75 years later, atomic bombings still provoke debate

75 years later, atomic bombings still provoke debate

August represents the 75th anniversary of the U.S. military’s atomic bombings of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. Both cities were selected because they held important military and industrial value, though some today disagree. What is not disputed is both cities were decimated by the bombs in 1945.

The two incidents, usually linked together as one larger action, were the culmination of years of heated debate and scientific study—not just over its feasibility but over its morality.

 

“Seventy-five years ago, a single nuclear bomb incinerated the Japanese city of Hiroshima. Tens of thousands of men, women, and children were killed in an instant, and tens of thousands more died after terrible suffering in the days, weeks, and years to come,” wrote Matthew Bunn, Professor of the Practice of Energy, National Security, and Foreign Policy at Harvard University.

“Even today, beneath the city’s streets and in the city’s rivers, there remain traces of many innocent citizens who were reduced to mere ashes in a moment, their spirits filled with indignation,” writes Hidehiko Yuzaki, the former Governor of Hiroshima prefecture, in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists.

Nagasaki, before and after the atomic bombing. (U.S. National Archives photo)

As a defining moment and generational trauma in Japanese history, it still provokes that very same debate nearly a century later.

“It was not necessary or justified to use nuclear weapons against japan. It was a reprehensible crime,” said one Twitter post with more than 100,000 likes.

“Today is the 75th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima by the United States. This unprecedented act of violence killed an estimated 100,000 people. Irrefutable historical evidence proves that the bombings were militarily unnecessary and morally reprehensible,” wrote another with nearly 3,000 likes.

Daryl Kimball, Executive Director of the Arms Control Association, is one such critic.

“There were several alternatives to the use of the bomb on Hiroshima and to the second use of the bomb on Nagasaki. There could have been a demonstration of the new weapon, as the group of Manhattan Project scientists proposed; there could have been the further prosecution of the war by the Americans and with the entry of the Soviets in early August 1945, it is quite clear that the Japanese high command would at that point have recognized their military situation to be impossible; and there could have been a pause after the August 6 attack to allow the Japanese leadership to absorb the significance of the bombing,” he said.

“The bomb that was used to destroy Nagasaki on August 9 hit a mere 10 hours after the official entry of the Soviets into the war on Japan and as the Japanese leadership were debating whether to surrender,” Kimball said.

It’s not an uncommon sentiment, either in Japan or anywhere else. The bombings are also unavoidably politicized. A common talking point among the Japanese right-wing for decades has been to have the United States apologize for the bombings.

A religious figure stands in the rubble at Nagasaki, six weeks after the bombing. (Cpl. Lynn P. Walker, Jr./U.S. Marine Corps)

When President Barack Obama visited the Hiroshima Memorial in May 2016, he drew criticism from some American conservatives for the perceived apology, and likewise criticism from locals for only expressing sympathies and not actually apologizing.

Before Obama’s visit, Chinese state-run news outlets blamed Japan for the bombings and said they were justified to bring an early end to World War II, avoiding protracted warfare and saving more lives.

That seems to reflect a general historical consensus among most Americans, that the bombings were a deadly but necessary alternative to the horrors of a prolonged land invasion of the Japanese mainland.

“Even after winning dozens of major battles against Japan, they showed no willingness to surrender. No one was certain that these bombs would force a Japanese surrender and in fact the Japanese signaled the opposite after the first bomb, and of course did not surrender,” said Jeff Crater, co-founder of the Advanced Nuclear Weapons Alliance Deterrence Center. “It was only after the second bomb did Japan surrender, likely figuring the United States could have additional nuclear weapons it could use to destroy military industrialized Japanese cities, co-located with tens thousands of Japanese citizens.”

“Japan knew they were defeated after Midway, but could not bring themselves to admit the consequences which were surrender or fight to the very end,” said Peter Huessy, Director of Strategic Deterrent Studies at the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies. “Japan gave it citizenry instruction on how to resist, how to use kamikaze weaponry against U.S. ships, how to dig caves and remain in resistance. The estimated casualties were 1 million U.S. and Allied and 3-5 million Japanese, based on real figures from real battles.”

