Hiroshima - 64 years yesterday

[Daimo]

Someone posted this link up and I found it a rather interesting viewing for a bit. Some amazing pictures...

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/08/hiroshima_64_years_ago.html

Anyone got any other interesting links like this I can waste my friday afternoon viewing? :)

[madnlooney]

i just watched a 2 hour thing on history channel about it. was interesting

[Spiderman]

yeh i watched a similar thing a couple of weeks ago in the run up to the aniversary.

The biggest war crime of mass genocide ever perpetrated in humanity. Fascinating photos to look at, hopefully one day those who decided to tst their bomb on a largely civialian population will be brought to justice.

[Alpinestarhero]

I didnt realise. I guess due to the sort of hipocrosy surrounding it (america is the only nation to use WMD's in an active war, and then in recent times made up a war as a reason to invade iraq to look for WMD's that didnt exist)

I'm a big fan of the physicist richard feynmann. He did alot of work on the theoretics of the atom bomb, and he mentions that at the time, the pupose of the work was often forgotten because the science being discovered ment far more to them than the intended application

[Spiderman]

well even the godfather of the bomb, Oppenhiemer himself was quoted to say "I am become death, the destroyer of worlds" after he saw the first megaton bomb go off.

Bear in mind the desicion for it to be Hiroshima on that day was based not on a military need but simply cos the waether over that isalnd was clear and the yanks wanted the best pics of the bomb they could get. All those innocent lives taken just cos the weather was nice on that island on that day.

[timwilky]

I had an uncle on the Burma railway, he did not come back. Sorry to have to say I think the use of the bomb was justified. Millions of allied troops would have been killed trying to force a surrender by conventional means

[Daimo]

Bear in mind the desicion for it to be Hiroshima on that day was based not on a military need but simply cos the waether over that isalnd was clear and the yanks wanted the best pics of the bomb they could get. All those innocent lives taken just cos the weather was nice on that island on that day.



So your saying that the tradegy of Pearl Harbour was ok then? Attacking an entire fleet, with crew, whilst in port and not even really involved in the war?

And it wasn't just becuase it was "a nice day :lol: " It had been planned for a few days.



Anyone researched the bomb the Russians set off in the 60s? They halved the plutonium due to fears of the explosion, yet the one they set off was still massivly over powered from what they expected. If they had set the full power one off, owchy....

PS, I don't condone Americans actions in any war to date really. A nation of pussies, with superb equipment, and the mentality and discipline of a terrible 2 year old.

[TEC]

Its one of those places thats well worth the effort to visit, pictures just don't do it justice

[Milky Bar Kid]

Shocking pictures. I cannot comprehend how that was justified, to wipe out a city full of civillians who had done nothing wrong other than be in the wrong country at the wrong time.

[Mr Speirs]

MBK you can't believe that this was the only time civilians were targetting/killed in the war by the allies can you?

It happened in europe many many many times.

America will tell you that they used it to end the war, that is a load of rubbish they just wanted to see what it would do. It was just fortunate there was a war on. The yanks could use it on real people.

The fact is however that using the bomb did put an end to the war and save a lot of civilian and military lives despite the initial 250,000 casualties in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The fact is that horrendously it was the lesser of two evils.

[Milky Bar Kid]

I'm well aware that it has happened in other instances. I still don't think it is morally right though.

[madnlooney]

The pictures just blow you away and can never imagine what it would be like being there at the time. Theres a step which is burnt with a human shadow still there
http://www.richard-seaman.com/Travel/Japan/Hiroshima/AtomicBombMuseum/IndividualArtifacts/WomansShadowOnBankSteps.jpg

[lukemillar]

http://www.boreme.com/boreme/funny-2005/hiroshima-p1.php

[grh1904]

I do think that's it not really the current generations right to do any hand-wringing condemnation, unless of course you were alive at that time.

Yes you may have your views on WMD's, and views on the rights/wrongs & justifications or otherwise of the use of WMD's to bring WW2 to and end, but personally it happened just over 20 years before I was born.

That's almost akin to demanding that some current senior politicians stand down over Britain's involvement in the slave trade, 200 years ago. Wasn't there a saying something along the lines of don't blame the son for the sins of the father...........................

