[ RadSafe ] RE: [AMRSO] On This Day( NY Times) - Observation of Moment of Silence

Thu Aug 9 14:39:13 CDT 2007

You are overlooking (or dismissing) some huge realities.

First, bombing was very imprecise in WWII - bombers dropped lots of
bombs from aircraft in formations with the hope that some of the bombs
would hit the miliatry and manufacturing targets.  (Colateral damage was
considered just an inevitable side effect.)  Large bombs made bigger
explosions, requiring fewer bombs to get the job done.  The atomic bomb
is the ultimate example - one big explosion takes out everything.  It
remained the highest technology in bombing until smart bombs were
developed that can be flown in the front door of the target.  For
above-ground targets visible from the air, nuclear weapons are obsolete.
That's the reason for the interest in the bunker-buster design - if the
target can't be seen, the smart bombs can't hit them, so military
systems are being moved underground all over the world.  But in 1945,
Hiroshima and Nagasaki had war production going a maximum capacity and
were legitimate targets, no matter what type of bomb would be used.

Second, your explanation of 60-year-after-the-fact motivations omits
forcing an end to the war with Japan.  Absent the use of those 2 bombs,
how would the war have concluded?  The loss of life on both sides from
an invasion of Japan obviously would eclipse the toll from Hiroshima and
Nagasaki.  I've never seen a reasonable counter to this.  It is true
that Japan initiated surrender overtures in June, 1945, but with
conditions unacceptable to the Allies, and hence the Pottsdam
Declaration by the Allies - only unconditional surrender is acceptable.
Japan offered to surrender again after the first bomb was dropped and
before the second, but with the same rejected conditions.  If they had
the time to do that, they also had the time to surrender without
conditions, which they eventually did after the second bomb.  The actual
surrender happened 5 days after the second bomb, but that delay was due
the internal military insurrection that tried to block the surrender.
And BTW, how was the Allied command structure to know that was the
reason for the delay?

The opening shot of the Cold War was the joint occupation of Berlin,
well before the bombing in Japan.  I have no doubt that the warning
value that dropping the bomb would have on the Soviets was considered in
the planning stages, but a test drop over international waters would
have been just as good.  Intimidating the Soviets was not sufficient
justification by itself to use the bomb in Japan.

Now dip into a lifetime's worth of knowledge and experience about our
politicians at all levels of government and answer this for yourself -
would any politician leave himself/herself in the position of having the
American public find out that we went ahead with an invasion at a
terrible cost when we had a bomb in our arsenal that could have done the
trick without the invasion?

John R. (Bob) Flood
Radiological Health
Nevada Test Site
(702) 295-2514 

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
Behalf Of Peter Bossew
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 10:15 AM
To: Grant Wilton; don.mercado at lmco.com; radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] RE: [AMRSO] On This Day( NY Times) -
Observation of Moment of Silence

Grant, Don,

I disagree with you in this point.
The war of the Allies against the Nazis & Japanese was necessary, and in
that sense a good one. This must not be forgotten forever.
But still, the atomic bombs and the destruction of Dresden (like all the
air raids of this kind, after it has turned out the the anticipated
effect - demoralization of the people - did not happen as planned; quite
in the opposite - British and US knew that, and still carried on), were
crimes. These were atrocious crimes within a just war... history is
complicated as this. (As another example of this complexity, the
Stalinist regime was a highly criminal one, but still we have to be
thankful that they bore the brunt of destroying the Nazis.)

According to most historians, as far as I know, the dropping of the A
bombs on J is today considered as the initial shot of the Cold War,
politically targeted against the SU, only physically Japan was chosen,
for various reasons:
- it was easy to justify (this works until today obviously), because J
at that time was a criminal, genocidal regime;
- the US & Allies in the Pac. war have suffered heavy losses against J,
so this was, to many in the West, a kind of fair revenge;
- the Japanese as such were systematically de-humanized by US propaganda
during the war (as unfortunately it happens so often in wars), so moral
doubts could be anticipated to be no major factor;
- it had to be shown to the SU that J belongs to the US-sphere.

In fact, J was about to capitulate at that time, it was merely a matter
of formalities and negotiations. And then, even if one believes that the
first bomb was necessary, what about the second only 3 days later
without letting them due time to react ?

The Nagasaki bomb was "necessary", because also the effect of  a Pu bomb
on human guinea pigs had to be tested. Maybe more importantly, the
capacity of the US to produce more than just one bomb had to be
demonstrated to the SU.

Again, J was an abominable regime. Unfortunately, many Japanese,
including apparently their prime minister (a good friend of the US,
ironically), use the atomic bombs for trying to make forget (or at least
down-scale) their own historical crimes, which in reality are unique,
sui generis. To me this is a kind of mental continuation of these
crimes, similar to what the neo-nazis do.

Still, I say, these bombs were crimes.
History is complicated.

regards,
pb

Grant Wilton wrote:
> Dropping the atomic bombs on Japan was no crime, certainly no more so 
> than war itself.
>
>
> Grant Wilton
>
>
>   

> The bombings were not a crime. They were an act of self defense. Japan
attacked us first. We just ended it.
>
> DPM

-----------------------------------------------------
Peter Bossew 

European Commission (EC)
Joint Research Centre (JRC)
Institute for Environment and Sustainability (IES) 

TP 441, Via Fermi 1
21020 Ispra (VA)
ITALY 

Tel. +39 0332 78 9109
Fax. +39 0332 78 5466
Email: peter.bossew at jrc.it 

WWW: http://rem.jrc.cec.eu.int 

"The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may not in any
circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the
European Commission."

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/