PDA

View Full Version : Japan had nothing to apologize for in World War II


ahsingjai
08-04-2005, 12:21 AM
Hiroshima still stokes controversy

From Atika Shubert,
CNN Hiroshima

HIROSHIMA, Japan (CNN) -- The atomic bombing of Hiroshima -- an act that ushered in the nuclear age but also helped end World War II -- still stokes controversy 60 years on.

At 8:15 a.m. on August 6 1945, time literally stopped in Hiroshima. At that moment, the U.S. B-29 bomber Enola Gay released its payload -- an atomic bomb named "Little Boy" -- over the city of 350,000 people.

Hiroshima, situated 426 miles (686 kilometers) southwest of Tokyo, was charred and leveled beyond recognition.

Some 140,000 people died in the attack. Another 70,000 died when U.S. forces dropped another atomic bomb on Nagasaki, 593 miles (954 kilometers) southwest of Tokyo, three days later.

These days, more than a million people a year flock to Hiroshima's peace museum.

For many Japanese students, a visit to the first city to come under nuclear attack is a powerful lesson in World War II history, often leading to heated debate over Japan's record.

Days before this year's memorial ceremony, a 27-year old broke in and defaced this inscription:

"Let all souls here rest in peace, for this mistake shall not be repeated."

He chiseled away the word mistake and later told police he did it to show that Japan had nothing to apologize for in World War II.

For many in Japan, the defining moments in World War II were not the invasions of neighboring countries, but the devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

That attitude has riled neighbors, like China and South Korea, who say Japan must acknowledge that it was the aggressor, rather than the victim, of war.

So, what are Japan's youth -- the country's future -- learning about the past?

During a tour of the Hiroshima war memorial, students attend classes where survivors speak.

One class begins with an animated story of a young atomic bomb survivor that died of leukemia.

It soon moves into a harrowing, eyewitness account of the bombing. There is no question and answer session. Discussions of why the bombing happened are rare.

"We are merely storytellers. What I can tell them is how terrible it was, how scary it was. But I cannot answer more difficult questions," says one Hiroshima survivor, Yoshiko Nakazono.

It is the graphic description of radiation burns that moves and affects young students the most.

"When she told us about the skin hanging from their fingers and how they screamed for help ... I was really affected by that," says student Erina Goto.

But for older students, difficult questions require answers.

"It was probably revenge for Pearl Harbor. But even knowing this, it's hard to forgive the killing of so many civilians," says another student, Atsushi Hayama.

"This chain of hatred and revenge is what creates wars. It may be impossible to erase such feelings. But we should at least try."

There is a strong hope here that past tragedies by any country will not be repeated.

To date, no nuclear weapons have been used in battle since 1945.



Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/08/04/hiroshima.lessons/index.html

yoMAMA
08-04-2005, 12:26 AM
hiroshima now a bastion of pacifsm

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050804/ts_nm/japan_hiroshima_dc;_ylt=Am73kjajB9_C9Yg7wNKgpO8Bxg 8F;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Tao
08-04-2005, 12:45 AM
*sigh*

hooligan
08-04-2005, 12:53 AM
Did you hear about that blind Black guy who joined the KKK? Me too.

deez nuts
08-04-2005, 10:34 AM
lol. here we go again.

YuheiCarreau
08-04-2005, 12:51 PM
Wow, I take a little break from YW, and come back to find some things never change...

Anyways, I've been to the museum in Hiroshima. There was no intense debate going on; it's an intensely sad place and there's not attempt by the people who run it to justify war of any kind, for any reason. It's not like they're presenting the bomb as a totally unprovoked attack on Japan, or as a justified response to the attack on Pearl Harbor (which is usually the way I see it presented in many American history books, museum exhibits, etc.).

Anyways, just read the article and do the math: a million people visit each year, and this year one person did something stupid. What does that add up to? Why are you bringing the focus to that part of the article, and not the final quote, "This chain of hatred and revenge is what creates wars. It may be impossible to erase such feelings. But we should at least try."?

VV o n g B a
08-04-2005, 01:06 PM
does anyone have the entire quote? from the way i read it, it sounds like the "mistake" is the nuking of hiroshima by the US and not japanese aggression... or at most that everyone involved in the war made a mistake.

deez nuts
08-04-2005, 01:17 PM
Wow, I take a little break from YW, and come back to find some things never change...

Anyways, I've been to the museum in Hiroshima. There was no intense debate going on; it's an intensely sad place and there's not attempt by the people who run it to justify war of any kind, for any reason. It's not like they're presenting the bomb as a totally unprovoked attack on Japan, or as a justified response to the attack on Pearl Harbor (which is usually the way I see it presented in many American history books, museum exhibits, etc.).

Anyways, just read the article and do the math: a million people visit each year, and this year one person did something stupid. What does that add up to? Why are you bringing the focus to that part of the article, and not the final quote, "This chain of hatred and revenge is what creates wars. It may be impossible to erase such feelings. But we should at least try."?

