Nagasaki

[Ruso]

Today, 60 years ago, Japan was experiencing one of the worst tragedies in human history. After the drop of a second American atomic bomb, the city of Nagasaki, and its citizens were tragically marked forever. Over 80 000 people were exterminated by the bomb (called Little Boy), and the ones that survived were later killed by the effects of radioactivity. The other city destroyed, Hiroshima, lost about 75 000 people, and, similarly to Nagasaki, witnessed the slow suffering of the few survivors.

I do not expect this to become a useless political or ideological war, but solely a reminder of human cruelty. Just like the world remembers other tragedies like 9-11, the bombings of these cities can not be forgotten.

http://www.exploratorium.edu/nagasaki/mainn.html

[Viper]

Tragic indeed. I don't believe they should have been dropped directly on a city. Perhaps a dozen miles offshore may have been potent enough to scare them into surrendering.

However, we did inform Japan that we were going to drop the bombs well before we did. Pamphlets were also dropped from planes upon both cities urging the citizens to evacuate. That doesn't make it right but at least we gave them a chance by warning them.

[Brickell]

Don't forget the firebombing of Tokyo which some accounts have 100k+ dying in a single night. War is hell, and that's why I never take it lightly.

[monsoon]

What in WWII wasn't a tragedy? The bombing of London, the incineration of Dresdin, the 20 million Soviet dead, the 6 million Jews exterminated, the 2500 dead at the bombing of Pearl Harbor, the thousands that died on the beaches or Nomandy....... ? The entire 6 year war was a human tragedy that I hope is never repeated.

All too often however people are too quick to forget this and jump to war to solve problems..

The good thing about Nagasaki is it marked the end of WWII.

[designspace]

Ruso, Thanks for posting this article. It's essential that we reflect on the past while enjoying the present and contemplating our future.

[Charleston native]

...The good thing about Nagasaki is it marked the end of WWII.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Let's also not forget that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki probably saved hundreds of thousands of American soldiers' lives. I'd consider that a good thing too.

[Brickell]

That's debatable. There's some that believe Japan would have surrendered anyway once Russia entered the war. US leaders wanted Japan for themselves, thus the race to drop the bomb before Russia formally entered the Pacific Theater.

I can't help but think that it had to be done. It would have been done sooner or later. Unfortunately the japanase were the sacrifice so that we might avoid an all out nuclear war later.

[Ruso]

Yeah, Japan was already about to surrender. (there a great documentary about that, I think in BBC) The USA wanted to demonstrate their nuclear power, and kind of "warn" the Soviets. Nevertheless, besides marking the end of the war, I think there was nothing good about it, especially after hearing some of the survivors stories. The important thing is to learn from that event.

[Viper]

Having not used one since displays that we did learn from it.

[Ruso]

Having not used one since displays that we did learn from it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We'll have to wait for the future, not only from the USA, but from every nation with nuclear bombs.

[jb4563]

Yeah,  Japan was already about to surrender.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wrong. Most wanted to keep fighting even after Hiroshima. They thought we only had one bomb.

They wanted to fight to an apolyptic end.

The emperor had to even overrule his military leaders after Nagasaki.

[pvenne]

both bombings were tragic...just as it was tragic when japanese destroyed nanking and raped countless numbers of women with bayonettes and then disemboweled them in fron tof their husbands before killing them too. just as it was tragic that hitler killed all the jews and stalin mass murdered his own people and the japanese used prisoners for experiments. but what makes the japanese bombings so bad is that they werent military outposts, they were civilian cities (as were many others targeted, im sure, but this obliterated the entires area in a very short time, killing indiscriminately). and the worst thing about it all is that we bombed japan over bombing germany (arguably the bigger threat at the moment we developed the bomb) for racist reasons. there are old newspaper clipping showing the japanese soldiers as apes and savages, none of this happened in portrayals of the germans, who essentially looked like most american leaders. and the fact that we did it twice was unnecessary too. some say it was to strike fear into the hearts of the russians, but if thats the case, then we should have dropped it ON THEM if they tried anything tricky in the post-war months. but forget it, we nuked those "japs" after destroying their livelihood in this country because they were more expendable than other caucasians. and some estimate a land invasion of japan would have cost a million american lives, but that would have never happened, because after droppin Abomb 1, they WERE ready to surender...and fire bombings never killed 100K in a night, more like overall, over a period of time.

[MR-2]

Are you sure it was 20 million Russians? 2 million seems a lot more accurate. Still far higher than any other nation's casualties.

[pvenne]

Are you sure it was 20 million Russians? 2 million seems a lot more accurate. Still far higher than any other nation's casualties.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

well, there were at least 12 million russian civilians killed by stalin himself in concentration camps.....more than the jews and mentally challenged killed by hitler, then add in the soldiers killed.

[Viper]

Are you sure it was 20 million Russians? 2 million seems a lot more accurate. Still far higher than any other nation's casualties.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

20 million is actually the low end of the scale, though more commonly accepted. 28 million is the high end.

