Should America Apologize For Hiroshima?

by Bangalore 39 Replies latest jw friends

  • Bangalore

    Should America Apologize For Hiroshima?


  • undercover

    The USA has a lot of issues, things they've done wrong and continue to do wrong...

    But WWII is not one of them. No apologies for bombing Hiroshima or Nagasaki. The emperor was given chances to surrender. The war had invasion of Japan itself was imminent. War is hell and innocents die, it's a shame but a fact. When the army/nation with the upper hand has at its means the tools to incur its wrath on the enemy that refuses to yield without incuring casualties on its own side, it only makes sense.

    They want an apology? Ask the god/emperor for getting them in the mess in the first place...

  • VIII


  • Soldier77

    No. They bombed Hawaii. I have/had family living during the bombing. I say the emperor got what he asked for, you mess with a bull you're going to get the horns.

  • Lore

    A little late for that isn't it? None of the people responsible for the bombing will be the ones apologizing.

    It happened 45 years before I was even born. . . Should I apologize?

    It even happened 16 years before Obama was born. . . would an apology from him even mean anything?

    Truman, the only guy from whom an apology would mean anything, has been dead for 38 years. . . he died before I was born.

    So sure, I don't care if we apologize, I think the survivors deserve an apology from the people who dropped the bomb and the japanese government who got them into that mess, but they're never gonna get the apology they deserve since the people responsible are all dead.

    Same goes for Pearl Harbor, Admiral Yamamoto would be the one to apologize, but he died in 1943. . . Who the heck else would we expect an apology from?

    This whole concept of expecting apologies from people who were not involved for things that happened 60 years ago is childish and stupid.

  • BurnTheShips



  • PSacramento

    Not sure why anyone needs to aplogise for any "war act" in time of War.

    Perhaps Nagasaki was uncalled for, but the fact is that during war things are done to end the war and when you have a "KO punch" you have to use it.

    The Atomic bomb was that "KO Punch".

    Would it have been better not to use it? Yes, looking back we can be far more enlightened then those people that made the decision.

    In the end, the war is over and the ties have been mended ( as much as they can) and life goes on.

    The dropping of the A-bomb was a military action during war time, it was not a massacre of a village, a raping of a city, the use of women as prostitutes and the many other atrocites that were and are commited during war that have NOTHING do to with winning the war.

    Those are the things that people MUST apologise for.

  • james_woods

    I have read several books on the Manhatten project, including the one by General Groves.

    One point made by Groves was that the high command around Truman did have a debate on dropping the bomb on a Japanese city with civilian population. Nobody wanted to do this, but at the same time, nobody had a militarily viable alternative - it was clear that an invasion of Japan would cost a million or more casualties and probably kill more Japanese civilians than the bomb itself.

    One proposal was made that a demonstration A-bomb blast on some uninhabited island might bring the Japanese to their senses and avoid loss of life. It was eventually rejected as unrealistic - clearly the Japanese military had a fanatical and suicidal mindset and would never be convinced to lay down arms. This was proven true as finally the Emporer himself (advised by the remaining sane military leaders) had to declare an end to the war, and a fanatical military uprising against the Emporer had to be put down at the last moment in order to make way for peace.

    Anti-U.S. revisionist history 65 years after the fact has ignored the simple truth that the U.S. had really no other choice to end WW2 in the Pacific without far greater loss of life on both sides. The bomb proved to be the only thing to break the Japanese determination to fight to the last man, woman, and child.

  • BurnTheShips

    The only other alternative was invasion. The A bomb saved many millions of lives.

  • Gregor

    As James Woods has, I have read more than a few books on that era but the one that was most meaningful to me was the bio "Truman" which put the Japan atom bomb deployent in vivid context. Truman made his decision and never uttered one word of regret or doubt for the rest of his life. This was a man of great common sense and moral integrity.

    If we had a Democratic party today that reflected Truman's values, I'd be a Dem.

Share this