That latter statistic remains contentious. “In July 1945, Truman was briefed on the the U.S. miitary’s assessment that a full-fledged invasion of Japan might result in 40,000 American military deaths and some 150,000 wounded,” said Kimball of the Arms Control Association. He said somehow that number expanded significantly, so that by 1947 when the bombing was already in the past, “it was cited by former Secretary of War Stimson in his February 1947 article published in Harper’s to defend the decision to drop the bombs.”

A decision which, according to Kimball, was not even a matter of military consensus. “There was no consultation with key members of the ‘war brass’ including General MacArthur and General Eisenhower, who expressed his view that the use of the bomb was not necessary to end the war, and Admiral Halsey, who later said it was a mistake in part because the Japanese had put out a lot of peace feelers and had been contemplating surrender as early as May 1945,” he said.

In Kimball’s eyes, the bombings were as much a political maneuver against the threat of Soviet power as they were a swift defeat of Japan.

“The historical evidence, including Truman’s diaries and his communications with senior advisors, makes it very clear that those who approved and pushed the use of the bomb on Japan believed it would have value in sending signals to other countries, particularly the Soviet Union, in the post-war world,” he said. “President Truman and his advisers were aware of the alternatives, but Truman chose to authorize the use of the atomic bombs in part to further the U.S. government’s postwar geostrategic aims vis-a-vis the Soviet Union.”

Joseph Stalin, Harry S. Truman, and Winston Churchill meet in Potsdam, July 1945. (German National Archives)

The Soviet Union, which helped conquer Berlin and invaded Japanese-controlled territory earlier in the year, could have driven the Japanese surrender according this interpretation.

“The entry of the Soviets in the war against the Japanese in Manchuria beginning August 8 was another very significant factor… We can only speculate about the costs and to whom, but the body of evidence we have today suggest that the use of the Hiroshima bomb, and certainly the Nagasaki bomb, were not necessary to achieve Japan’s surrender in the summer of 1945,” said Kimball.

“Undoubtedly, the Soviet Union’s entry into the war on August 9 was critical,” said Sharon Ann Squassoni of George Washington University. “This was no surprise — under the terms of the Yalta agreement, they were bound to join the Pacific theater of war by August 9. The Soviet Foreign Minister Molotov delivered the declaration of war to Japan’s ambassador to the Soviet Union Naotake Sato on August 8th and the invasion began shortly after midnight.”

A year after the bombings, the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey concluded that the bombings were unnecessary to ending the war, saying “it seems clear that, even without the atomic bombing attacks, air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion.”

Surrender through this method would not have been unconditional nor ideal, said Huessy.

“A ceasefire or armistice would have left in place Japanese forces in China and Korea and throughout the Pacific and Southeast Asia,” he said. “Negotiations would have had to be undertaken in multiple countries with multiple actors with no standard outcome. The Soviets promised regular elections throughout Eastern Europe, and of course reneged on all those promises at Yalta, and we know the outcome: totalitarian rule until the end of the Cold War.”

President Truman announces Japan’s surrender. (Truman Presidential Library)

(Editing by Bryan Wilkes and Allison Elyse Gualtieri.)



The post 75 years later, atomic bombings still provoke debate appeared first on Zenger News.

WATCH: Militia groups face off in Louisville

WATCH: Militia groups face off in Louisville

Around 500 armed demonstrators wearing all-black uniforms marched with the “Not Fucking Around Coalition” Saturday in Louisville, Kentucky, drawing hundreds of onlookers and rival militia counter-demonstrators.

The NFAC describes itself as an all-black militia group committed to racial justice. The newly founded group has gained national attention in the past month for holding two armed marches in Georgia.

The coalition assembled at Louisville’s Baxter Park, where at approximately 1 p.m., a single accidental blast from a firearm left three people injured. The shooter and all three victims were coalition members, according to Louisville Metro Police Department Deputy Chief LaVita Chavous.