/gives you a soapbox for you to stand on/

nola
08-04-2005, 01:35 PM
Glad to see you back, YuheiCarreau.

ahsingjai
08-04-2005, 02:37 PM
Anyways, just read the article and do the math: a million people visit each year, and this year one person did something stupid. What does that add up to? Why are you bringing the focus to that part of the article, and not the final quote, "This chain of hatred and revenge is what creates wars. It may be impossible to erase such feelings. But we should at least try."?

From yomama's article. It sound like militarism is rising.
...Japanese public opinion has shifted away from once-overwhelming opposition to revising Article 9, although those backing a change still fall short of a majority.

Some politicians have even broken a decades-old taboo to suggest Japan should possess nuclear arms.

"Japan is clearly leaning to the right and the trend has become very strong," said Motofumi Asai, a former diplomat who is president of the Hiroshima Peace Institute.

YuheiCarreau
08-04-2005, 10:08 PM
From yomama's article. It sound like militarism is rising.


Technically, when your constitution forbids the use of military force in any agressive capacity, even the tiniest thing is a major increase in militarism. But most Japanese are still in favor of keeping Article 9, if only because most Japanese prefer an isolationist attitude in Japanese foreign policy.

Realistically, it's pretty foolish to assume that Japan will stay out of the arms race (conventional or nuclear) forever. No other nation has.

applehead
08-04-2005, 10:11 PM
Did you hear about that blind Black guy who joined the KKK? Me too.

aaaaahahahahahhaa.
that's such a classic.

ahsingjai
08-04-2005, 10:22 PM
Realistically, it's pretty foolish to assume that Japan will stay out of the arms race (conventional or nuclear) forever. No other nation has.

Switzerland

hooligan
08-04-2005, 10:24 PM
Switzerland

Yes, but the swiss had the deadliest weapon of them all. The Swiss Army Knife and St. Bernards with booze on their collars.

yoMAMA
08-04-2005, 11:49 PM
Yes, but the swiss had the deadliest weapon of them all. The Swiss Army Knife and St. Bernards with booze on their collars.

and the uber weapon:

swiss bank accounts!

:biggrin:

Technically, when your constitution forbids the use of military force in any agressive capacity, even the tiniest thing is a major increase in militarism. But most Japanese are still in favor of keeping Article 9, if only because most Japanese prefer an isolationist attitude in Japanese foreign policy.

Realistically, it's pretty foolish to assume that Japan will stay out of the arms race (conventional or nuclear) forever. No other nation has.

Koizumi should stick to reforming the post office :wink:

bluemonq
08-05-2005, 12:12 AM
Yes, but the swiss had the deadliest weapon of them all. The Swiss Army Knife and St. Bernards with booze on their collars.
in all seriousness though, don't forget the swiss mercenaries; even from way back you didn't mess with those mofos. there was some convention or other that ended up banning the swiss from exporting mercenaries since they were so scary and powerful; only the vatican has 'em now, the swiss guard.

omg. i said mofos.

hooligan
08-05-2005, 12:52 AM
in all seriousness though, don't forget the swiss mercenaries; even from way back you didn't mess with those mofos. there was some convention or other that ended up banning the swiss from exporting mercenaries since they were so scary and powerful; only the vatican has 'em now, the swiss guard.

omg. i said mofos.
I thought those are South Afrikaans now?

Banana
08-05-2005, 09:12 AM
The Swiss guard? The guys in the clown outfits with polearms?

bahaha

A.R.A.M.
08-05-2005, 11:41 AM
Switzerland can afford the luxury of being neutral due to its geography. All they have to do is blow up a few roads, and no invading army can get through the mountain passes.

But their military doesn't hurt. Every man is trained as a soldier and can be called up at any moment. They keep their weapons and equipment at home I hear. For the women, the Swiss government insists they take sewing and cooking classes.

ahsingjai
08-05-2005, 02:03 PM
Switzerland can afford the luxury of being neutral due to its geography. All they have to do is blow up a few roads, and no invading army can get through the mountain passes.


This isn't 1800s anymore. In Modern times, there are unmanned strike planes.

A.R.A.M.
08-05-2005, 04:06 PM
This isn't 1800s anymore. In Modern times, there are unmanned strike planes.

You're absolutely right. No airforce in the world, no anti-aircraft gun, could ever protect a small state from an unmanned strike plane. It's too bad the technology does not yet exist to protect against these unmanned terrors of the skies. We need to get a crack team of scientists working on a solution to this problem.

Anyways, I regret posting about Switzerland in a thread about Japan and World War II. Perhaps we can return to the original subject?

hooligan
08-05-2005, 04:30 PM
You're absolutely right. No airforce in the world, no anti-aircraft gun, could ever protect a small state from an unmanned strike plane. It's too bad the technology does not yet exist to protect against these unmanned terrors of the skies. We need to get a crack team of scientists working on a solution to this problem.

Anyways, I regret posting about Switzerland in a thread about Japan and World War II. Perhaps we can return to the original subject?

Sure, how about that Dave Chapelle, he's a genius isn't he?