well, aside from waging war on one another in the first place), or better, gives it a rest.
The only sincere apology / real peace settlement can only be between individuals, anyway. Most everything else is just politics.
nikimcbee
08-05-10, 08:11 PM
It's not the first time that's happened you Drama Queen! :DL
:haha:Give that man a Glenn Beck gold coin!
mookiemookie
08-05-10, 08:12 PM
:haha:Give that man a Glenn Beck gold coin!
http://motherjones.com/files/images/Beck_Secondary2.jpg
nikimcbee
08-05-10, 08:15 PM
*grabs popcorn for the inevitable 'bomb shouldn't have been dropped' argument*
This. On a side note, I haven't met any WW2 vets that didn't mind dropping the bomb.
Ducimus
08-05-10, 08:29 PM
Yup, the effects of dropping those bombs have had far reaching consequences. The radiation must have twisted their gene pool. (http://www.cracked.com/article_18567_6-japanese-subcultures-that-are-insane-even-japan.html) :har:
mayor seeks disarmament on A-bomb 65th anniversary.HIROSHIMA, Japan (AP) — A U.S. representative participated for the first time Friday in Japan's annual commemoration of the American atomic bombing of Hiroshima, in a 65th anniversary event that organizers hope will bolster global efforts toward nuclear disarmament.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/08/06/nuclear-powers-join-hiroshima-memorial-time-th-anniversary/
Note:Published August 06, 2010
Another little thought that ran through my mind last night as I went to bed, the Japanese economic miracle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_post-war_economic_miracle
Now...surely if Japan had not surrendered in the manner that it did, this economic miracle would never have occured and Japan would not be the nation it is today, a true economic powerhouse and technological hotzone.
Japan lost two cities, and when I say lost, I mean temporarily because both Hiroshima and Nagasaki are thriving cities today, however if the invasion had gone ahead, just about every city would have been firebombed into oblivion, the atomic bombs would have been dropped and possibly in greater numbers than just two, and the sheer amount of casualties incurred would have swung US public opinion further against the Japanese and discouraged the post-war investment that the US poured into Japan in reality, it could well be that Japan would wind up facing some kind of Versailles type reparations to help fix the US manpower drain that would have happened.
Then there's the Soviets, eagerly eating any form of territory they could get their hands on, perhaps Japan would have found itself in two pieces like Germany? What would that have done to the economic powerhouse that Japan would become? Would Japan have become like Korea?
There's lots of what-ifs in this scenario...but when one looks at Japan today, and one thinks of what could have been...two cities seems a small price to pay. :hmmm:
frau kaleun
08-06-10, 08:11 AM
There's lots of what-ifs in this scenario...but when one looks at Japan today, and one thinks of what could have been...two cities seems a small price to pay. :hmmm:
Like anything it's a matter of perspective. No ill wind that doesn't blow someone some good, etc., which doesn't mitigate how awful the storm is for those who are destroyed by it.
It's no different than saying that 50,000+ casualties in Normandy was a small price to pay for making a successful assault on Fortress Europa; a small price perhaps in terms of the war as a whole and what was at stake, but a huge price for those who actually paid it, as such things inevitably are.
Not suggesting that you aren't savvy or thoughtful enough to be very much aware of this - just wanted to see it said. :DL
joegrundman
08-06-10, 08:15 AM
i've even met some japanese who, in their own words, were glad the a-bombs were used. This was on the grounds that the implacable and suicidal mentality of many in senior positions at the time, without the a-bomb shock, meant the war wouldn't have stopped until japan was ground to dust.
And the Japanese are, as a whole, very respectful and appreciative of the US military, and the remarkable generosity of spirit shown by the US after the war ended.
Still, I don't fully understand the American obsession with the evil of Pearl Harbor, and it's self-evident moral equivalence with the incineration of hundreds of thousands of civilians (including conventional firestorms). Tater's disingenuous comments notwithstanding.
PH was a perfectly valid military target by anyone's yardstick, delivered with an approximately contemporaneous formal declaration of war. When was the last time the US bothered with a formal declaration of war before attacking military or civilian targets? And are you saying that had Japan atom bombed a US city too, killing say 100,000 civilians, you'd be au fait with that, as being of the same kind of moral outrage as the attack on a military target?
And when some mention the Japanese burying it's head in the sand regarding the past. Even if true, it's hardly a unique phenomenon. It is more the case that Germany's full on confrontation with its past is the unusual event.
official appearance at the memorial, as well as U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. Altogether, 74 nations were represented.China, which sent a low-ranking official in 2008, was not participating. Officials said Beijing did not give a reason.
China are busy with other activities, so this is certainly a low priority for them. :ping:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/06/participates-hiroshima-memorial-time/?test=latestnews
Safe-Keeper
08-06-10, 11:39 AM
There are no words in the English language to describe the evil behind this unforgivable atrocity. Look at this! 100 000 casualties!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/Manila_Walled_City_Destruction_May_1945.jpg
...oh, wait, cough, my bad, that's Manila, not an a-bomb. But look here!
http://www.subvertednation.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/dresden-in-ruins.jpg
...wait, that's Dresden. Here we go!
http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/images/30013321-p.jpg
...whoops, sorry, wrong again, that's Berlin. What about this?
http://visualrian.com/storage/PreviewWM/0658/85/065885.jpg?1245934143
...nope, that's Stalingrad.
Er, you were saying?
Seriously, though, why are we even discussing this? We're talking about a bomb that prevented an invasion and saved countless lives. Compared to the other butchering going on during WWII, this was nothing out of the ordinary, except, of course, that, say, the Battle of Manila or bombing of Dresden didn't end the war and spare millions of lives.
I wager that the only reason people care is that they used atomic bombs. Had they levelled Hiroshima and Nagasaki with incendiary bombs, no one would've cared less.
Ducimus
08-06-10, 11:54 AM
i
Still, I don't fully understand the American obsession with the evil of Pearl Harbor,
PH was a perfectly valid military target by anyone's yardstick, delivered with an approximately contemporaneous formal declaration of war. When was the last time the US bothered with a formal declaration of war before attacking military or civilian targets?
Here's the thing about Pearl Harbor, as far as i'm able to explain.
1.) As far as i know, the Japanese gave no indication that diplomacy wasn't working. They just attacked out of nowhere. While militarily sound, the thing is, the US has never attacked like this. If our government is upset with a country, it announces it first. Desert shield in the first gulf war being an obvious example. Even in the 2nd gulf war, im pretty sure Bush said something along the lines of "Cooperate, or else." (the whole harboring terrorist speech, nevermind the UN weapons inspection they snubbed off) The fact that Japan gave first indication that diplomacy failed after the fact (Or rather, by the attack itself), IS a really big deal.
2.) The attack happened on American soil. We as a people are NOT used to this idea. It's only happened twice ( if you don't count the war of 1812 and the brits burning the white house..errr executive mansion.), Dec 7, and Sept 11.
Both points have left a scar.
mookiemookie
08-06-10, 11:56 AM
I wager that the only reason people care is that they used atomic bombs. Had they levelled Hiroshima and Nagasaki with incendiary bombs, no one would've cared less.
I think you're absolutely right - they would have still been tragedies like the cities that you mentioned, but they wouldn't have been a special case.
So, in this day, this song:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZ_X43zcXcU
Sorry, I was listening it and remember it was today. Here the news only do a small report about it!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/world_news_america/8894077.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/world_news_america/8894077.stm and, I believe that none of the crew had no idea of the consistency,they did what they could but in reality, what stage after which they were not knowing, perhaps in theory but not in the practical sense.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.