Hiroshima on TV

Owd Bert · 08-08-2005, 08:45

Before the AccyWeb Bleeding Heart Society shed tears for the victims of the Atom Bonbing, I wonder if anyone thinks a better balance would have been struck if the programme had been preceeded by a documentary showing the treatment meeted out to P.O.Ws ?

WillowTheWhisp · 08-08-2005, 08:50

This is such an emotive subject. I can see your point and the way the Japanese treated thir POWs was despicable, but it broke my heart to see children of Hiroshima suffering and dying. The mother who could not get her child out from under the rubble and heard the cries as the fire burned her to death - I cannot begin to imagine how that mother must have felt as she kept saying "I'm a bad mother to you." over and over again.

I think we've had documentaries about the treatment of POWs before and things like the building of the Burma railway but I've never seen Hiroshima from the Japanese side before.

Recently there has been criticism of the cheering and jubilation shown by some muslims on hearing of the London bombings and previously the WTC towers, but last night showed equal jubilation from US soldiers when they were told of the bombing of Hiroshima. That kind of levelled the field a bit for me. It's easy to paint an "us and them" image with "us" as the goodies and "them" as the baddies but we are all human beings with very similar feelings and anything which helps us to understand that has got to be a good thing.

Tealeaf · 08-08-2005, 09:17

The other relevant question is "How many lives did dropping the bomb save". I certainly do not accept that Japan was on its knees in the summer of 1945;as such, the only way to finish them would have been an invaision of their mainland. Given the Japanese tactics used on the outlying islands, allied planners put the cost of this in Japanese lives at anywhere between 1m & 5 million civilians alone (not to mention Japenese & Allied military lives)

I therefore have no sympathy whatsoever with the Japanese sense of victimisation; as a nation, they are still in self denial over their endless catalogue of war crimes starting in Manchuria in the 1930's through Pearl Harbour and their evil treatment of Allied POWs.

Sod this Japanese and western bleeding-heart whinging; I have no time for it.

Roy · 08-08-2005, 09:21

Exactly tealeaf. The bombs happened, they had to happen - they saved a lot more lives than they took away. Thank goodness it was the americans that got the bomb first, thats all I can say!

cashman · 08-08-2005, 09:38

agree with tealeaf 100% yeh we know the devastion @ aftermath were terrible,but at the end of the day many more lives would have been lost if it had not happened.also noticed they said at the end that japan is a NO WAR at ANY PRICE country since,and giving japanese history thats a great result.

garinda · 08-08-2005, 09:53

Who are the Accy Web bleeding hearts? Am I one? Do I get a little bleedin' badge?

If you are fighting a war you use everything at your disposal to win. The Allies had the atomic bomb and used it to end the war in the East against the Japanese. This doesn't mean you can't sympathise with the death and mutilation this event caused, just as you can feel pity and sadness for the civilian victims of the Blitz.

The fact that there hasn't been a world was on this scale for sixty years, speaks volumes about the decision to use the two atomic bombs in Japan.

Do I have to hand my badge in now?

sean777 · 08-08-2005, 10:53

it was inevatable a bomb of that nature would be used sooner or later, lets just hope the need never arises again.We spend time correcting the past and not enough time saving the future.

entwisi · 08-08-2005, 10:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

If you are fighting a war you use everything at your disposal to win. The Allies had the atomic bomb and used it to end the war in the East against the Japanese. This doesn't mean you can't sympathise with the death and mutilation this event caused, just as you can feel pity and sadness for the civilian victims of the Blitz.

Without wanting this to be directed at you Mr Rindy..

So if as we should think that we at WAR against the terrorists then why are we not using everything at our disposal against them now. We are more concerned with PC and how we are seem by others than doing what we should be doing i.e. taking all possible actions against those who seek to destroy us.

