[Vision2020] Bishop: Bombing Hiroshima, Nagasaki Same As Terrorism

[Tbertruss at aol.com]

All:

Consider this quote from Eisenhower regarding the use of nuclear weapons 
against Japan in WWII, and other quotes on this subject, available at the link 
this quote came from:

http://www.doug-long.com/quotes.htm

~~~DWIGHT EISENHOWER

"...in [July] 1945... Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in 
Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb 
on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent 
reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. ...the Secretary, upon giving me the 
news of the successful bomb test in New Mexico, and of the plan for using it, 
asked for my reaction, apparently expecting a vigorous assent. "During his 
recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression 
and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief 
that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely 
unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking 
world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no 
longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan 
was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of 
'face'. The Secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude..." - Dwight 
Eisenhower, Mandate For Change, pg. 380 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------

All of the following information regarding the nuclear attacks against Japan 
in WWII from this site, which presents the arguments pro and con regarding 
these nuclear strikes:

http://www.answers.com/topic/atomic-bombings-of-hiroshima-and-nagasaki

The Manhattan Project had originally been conceived as a counter to Nazi 
Germany's atomic bomb program, and with the defeat of Germany, several scientists 
working on the project felt that the United States should not be the first to 
use such weapons. One of the prominent critics of the bombings was Albert 
Einstein. Leo Szilard, a scientist who played a major role in the development of 
the atomic bomb, argued "If the Germans had dropped atomic bombs on cities 
instead of us, we would have defined the dropping of atomic bombs on cities as a 
war crime, and we would have sentenced the Germans who were guilty of this 
crime to death at Nuremberg and hanged them." 

Their use has been called barbaric as several hundreds of thousands of 
civilians were killed, and the choice of areas heavily populated by civilians. In 
the days just before their use, many scientists (including Edward Teller) argued 
that the destructive power of the bomb could have been demonstrated without 
the taking of lives. 

It has been argued that the use of atomic weapons against civilian 
populations on a large scale is a crime against humanity and a war crime. The use of 
poisonous weapons (due to the effects of the radiation) were defined as war 
crimes by international law of the time. Some have argued that Americans should 
have done more research into the effects of the bomb, including radiation 
sickness and the terrible burns that followed the explosion.  
Sadako Sasaki, a young victim of the bombing, became a well-known symbol of 
nuclear war and is now commemorated by a statue in Hiroshima, carrying a paper 
crane (a symbol of peace).

Some have claimed that the Japanese were already essentially defeated, and 
therefore use of the bombs was unnecessary. General Dwight D. Eisenhower so 
advised the Secretary of War, Henry L. Stimson, in July of 1945. [11] (
http://www.doug-long.com/quotes.htm) The highest-ranking officer in the Pacific Theater, 
General Douglas MacArthur, was not consulted beforehand, but said afterward 
that there was no military justification for the bombings. The same opinion was 
expressed by Fleet Admiral William Leahy (the Chief of Staff to the 
President), General Carl Spaatz (commander of the U.S. Strategic Air Forces in the 
Pacific), and Brigadier General Carter Clarke (the military intelligence officer 
who prepared intercepted Japanese cables for U.S. officials) (all also from [12]
 (http://www.doug-long.com/quotes.htm)); Major General Curtis LeMay ([13] (
http://www.learner.org/biographyofamerica/prog23/feature/)); and Admiral Ernest 
King, U.S. Chief of Naval Operations, and Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, 
Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet (both from [14] (
http://www.doug-long.com/ga1.htm)). 

Others contend that Japan had been trying to surrender for at least two 
months, but the US refused by insisting on an unconditional surrender. In fact, 
while several diplomats favored surrender, the leaders of the Japanese military 
were committed to fighting a 'Decisive Battle' on Kyushu, hoping that they c
ould negotiate better terms for an armistice afterward—all of which the Americans 
knew from reading decrypted Japanese communications. The Japanese government 
never did decide what terms, beyond preservation of an imperial system, they 
would have accepted to end the war; as late as August 9, the Supreme Council 
was still split, with the hardliners insisting Japan should demobilize its own 
forces, no war crimes trials, and no occupation. Only the direct intervention 
of the Emperor ended the dispute, and even after that a military coup was 
attempted to prevent the surrender (although it was easily suppressed). 

Some have argued that the Soviet Union's switch from wary neutral to enemy on 
August 8, 1945 might have been enough to convince the Japanese military of 
the need to accept the terms of the Potsdam Declaration (plus some provision for 
the emperor). As it happened, the decision to surrender was made before the 
scale of the Soviet attack on Manchuria, Sakhalin Island, and the Kuril Islands 
was known, but had the war continued, the Soviets would have been able to 
invade Hokkaido well before the Allied invasion of Kyushu. 

Other Japanese sources have stated that the atomic bombings themselves 
weren't the principal reason for capitulation. Instead, they contend, it was not the 
American atomic attacks on August 6 and August 9, but the swift and 
devastating Soviet victories on the mainland in the week following Stalin's August 8 
declaration of war that forced the Japanese message of surrender on August 15, 
1945. Certainly the fact of both enemies weighed into the decision, but it was 
more the fear of Soviet occupation that hastened imperialistic Japan's 
acceptance of defeat. 

Many critics believe that the U.S. had ulterior motives in dropping the 
bombs, including justifying the $2 billion investment in the Manhattan Project, 
testing the effects of nuclear weapons, exacting revenge for the attacks on Pearl 
Harbor, and demonstrating U.S. capabilities to the Soviet Union. Scientists 
who had worked on the project later noted that they were pressured to finish 
the bomb by a set schedule, one which was timed to coincide with the Russian 
entrance into the Pacific theater, and one which additionally implied that the 
war would be potentially over very soon. 

Some believe more effort to reduce casualties should have been made. Further, 
some claim this could have been done without affecting the stated purposes of 
the bombing. "No evidence has ever been uncovered that leaflets warning of 
atomic attack were dropped on Hiroshima. Indeed, the decision of the Interim 
Committee was that we could not give the Japanese any warning." [15] (
http://www.doug-long.com/letter.htm) However, after the Hiroshima bombing, Truman 
announced "If they do not now accept our terms, they may expect a rain of ruin from 
the air the likes of which has never been seen on this earth." On August 8, 
1945 leaflets were dropped and warnings were given to Japan by Radio Saipan. 
(Nagasaki did not receive warning leaflets until August 10). On August 9, 1945 at 
11:02 (Nagasaki time) Fat Man exploded at 1950 feet near the perimeter of the 
city, scoring a direct hit on the Mitsubishi Steel and Arms Works with a yield 
of 19-23 kt. [16] (http://vikingphoenix.com/public/JapanInco
rporated/1895-1945/abombchr.htm) (An English translation of that leaflet is available at PBS (
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/truman/psources/ps_leaflets.html) and below.) 

The decision to bomb Nagasaki only a few days after Hiroshima raises separate 
issues. Some people hold that most of the arguments for the use of the atomic 
bomb do not justify dropping the second one on Nagasaki. In his 
semi-autobiographical novel Timequake, Kurt Vonnegut said that while the Hiroshima bomb may 
have saved the lives of his friends in the U.S. armed forces, Nagasaki still 
proved that the United States was capable of senseless cruelty. 
-----------------------------------

Vision2020 Post by Ted Moffett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20050806/8b0a5a3a/attachment.htm