Japan marks 70th anniversary of Hiroshima atomic bombing
Japan's
marking a tragic anniversary today - 70 years ago an atomic bomb was
dropped by US forces on Hiroshima. Tens of thousands attended a
solemn ceremony in the city's Peace Park near the epicentre of the
attack and observed a minute's silence. The bombing of Hiroshima and
then of Nagasaki led Japan to surrender in WWII, but it cost tens of
thousands of lives.
READ
MORE: http://on.rt.com/6oin
Rewriting history....
We learn from this article that America's genocide was all worthwhile because it "saved Japan from invasion by the Soviets"
"You
must totally destroy a city and all its inhabitants with atomic
weapons to save them from the Russians".
---Mark
Sleboda
Stalin
had planned to seize a major Japanese island. When Truman refused,
Stalin blinked. Why?
Japan’s
second-largest island, roughly the size of Maine, Hokkaido was of
huge strategic significance. Joseph Stalin’s possession of the
island would turn the vast Sea of Okhotsk into a Soviet lake, and
ease the projection of Soviet naval power into the Pacific. Stalin
had his eyes on a big prize. The detailed Soviet operational plans,
published Wednesday by the Wilson Center in the full English
translation for the first time, show that all the pieces had been put
in place for a swift Soviet occupation.
All
that was missing was a final go-ahead from Stalin.All that was
missing was a final go-ahead from Stalin. On Aug. 16 the Soviet
leader asked U.S. President Harry S. Truman to acquiesce in this
“modest wish” or risk offending “Russian public opinion.”
Although just months earlier, the U.S. War Department had considered
letting the Soviets occupy Hokkaido and even part of Honshu, Japan’s
largest island, Hiroshima had clearly changed things for Truman.
Possession of a mighty new weapon gave Truman the confidence to set
the terms of his relationship with Stalin. On Aug. 18, Truman bluntly
turned Uncle Joe down. Stalin procrastinated, weighing the pros and
cons. Two days before the planned Aug. 24 landing on Hokkaido, he
called off the operation.
Stalin
was not known for his measured appetites. Why did he refrain from
taking a large chunk of Japanese territory that would have given him
a much greater say in the running of postwar Japan and, quite
possibly, led to the creation of a Soviet-controlled satellite in
Hokkaido, a kind of a “Democratic People’s Republic of Japan,”
on North Korea’s model?
Have
70 years of nuclear policy been based on a lie?
The
U.S. use of nuclear weapons against Japan during World War II has
long been a subject of emotional debate. Initially, few questioned
President Truman’s decision to drop two atomic bombs, on Hiroshima
and Nagasaki. But, in 1965, historian Gar Alperovitz argued that,
although the bombs did force an immediate end to the war, Japan’s
leaders had wanted to surrender anyway and likely would have done so
before the American invasion planned for November 1. Their use was,
therefore, unnecessary. Obviously, if the bombings weren’t
necessary to win the war, then bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki was
wrong. In the 48 years since, many others have joined the fray: some
echoing Alperovitz and denouncing the bombings, others rejoining
hotly that the bombings were moral, necessary, and life-saving.
Both
schools of thought, however, assume that the bombing of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki with new, more powerful weapons did coerce Japan into
surrendering on August 9. They fail to question the utility of the
bombing in the first place — to ask, in essence, did it work? The
orthodox view is that, yes, of course, it worked. The United States
bombed Hiroshima on August 6 and Nagasaki on August 9, when the
Japanese finally succumbed to the threat of further nuclear
bombardment and surrendered. The support for this narrative runs
deep. But there are three major problems with it, and, taken
together, they significantly undermine the traditional interpretation
of the Japanese surrender.
The use of nuclear weapons in a new war would mean the end of humanity. This was candidly foreseen by scientist Albert Einstein who was able to measure their destructive capability to generate millions of degrees of heat, which would vaporize everything within a wide radius of action. This brilliant researcher had promoted the development of this weapon so that it would not become available to the genocidal Nazi regime
Setting the record straight
From
2012
Fidel
Castro's Message Against Nuclear War: Calling for World Peace
The use of nuclear weapons in a new war would mean the end of humanity. This was candidly foreseen by scientist Albert Einstein who was able to measure their destructive capability to generate millions of degrees of heat, which would vaporize everything within a wide radius of action. This brilliant researcher had promoted the development of this weapon so that it would not become available to the genocidal Nazi regime
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.