Ian

Doug · 08-08-2005, 11:07

I have to agree with Mr T and the lads. It was a war in which technology give birth to some pretty grime experiences for all concerned. We should not forget the many hundreds of British women and children who also died at the hands of the Japanese. What I get sick of is how we are expected to apologise for what happen 60 odd years ago. It happened; those that started it did not give any concern for there victims and many of them still believe they where in the right. It’s now part of our history and we have got to recognise and accept what happened. I don’t object to anyone remembering these events but we should never be made to feel guilty or ask to apologise for the actions of our servicemen (and Women) or those of our leaders they all did what they had to do at the time….

garinda · 08-08-2005, 11:08

Terrorists are an unseen enemy. I don't really see the equation?

Just because in a different thread I've criticised the police not releasing information, so as to stop the suspected suicide bomber from becoming a martyr if he had of been a Muslim, and perhaps leading to more bloodshed, I don't see the relevance.

I fully support the war against terrorism, sadly there is no enemy to bomb, they are hidden everywhere.

Doug · 08-08-2005, 11:19

It’s called seek and destroy Garinda, even unseen enemies can be brought to boot, the only difficult in our country is we’ve lost the morel ground to the nimbi’s, the PC brigade and those who plead innocents but go on to support those that inflict terror on us. The British military and security force will get out there and do the job. The last thing they want is pillocks bleeding information to the unseen enemy so that they can avoid justice or a bullet.

garinda · 08-08-2005, 11:57

I'm just stating a fact. Terrorists are an unseen enemy just like the IRA were, that is there point. A nuclear weapon can't be used against them. There are no diplomatic channels to go through, and no country to bomb.

JohnW · 08-08-2005, 12:20

I get mighty tired of our own side calling us terrorists and murderers and and all that crap. On another site on which I post I am a minority among bleeding heart liberals who do nothing but pull to pieces the British and American governments. Here is a response I posted on the subject of the Hiroshima bomb.

You are right, many thousands of people in Hiroshima died on that fateful day. However, I wonder how many lives were saved because those people lost theirs. The dropping of the two atomic bombs brought Japan to its knees and resulted in their surrender. America was at the time preparing to invade Japan and many thousands of war-weary soldiers on both sides were set to lose their lives. When war is waged on the ground in any country, it is impossible not to have many civilian lives lost in the fighting. I'm quite sure that most of the Japanese people thought that their country was 'in the right' and would have looked upon the Americans as an unjust invading army who would rape, pillage and generally strip the country of its assets and freedom, and this could well have resulted in many civilians taking up arms and killing and dying also. Let's just remember here who started the bloody war in the first place. Had the bombs not been dropped, the resulting ground offensive could have killed just as many Japanese as did the bombs. The fact that they were dropped undoubtedlly saved many American lives.
Let us now look at the aftermath. Did America go in and take over the country, strip it of its assets and enslave the Japanese people? No. Japan is now one of America's biggest trading partners and was given a great deal of help after the war to help their trade and help them to be accepted back into the world as a respected country. They're doing very nicely thank you. Same with Germany. Would America have been afforded the same consideration if Japan had won the war? I think not. Would England have been afforded the same consideration by Germany if they had won the war? I think not. It seems to me that a lot of people are forgetting that, generally speaking, we're the bloody good guys.

Tealeaf · 08-08-2005, 12:43

Its interesting that we've also had the same crap from some Germans, with a large number of them now referring to Churchill & Sir Arthur Harris as "War Criminals", on the basis that the British and US strategic policy of bombing German cities from 1942 onwards was no more than terror bombing and had little military usefulness, with the bombing of Dresden being a classic example.

I'm sorry, Herr Fritz, but you're wrong, matey. At least you got to shoot down Lancasters and B17's and lynch the pilots. The Nazis were the ones who begin the policy of laying waste cities, starting with Guernica, then Warsaw,Rotterdam and London...they sowed the seed and then they reaped the whirl wind. Except our technology was bigger and better than theirs. - although I really do think there was nothing greater than a terror weapon than the V1's and V2's of 1944/45.

Doug · 08-08-2005, 12:48

Churchill & Sir Arthur Harris were men of their time, without these leaders and the men that followed them we would have been finished.

Do you like my new no swearing policy?