It happened, we can't turn back time and stop it, and what is most horrific is that we still haven't learnt the lessons.

Those responsible are now dead, so who are you going to blame????

What I did find interesting in the article was this: -

At the moment of detonation, a small explosive initiated a super-critical mass in 64 kg (141 lbs) of uranium. Of that 64 kg, only .7 kg (1.5 lbs) underwent fission, and of that mass, only 600 milligrams was converted into energy

Less than 1kg underwent fission and look at the destruction it caused. It just doesn't just bear what would have happened if all 64kg underwent fission.

I mean think about it, no Japan at all would have been left, no Honda, Suzuki, Kawasaki, and we'd all still be on BSA GoldStars.

[Milky Bar Kid]

I'm not really blaming anyone, tbh, I'm not sure if the Americans really knew what an impact the bomb was going to have!

[Bri w]

Whether its Hiroshima, Coventry, Dresden, the Somme, Rwanda, Serbia etc etc you can't get away from the fact that man, not woman, is a brutal animal. Whatever the innate programming is, education doesn't seem to help. Western leaders of supposed civilised countries still order death and destruction using a guise of freeing the suppressed.

Hey, let's invade somewhere, build schools and hospitals. And whilst we're at it we can kill half the population who need the schools and hospitals. Then we can install, or support, a puppet regime that gives all the building contracts to companies from the invading nations. Hell of a view from the soap box but i think the altitude causes sweeping statements and nose bleeds.

Breathe in, hold, and relax 2,3,4.

Sorry, nearly went off on one.

[Spiderman]

I'm not really blaming anyone, tbh, I'm not sure if the Americans really knew what an impact the bomb was going to have!

They'd done plenty of test, you may have seen some of the footage. some of the other test they did that are not so easy to find included lining up living animals and dead human cadavers to see the effect on thos.

So they knew full well what they were unleashing. They just wanted to unleash it for real on an unsupecting populace to see the real damage and instill fear in their enemies.

War is not a nice fulffy place, we know that. However simply testing yrour weapons on civillians and then attempting to justify that the instant deat of 100,000 people is in some way avoiding the possible future death of more military personnel is just contemptable beyonf belief.

Good point made by Grh1904 regarding the sins of the father, the sad trth however is the fathers engineer laws to protect themselves from prosecution while they are alive, so what choice are we left with?
Recently Jack Straw decided that the notes regarding the lead up the the illegal iraq invasion, tho not in any way show illegal intent on anyones behalf, should still be locked down for aa minimum of 30yrs. Iwont be surprised if after the 30yrs are up that a majority of it that is realesd is blacked out in massive chuncks, thus ensuring no-one can be held accountable for thier criminal actions....and as much as persecuting the sons for the fathers ations aint right, neither is hiding the truth and protecting yourself from you vile and eveil behaviour.

[BanditPat]

War is not a nice fulffy place, we know that. However simply testing yrour weapons on civillians and then attempting to justify that the instant deat of 100,000 people is in some way avoiding the possible future death of more military personnel is just contemptable beyonf belief.



It was the sensible and logical approach to the war approx 250,000 dead from the two bombs. An invasion by conventional methods would have meant at least one million fatalities on the allied side alone with the Japanese fatalities exceeding them. Even in conventional warfare there is collateral damage, chances are that the collateral inflicted by a conventional approach to ending the war in the pacific theater would have left more than 250,000 of the civilian populace dead with even more injured.

[Spiderman]

yes Pat, the military justify it that way. Lots of "could haves" and "possibles" in their answers. Truth as i see it is that the yanks always have seen their troops lives to be worth far more than their enemies lives, troops or civilians. Even to this day they have that attitude.
if a conventional war had continued the yanks were fearfull of loosing lots of their troops so they took the illegal way out and killed 100,000 civilians in one blast and not one of their troops was even in any danger at the time...just how the yanks like to fight their wars. Hence theur refusal to sign the land mine ban treaty many years on.

