Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

"The Japanese city of Hiroshima has marked the anniversary of its destruction by the world's first atomic bomb 60 years ago.

About 140,000 people were killed by the bomb and its aftermath.

Some 55,000 people thronged into the peace park to remember the moment the bomb was dropped by a US plane, at 0815 on the morning of 6 August, 1945.

Nicknamed "Little Boy", it generated a wave of heat which reached 4,000C (7,200F) and expanded across a radius of 4.5km (2.8 miles), obliterating the city.

Besides those who were killed instantly, many died later from severe burns or radiation.

Many commentators believe the US attack helped bring an early end to World War II in the Pacific.

During the ceremony, children dressed in black and white, the colours of mourning, laid wreathes of flowers at a simple, arch-shaped memorial.

Ladles of water were also offered for those who suffered the atomic heat. As dusk fell, paper lanterns were floated down a river by the park to represent the souls of the dead.

Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said that, after the bomb, the city had relentlessly pursued peace.

"The citizens of Hiroshima are the witnesses of global peace, we hope that Hiroshima will continue to be the symbol of global peace," he said.

'Never again'

Hiroshima's mayor, Tadatoshi Akiba, led the crowd in a minute of silence, 60 years on from the instant the blast struck the city.

A huge metal bell tolled in memory of the victims.

Mr Akiba warned nuclear powers that they were "jeopardising human survival" by clinging on to their arsenals.

"We have to pay due tribute to all the souls claimed by the atomic bomb," he said. "We will not make the same mistake again."

The speaker of Japan's parliament, Yohei Kono, said militarism had led Japan to disaster in World War II.

Fumie Yoshida, who survived the Hiroshima blast aged 16 but lost her father, brother and sister, said she had paid her respects privately.

She said: "Those of us who went through this all know that we must never repeat this tragedy. But I think many Japanese today are forgetting." "

I've read the recently released book, telling the story of Hiroshima.

Incredible, but horrific.

-AC

it is quite sad that all of those civilians died to teach the Japanese government a lesson. Sure, the attack at Pearl Harbor was awful but I don't think over 100,000 lives is acceptable collateral damage.

hiroshima is an example of america's lack of compasion. We can kill thousands of people with bombs, but when two planes hit our country we have the right to go crazy.

in America's defense...........they did have the right to do something extreme. They were attacked by a country we were not at war with......which resulted in massive casualties. One minute a guy is drinking a beer talking to his buddies, the next moment a plane appears out of nowhere dropping a bomb on them for no apparent reason.

I merely feel the placement of the bomb was too extreme. Surely there were better places to drop it to cut down on civilian casualties while still letting Japan know our strength.

The dropping of the atom bomb is an unseemingly complex situation.

Its very easy to say.
"I was all carp, and America is evil for doing that"
And its just as easy to say the opposite,
"America was completly justifyed for dropping the bomb"

And there's plenty of evidence to support both.
I believe the truth lies somewhere between the two.
There are so many different variable that noone seems to take into account.

The Russians. The USA had made an agreement with them that they would help the upcoming US invasion of Japan. This would add to the US/USSR rivalry, and there is a bunch of stuff that goes along with this.

The Japanese. They were incredibly ferocious and spirited. They would have not ever given up after an invasion and an occupation would be disasterous. They were training women and children to be suicide bombers against tanks and other american weapons, soldiers and the like.

The Americans. This was way too top secret. FDR died, and all of a sudden Truman was let in on the Manhattan Project, and was forced to make a decision about the bomb.

The rest of the world. Although VE day had allready come, the Germans had been working on an atom bomb, and if they hadn't surrendered by the time it was finished, we would be talking about the bombing of Berlin or some other German city, undoubtably.

There are more, but you really have to do your research before coming to any sort of conclusion about this topic. its so multi-sided.

Originally posted by Superfly4000
hiroshima is an example of america's lack of compasion. We can kill thousands of people with bombs, but when two planes hit our country we have the right to go crazy.

Lack of compassion huh?

We have a right to defend our country (excuse me if you aren't from America, please insert the name of the unappreciative landmass form which thou hails) You don't seem to see that open war was declared on us and that the people you defend (if you can call Al Qaeda people) would come after you just as well as me or anyone else regardless of our feelings toward them.

You seem really concerned about these cold blooded killers, but yet say nothing about or for 3,000 people of 9-11 and the 3,000 sailors of Pearl Harbor. Oh and let's not forget the beheadings in Iraq.