[pvenne]

Allied casualties

Country Military casualties Civilian casualties Totals by country

Albania 20,000 11,000 31,000

Australia 39,366 735[1] 40,101

Belgium 12,000 76,000 88,000

Brazil 493 N/A 493

Bulgaria[2] 18,000 N/A 18,000

Canada 43,000 N/A 43,000

China 2,500,000[3] 15,000,000 17,500,000

Czechoslovakia 46,000 294,000 340,000

Denmark 1,800 2,000 3,800

Ethiopia 5,000 5,000 10,000

Finland[4] 1,000 N/A 1,000

France 210,000 350,000 560,000

Greece 88,300 325,000 413,300

Empire of India 36,000 2,150,000 2,186,000

Italy[5] 87,500 N/A 87,500

Luxembourg 4,000 N/A 4,000

Mongolia 3,000 N/A 3,000

Netherlands 7,900 200,000[6] 207,900

New Zealand 11,625 N/A 11,625

Norway 2,000 7,000 9,000

Philippines 27,000 100,000 127,000

Poland 123,000 5,680,000[7] 5,803,000

Romania[8] 5,000 N/A 5,000

South Africa 6,841 N/A 6,841

Soviet Union 8,000,000 20,000,000[9] 28,000,000

United Kingdom 403,000 92,700 495,700

United States 407,000 6,000 413,000

Yugoslavia 300,000 1,500,000 1,800,000

Totals 12,300,000 45,500,000 57,800,000

- wikipedia.com

[Brickell]

...and fire bombings never killed 100K in a night, more like overall, over a period of time.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Every source I've seen says it was 100k+ in one day.

Do you have a source that says otherwise?

[pvenne]

Every source I've seen says it was 100k+ in one day.

Do you have a source that says otherwise?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

im sorry, you are correct. but damn, can you imagine? 100K+ in a day, thats unbelievable...

[Viper]

I do believe Stalin and Hitler maintained that pace at peak times.

[pvenne]

I do believe Stalin and Hitler maintained that pace at peak times.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

its just so unbelievable.

[Viper]

And somehow many people attempt attribute Bush to Stalin and Hitler. They complain of our killing a few dozen in one day. If you notice, it's mostly the younger generation making that statements too and they do so without having lived through any of those tragedies.

[pvenne]

And somehow many people attempt attribute Bush to Stalin and Hitler.  They complain of our killing a few dozen in one day.  If you notice, it's mostly the younger generation making that statements too and they do so without having lived through any of those tragedies.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

you are right, but it seems people from the older generation would be the ones complaining and the people from the younger generations would be the ones ready to rush into war. bush is not a good president...but he is not a bad person. in no way is he even close to comprable to stalin or hitler...wow, iver never even heard of that before. what idiot would say something like that, and with what comparison? it just sounds silly. It's like comparing ralph nader to satan.

[Viper]

I hear it from young people quite often. Canada conducted a poll that sampled a few hundred youths and of a listing of words to describe Bush, a majority chose 'evil'. My World Affairs last year was non stop regarding much of that attitude especially with the help of Moore and his non-documentary.

By the consensus I've seen, the older generations are more tolerant of the war than the youth but its common in America for youths to be liberal and grow more conservative with age.

[pvenne]

its common in America for youths to be liberal and grow more conservative with age.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

you are right. Winston Churchill I think it was said that "if youre not a liberal by 20, you have no heart. But, if youre not a conservative by 40, you have no brain". I dont know if I agree, but youre not the first person to notice that trend in people. Anyhow, I was simply saying that it makes more sense for the older generations who remember previous wars to be against this current one. And I would imagine the youth (who dont know how truly bad it can get) to be all for it. At least this is what I remmebr learning about in college...

[TennBear]

Let's also not forget that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki probably saved hundreds of thousands of American soldiers' lives. I'd consider that a good thing too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is not true. The fact is that Japan had tried and was trying to surrender. The Emperor has dissolved the War Cabinet and had formed a new Cabinet to work for surrender. Because the US and Japan did not have diplomatic relations at the time, the Japanese asked for the USSR to intercede. The USSR had know interest in interceding because they wanted to use the dropping of the bomb to declare war on Japan. Which they did as soon as the first bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. They captured some land on the mainland of Asia and Sakolin Island. The US knew that they wanted to surrender, but did not care. Dropping of the bombs would do two things, prove that an atomic bomb could be done and be retrobution for the attack on Pearl Harbor. The Japanese in their bargining for surrender only wanted to guarranty that the Emperor would continue because it was too important to the Shinto religion. We demanded unconditional surrender. The Japanese could not consider any surrender that did not include the continuance of the Emperor and responded that was the case. The US took this as a refusal and dropped the bomb on Hiroshima. Before the Japanese Cabinet could convene again, we dropped the bomb on Nagasaki. They imediately capitulated and accepted unconditional surrender. Of course, we allowed them to keep the Emperor. We got to prove that the atom bomb would work, we got retrobution, and it had nothing to do with saving any lives of the American military. By that point in the war the Japanese were completely broken, we could bomb them into the third world if we wanted to. don't believe all the propaganda that the US has told you. What you are taught as history is the vision that someone wants you to believe. That is usually the viewpoint of whoever won. All of the documents from WWII have been declassified and you can come to your own decision, if you want to take the time to actually know what happened.