[Milky Bar Kid]

yes Pat, the military justify it that way. Lots of "could haves" and "possibles" in their answers. Truth as i see it is that the yanks always have seen their troops lives to be worth far more than their enemies lives, troops or civilians. Even to this day they have that attitude.
if a conventional war had continued the yanks were fearfull of loosing lots of their troops so they took the illegal way out and killed 100,000 civilians in one blast and not one of their troops was even in any danger at the time...just how the yanks like to fight their wars. Hence theur refusal to sign the land mine ban treaty many years on.


+1 to that.

This subject, and any subject regarding a decision made in war or to go to war, will always be a highly emotive subject with many different view points.

I respect everyones opinion but it cannot change my mind and make me believe that killing 100,000 civillians was right.

If we were at war with another country, who were facing catastrophic losses to their military personnel, and they unleashed, for example, a chemical bomb in the centre of London killing 100,000 innocent, ordinary people, what would you say then?

The reasons behind the war do not matter here, and the incident at Pearl Harbour does not in any way, shape or form, justify the killing of so many innocent men, women and children.

[Spiderman]

+1 to that.

This subject, and any subject regarding a decision made in war or to go to war, will always be a highly emotive subject with many different view points.

I respect everyones opinion but it cannot change my mind and make me believe that killing 100,000 civillians was right.

If we were at war with another country, who were facing catastrophic losses to their military personnel, and they unleashed, for example, a chemical bomb in the centre of London killing 100,000 innocent, ordinary people, what would you say then?

The reasons behind the war do not matter here, and the incident at Pearl Harbour does not in any way, shape or form, justify the killing of so many innocent men, women and children.

MBK, you know you and i dont often see eye to eye on things but i'd like to say BRAVO to your post above.

[Milky Bar Kid]

MBK, you know you and i dont often see eye to eye on things but i'd like to say BRAVO to your post above.

Why thank you very much Spidey!:takeabow:

[Wideboy]

in no way condone the fact the 100,000's of innocent people were killed but you can't really jump at the yanks, if they hadn't of done it someone else would have........ its very sad that it had to come to that to end the war.

the Nazi's and japs were shipping uranium and other bomb making gear to each other via submarines for some time during ww2, the Nazi's were brewing heavy water in Telemark and if they hadn't have been defeated then chances are we wouldn't be talking about Hiroshima but talking about London?............. or even talking about it at all for that matter. Everyone was at it and the nuclear arms race after ww2 backs it up, even we had a sh"te attempted at it :lol:

i agree that at the end of the day the bombs was dropped to save US troops and its hard to condone that, however, if they had of invaded on foot, how many of the "innocent" civilians would have lifted arms and fought against the yanks? it did happen on a lot of the islands as the yanks moved towards Japan, it would have gone the way Vietnam did with not knowing who is innocent and who is the enemy...... abit like the modern day middle east.

also were innocent people attacked at pearl harbour? there was no war between the two so technically weren't they also innocent? :smt102

dropping the bombs must have been one hell of a difficult decision to make




I have a long drive with a hang over and Its not often that i switch on the sensible side of my brain but this thread caught my attention............ so plz don't flame me :smt053

[Steve_God]

War is bad, full stop.

Mmm Kay?

[The Guru]

I'm not really blaming anyone, tbh, I'm not sure if the Americans really knew what an impact the bomb was going to have!

I think they did...

Search Trinity Atomic Test

[grh1904]

in no way condone the fact the 100,000's of innocent people were killed but you can't really jump at the yanks, if they hadn't of done it someone else would have........


Yes, putting aside all the hand-wringing/condoning, someone has to go first.

When I was at school my modern studies (politics!) teacher was a fully paid up CND/lefty/socialist type, he even tried to sell the Socialist Worker paper to kids at school :smt102

He did however raise one point that, 25 years later is still with me: -

Would the "Ban the Bomb" movements in the 50's & 60's have gained as much momentum as they did, had the populace not seen for themselves the destructive power of a nuclear explosion?

I can remember debating this point in class, and although people went to the cinema to watch the news reels (I've also seen them some 40 years after they were made) and saw bright flashes/big clouds etc, the faces of those "observing" were all smiles and the propaganda machines went into overdrive.

