73 years on, Hiroshima remembers

[Augustinian]

The urgency of our bomb development program was specifically aimed at use in Europe, fueled by the fear that the Germans would get the bomb first.

The Japanese were also working on a nuclear bomb during WWII.

 

[joeybaggz]

I’d be willing to bet there was a much lower chance that we would have used these weapons in Europe.

If you study history, you will find that Hitler was pursuing the bomb himself. Do you think he would have used it on Europe, Russia, and the U.S.?

 

[joeybaggz]

we methodically chose to use them on cities of no military importance

Categorically untrue. Check the facts, not someone’s opinion. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were strategic targets with war materiel making capabilities.

 

[GKMotley]

Two projects, one run by the Army, one by the Navy. Small scale, and never reached beyond the table-top experimentation level. Wilcox’s JAPAN’S SECRET WAR is the only book length account of it I have, but it is flawed.

 

[GKMotley]

Hiroshima/Nagasaki were indeed conventional military targets, though not conventionally targeted. But while that was quite true, the destruction of that military capacity in itself was not the anticipated cause of the post-haste Japanese surrender. Such destruction of military capacity/urban infrastructure had taken place in many other places in the Home Islands (most noticeably in the raids on the six major cities between March and July 1945) and could have been done with multiple B-29 raids on those two cities, and the Japanese still would not have been prepared to surrender. Rather, it was the shock of the destruction realized from a single B-San/single bomb that was counted on to end the war. That is, it was not the destruction of that military capacity (or deaths) in itself that was the primary goal of the bombing, it was the breaking of the Japanese will to continue the fighting, by doing so with such economy of effort: one plane/ one bomb/one day.

 

[joeybaggz]

That is, it was not the destruction of that military capacity (or deaths) in itself that was the primary goal of the bombing, it was the breaking of the Japanese will to continue the fighting, by doing so with such economy of effort: one plane/ one bomb/one day.

True. But the U.S. had to select cities that were conventional military targets, because to bomb a target that wasn’t was to admit killing massive amounts of people for shock purposes only. The choice of Hiroshima and Nagasaki gave the U.S. some justification for using the bomb as a military weapon, and not a weapon of mass terror.

 

[GKMotley]

True, in a sense, but a little misleading. A number of factors went into the selection of the target list, including the nature and concentration of the structures in the selected city, inclusion of targets of military value, and relatively untouched by previous bombing, to permit assessment of the effectiveness, and maximum visual shock value. As always, shock value was paramount. LeMay could reduce Hiroshima and Nagasaki, business as usual. Which the Javanese were inured to. This had to be a game changer, to change the game.

Stimson saved Kyoto, twice, from the list, Groves would have bombed it, for the shock value

 

[joeybaggz]

inclusion of targets of military value,

Again, the vital consideration. The A-Bomb had to look like a military weapon and not a weapon of simple mass destruction, read-terror.

 

[GKMotley]

20 years of reading on the subject, a library on it of over 150 titles, I differ.

Reductionism is always to be avoided, but, in a weighted consideration, the shock value of the bomb was the key, though not an absolute. That the targets, even Kyoto, had military value, was a plus.

 

[ratio1]

Lots of people here are discussing about the past what could have happened etc.

Well the past we cannot change. I’d like to discuss the present.
Can anyone imagine the German prime minister worshipping Hitler publicly? And German schools textbooks not mentioning the Holocaust?
Yet the equivalent is precisely happening in Japan. Seems like no one blinks an eye apart from Korea and China.

I remember watching a documentary that the museum of Hiroshima where it talks about the a bomb and everything but no mention about the war preceding it and what prompted this. Even the director of museum spoke out to say it doesn’t really put it into context. How is the public going to learn about never to commit the atrocities of war? The government is bowing to right wing groups.

 

[ratio1]

http://hpmmuseum.jp/modules/info/index.php?action=PageView&page_id=45&lang=eng

I haven’t been there but I’m told there is very little to no mention of ww2 atrocities that Japan committed. And it’s called the peace memorial.
Oh the irony!