64 Years ago, Yesterday... (Warning some graphic material)

First time for an air launch success.
How many people buy the first production run on a new automobile.
Not the wise one.
Engineering wise there are infant mortality rates.
The bombs shown in movies may never have been used.

Not that much of a history sleuth but I've heard things.

reply to post by Xtrozero
I think the reason Hiroshima and Nagasaki were stressed is because there are certain lines / limits that once you cross you cannot go back.

On those two days humanity crossed a very serious line. He used two atomic bombs to destroy on a massive scale human life.

We as a species crossed a line / went beyond a point of no return.

Up until August 6th and 9th that line had not been crossed.

It's sort of like a person losing their virginity once it's done it's done and you are never again a virgin.

Now, I agree with your post that any kind of killing or war is horrendous.

My husband mentioned in the kitchen this morning.

You show a people a row of dead babies and they cry you show them a row of dead men and it's sad but not the same to most people.

But all life is precious.

A life is a life, my 30 year old son's life is as precious to me as your 2 year old daughter's is to you.

Nobody should be killing anybody.

If mankind does not wake up we are going out think ourselves right into oblivion.

The question everyone should be asking is who is manipulating man into making war against himself?

Read The Gods of Eden by William Bramley.




[edit on 8-8-2009 by ofhumandescent]

reply to post by silo13


I actually considered it but I figured someone does it every year and it would lose its specialness.

reply to post by Xtrozero

We put too much emphasis on “nuclear bomb” when it really doesn’t matter what killed those people and destroyed those cities.

What does it matter?
You’ve got to be kidding me right? What does it matter?

How about POOF YOU’RE GONE!

Compared to being able to look in your loved ones eyes for the last time.

Make your peace with God for the last time.

Rant and rail at life for the last time.
Feed your dog a last time - even if you know neither of you won't be there tomorrow!

Look at the sun one last time!

Jesus God on the Cross and the Creator - even the damned have a last meal and a last prayer!

You’re talking about women and children here - and THEY DIDN’T!

peace

reply to post by Asktheanimals


Some great insight in your post, I hope others take the time to read it.
Thank you.
peace





[edit on 8-8-2009 by silo13]

reply to post by Jezus


I love this post.
I really do.

This is more accurate.

Japan: Okay, this is over lets talk about it...
US: Surrender Unconditionally!
Japan: wait wait...Unconditionally?
BOMB 1
Japan: WTF?! We surrender lets talk! Hello? Hello?
BOMB 2
Japan: We Surrender Unconditionally...

Thank you

Originally posted by silo13
64 years ago yesterday the USA used a weapon of mass destruction on Hiroshima Japan. Three days later on the 9th the USA again bombed the East (Nagasaki), in total killing over 250 thousand innocent men, women and children. The USA would go down in history as the first ‘modern’ nation on earth to do so. 64 years later, we’ve forgotten. Almost

Just because the media has forgotten to remind us what happened on a particular date, doesn't indicate that people have forgotten what happened to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

That dates aren't nearly as important as the example of how much death we can heap upon one another. I suppose, from a historical context, putting all that death into a couple of events like that shocked the world sufficiently - so, that it has yet to be used again.

I personally hope that technology never get's used again in war.

Although, if I were Harry Truman back in that time period, I must say that I probably would have done the same thing - not out of any hatred for the Japanese or any desire to see anyone suffer, but simply to avoid the potential large number of deaths on both sides that would come from a land invasion of Japan at that time.

Operation Downfall

A study done for Secretary of War Henry Stimson's staff by William Shockley estimated that conquering Japan would cost 1.7 to 4 million American casualties, including 400,000 to 800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese fatalities. The key assumption was large-scale participation by civilians in the defense of Japan.

Anyway, peace people.

Originally posted by IntastellaBurst

I dont want to take away from the meaning of the article, ... but whats the significance of the 64 year anniversary ??? next year it will be 65 years, ... should we observe it as a holiday or something ??

I think the sad thing is .... Japan had already surrendered before the bombs were dropped. ... but the US wanted revenge for Pearl Harbour, ... as well as being able to test the new weapon on a population.

[edit on 7-8-2009 by IntastellaBurst]

I studied this in dept for for a project in school. It seemed from what I learned that towards the end of WW2 tension between the USA and USS were beginning to rise. It was the dawning of the Cold War. One of the reasons the American Govt decided to drop the bombs in Japan was to warn off the Russians. It was a show of power as if to say "This is what we do to our enemies. Do not mess with us or it will happen to you too"

[edit on 8-8-2009 by ZiggyCooper]

I'd just like everyone to remember

that, japan didnt surrender after the 1st bomb...