It wasn't until the bomb was dropped that the world saw the real devastation that could be unleashed. Especially when you read my earlier post where I commented on only a very small part of the weapon actually reaching fission, or whatever it is that nuclear weapons do.

Take the Cuban missile crisis, both the USA & CCCP had between them enough weapons to destroy this planet several times over. Do you think that if the bomb hadn't been dropped on Japan then this crisis would have turned out differently??

I do.

As much as the unleashing of any WMD is just unbearable to think about, in the case of Hiroshima & Nagasaki, it's happened, and there is nothing this generation can do about it, BUT, (and please don't burn me at the stake for this next bit!!!), in a way I'm glad it did happen.

If it hadn't then, then it would have done by now. Maybe none of us would be here if the both the yanks & the commies had started a big metal spear throwing war in the Carribean.

If it hadn't happened in WW2 then maybe there wouldn't have been such a restriction by the superpowers as to who could join in the fun of a DIY garden shed nuclear bomb. Every despot little dictator since then may have been able to get their dirty little hands on them and worse still, USE IT.

I do actually believe that the greed of the superpowers wanting to keep this limited, and only to themselves, has been an inadvertant bit of good luck. Their wanting to keep it all to themselves has in a way stopped all the fanatics. If Saddam Hussein had them in 1991 would he have held back from actually using them???

Genocide, in relation to the Balkans, Rwanda, Somalia, even Muggabe might have had a far more sinister outcome. Hell even the Argies have said that had they had nuclear tipped tactical weapons then they would have used them on us.

I would rather that we didn't have them at all, but when faced with a choice of the likes of Saddam, or Muggabe, or Ahmadinejad (Iran) having them, then what we have now is the best out of a bad lot.

I believe that what we have now has in some way been bourne out of the dropping of the bombs on Japan. Had they not been dropped then the outcomes and what we have today would have been entirely different, and probably not for the better.

[ThEGr33k]

Im with Milky Bar Kid & Spiderboy. People here seem to be forgetting that its crappy Governments that cause the war's, not the people, they cold have perhaps voted them out or got rid of them in some other way... Either way the forces dont really have a choice in what they have to do...

Basically this was down to a hand full of people on both sides of the war who were responsible for starting a War and keeping it going, and in the end finishing it. Ill bet the US didnt get done for war crimes? Of course not, they won. Shocking if im honest.

Same goes in todays conflicts. Our forces get a lot of stick for being out there but lets be honest they dont have much choice... they do what they are told by a crappy Government that has most things backwards. This is one of the reasons im getting out, I dont want to be in that line of work when the Government just uses and abuses us and doesnt look after us when we need it. :(


As to the Nazi's and Nuclear bombs it was always meant for the US, they had the means to bomb us with them. Hitler liked us Brits because he cosidered us to be part of the Master race.

[Spiderman]

As to the Nazi's and Nuclear bombs it was always meant for the US, they had the means to bomb us with them. Hitler liked us Brits because he cosidered us to be part of the Master race.

Not forgetting that Queenie is also of german heritage and her sisters were in the nazi party.

[yorkie_chris]

yeh i watched a similar thing a couple of weeks ago in the run up to the aniversary.

The biggest war crime of mass genocide ever perpetrated in humanity. Fascinating photos to look at, hopefully one day those who decided to tst their bomb on a largely civialian population will be brought to justice.

Bit late, since they're dead. I think it would be a dull trial, and I think you are wrong.

I had an uncle on the Burma railway, he did not come back. Sorry to have to say I think the use of the bomb was justified. Millions of allied troops would have been killed trying to force a surrender by conventional means

I have read somewhere the US expected to lose nearly a million troops in an invasion of the Japanese home islands.

Shocking pictures. I cannot comprehend how that was justified, to wipe out a city full of civillians who had done nothing wrong other than be in the wrong country at the wrong time.

The Japanese would have done the exact same to us, or to civilian populations at the end of a bayonet. They were not pleasant enemies. Savages beyond reason.


So, what would you have done? Continued the blockade, the conventional bombing? Starved a whole nation of civvies to death rather than incinerate one city.

Or not started a war in the first place, but if you believe that's possible then you don't understand people.