Police and EMS respond after three members of the all-black “Not Fucking Around Coalition” militia were injured in the an accidental discharge of a member’s firearm at Baxter Park in Louisville, Kentucky on July 25, 2020. (Ford Fischer / News2Share / Zenger)

 

Police and EMS wheel away one victim in a stretcher after three members of the all-black “Not Fucking Around Coalition” (NFAC) militia were injured in an accidental firearm discharge at Baxter Park in Louisville, Kentucky on July 25, 2020. (Ford Fischer / News2Share / Zenger)

“The Louisville Metro Police Department, Louisville Division of fire, and Louisville Metro EMS responded quickly and rendered aid to all three victims,” said Chavous. “Without their quick response, this could have been a much worse situation.”

In spite of the accidental shooting, the march went on as planned. The group’s leader, John Fitzgerald Johnson, who also goes by “The Real Grandmaster Jay” and ran as an independent candidate for president in 2016, led his group into downtown.

The group struggled to keep media at a distance. “Y’all back up and give me some goddamn room please,” Johnson told a crowd of photographers, before pointing a semi-automatic rifle into the air.

“I’m gonna shoot up in the air,” he said, which repelled the journalists several feet. He lowered the weapon without firing it.

Following an approximately half-mile march, Johnson addressed the crowd with a 50-minute-long speech. He plainly warned Louisville that if there “aren’t answers” in the death of Breonna Taylor within four weeks, his group would “burn this motherfucker down.”

Breonna Taylor was a 26-year-old black woman shot and killed by police officers in a no-knock raid on her home by the Louisville Police Department in March. The shooting sparked nationwide protests. One officer has been fired, but none have been charged.

Ahead of the coalition’s demonstration, a group of  about 100 people affiliated with Three Percenters militias, styled as “III%ers,” also assembled in downtown Louisville to counter the coalition. The name refers to the unconfirmed historical theory that only 3% of the population of the American colonies participated in the revolution against Britain. It is now used by right-of-center non-government militia groups in the United States.

The right-wing activists assembled and were led by Tara Brandau, who heads a Kentucky-based militia called “Wild Card III%.”

Brandau—who prefers to go by her in-group call sign “Hoggirl”—said that her group’s goal was to ensure that “things remain peaceful.”

Members of the all-black “Not Fucking Around Coalition” pause to evaluate the block ahead as they march into Louisville, Kentucky on July 25, 2020. (Ford Fischer / News2Share / Zenger)

 

John Fitzgerald Johnson, known as “The Real Grandmaster Jay,” speaks to members of his all-black “Not Fucking Around Coalition” in Louisville, Kentucky on July 25, 2020. (Ford Fischer / News2Share / Zenger)

 

All-black “Not Fucking Around Coalition” (NFAC) leader John Fitzgerald Johnson, known as “The Real Grandmaster Jay,” carries a semi-automatic rifle in Louisville, Kentucky on July 25, 2020. (Ford Fischer / News2Share / Zenger)

 

“Wildcard III%” militia leader Tara Brandau examines her group as they begin to march into downtown Louisville, Kentucky on July 25, 2020. (Ford Fischer / News2Share / Zenger)

 

A lone Black Lives Matter protester is arrested for refusing to vacate the street ahead of protests in downtown Louisville, Kentucky on July 25, 2020. (Ford Fischer / News2Share / Zenger)

 

Police separate Three Percenter militia members from other demonstrators in downtown Louisville, Kentucky on July 25, 2020. (Ford Fischer / News2Share / Zenger)

“The NFAC, I don’t really have a view of them,” she said. “As long as they stay peaceful, I’m fine with them doing their 1st and 2nd Amendment,” referring to the amendments that protect the right to speak freely and carry arms.

While the group presented itself as a neutral peacekeeping force, an online graphic spread by the Three Percenter groups told militias to come “stand against the NFAC!”

A handful of unarmed protesters confronted the right-wing activists early in the day. Police had arrested two people by the time authorities put up barricades separating the militia group from other protesters.

Chavous confirmed a total five arrests had been made throughout the day, with charges including “disorderly conduct, obstructing a highway and menacing.”

(Edited by Allison Elyse Gualtieri.)



The post WATCH: Militia groups face off in Louisville appeared first on Zenger News.