It took a 2nd nuke.



That in itself, is more shocking, than any pictures or readings.

It is good that we remember the horror of the atomic bombs that were dropped on Japan, but it is essential that we understand why those bombs were dropped.

Everything that the US had learned fighting the Japanese for the previous four years led us to believe that an invasion of the mainland would cost more than one million US lives and that the Japanese would fight to the very last man, woman, and child.

It's a shame that the real lessons of history get lost in the ideological BS.

Originally posted by silo13
Oatmeal and Exuberant

Japan was ready to call it quits anyway. More than 60 of its cities had been destroyed by conventional bombing, the home islands were being blockaded by the American Navy, and the Soviet Union entered the war by attacking Japanese troops in Manchuria.

American refusal to modify its "unconditional surrender" demand to allow the Japanese to keep their emperor needlessly prolonged Japan's resistance.

A demonstration explosion over Tokyo harbor would have convinced Japan's leaders to quit without killing many people.

Even if Hiroshima was necessary, the U.S. did not give enough time for word to filter out of its devastation before bombing Nagasaki.

The bomb was used partly to justify the $2 billion spent on its development.

The two cities were of limited military value. Civilians outnumbered troops in Hiroshima five or six to one.

Japanese lives were sacrificed simply for power politics between the U.S. and the Soviet Union.

Conventional firebombing would have caused as much significant damage without making the U.S. the first nation to use nuclear weapons.

peace

[edit on 7-8-2009 by silo13]

Japan didn't abandon their fruitless quest to convince the Soviets to help them get even better terms and start trying to surrender "just" with a guarantee for the Emperor until August 10. Both A-bombs had already been dropped by then. It is true that our refusal to give such a guarantee prolonged the war from August 10 to August 14. But I wouldn't call it needless. The fact that we retained the ability to depose the Emperor helped ensure Japan remained peaceful.

I think it unlikely that a demonstration over Tokyo would work given the fact that the actual use on Hiroshima didn't work.

Japan (the government anyway) was fully aware by August 7 that we had destroyed the entire city of Hiroshima with a single bomb and that we had claimed it was an A-bomb. That gave them two days to decide to act if they had wanted to.

The cost of developing the bomb wasn't much of an issue. If we had not used the bomb in this war, we would have used it in the next war.

The two cities had considerable military value. Hiroshima was Japan's primary military port, and was where most of their invading forces had shipped out from. It held tens of thousands of soldiers, giving it the highest soldier/civilian ratio of any Japanese city. Nagasaki was an industrial center devoted to manufacturing weapons.

Japanese lives were sacrificed more for power politics between the US and Japan than between the US and USSR.

Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by silo13

 

Don't forget the "Unconditional Surrender" nonsense that was our policy at the time.

Japan refused to surrender unless they could have guarantees that the Emperor would not be punished for war crimes. America said "No. Unconditional surrender is all we'll accept".

....But guess what - We decided not to prosecute the Emperor afterall.

Japan's request was for a guarantee that Hirohito remain sovereign ruler of Japan.

They didn't make the request until after both A-bombs had already been dropped.

The fact that we refused the request and retained the ability to depose the Emperor helped ensure Japanese cooperation after the war.

Originally posted by Jezus
Most historians agree that Japan was already trying to surrender...

All historians agree that Japan did not send any surrender requests until after both A-bombs had been dropped.

reply to post by Oralloy

Japanese lives were sacrificed more for power politics between the US and Japan than between the US and USSR.

It seems to boil down to that more than anything doesn't it.
The proverbial two birds with one stone...

Thanks for your post...

peace

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by IntastellaBurst

I think the sad thing is .... Japan had already surrendered before the bombs were dropped. ... but the US wanted revenge for Pearl Harbour, ... as well as being able to test the new weapon on a population.

Japan had not surrendered. After the first bomb, their response was misunderstood because they did not say "we surender" but used a different word. They got #2 and were asked again. This time they said "surrender." War over.

Actually, the alleged mistranslation was their reaction to Potsdam, well before both bombs.

They used a word that meant that they "reject it with contempt".

It is alleged that they actually meant "studying it with interest". However, that is not the case. The context of the rest of the response was quite clearly along the lines of "reject it with contempt".

Japan didn't give any response at all after Hiroshima.