Maybe you don't give a shit because none of them were YOUR relatives? But yet you feel sorry for Al Qaeda and a regime that kept American and Allied POW'S in stinking jungle camps where they did all manner of inhuman experiments on them, many times while they were still alive.

Nice going...just remember to sympathize with Al Qaeda they day they carry out another 9-11, and don't forget to cheer for them.

Originally posted by Tptmanno1
The dropping of the atom bomb is an unseemingly complex situation.

Its very easy to say.
"I was all carp, and America is evil for doing that"
And its just as easy to say the opposite,
"America was completly justifyed for dropping the bomb"

And there's plenty of evidence to support both.
I believe the truth lies somewhere between the two.
There are so many different variable that noone seems to take into account.

The Russians. The USA had made an agreement with them that they would help the upcoming US invasion of Japan. This would add to the US/USSR rivalry, and there is a bunch of stuff that goes along with this.

The Japanese. They were incredibly ferocious and spirited. They would have not ever given up after an invasion and an occupation would be disasterous. They were training women and children to be suicide bombers against tanks and other american weapons, soldiers and the like.

The Americans. This was way too top secret. FDR died, and all of a sudden Truman was let in on the Manhattan Project, and was forced to make a decision about the bomb.

The rest of the world. Although VE day had allready come, the Germans had been working on an atom bomb, and if they hadn't surrendered by the time it was finished, we would be talking about the bombing of Berlin or some other German city, undoubtably.

There are more, but you really have to do your research before coming to any sort of conclusion about this topic. its so multi-sided.

The Russians were weakend by the invasion in 1941 and therefore in no position to help us out because of the possible calculated preemptive strike to coincide with the Pearl Harbor attacks. 2 birds were killed with one stone and Hitler saw the chance to take out Russia in a violation of the Non-Aggression Pact he had with them.

Russia had been beaten by the Japanese in the Kuril Islands conflict (aka the Russo Japanese war) in 1912 and part of their "willingness" to help us probably came from the chance to avenge their disgrace. As history bore out however, the deals at the Yalta conference gave Russia all of Eastern Europe and for all our help they slammed the door in our faces. Thus the birth of NATO and the Warsaw Pact.

Yes the Japanese probabaly wouldn't have give up. Suicide bombers?
All too disturbing considering today's events. They had to be shown that they were mortal like evertyone else. They were rolling over Asia and Australia the same way the Germans rolled over Europe. And it's a good bet that had Germany or Japan made the bomb first, well then guess who they would have used it on? Russia or England pehaps. That would have stopped Russia cold as they advanced from the East and it would have stopped the resistance in England and probably decimated a air number of American troops as well.

These people who always knock the nukes should realize as you do, that this was too complex a situation to cut and dry. It was war and it was either them or us. Thank God WE won because many of us wouldn't be here today.

Actually alot of modern historical work, such as that done over the last five to six years, shows that the civilian population of Japan was to a large extent ignorant of the state of the war, and while it is purely theoretical it is coming to be believed that if the US had invaded the entire nation wouldn't have turned against them. It is misleading propaganda of the day that it was a nation of samurai prepared to fight to the last man, woman and child.

Rather more disturbing is the fact that in the months before the bombing Japan had actually been negotiating is surrender with the main powers. However they said they would not surrender unless the Emperor could remain in power. The US flat out said no to this, the surrender had to be unconditional. However at the time of the bombings the Japanese were reasonably advanced in surrender negotiations with the USSR, who were prepared to allow the Emperor to remain in power. Then the atomic bombs were dropped a short time later, and Japan surrendered a short time later, however the US then allowed the Emperor a kind of amnesty, the very thing the Japanese wanted to begin with that could have led the way to a *peaceful* surrender.

Likewise, in the lead up to the bombings there was alot of discontent in the American leadership ranks. A number of prominent scientists joined together to protest the use of the bomb, while high ranking men like Eisenhower advocated if the bomb had to be used, it should be used on a neutral ground with low human losses, that there was no need to actually use it on a populated area, as the affect would have been sufficient regardless of where it was dropped.

Really it is hard to judge the validity of the bomb as a *last resort* when it might not have needed to be. There sufficient evidence available today that shows it could have been handled quite differently, that the bombing was more to scare Russia and the world, and as an act of revenge, rather then winning a war which level headed military experts of the day, from Gen. Douglas MacArthur to Gen. Dwight Eisenhower believed to be already basically won.

