Monday, 11 April 2016

No American Apology For Hiroshima

During his lifetime, Enola Gay crew member Theodore Van Kirk, said that he had been asked many times if he regretted what his team did that day and he said: 'I have never apologised for what we did to Hiroshima and i never will. I was proud to be on the Enola Gay'.
United States leaders have avoided Hiroshima since that day in 1945 because of political sensitivities but John Kerry was there today but no apology for what his country did to Japan tumbled from his lips and a senior American official travelling with Kerry, it was never going to.
'We will revisit the past and honour those who perished" Kerry said as he met with Japanese dignitaries.
No answers to why America chose a civilian city with no military significance and why the weapon was not used against a military target.
Neither why they targeted so many innocent people and why a show of strength on one of the uninhabited islands with a warning that this could be one of your cities next time was not the option.
I get that it was during war-time but to drop such a horrific weapon, and then drop another one days later, killing so many civilians when the Japanese were negotiating an end to hostilities just stinks.    
What the US did against Hiroshima and Nagasaki is amongst the roll call of humanities greatest atrocities where almost a quarter of a million people died instantly, mostly innocent civilians, so damn sure they should apologise, 'honouring them' for being on the end of American brutality is not enough.

21 comments:

Keep Life Simple said...

That is one viewpoint.

Keep Life Simple said...

I would say Japan reaped what it sowed. So would my grand parents and great aunts and uncles. Kill every living thing in Machuria, surprise attack of Hawaii, complete disregard for conventions of war...

Falling on a bruise said...

That is one viewpoint, atrocious mass slaughter of civilians is another.

Samuel Guevara said...

The greatest atrocity against humanity. And a shame for all those who continue searching justifications for the murder of hundreds of thousands of civilians or denying apologies.
That is the "Americano exceptionalism".

Keep Life Simple said...

A Spaniards should talk after slaughtering entire races in South America

Samuel Guevara said...

http://samuelguevara.wordpress.com/2014/10/12/national-day/

Keep Life Simple said...

I just read a Truman biography. The author said Truman had little choice. Americans "would have hung him" if he had done anything that spared Japanese lives at the cost of American lives.

Further, bombing civilian targets had become a norm that was accepted by all sides. Lastly, fire bombing killed far more Jspanese than the two atomic bombs.

Keep Life Simple said...

Sammy, it is arguably the greatest. But then there was the Spanish conquest of the new world, the Japanese invasion of Manchuria (brutal), stalin's purge, Mao's purge, the holocaust, pol pot's purge just to name some modern history atrocities.

Samuel Guevara said...

Japanese civilians weren't responsible of their emperor's actions, it is totally absurd and unfair to say that they deserved the nuclear bomb. You aren't responsible of the bombs that Truman decided to launch 70 years ago, as I'm not either of the atrocities that the Kings of Castille did 5 centuries ago. But we are responsible of condemn now that atrocities, or justify them just because the patriot is more important than the rest of humanity.

Keep Life Simple said...

That is your opinion. I get it. I disagree. War is a good thing to avoid. Arbitrarily deciding it is ok to kill men in uniform but not others is bogus. Killing a civilian neither better nor worse than killing a soldier.

Falling on a bruise said...

What crap, the military choose to fight, civilians don't. Complete nonsense thing to say killing a civilian is not better or worse than killing a soldier.

Keep Life Simple said...

until recently the vast majority of combatants were forced into military service. There is a bias that only men Should die in combat. I am surprised that you do not insist that an equal portion on men and women die in combat. Especially since You, being a leftist, are always seeking equality. Further, you should be insisting that the proper proportions of blacks, Chicanos, Asians, whites, etc die in combat.

Keep Life Simple said...

You are being two-faced about equality when it comes to white men. You don't care that men die at a ratio of 3:1 compared to women due to alcohol; now you are indifferent to the vast majority of military deaths being males.

So much for your never ending quest for equality. Sexist.

Falling on a bruise said...

What are you on? Whatever it is cut the dose! You are sounding more and more nuttier.

Keep Life Simple said...

caught in your double standard do you launch a personal attack on attack me instead of the idea. Leftist

Falling on a bruise said...

Because you are coming across as a nut. Take some time out, it feels like I'm dealing with someone who over the last 12 months or so has become more and more unravelled.

Keep Life Simple said...

I'm not unraveled. I didn't say that the lives of men count less than women and children. You did.

Falling on a bruise said...

Civilians and soldiers, you cant even get that right.

Keep Life Simple said...

"The military choose to fight civilians don't".

First, That is utter crap. The vast majority of soldiers have been pressed into military service.

Second, when the enemy sets up HQ and attacks from their own civilian sites they have brought their civilians into the fight.

Third, if the enemy is willing to target your civilians they throw out the rules of engagement.

Falling on a bruise said...

Civilians choose to fight?? Damn lucky you got turned down for the military isn't it.

Keep Life Simple said...

I got turned down because in the first Gulf War I was already 35 and they wanted younger people. But until the first Gulf War the US drafted a huge majority of the combatants for WW2, WW2, Korea, and Vietnam.