[Milky Bar Kid]

[QUOTE=Milky Bar Kid;1997798
I respect everyones opinion but it cannot change my mind and make me believe that killing 100,000 civillians was right. [/QUOTE]

I am aware difficult decisions will always have to be made in war. But as I stated above, I still won't make me feel that it was ok.

[Daimo]

.

Damn good read your reply there :) Have to say I agree. If not the Americas (mad oil hungry fly boys), then imagine if Russia (plain mad arses), or any Taliban "type" of party got a hold of them and what could be done today!!

Was moves Human technology forwards. You got to feel for all people in war, of which there are casulties :(

[ethariel]

Bit late, since they're dead. I think it would be a dull trial, and I think you are wrong.



I have read somewhere the US expected to lose nearly a million troops in an invasion of the Japanese home islands.



The Japanese would have done the exact same to us, or to civilian populations at the end of a bayonet. They were not pleasant enemies. Savages beyond reason.


So, what would you have done? Continued the blockade, the conventional bombing? Starved a whole nation of civvies to death rather than incinerate one city.

Or not started a war in the first place, but if you believe that's possible then you don't understand people.


Got to say YC just beat me to this type of reply.

Had the Hiroshima bomb not been dropped then the nubmer of lives lost on the allied side would have been huge during the taking and pacification of the home islands and would have led to many many more civilian casualties during such fightind. Perhaps not directly but inderictly in the form of Suicide rather than be on ground taken by the allies.

The bombing of Nagasaki after however was very much overkill, i strongly believe that the Japenese would have surrendered after just the one bomb but..........



Hindsight is a powerfull tool, used my the many to persecute the few.


I thank <insert your diety of choice here> that i was never and probably will never be in the position where a decision i make will result in the deaths of any let alone thousands of people, enemies or not. I have no illusions about my ability to sleep fter such an act!.

Most of us posting on this board would not have existed (well depending how you look at things, ALL of us may not have existed) if the bomb was not dropped.

Where would the Russians have stopped, Berlin?, Paris?, London? who knows.

It was a regrettable action but 100% needed at the time and thinking reasonably, as they could have struck at Tokyo it's self, it was also a restrained act.

Well im half cut and tired, nighters all!

[keith_d]

I can't resist chucking my 2d worth in....

During WW2 there were atrocities on all sides. The ones which spring to mind are:

The Burma railway
Firebombing Dresden
Genocide of the jews, gypsies, etc..
Bombing Nagasaki

I'm sure there were many, many smaller atrocities which went unrecorded. Looking back with hindsight we can try to second guess the people who made those decisions, but without living through the war we have little chance of really understanding their motivation.

So sitting in front of our computers and wagging our fingers at the dead seems entirely futile. The best we can do is try to understand why the decisions were made, in the faint hope of avoiding the same mistakes in the future.

As Santayana's famous quote says, "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

[Daimo]

Aye, becuase the UK's history is all roses and sweet nothings isn't it :lol:

England has done nothing but be kind and friendly to the whole world in its past hasn't it :lol:

[Alpinestarhero]

Aye, becuase the UK's history is all roses and sweet nothings isn't it :lol:

England has done nothing but be kind and friendly to the whole world in its past hasn't it :lol:

yep, and once we buttered them up with sweet nothings, we chained them up, stuck 'em on a ship and got them to do our dirty work!

slavery - englands dark secret, seldom discussed

[vixis]

I didnt realise. I guess due to the sort of hipocrosy surrounding it (america is the only nation to use WMD's in an active war, and then in recent times made up a war as a reason to invade iraq to look for WMD's that didnt exist)

I'm a big fan of the physicist richard feynmann. He did alot of work on the theoretics of the atom bomb, and he mentions that at the time, the pupose of the work was often forgotten because the science being discovered ment far more to them than the intended application

I love any scientist who lists safe cracking and playing the bongo's as his main hobbies. A good site for a few lectures (the short ones) is:
http://www-scf.usc.edu/~kallos/feynman.htm

[keith_d]

Aye, becuase the UK's history is all roses and sweet nothings isn't it :lol:

England has done nothing but be kind and friendly to the whole world in its past hasn't it :lol:

That's why I included firebombing Dresden, it was one of ours.