And Dagons Blade, you make some good points, although it's important to point out that Japan was far from "rolling over Asia and Australia" at any point in the war, they had success but not to that extent, and by the time of the bombings the power in Asia (they never invaded Australia) was effectively broken.

Well said xmarksthespot, you hit the nail on the head as to what I was getting at. It seems even at the time of the bombings that there were plenty of intelligent people, with the facts, who believed that the bombings were unnecessary, and more political then anything.

The thread is about Hiroshima not 9-11. Apples and oranges.

Tell that to Superfly, HE was the one who said we went nuts after 2 planes hitting the WTC. I'm not going to sit by and let that sort of disrespect for the tragedies to go unanswered. And this is about HIS apparent lack of compassion for the victims of the acts of those who brought our retribution upon themselves. End of story.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
And Dagons Blade, you make some good points, although it's important to point out that Japan was far from "rolling over Asia and Australia" at any point in the war, they had success but not to that extent, and by the time of the bombings the power in Asia (they never invaded Australia) was effectively broken.

Thanks for the comment

I always thought that since Australia was a stone's throw away that they actually got there in practical terms,or being on the doorstep as it were. But given their rapid military successes, it could have been different and they could have easily done it. While their army wasn't as complex as the German army, in terms of the wide range of vehicles and specialized troops, they did have very good, high quality men who were as equally good with a sword as they were the barrel of a gun. The possibility was always there that they could have made it to Australia and ended the war in that part of Asia.

Originally posted by Dagons Blade
The thread is about Hiroshima not 9-11. Apples and oranges.

Tell that to Superfly, HE was the one who said we went nuts after 2 planes hitting the WTC. I'm not going to sit by and let that sort of disrespect for the tragedies to go unanswered. And this is about HIS apparent lack of compassion for the victims of the acts of those who brought our retribution upon themselves. End of story.

And what about YOUR apparent lack of compassion for those in Hiroshima who also died pointlessly, and in fact number far more than those who were killed in 9-11 and Pearl Harbor combined? I don't mean any disrespect on people who died in any of the above events, they were all horrible, but it seems as if you were overlooking something a teensy bit there.

It could've easily been New York. Look at it this way: Japan could've nuked us to impunity, if we hadn't nailed Hiroshima. I think I prefer *not* having been nuked to impunity

Originally posted by Dogbert
It could've easily been New York. Look at it this way: Japan could've nuked us to impunity, if we hadn't nailed Hiroshima. I think I prefer *not* having been nuked to impunity
What on earth are you talking about? The Japanese were in no way near completion of a nuclear weapons project.

The only reason Einstein abandoned his lifelong pacifism and wrote his initial letter to Roosevelt was a concern that Nazi Germany could potentially gain a nuclear weapon. That was also the motivation for many of the scientists working on the Manhattan Project, however when Germany's fall seemed inevitable some such as Szilard began to question the Manhattan Project.

Yes... This is before every major military power in the world had a nuclear arsenal, remember.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
What on earth are you talking about? The Japanese were in no way near completion of a nuclear weapons project.

The only reason Einstein abandoned his lifelong pacifism and wrote his initial letter to Roosevelt was a concern that Nazi Germany could potentially gain a nuclear weapon. That was also the motivation for many of the scientists working on the Manhattan Project, however when Germany's fall seemed inevitable some such as Szilard began to question the Manhattan Project.

What on Earth am I talking about? Because it *could've* easily been new york that got removed from our planet. Either you don't understand what I'm saying, or you simply don't care >.>

BTW, what I'm saying is what if we never used them... I am fairly sure, they would've (When they eventually got them).

The truth of the bomb was that it has proven to be little more than a time buying device. The reality of the situation is that we did win the war by using the bomb. It was a last resort option. However, we made a long lasting enemy by pissing off the Japanese population. They aren't about to forget that we bombed the hell out of them. At least not until they bomb the hell out of us.

Actually I to am confused. By the time of the US bombings of Japan, the Japanese had no way to launch such an attack against another nation. They had no atomic weapons, their airforce and navy was pretty much neutralised/gone. Whether the US had bombed them or not there was no way they were going to get halfway around the world and somehow destroy an American city.

And the important thing is one nation in all of history has used nuclear weapons in an intentional, offensive manner, and that is the US. Japan at the time in question was both incapable of, and not interested in, using atomics, even if they possessed the know-how and ability to make them. They were effectively beaten as it was, and looking to surrender. The fact is the US chose to utilise a weapon that it really looks like they didn't need to.

