It took me about an hour to read this whole thing. If you are like me and find the Hiroshima event fascinating, I highly recommend doing this. The piece follows several people who ended up in a park together the night after the bomb, and hauntingly captures the mood of that night and the horrifying physical details of what people went through. I definitely think I'll remember some images from this article for a while…
Hiroshima (1946)
51–60 of 196 posts
Re: Hiroshima (1946)
#52> In the street, the first thing he saw was a squad of soldiers who had been burrowing into the hillside opposite, making one of the thousands of dugouts in which the Japanese apparently intended to resist invasion, hill by hill, life for life; the soldiers were coming out of the hole, where they should have been safe, and blood was running from their heads, chests, and backs. They were silent and dazed. However I ma…
They sure teach the kids well in US schools.
Moved out West and obviously introduced to a few different interpretations of the event, but it took a few years to start to question what I was taught early on and that maybe it is not 100% what would have happend in regards to WWI if not for the assassination.
Re: Hiroshima (1946)
#53It's very easy to judge past America 60 years from the moment. Say you're about to be shipped out to run up a hill and killed by Japanese machine guns. Wouldn't you prefer Truman use a super weapon to end the war ?
I mean there are ways to end a war without total destruction.
And the logic of killing civilians to save soldiers is just .. no comment.
Re: Hiroshima (1946)
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
Now explain why we decided to vaporize tens of thousands more civilians a few days later.
A few days later than what?
August 9th, bombing of Nagasaki
August 15th, Japan surrenders.
One could note that the two bombs were of different design, that both were tested on real cities and real human beings. As for whether or not Soviet or the bombs won the war - or if the bombs made much difference that waiting would not have; it's hard to judge. Here's one take on it:
http://archive.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2011/08...
Re: Hiroshima (1946)
#55> In the street, the first thing he saw was a squad of soldiers who had been burrowing into the hillside opposite, making one of the thousands of dugouts in which the Japanese apparently intended to resist invasion, hill by hill, life for life; the soldiers were coming out of the hole, where they should have been safe, and blood was running from their heads, chests, and backs. They were silent and dazed. However I ma…
By this logic, the US should just nuke any area causing problems for it. Iraq invades Kuwait? Nuke it. North Korea developing weapons of mass destruction? Nuke it. Why mess around with invasions. Note the scientists who developed the bomb begged the US government to first drop one off the coast of Japan to demonstrate to them what they were facing. Instead we killed tens of thousands of civilians on purpose, not once…
Re: Hiroshima (1946)
#56Re: Hiroshima (1946)
#57It's funny how war is always glorious from the point of view of the aggressor and always sad from the point of view of the aggressed (sp?), even when they're the same person! How we feel depends on who's story we're reading at the time. "She had not had an easy time. Her husband, Isawa, had gone into the Army just after Myeko was born, and she had heard nothing from or of him for a long time, until, on March 5, 1942,…
"Allan suggested we walk to the front of the crowd between the soldiers and the Timorese, because although we knew that the army had committed many massacres, we hoped that we, as foreign journalists, could serve as a shield for the Timorese. Standing with headphones on and microphone and camera out in full view, we went and stood in the middle of the road, looking straight at the approaching troops. Behind us, the crowd was hushed as some Timorese tried to turn away, but they were hemmed in by cemetery walls.
The soldiers marched straight up to us. They never broke their stride. We were enveloped by the troops, and when they got a few yards past us, within a dozen yards of the Timorese, they raised their rifles to their shoulders all at once, and they opened fire. The Timorese, in an instant, were down, just torn apart by the bullets. The street was covered with bodies, covered with blood. And the soldiers just kept on coming. They poured in, one rank after another. They leaped over the bodies of those who were down. They were aiming and shooting people in the back. I could see their limbs being torn, their bodies exploding. There was blood spurting out into the air. The pop of the bullets, everywhere. And it was very organized, very systematic. The soldiers did not stop. They just kept on shooting until no one was left standing.
A group of soldiers grabbed my microphone and threw me to the ground, kicking and punching me. At that point, Allan threw himself on top of me, protecting me from further injury. The soldiers then used their rifle butts like baseball bats, beating Allan until they fractured his skull. As we sat on the ground, Allan, covered in blood, a group of soldiers lined up and pointed their M-16s at our heads. They had stripped us of all of our equipment. We just kept shouting, "We’re from America!" In the end, they decided not to execute us."
Excerpted from http://www.democracynow.org/2006/11/13/amy_goodman_recounts_...
Re: Hiroshima (1946)
#58Mark Selden, a researcher at Cornell University, wrote an excellent article detailing this: http://apjjf.org/-Mark-Selden/2414/article.html
He points out how the attacks on civilians in Dresden, for example, were met with shock by Europeans at the time. But the Americans never reacted as strongly to the same bombings in Japan.
Several cities of civilians were destroyed in the Korean War. In Vietnam city bombins and chemical weapons were deployed against civilians. Carpet bombing was the term for targeting civilians in Iraq I. Etc etc etc. It's all basically the same.
Re: Hiroshima (1946)
#59Same with Germans. People know about how the Germans behaved in WW2, they're not proud about it, it's learned in schools, and they do not hide it.
Japan on the other side, actively hide their actions. Japanese schools present a revisionist version of history in which all their horrible and brutal war crimes never happened. The Japanese people promote a vision of Japan with a tradition full of honor and virtue. Do they teach their kids that they dropped a bomb carrying the bubonic plague? or the massacre of Nanking? the mass beheadings of people? the sexual slavery? and many other horrible crimes, even targeting kids... probably not. This is the difference.
Re: Hiroshima (1946)
#60It's very easy to judge past America 60 years from the moment. Say you're about to be shipped out to run up a hill and killed by Japanese machine guns. Wouldn't you prefer Truman use a super weapon to end the war ?
I think would much rather my leaders just sign some sort of an armistice agreement rather than annihilate "enemy" civilians. I mean there are ways to end a war without total destruction. And the logic of killing civilians to save soldiers is just .. no comment.
Great idea! Now, how do we persuade the other side to sign that agreement?