After Nagasaki they asked to surrender as long as we guarantee that Hirohito remained sovereign ruler of Japan.

Originally posted by silo13
I believe the Japanese were actively seeking peace using the Russians as intermediates.

What Japan was trying to do was get the Russians to pressure the US to give Japan much more favorable surrender terms (even to the point of ending the war as a draw).

Neither the US nor Russia was interested in such a thing.

The only way for Japan to avoid the bombs was to actively seek to accept the Potsdam terms.

-----

Sigh -- this is the second time I've tried to post in this thread only to have to shut down the computer because of an approaching thunderstorm.

Be back later.

Originally posted by hisshadow
I'd just like everyone to remember

that, japan didnt surrender after the 1st bomb...

It took a 2nd nuke.
That in itself, is more shocking, than any pictures or readings.

Here is something people always over look when discussing the Bombings.

It is widely known that the US was destroying a city a day with conventional bombing. When they heard about Hiroshima the Japanese assumed it was just yet another one of their cities to be destroyed by conventional means.

Remember it was a secret weapon. Up until that time the A-Bomb was just a theory

It wasn't until the reports came in of strange effects that it caught the Japanese attention. The Japanese actually didn't know that in fact Hiroshima was destroyed by the "A-bomb" they didn't really understand what had happened. By the time they really got a handle on the situation it was too late we dropped the second.

After the second it was sianara.


Japanese realization of the bombing

The Tokyo control operator of the Japanese Broadcasting Corporation noticed that the Hiroshima station had gone off the air. He tried to re-establish his program by using another telephone line, but it too had failed.[34] About twenty minutes later the Tokyo railroad telegraph center realized that the main line telegraph had stopped working just north of Hiroshima. From some small railway stops within 16 kilometers (10 mi) of the city came unofficial and confused reports of a terrible explosion in Hiroshima. All these reports were transmitted to the headquarters of the Imperial Japanese Army General Staff.

Military bases repeatedly tried to call the Army Control Station in Hiroshima. The complete silence from that city puzzled the men at headquarters; they knew that no large enemy raid had occurred and that no sizeable store of explosives was in Hiroshima at that time. A young officer of the Japanese General Staff was instructed to fly immediately to Hiroshima, to land, survey the damage, and return to Tokyo with reliable information for the staff. It was generally felt at headquarters that nothing serious had taken place and that the explosion was just a rumor.

The staff officer went to the airport and took off for the southwest. After flying for about three hours, while still nearly one hundred miles (160 km) from Hiroshima, he and his pilot saw a great cloud of smoke from the bomb. In the bright afternoon, the remains of Hiroshima were burning. Their plane soon reached the city, around which they circled in disbelief. A great scar on the land still burning and covered by a heavy cloud of smoke was all that was left. They landed south of the city, and the staff officer, after reporting to Tokyo, immediately began to organize relief measures.

[edit on 9-8-2009 by SLAYER69]

reply to post by silo13
[more
Some people would beleive dropping thoses atomic bombs and killing that many innocent victims would be classed a a war crime.The nazi's and russians killed millions of jews and germans.Whats the difference.There is no difference.There all war crimes.Its just the americans got away with it and the nazi's copped it all from both sides.Of course if hitler did manage to build atomic bombs and use them.Our world would be a different place now ,if that happened.

Originally posted by silo13

In a nutshell - what significance does the anniversary have?

That it happened at all - as I agree we couldn't wait to *test* the bomb and Japan paid the price.

peace

Yes, it happened, a long time ago. Now our President is trying to ban nukes in order to prevent another similar catostrophe from ever happening again, and you appear more interested in a yearly memorial. I personally find the push for a nuke ban far more significant than rehashing an event that is 64 years old.


Cheers,
Strype

reply to post by Strype

and you appear more interested in a yearly memorial. I personally find the push for a nuke ban far more significant than rehashing an event that is 64 years old.

Regardless of the number of years, 64, or 64 thousand, this is an incident that changed the world as we know it - forever. Some say one of the most pivotal moments in modern history.

If I chose to bring this to the attention of ATS, such a significant a day of remembrance for the readers - the anniversary of over 250 thousand people - DEAD - and not caused by a natural catastrophe but by the hand of man - I can think of no better way I could have spent my time yesterday morning.

You might want to check this thread out also, before passing judgment.

Nagasaki 64 Years ago Today. Warning - Post may contain Hope.

I'll look forward to reading your post there.

peace