All I can say was that I watched a show on the History channel regarding the dropping of "The Bomb" on Hiroshima. We had good reason; invasion would have been far more dreadful for both sides, despite the horrible results of the dropping of Little Boy.

The pictures of the shadows burned into concrete are just creepy...

Originally posted by Dogbert
What on Earth am I talking about? Because it *could've* easily been new york that got removed from our planet. Either you don't understand what I'm saying, or you simply don't care >.>
BTW, what I'm saying is what if we never used them... I am fairly sure, they would've (When they eventually got them).
Have you not read anything that anyone else has written on this thread? I understood what you wrote it just didn't make sense. What if we never used them? Rather than quote myself...
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Actually alot of modern historical work, such as that done over the last five to six years, shows that the civilian population of Japan was to a large extent ignorant of the state of the war, and while it is purely theoretical it is coming to be believed that if the US had invaded the entire nation wouldn't have turned against them. It is misleading propaganda of the day that it was a nation of samurai prepared to fight to the last man, woman and child.

Rather more disturbing is the fact that in the months before the bombing Japan had actually been negotiating is surrender with the main powers. However they said they would not surrender unless the Emperor could remain in power. The US flat out said no to this, the surrender had to be unconditional. However at the time of the bombings the Japanese were reasonably advanced in surrender negotiations with the USSR, who were prepared to allow the Emperor to remain in power. Then the atomic bombs were dropped a short time later, and Japan surrendered a short time later, however the US then allowed the Emperor a kind of amnesty, the very thing the Japanese wanted to begin with that could have led the way to a *peaceful* surrender.

Likewise, in the lead up to the bombings there was alot of discontent in the American leadership ranks. A number of prominent scientists joined together to protest the use of the bomb, while high ranking men like Eisenhower advocated if the bomb had to be used, it should be used on a neutral ground with low human losses, that there was no need to actually use it on a populated area, as the affect would have been sufficient regardless of where it was dropped.

Really it is hard to judge the validity of the bomb as a *last resort* when it might not have needed to be. There sufficient evidence available today that shows it could have been handled quite differently, that the bombing was more to scare Russia and the world, and as an act of revenge, rather then winning a war which level headed military experts of the day, from Gen. Douglas MacArthur to Gen. Dwight Eisenhower believed to be already basically won.
"It could've been New York." Is false. "Japan could've nuked us to impunity." Is false. Neither the Japanese nor Nazi Germany were anywhere close to developing a viable nuclear weapon. You're assuming that having developed the nuclear weapon they would actually use it and that they would target civilians and they would specifically target New York. Your comment is based entirely on assumption without fact.
Would I care if New York was attacked by an atomic bomb? Of course I would. Don't ask fatuous questions.
Your "better them than us" remark followed by a smiley is flippant and disrespectful to those hundreds of thousands of civilians who died.

...

Why are we arguing about it?

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Have you not read anything that anyone else has written on this thread? I understood what you wrote it just didn't make sense. What if we never used them? Rather than quote myself...

"It could've been New York." Is false. "Japan could've nuked us to impunity." Is false. Neither the Japanese nor Nazi Germany were anywhere close to developing a viable nuclear weapon. You're assuming that having developed the nuclear weapon they would actually use it and that they would target civilians and they would specifically target New York. Your comment is based entirely on assumption without fact.
Would I care if New York was attacked by an atomic bomb? Of course I would. Don't ask fatuous questions.
Your "better them than us" remark followed by a smiley is flippant and disrespectful to those hundreds of thousands of civilians who died.

history is written by the victors dear, despiste what their propoganda machines say.

Besides, all the Japanese had to record was 'We got bombed, a lot of people died, we surrendered' really...

Originally posted by Captain REX
Besides, all the Japanese had to record was 'We got bombed, a lot of people died, we surrendered' really...

that's actually more factual than you realize. They won't forget.

Nope. I don't think anyone would forget being used as a test subject for the first atomic bomb.

I think this is a very telling piece of evidence, from the declassified Target Committee meeting where potential targets were discussed:



It also speaks of the poor logic of the use of the weapon as a tool of retribution. Pearl Harbour was a terrible event, although it was the bombing of a military target. Yes, it's natural to want to get ones own back, but it shouldn't be assumed the common Japanese citizen at the time was somehow implicit in this. Japan, like Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy employed propaganda and forms of dictatoship. The Japanese people had little to no say in what the Government or army did. I am not saying they are innocent, but they were still civilians. The fact that Hiroshima was chosen in part because the terrain would make the bomb even more terrible seems rather harsh, especially as the people who invariably suffered were civilians, and who suffered years and years up to today with the side affects. In fact it really does sound like something a terrorist would consider, symbolic targets, the best place to attack in order to do the most damage, kill the most civilians, and to have the biggest possible media effect on the world.....

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
I think this is a very telling piece of evidence, from the declassified Target Committee meeting where potential targets were discussed:



It also speaks of the poor logic of the use of the weapon as a tool of retribution. Pearl Harbour was a terrible event, although it was the bombing of a military target. Yes, it's natural to want to get ones own back, but it shouldn't be assumed the common Japanese citizen at the time was somehow implicit in this. Japan, like Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy employed propaganda and forms of dictatoship. The Japanese people had little to no say in what the Government or army did. I am not saying they are innocent, but they were still civilians. The fact that Hiroshima was chosen in part because the terrain would make the bomb even more terrible seems rather harsh, especially as the people who invariably suffered were civilians, and who suffered years and years up to today with the side affects. In fact it really does sound like something a terrorist would consider, symbolic targets, the best place to attack in order to do the most damage, kill the most civilians, and to have the biggest possible media effect on the world.....


I never said they weren't innocent. I said they wouldn't forget. Although, your statement above indicates why they are pissed.

Yes, I agree with you. Nations have long, long memories, as Japan is returning to the world as a major economic player. They are an ancient nation, who are believed to be very honorable. I have no doubt they haven't forgotten, and it's possible many haven't forgiven, seeing as how there are still people today who feel the effects.

Though, what're they going to do, start another World War, or a Nuclear War?

Power these days, true power, comes in economic forms. China, Japan, the US, Saudi Arabia and so on exert alot of influence, and in this age it's quite something, who knows what will happen. Nothing. Something. Only time will tell, but it probably wont be war.

Through a new post-WWII consyitution Japan established itself as a pacifist democratic nation. A provision in the constitution states Japan renounces war as a sovereign right of the nation. The Japanese SDF is not an army per se. It's unlikely they would ever instigate a World War.

Also as the only country to have ever experienced a nuclear assault, Japan is intrinsically opposed to the acquisition and development of nuclear weaponry.

Modern Japan is (if I recall correctly) the world's second largest economy, as Imperial Samurai said that is where it's power lies. (U.S. gross federal debt to Japan was $679 billion at the end of March, 2005.)

Appearances Can Be Deceiving

Seriously, I doubt Japan will try to get back at the US in ways other than making us owe them billions...

I don't think dropping the atom bomb was ment to be anything other than an offensive tool. It was made to end the war. To do something so completly distructive and moral destroying that it would kill the will to fight.
Its the same reason that we bombed Berlin, and why Germany V1 and V2ed London, along with London bombings.
This was not a new concept. The Hun's used it to build their empire. They would attack a village and burn it to the ground, so that surrounding villages would pay them tribute.
We just took it to the extreme.

And Germany WAS very close to a working nuke. But luckly the Allied troops hit Berlin first.

No, I doubt they'd nuke us.

I don't, but thats simply "what if's"
Wether they would or not is irrelavant, they almost had the nuke.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki are a terrible act from the past...300,000 dead and countless others since...but given the death toll of WW2 was 90,000,000 and 11,000,000 of which were killed in the Nazi death camps...50,000,000 of the total number dead were Russians...there were other terrible acts during ww2...the bombing of dresden...some sources say the magnesium phosphorus and napalm used killed over 100,000 with conventional weapons

i say the only benefit (and i am sure im repeating myself as i remember having this debate on KMC before) is that we say the awful power of nuclear weapons while they were at there weakest and most crude...a typical H-bomb(1 megaton) is 10,000 times more powerful than the one dropped on Hiroshima...and the most powerful bomb detonated (the tsar bomba of Russia) was estimated between 58 and 100 megatons which is upto a million times that of the Hiroshima bomb

we can consider Hiroshima...a lesson learned

Originally posted by jaden101
we can consider Hiroshima...a lesson learned

It was recorded that after the attack on Pearl Harbor, Yamamoto said he awakened a "sleeping giant" and he couldn't have been more right. At least ONE of them realized they ****ed up big time..